Forum member Mel Ayton has written an article on the Martin Luther King murder for the Crime Library. Do you agree with his theory?

http://crimemagazine.com/05/martinlutherking,0612-5.htm

I am writing this as i read the article and it is a re-hash of what Posner has written in the past.
Heres a few points.
-It was the king family who asked for the reparation of one dollar and it was not because the judge saw their claim as unworthy of a large settlement.
-Mr.Ayton excludes some of dr.peppers witnesses completely, not even mentioning Glenda Grabows account of how she was told by Raoul that he had killed or assissted in the killing of king and had been raped by him. The jury was shown a telephone record of a conversation between Grabow and Raoul months before the trial, the conversation was 6 minutes long, which would indicate that they knew each other.
-Ms.Grabow also worked for fercy foreman who told her that Ray had to be "sacrificed" for their welfare and told her that Ray was innocent.
-Beverly oliver, chari angel and madeleine brown all picked Raoul out of a photo line up as a man they saw with jack ruby in his carousel club
-FBI agent Don Wilson found in an abandoned Mustang shortly after the assassination a file of documents including a paylist for the assassination and a 1963 dallas telephone directory with H.L. hunts number on it, also with the number for the carousel club written in the corner. another sheet had the number of the FBI Atlanta field office
-Rays alias after he tried to escape 'eric s galt' belonged to a man with high level security clearance.
-A british man whose name i can not seem to remember testifid that he was offered rifles by raoul in the 60s
-one of dr.peppers miltary sources known as warren picked raoul out of a photo line up as the man he had seen with zip chimento who ran carlos marcellos gun running operation out of new orleans.


these are but a few of the points that Mr.Ayton does not acknowledge, though I am sure he is aware of them.
i must say that much of this article is not evidence based (at least he does not source any evidence and only states that Posner has disproved such notions about raoul etc)

I suggest that anybody interested in the case read Dr.Peppers 'an act of state, the execution of dr. martin luther king jnr.' It is an excellent book and goes into huge detail to rebut Mcmillan and Posner.
by the way George Mcmillan is the husband of priscilla McMillan who interviewd lee oswald in russia and stayed with marina oswald after the jfk assassination.

perhaps Mr. Ayton might return to the forum to discuss his article

All the best
john Geraghty

I think it is also worth bearing in mind that Dr.William Pepper knew Dr.King and was instrumental in showing him the horrors people were suffering in vietnam.
John

I can recommend an excellect book: The Martin Luther King Assassination, by Phil Melanson

Dawn

Hello John,
A response to your post - I hope we can keep this civil – I left the JFK discussion as I will not engage in petty and personalised exchanges.You were correct in saying the article left out a number of issues.In the nature of these things articles which have to be succinct cannot cover all grounds.You will find fuller descriptions/answers in my book.And my article (or book) is not ‘a rehash of what Posner has written in the past’ as you claim.Posner’s book was published in 1998.He could not write about the DOJ 1998-2000 investigation, the 1999 Jowers’ Trial or the new evidence about Army personnel – nor did he have access to the original Scotland Yard file which delineated Ray’s activities in London.
William Pepper
The way in which Pepper selects his facts to prove the existence of a conspiracy can be no better highlighted than by his description of Jowers’ trial witness Sid Carthew who you refer to as ‘a British man’.Carthew was important to Pepper as the ex-British merchant seaman recalled meeting a gunrunner by the name of ‘Raul’ in Montreal in 1967.During the trial and in his book, Pepper described Carthew as a ‘British Nationalist’ probably aware that most Americans would think nothing of this except he was simply a patriotic Englishman.Pepper does not, however, inform his readers of Carthew’s real political activities in Britain.For many years Carthew has been a committed racist from West Yorkshire, an activist who supported the racist British National Party, a political organisation which has established close links to neo-fascist terror groups like ‘Combat 18’.If the Jowers’ jury had been informed about Carthew’s past they may have concluded the UK racist had given his support to Ray for ideological reasons.I believe he has no value as a witness.Whether you agree with this or not is your choice but his story has no corroboration whatsoever.
Pepper’s criticisms of the DOJ investigation are supported in part by the unreliable statements of other witnesses who appeared at the Jowers conspiracy trial .(The list is endless and I must refer you to my book). Their recollections of the event were never closely scrutinised during the trial and are laden with conjecture and speculation.(Remember the trial was not a real trial at all – the ‘defense’ and ‘prosecution’ were in league with one another and agreed on most of the issues raised.Jowers’ lawyer never challenged Pepper’s conspiracy claims.)
Playing a highly selective ‘shell game’ Pepper changes the assassination scenarios to suit his purposes.Over time his accusations of who the alleged shooter really was has changed, transferring guilt to people who have died during the course of his enquiries.He also manipulates facts to suit new realities.For example, Ray always maintained he had heard the news about the assassination from the Mustang’s radio.The DOJ investigation discovered the car radio did not actually work.Therefore Pepper in his 2003 book wrote, “He headed south through Mississippi to Atlanta.On the way, he heard on his car or some other radio when he stopped (emphasis added) that Dr King had been shot and they were looking for a white man in a white Mustang.”
As to his attacks on Gerald Posner a clue may be found in Posner’s book ‘Killing The Dream’ which exposes Pepper’s past life.Posner wrote, “….Pepper had moved to England in 1980 claiming in ‘Orders To Kill’ that he was forced to move because the mafia in New England had made him a ‘marked man’ after he led a successful effort at reorganizing a school system ‘rife with corruption’.Actually, a company of which Pepper was the president had received more than $200,000 from the state of Rhode Island to run a foster-care program for troubled youths.On July 6, 1978, Pepper was charged with four felony counts of transporting two teenage boys ‘to engage in lewd and indecent activities.’The local police also learned that in 1969 a US Senate subcommittee heard statements from two young boys who said Pepper had sexual contact with them when they were eight.No charges were filed against him then.Shortly after his arrest a state audit charged that more than half of the money given to Pepper’s firm could not be accounted for.His legal problems worsened when a real estate company sued him civilly, claiming he had reneged on a deal to sell his $350,000 Westchester, New York, home.Eventually the felony morals charges were dropped to misdemeanor charges.he left for England, and finally in 1990 the morals charges were dismissed for lack of prosecution.Pepper denied the charges and claimed that his legal problems were part of a conspiracy to punish him for his anti-Vietnam stance in the late 1960’s and his friendship with King.”. Pepper never challenged these allegations in his 2003 book, ‘An Act Of State’.
Glenda Grabow
Grabow was a former Houston waitress who, after being hypnotised, said a customer she knew as ‘Dago’ claimed responsibility for orchestrating the King murder .He also confessed to assassinating President Kennedy.Amongst her many highly dramatic claims were; she had known Jack Ruby, the man who killed Lee Harvey Oswald; she had an intimate relationship with Ruby; and she had a close relationship with former Johnson Administration official, Jack Valenti.. Glenda Grabow maligned the character of Valenti by describing him as a ‘pornographer’.Instead of showing her the door Pepper enlisted her as a Jowers Trial witness.Valenti said the allegation was ‘pure fantasy’ and ‘utterly false’.Do you believe for one moment that a man whose character has never been questioned throughout his life should be attacked in this way without any evidence to corroborate it whatsoever?
Grabow claimed that in the two weeks prior to President Kennedy’s assassination she saw ‘Dago’ receive some uniforms from Jack Ruby and was to give them to Lee Harvey Oswald.On the day President Kennedy went to Houston, before his trip to Dallas, she had observed ‘Dago’ standing on the roof of a car near the presidential motorcade armed with a rifle.Grabow claimed to have spoken to ‘Dago’ following the assassination of President Kennedy and Dago had confessed to shooting Kennedy.Do you believe these claims ? – if so, you are one of the very few JFK assassination researchers who do.
Grabow said the Raoul she knew had been involved in gun smuggling in the port of Houston.According to Grabow, ‘Raoul’ would spend a lot of time in Houston with a relative and her association with Raoul would last over ten years until the mid-1970’s.Many years later William Pepper and his investigators showed Grabow a photo spread and she identified ‘Raoul’ as the person she had known.
Both Jack Saltman, a British television producer, and William Pepper, working on independent investigations, located ‘Raul’ in 1995.He was living quietly in the north-eastern United States.It was there in 1997 that journalist Barbara Reis of the ‘Lisbon Publico’ working on a story about Raoul, spoke with a member of ‘Raul’s’ family.Reis testified at the Jowers’ trial that she had spoken in Portuguese to a woman in Raul’s family who said, ‘they’ had visited Raul - indicating US government agents had been protecting the alleged conspirator.Raul was identified by Grabow and, as a result of Grabow’s claims, Pepper added ‘Raul’ as a defendent in the Jowers civil trial.Pepper had changed the name of Ray’s mysterious ‘Raoul’ to ‘R-A-U-L’ to accommodate the new realities.

William S. Gibbons, the Shelby County District Attorney sent investigators to interview Raul’s family members.The picture that emerged was of a family man who worked for 30 years for the same company, “raised a family, had friends and lived a normal life.” The investigators discovered Raul had never been absent for long periods in 1963, 1968 or at any other time in the 1970’s.Raul had no relatives in Houston and had never visited there.Investigators looked at Raul’s employment records, medical records, bank records, and land transfer information.They took a detailed statement from him, and interviewed family friends and acquaintences.The report concluded, “All this information reinforced the conclusion that ‘Raoul’ was never involved in the assassination of Dr Martin Luther King,Jr.” Grabow’s story was also investigated by Justice Department officials in 1998-2000 (Remember, Reno chose them as they had no links to the FBI).They looked into Raul’s background from the time he arrived in the United States from Portugal in 1961. Raul fully cooperated with the inquiry.He provided investigators with a sworn affidavit denying any involvement in the King killing.
Shown the photograph of ‘Raul’ which had been obtained from immigration files, James Earl Ray identified him as ‘Raoul’.The photo was shown to Grabow and her brother Rayce Wilburn.During the Jowers’ trial, no one questioned how Wilburn, who had been six years old at the time, was able to identify Raul.Furthermore, Justice Department investigators discovered that the photo used was extremely suspect. “The contrast in ‘Raul’s’ picture is so pronounced,” the report said, “that the facial features are indistinct, large areas are entirely washed out and all details are obscured.Thus the representation of ‘Raul’ appears more like a block print than a photograph and stands out markedly from the others (photos in the identification group used by Pepper)”.
According to Ray he had been able to communicate well with ‘Raoul’.But Pepper’s ‘Raul’ had such a poor command of English during the 1960’s it was impossible for him to speak words other than hello, goodbye etc. Raul had lived in a close Portuguese community in New York state since arriving in the United States and friends, relatives and employers who were contacted by the Justice Department investigators confirmed there was no evidence to support the allegations that he had any connection to criminal activities or government work.They also learned that Raul received formal education in the English language until 1975.The Justice Department also investigated Raul’s employment records and found that Grabow’s claims that Raul was in Houston during a crucial period were contradicted.
The telephone call that you refer to was nothing more than the responses of a confused man with little command of the English language and who wanted to be civil to a caller he wasn’t sure he knew.Read the transcript again and you will find nothing incriminating.
The idea that Grabow worked for Percy Foreman is pure invention.Foreman was dead by the time her story surfaced and there is nothing to indicate she was telling the truth.In light of the other fantasies she created it is likely she added this part of her story for effect.
Don Wilson
One paper allegedly recovered by Wilson was a torn page from a 1963 Dallas phone book with a number written on it that belonged to Jack Ruby’s Vegas Club.The slip of paper also had the name ‘Raul’ written on it.The second piece of paper also had ‘Raul’ written on it along with some words and figures that looked like dollar amounts because they had a decimal point followed by two zeroes.One of the words was ‘Canada’, the place where Ray fled to following the assassination.

Although Wilson’s claims were immediately seized upon by conspiracy advocates as ‘proof’ that King had been murdered by a group of conspirators which included Raoul, the response to Wilson’s allegations was not universally applauded.Former FBI officials immediately labelled the claims a lie. Retired FBI agent Jack T. Beverstein, who helped search Ray’s abandoned car said the claims were untrue.Retired agent Carl E. Claiborne said, “There was no Don Wilson that I heard of.”

It soon became clear that Wilson’s claims were suspect. The document with Raoul’s telephone number written on it was conveniently torn.Only part of the telephone number could be seen.Wilson was obviously aware that if the document had shown the full number it could be checked and verified.

FBI records revealed that Wilson had not been in the group of agents who had been sent to examine the abandoned Mustang.Special Agent James Joseph Dolan accompanied the vehicle when it was towed from a parking lot at Atlanta Capitol Homes public housing project to the FBI garage in downtown Atlanta.The car was examined by agents Beverstein, Claiborne, Jack B. Simpson, Richard H. Davis and Alden F. Miller.The examination lasted 5 hours and only Claiborne and Miller inspected the car’s trunk and interior.Evidence which included fibres, clothing bed linens and soil scrapings were then sent to the FBI laboratories in Washington D.C.Wilson did not participate in the search of the car , although FBI files confirm the probationary agent was involved in examining copies of money orders in the investigation to find King’s assassin.

Apparently Wilson wove his story around real evidence which had actually been discovered during the search of the car.There were indeed scraps of paper found in the abandoned car but they did not make reference to ‘Raoul’ or ‘Jack Ruby’.

In October 1968 the FBI handed over the evidence found in the Mustang to the Memphis prosecutor Phil Canale. An FBI memo dated 25.10.68 states, “Items From 1966 Ford Mustang, (From FBI, Atlanta)....A piece of Kleenex box bearing letters ‘At pool’ on one side and names ‘Ginger Day and Anita Katzwinkle, 1535 Serrano, Apt 6, on the other side....One air release shutter in original package...sunglasses with case...Two pieces of cardboard from trunk...Scraps of paper from glove compartment...Scraps of paper from under rear seat.....”.

Justice Department investigators discovered that Wilson’s statements about the documents were inconsistent.At first Wilson said he had 4 documents which he then amended to five. He claimed he looked at the documents when he arrived home the night the car was discovered.Later he said he looked at the documents at the scene of the abandoned Mustang.

Further inconsistencies were discovered by Justice Department investigators.Wilson said he did not realise the significance of the documents until 1993.Then he said he realised their significance at the time he found them.He gave differing rationales for hiding the documents, including career considerations and a fear of the FBI, and he was inconsistent about their location.Wilson also said he ‘lost’ two of them.

With regard to Wilson’s claims, the Justice Report concluded; “....there appears to be no reasonable explanation for Wilson’s lack of candor in his first public statements about the documents.A person genuinely interested in an accurate, complete, and honest disclosure of information after 30 years of concealment does not withold some of the evidence, particularly that portion which is potentially most significant.Consequently, Wilson’s belated revelation, if true, raises serious questions about the credibility of his other comments about the documents including where he got them........If Wilson sought discovery of the truth he would have disclosed the existence of the documents long before 1998.”

The Justice Department investigators concluded that Wilson’s claims of finding documents in the Mustang were not believable.They also concluded his claims to have searched Ray’s apartment in Atlanta were untrue. Government records were scrutinised and showed Wilson had not been at the place where the Mustang had been found; photographs taken at the time do not show Wilson at the scene; and witnesses, both government and civilian, reported that Wilson had not participated in the recovery or the search of the vehicle.Nor was the ‘door ajar’, as Wilson claimed.Photographs taken at the scene of the abandoned car prove the car doors were closed and locked.

Furthermore, scientific experts were asked to examine the documents.They concluded that it would have been easy to fabricate notations on them, particularly the page from an old 1963 Dallas telephone directory.The experts concluded that, “Scientific testing established that ‘Raul 214-‘, indicating a portion of a telephone number, was written on the scrap of paper AFTER it was torn from the telephone directory.Thus, contrary to the impression the document creates, the pre-torn, whole page from the telephone directory NEVER contained the remainder of Raul’s telephone number.” The report thus concluded, “The content of the writing and its position on the torn page from the Dallas telephone directory...suggest(s) that the document was designed to create the false impression that the assassinations of President Kennedy and Dr King are connected and that James Earl Ray once had Raul’s complete telephone number.”

The Justice Department investigators, under the direction of Attorney General Janet Reno, did not solicit FBI assistance in their investigation, aware of allegations of FBI involvement in the murder.It is also clear that claims Justice Department officials had no interest in finding the truth about the King murder, is at odds with political realities.President Clinton had high regard for the King family and was given overwhelming political support from African-Americans during the 1992 and 1996 presidential elections.Furthermore, as the report concluded, “..we find it compelling that James Earl Ray failed to identify the documents.He should have recalled them had they been in his car, and he had a strong motive to claim them, regardless of their authenticity.”

WARREN
‘Warren’ is a pseudonym.
Agents Jimmie Locke, William Perry, Thomas Harris and James Green confirmed to reporters they were the only members of the MIG group left in Memphis on April 4th.They were neither in the vicinity of the assassination at the time King was killed nor were they involved in the murder.
In the late 1990’s Justice Department Investigators interviewed Stephen Tompkins who had first alleged that the military had been somehow involved in the King killing.Tompkins said he did not believe his source, Jacob Brenner, who had told him that the 902nd Military Intelligence Group undertook surveillance on King.Brenner had asked for increasing amounts of money for photographs, purportedly taken of the assassination.Tompkins said the story was just like “numerous false stories he had heard from conspiracy buffs asking for money”.
Tompkins also doubted the credibility of two more of his sources who had told him they were sent to Memphis with the 20th Special Forces group of the Alabama National Guard, met a policeman and a CIA agent and witnessed the assassination.
The Justice Department examined military records for the 902nd and the 111th and found no written record of any surveillance of the Lorraine Motel from any unit. However, Carthel Weeden, captain of fire Station 2 in 1968, testified at the Jowers trial that he had been on duty the morning of April 4th when two Army officers approached him.The officers said they wanted a lookout for the Lorraine Motel.Weeden said they carried briefcases and indicated they had cameras.The soldiers were allowed on the roof.
Although Captain Weeden confirmed to the Justice Department investigators that his memory may have been inexact when he testified at the Jowers trial, the Justice Department investigators found no reason to doubt the essential elements of his story. There was a plausible reason why Weeden had not been deliberately lying when he said he had escorted Army personnel to the roof of the Fire Station on the day of the assassination.Sergeant James Green of the 111th MIG, told investigators that he had gone to the roof of the Fire Station with another agent on the day King’s advance party arrived in Memphis, perhaps March 31st.
Green said he went to scout for locations to take photographs of persons visiting the King party at the Lorraine.He said someone from the Fire Station may have shown them to the roof.Green and his partner remained there for 30 to 45 minutes before concluding the area was too exposed to take photographs.According to the 2000 Justice Department report “Green stated he never returned to the roof or the vicinity of the Lorraine and never conducted surveillance of or photographed Dr King.He also advised that he never heard that any other military personnel were in the area of the Lorraine on the day of the assassination or conducted surveillance of Dr King.”
The DOJ Report concluded, “In addition to reviewing records, we located and interviewed five surviving members of the 111th MIG who were in Memphis on April 4, 1968.They all claimed they were not aware that military personnel from any other unit, including the 902d MIG, were in Memphis around the time of the assassination.....Additionally, no one from the 111th MIG had firsthand knowledge that any military personnel were in the vicinity of the Lorraine on the day of the assassination or that military personnel ever conducted surveillance of Dr King.Steve McCall, then a Sergeant and investigator with the 111th MIG, did remember, however, somehow hearing that agents from his unit were being dispatched to the Lorraine on the day of the assassination to watch Dr King and his party.”
Former purported CIA operative Jack Terrell testified at the Jowers Trial by videotape that his best friend J.D. Hill had confessed to him, shortly before Hill’s death, that he had been a member of an army sniper team assigned to shoot an unknown target but their mission had been suddenly cancelled.Hill claimed to have been with the 20th SFG and that he had been specifically trained to participate in a military sniper mission to assassinate Dr King.However, according to Justice Department investigators records clearly establish that Hill was not even in the military during the period of King’s assassination.
It had been quite evident that William Pepper had accepted uncorroborated allegations from many sources whose credibility was unsound.Pepper’s worst mistake was to name a former soldier as one of the assassination back-up team without verifying if the facts were true.As Pepper told it, the commando of the sniper team, Billy Eidson, was then killed off to keep the plot secret.However, not only was the military cablegram Pepper produced declared a forgery but Green Beret. Eidson, was found to be alive and well and furious at the allegations that he was involved in the assassination.He was supported by General William Yarborough, the father of the Green Berets and his chief aide, Rudi Gresham.Members of the ‘team’ were invited to meet Pepper during the filming of an ABC television documentary.When they refused to shake Pepper’s hand the lawyer became visibly shaken.The former army personnel showed contempt for Pepper.Eidson said, “I just want to look at you”.
Eidson brought a $15 million lawsuit against Pepper and his publishers and received an out of court settlement and a published retraction.Carrol and Graf, said, “Some statements by the author about Billy Ray Eidson were not accurate.Carroll and Graf regrets that Mr Eidson was identified as the leader of a military team of snipers assigned as back-up for the assassination of Dr Martin Luther King.In view of the information received since publication, Carroll and Graf no longer believes that Mr Eidson was involved in any such assassination team.”
Pepper’s allegations were further damaged when former General Henry Cobb, who had been the commanding officer of the 20th Special Forces Group, a National Guard Unit, told UK television reporters, “There is no way it could ever happen without my knowledge and I had no knowledge of it and if I had had knowledge of it they wouldn’t have been there in the first place because I wouldn’t have sent them.That’s not a mission....you can’t order people to murder.”
Investigative journalist Marc Perrusquia interviewed military historians, former high-ranking Pentagon civilians and high-ranking intelligence officers.He concluded there was no evidence to support the allegations the Army watched King day to day.He did however, believe army agents occassionally watched the Civil Rights leader at public rallies.
The Justice Department’s investigation confirmed there was no military involvement in King’ assassination.They found no evidence, witnesses, documents or photographs to confirm the hearsay evidence presented at the Jowers trial.The Report stated, “...we found nothing to indicate that surveillance at any time had any connection with the assassination.”
The Justice Department Report said that there was no credible evidence to suggest any participation by government agencies in the crime and that the only credible witnesses (Police Officers James Smith, Eli Arkin and Firefighter Carthel Weeden) pointing to government involvement referred only to King’s surveillance and not his murder.
Ray’s aliases.
There was nothing unusual about one of Ray’s aliases having had a ‘security clearance’.Hundreds of thousands of people work for the ‘military-industrial’ complex and have such backgrounds.I had one many years ago – but there’s nothing suspicious in that. Authors who claim otherwise have woven a web which can be repeated endlessly by juxtapositioning biographical details.

As far as your comments about the article as ‘not being evidence based’ - this is not a format that Crime Magazine uses - my book is fully sourced.

Mel,
I enjoyed reading your response. You have been civil to me and so I shall be to you. Apologies for my statements about the lack of detail in your article on crimemagazine.com, I took it to be a chapter from your book, and I'm sure you have the appropriate sources and footnotes in your book.
I'm a relative novice to the King assassination but I have a few things to say which I jotted down while reading your post. Please bear in mind I do not have a copy of 'an act of state' in front of me as I have to read it at my local library.

I believe that Pepper does say that Carthew was in the British National Party and did not simply call him a british nationalist which indeed does not sound as seedy. I think from the fact that Carthew was interested in buying guns we can tell he is not an average political activist.
I somehow don't think that Sid Carthew would be willing to risk perjury by coming forward with this story of his meeting with Raoul just for the sake of helping out a fellow 'racist'. Having said this the BNP puts on a nice face for the public but is essentially a nazi organisation.

With regard to Pepper changing who he believed to have been a shooter, he freely admits this in his book, we can see his gradual process of looking at several possible suspects, which is what is done in any good investigation. The process of elimination is essential.

With regard to the stories about Dr. Peppers past himself, this is the first I have heard of them. You may not agree with what I have to say next but keep an open mind. When I think of the credibilty of a researcher or activist such as mr.peppers being called into question, I tend to think 'who's dirty trick is this'. CIA agent David Atlee Philips admitted to researcher and lawyers Mark Lanes face that he had issued orders for fake stories to be made about him to dent his credibility due to the publicity he was getting over his work on the Kennedy assassination. Lets not forget poor old Jack Anderson who may have been killed had Howard Hunt gotten his way.

I have never heard Glenda Grabows statements with regard to the Kennedy assassination before, did she say this to Pepper, Posner or the department of justice?

As far as I can tell ray never had to spell Raouls name when he associated with him so his spelling of the name is quite irrelevant. Some of my friends whom I have known for years still can not spell my surname.

Have you heard of Gerry Hemmings claim that Raoul was Robert Emmett Johnson who worked in the Dominican republic for Trujillo and others?
Do you know of an online link to the transcripts in the case including the telephone conversation between Grabow and Raoul?

I fail to see what Don Wilsosn motives are for lying about finding the documents and telephone pages. Wilson was retired by the 90'6 and had a business of his own with his wife, I can't remember what the business was i'm afraid, several of his clients received threatening phone calls telling them not to do business with Don, as a result his business took a downturn.

J edgar Hoovers hatred of Martin Luther king and Bobby Kennedy is well known. we know that Martin Luther King was on top of a list of people to be rounded up in case of a national emergency, also the COINTELPRO activities are well documented. There was a policy of assassination by the FBI in relation to black leadership, most notably in halting the black panther movement. Do you believe it is possible that King was marked for assassination by Hoover as he believed him to be a communist? I am asking this even if there was no conspiracy in Kings murder and I'm not trying to make a point, I'm interested in your thoughts on the King-Hoover relationship.

We know that the King family believes in james Earl Rays innocence, we also know that Lloyd Jowers told the king family to their face that he was involved in the operation that killed Dr.King, would that kind of ordeal be worth any kind of money he may have been hoping to get from this publicity? (He received no money as a result of a film or a book deal)

There was no written record of surveillance of Dr.King at the lorraine, I would expect not should they be about to bear wittness to one of the crimes of the century.
Have you had the chance to meet or speak with Glenda Grabow, Don Wilson or William Pepper?
I must ask before I read your book, is it a linear story of how King was murdered by Ray or is it centred around 'debunking' conspiracy theories surrounding the case?

I must say that I am skeptical and unsure of the story of the portuguese man being the Raoul which Ray spoke of. As regards his history, I'm sure you know after researching and coming accross CIA agents and operatives that they have a cover job or story while they are working covertly, I turn to our good friend David Atlee Philips once again for an example how he was working in a public relations firm in Cuba while working for the CIA.

Mel I look forward to some good debate with you. Please stick around the forum
All the best
John Geraghty

John,

For some years Pepper described Carthew as a ‘British Nationalist’ – to his American readers this would mean nothing more than the man was patriotic.When Pepper’s deception was revealed he then cited Carthew’s real political affiliation.Even then, within the context of his writing, most American readers would not have known what the BNP stood for.Carthew had no fear he would be charged with perjury – there was simply no way of verifying whether or not his statement was true.

This is the way Pepper works.He introduces a fact then when it is exposed as untrue (eg:The Mustang’s radio) he adds a slight change.He uses clever ‘lawyerly’ language which appears to fool many people.He omits many facts about the credibility of his witnesses re:Olivia Catling who gave testimony at the Jowers’ trial she had observed a man running away from the scene of the crime.
Catling had apparently managed to keep her conspiracy story secret for over 25 years.She lived a short distance from the Lorraine Motel and had planned to walk down the street on April 4th in the hope of seeing Dr King.She testified at the Jowers trial that when she heard the shot a little after 6pm she ran with her two children and a neighbour’s child to the corner of Mulberry and Huling streets and saw a man running out of the alley beside a building across the street from the Lorraine.The man jumped into a green 1965 Chevrolet just as a police car drove up behind him.He gunned the Chevrolet around the corner and up Mulberry past Catling’s house.She said the police ignored the man and blocked off the street leaving his car free to go the opposite way.She said the man she saw was not James Earl Ray.She also said that she heard a fireman on Mulberry street call to a police officer that the shot came from the bushes.
However, during an interview with Department of Justice investigators, during their 1998-2000 investigation, she contradicted her original story told at the Jowers’ trial.She insisted she had seen a man on Huling Avenue before the police arrived at the intersection, not after they set up their road block.She also told the investigators that she was accompanied by her 11 year old daughter and a neighbour’s 12 year old girl.The investigators interviewed the police officers who had made the road block.They denied anything happened as related by Catling.More importantly, Catling’s daughter contradicted her mother’s version of the events.According to the 2000 Report, “Catling’s daughter, Cheryl Morgan, told us that she was outside her front door and noticed police activity around the Lorraine but heard nothing before her mother came out of the house and said that Dr King had been shot.She understood that her mother had heard the news on the radio and television.Morgan further advised that she then went toward the Lorraine, but not with her mother.She did not see a car speeding away from the area.Rosetta Allen (the neighbour’s daughter) also told us that she did not go to Huling and Mulberry with Catling.Rather, she recalls that she never left her own yard.”
Pepper’s rebuttal to the DOJ Report in his 2003 book totally ignores the statement made by Catling’s daughter to the DOJ investigators.
With respect to your comments about Pepper changing his story about ‘the shooter’, most historians would find this a pretty irresponsible way of conducting an investigation – naming innocent people then excusing himself by saying he had been misled.In fact Pepper has been so gullible in his acceptance of ‘witnesses’ it has led to the propagation of a scenario that is actually ridiculous.The simple fact of the matter is that Jowers and his friends manipulated many people in this affair for financial gain. Jowers’ own family members told DOJ investigators that Jowers and his friends were in it for the money.
You can find the transcript of the telephone call in ‘An Act of State’.
Your comments about Wilson – if someone has lied about events they were allegedly involved in then it is easy to surmise they will lie about ‘sinister’ phone calls.In fact stories about ‘threatening phone calls’ to JFK-linked characters is frequently used in conspiracy literature – it provides drama and intrigue.There is no proof that Wilson received these calls apart from his own words.In fact the DOJ investigators gave Wilson every opportunity to tell his side of the story.He never mentioned threatening phone calls.
I am aware of how the CIA works from the perspective of an academic interest – there are some excellent books out there which counteract the sometimes ridiculous image of the CIA which is propagated by conspiracy advocates – Evan Thomas’s ‘The Very Best Men’, Thomas Powers’ ‘Intelligence Wars’ and Peter Grose’s ‘Gentleman Spy’ among many.
My book does not centre around exposing the conspiracy advocates but, instead, is a narrative of the story using the most up to date information – information that was not available when Posner wrote ‘Killing The Dream’.The book is sold worldwide through most booksellers and online.It was reviewed by JFK assassination expert Max Holland – and I recommend his book published by Random House, ‘The Kennedy Assassination Tapes’.

Mel,
You stated that for Pepper to switch from suspect to suspect in search of a shooter would be irresponsible as a historian. He was approaching the case as a prosecutor and not as a historian, so I would therefore think it quite proper of him to narrow the field of possible shooters.
Can you please rationalize why someone such a Dr.Pepper would undertake a case such as this if he did not fully believe in the cause he was fighting for, monetary reward is I'm afraid out of the question as Dr.Pepper did not make much money (it was never his intention to make money out of the case) from the case and spent years of his life working on a somewhat thankless cause.
The King family trust him, as did Martin Luther King himself.
I have seldom found a good response to a question such as this, for example the question as to why Oswald supposedly shot Kennedy and why Ruby shot Oswald.

The same goes for Don Wilson, what was his motive?
Again I ask who was it that hypnotised Grabow, Dr.Pepper or the DOJ?
Could you reread my post where I make reference to J Edgar Hoover and Cointelpro and tell me your take on the situation at the time.

What is your opinion of the King families complicity in fighting for James Earl Rays innocence?

John

John,
I cannot agree with your characterisation of Pepper's role.He cannot have it both ways - is his work a brief for the defense of Ray or is it a history of the assassination ? - either way, his work fails to convince. If we accept your description of him as a 'prosecutor' then his work has to be seen as extremely biased.
How could MLK 'trust' Pepper if he only had a slight acquaintance with him?MLK saw Pepper's article about Vietnamese refugees but they never carried on a long friendship.
I also fail to see how you can conclude Pepper was not in it for the money.Do you have any information about Pepper's financial gains or losses with respect to his life-long MLK investigation? Personally, I don't know what his motives are.It may be because he really believes in his 'quest'.I do know there was considerable money changing hands for the C4 'Trial' in the early 90s.Pepper also stood to benefit in a number of ways, including the now abandoned Oliver Stone movie and his book sales as well as payments he receives from the lecture circuit. Did you read Posner's expose of Pepper's money-making scheme before he established himself in the UK?
Please do not confuse the life of Dr King with his family who have come under severe criticism of late because of their obvious greed. The articles which chronicle this can be found by a simple google search.
Andrew Ross and Pulitzer Prize winner David Garrow (Bearing The Cross) also give testimony to the ways in which this family have had the wool pulled over their eyes.
SPITTING ON HIS FATHER'S GRAVE
Is Martin Luther King
Jr.'s son a fool or a knave?
Answer: He's both.
BY ANDREW ROSS

in an op-ed piece in Wednesday's New York Times, David Garrow, the Pulitzer Prize-winning biographer of Martin Luther King Jr., takes King's son to task for declaring that James Earl Ray did not assassinate his father on this day 29 years ago. Garrow wrote that Dexter King's "conduct is so misinformed and irresponsible that it threatens to betray his father's legacy."

Threatens? Dexter King could not have done more to betray that legacy if he had dug up his father's bones, pulverized them into dust and spat on his grave. His action brought home just how intellectually and morally bankrupt the civil rights movement has become.

In a bizarre episode last week, a nattily dressed Dexter King marched into the Nashville prison where James Earl Ray is serving a life sentence, shook the hand of his father's assassin and told him, "I believe you and my family believes you." Describing their meeting as a "spiritual experience," King accepted the lowlife bank robber's protestations of innocence, claims he has periodically proffered ever since voluntarily pleading guilty 28 years ago.

How all the white supremacists in the land must have laughed. Numerous investigations, including the House Assassinations Committee in 1978, have shown beyond the shadow of a doubt that Ray pulled the trigger on that fateful day, April 4, 1968. Dexter King has not one iota of evidence to contradict the official investigation's findings. What he does have, he told a Nashville news conference, is "My instincts ... that there are those forces out there that don't want what has been in darkness to come to light." That, and Ray's attorney, who has been leading the King family on a merry chase after unnamed "conspirators" who are supposedly the real killers of King. Oh yes, and a movie deal with myth-maker extraordinaire Oliver Stone, who cannot wait to unspool another vile distortion of American history, this time on the King case.

Dexter King might be dismissed as a hustler, or a vaguely potty relative of a political leader, like Roger Clinton or Billy Carter. But as president of the Martin Luther King Jr. Center in Atlanta, he's the official inheritor and spokesman for King's movement. As such, he's all too symptomatic of how badly corroded that movement, and its leaders, have become -- blame-mongers with little more to offer America's besieged black community than vague references to "forces out there" like the "CIA" and "white racism."

"In a strange sort of way, we're both victims," Dexter King told James Earl Ray, giving the victim pathology a sick new twist. But King is not alone in embracing people who sorely lack that moral character about which his father spoke so eloquently. In recent months, black churches have greeted O.J. Simpson like a long-lost brother; the Congressional Black Caucus feted Johnnie Cochran, who played the race card to get his client off; and the Rev. Jesse Jackson paid bedside homage to the late Tupac Shakur, whose "gangsta" role model sets such a constructive example to black youth.

In such a moral vacuum it is no surprise that the most listened-to black leader these days is Louis Farrakhan, a racist whose belief in blue-eyed devils, numerology and space ships differs only in degree from the conspiratorial worldview offered by more "moderate" leaders like Dexter King. With the heirs of the two greatest black leaders of our era -- King and Malcolm X -- converging in irrational paranoia, a civil rights movement rooted in rational democratic values has been officially snuffed out.

Meanwhile, racists and loons of various hues can now join hands and rewrite history at will. James Earl Ray didn't kill Martin Luther King Jr. The bigot Byron De La Beckwith didn't shoot Medgar Evers in 1963. The Ku Klux Klan didn't blow up four little girls in a Birmingham, Ala., church. It wasn't a gang of good 'ol boys, in an attempt to stop the gospel that Dexter King's father was spreading, who dumped the bodies of Goodman, Schwerner and Cheney in the red earth of Mississippi in 1964. It was all the work of the "dark forces" -- the CIA, the FBI, the ATF, the Zionist Occupied Government -- the same people who brought AIDS and crack to the black community, killed Martin, Malcolm, Bobby, JFK, Marilyn Monroe, the 168 people in Oklahoma City, Vincent Foster, the passengers on TWA 800, the extra-terrestrials who landed in Roswell, N.M., and -- we're sure to find -- members of Heaven's Gate.

In the end, it won't be the penny-ante thugs and racists like James Earl Ray who destroy the hopes and aspirations, still denied, of black Americans. It will be the mind-set perpetrated by the likes of Dexter King, leaders who have abdicated their intellectual and moral responsibilities and embraced myth, paranoia and helplessness -- everything that his father fought against.
April 4, 1997

Also David Garrow's take on the King family:
http://archive.salon.com/news/1998/04/28news2.html

With regard to your comments about J Edgar Hoover - the FBI's hatred of King and his COINTELPRO activities does not establish any proof that JEH was involved in MLK's murder - in fact there is no proof whatsoever. If you have any credible evidence I would like to see it.
Don Wilson's 'motive' becomes irrelevant and if his allegations are untrue - which I believe them to be.Your guess about his motives is as good as mine but I don't think it too far-fetched to believe his failing business had something to do with it as the DOJ investigators implied. Please read my post about Wilson again.
I don't know what you mean by the 'hypnotised' comments.Grabow was a fantasist as I stated in my last post.Do you believe she was correct about the JFK assassination and Jack Valenti's purpoted role as a 'pornographer'?

Mel,
I have learned of Dr.Peppers finances straight from the horses mouth, so to speak.
As regards the article that you have posted I fail to see how the Mississippi burning case or the firebombing of 4 churches compare with the magnitude of the king assassination.
Unless you can give me a good reason why Don Wilson would lie and give evidence forward i see no reason to doubt his testimony. How much money could a man really make from providing such a small piece of information about the case, I can't see oliver Stone making a whole film about one man finding documents in a car and not discussing them for 25 years.

I think J Edgar Hoovers branding of Dr.King as a communist has a lot to do with the assassination. It is said that James Earl ray stalked King before alledgedly shooting him, the same could be said of J Edgar Hoover who tapped Kings phone, bugged his rooms and even had an inside man in kings entourage. I would think that the evidence with regards to stalking is stronger against Edgar.

I have yet to read her account of the JFK assassination and who she said it to, The DOJ I presume. I will indeed get back to you when I have read it.
Grouping The assassinations of JFK,MLK and RFK with alien activities at Roswell is irresponsible and ininformed journalism to say the least.

All the best
John

John,
I have not got a clue what you mean by hearing about Pepper's finances 'from the horse's mouth' - I assume you have been in private correspondence with him.You need to provide further information about what you mean.

Yes, I think it would be best if you read the DOJ report first before any more postings.You also seem not to have read either my book or Gerold Posner's.If you limit your reading to 'conspiracy books' you will be intellectually 'trapped'.For my part I set out trying to destroy Posner's theories.I was unable to do it.I would have enjoyed nothing better than to provide impeachable evidence that Posner was wrong.

Oliver Stone never intended making a picture about one man's finding small pieces of evidence.Why you state that from what I wrote in my post is beyond me.A lot of people involved with Pepper and Jowers did believe they would benefit from the movie.I believe I have given you good reason why.

As per the article I posted - if you cannot accept the reasoning of these scholars then there is nothing more to be said.Nothing, apparently, will persuade you otherwise.Please don't take the comments about Roswell out of context- the writer is making a point about the ridiculous nature of events which have come about because of the way in which conspiracists have distorted this story.

The 'evidence' about JEH is nowhere to be found - can you quote the sources?If not, you simply cannot keep on guessing about his role in the assassination.I can come up with endless amounts of speculation about particular events in American History but I will be laughed out of town if I do not provide factual evidence.This is simply not the way history is written.You can guess all you like until the cows come home but that's all it is - guesswork.

John, I do not wish to be disrespectful but you have provided nothing in the way of evidence, apart from speculation, which can support your intimations that MLK was murdered by either the FBI or some form of government cabal.

Pepper's book, 'Orders To Kill, as you will be aware, sets out in detail Grabow's story which she told to Pepper.By reading the DOJ report you will also learn about the DOJ team's research into this woman's claims.

Hi Mel,
Yes it was from Dr.Pepper that I heard of his finances. Perhaps it is best that I don't mention that again.
I shall head to my local library tomorrow and 'bone up' so to speak. There they have 'orders to kill'. 'an act of state' and Gerald Posners book. I shall do a good bit of reading and shall post a few more bits of information etc.
You don't wish to be disrespectful and I agree that you don't, that i why i shall endeavour to take in the case a bit more.
All the best
John Geraghty

I'd like to thank John and Mel for this excellent thread. I believe the Forum suffers when it's limited to conspiracists jockeying for position. While my knowledge of the RFK and MLK killings is much less than my knowledge of the JFK killing, it certainly seems to me these killings are much more likely to have been the act of a lone-nut than that of JFK. Basically, there were men convicted of these crimes who appear to have been involved, and neither of them ever offered to tattle on any co-conspirators in exchange for leniency. If Oswald had lived and failed to try and cop a plea, or was unable to come up with a conspiracy scenario that seemed firmly grounded in reality, I would say the same about him. Jack Ruby, for whatever reason, did this country a great disservice.

I just thought that I would revisit this particular piece.
After re-reading Dr.Peppers book he does indeed at first describe Sid carthew only as a member of the BNP, he does, however later in the book describe Carthew as involved in racist activity that Mel has described.
I will transcribe the exact wording later in the day.
I just though that it was worth correcting this in case somebody reads this in the future.
John

John,
I don't know as much about the conspiracy angles of Dr. King's assassination as I would like to, and unfortunately don't have the time at this time to start learning about it. I don't even have the time to read all of Mel Ayton's long posts above. But I thought, as you seem to be particularly interested in the subject, that you would find the excertped material below interesting and relevant.


Patsy Sims, The Klan, 2nd ed., Lexington, KY: University Press of Kentucky, 1996.

“During the course of my research, one investigator also observed, ‘You know [J. B.] Stoner’s part of the conspiracy in King’s death, don’t you?’ Over the years, Stoner had slithered from one right-wing group to another, speaking before meetings and rallies, representing their members in court, sharing offices. His ties were like a bowl of venomous spaghetti. Was there an underground right-wing network that perhaps had plotted King’s assassination and other violence? On several occasions, Robert Shelton and Robert DePugh, former leader of the Minutemen, announced plans for such a network, and a meeting supposedly was held in Kansas City, Missouri, with Shelton and David Duke, among others, present. In 1976, Tony LaRicci also had told the press about the formation of a coalition of right-wing groups in Maryland. The FBI and many law enforcement officials scoffed at the idea of such a network, even in view of the Shelton-DePugh efforts and a coming together of right-wing leaders from around the world at an International Congress convened by Duke in New Orleans in September 1976. Were they concealing information? Was there indeed such a network? And could J. B. Stoner be the knot that tied the pieces together? Was he the key to more than the [Birmingham] bombings? Was he part of a conspiracy? Was his tie to James Earl Ray more than that of attorney and friend of Ray’s brother Jerry?

“An overall look at clips and photocopies and newsletters and bits and pieces of information gleaned from interviews and conversations provided grounds for speculation. In an article written less than two months after King’s assassination, the Philadelphia Inquirer quoted the FBI as saying Ray had entered into a conspiracy on about March 29 to kill the civil rights leader, the other party being ‘an individual whom he (Ray) alleged to be his brother.’ The article stated that the FBI had itself injected the word ‘conspiracy’ into the case on April 17 when it filed its original complaint against Ray, then identified as Eric Starvo Galt, one of at least seven aliases he had been known to use, and noted that ‘a day-by-day reconstruction of the movements of James Earl Ray indicates co-conspirators were active both in Memphis, where King was killed, and in Canada, where Ray lived the next month.’ (p. 141)

“Soon after his arrest in London on June 8, 1968, law enforcement agencies released a partial breakdown of Ray’s movements from the time of his April 1967 escape from a Missouri prison, where he was serving a term for armed robbery, through the April 4, 1968, slaying of King. As a fugitive, he had flitted from Birmingham to New Orleans to Los Angeles and on one occasion had seemed to be in two places simultaneously. The Inquirer article said that Ray first assumed the Galt alias in July 1967 when he turned up in Toronto several days after two men robbed a bank in Alton, Illinois, his hometown. A man legally named Eric St. Vincent Galt lived less than two miles from the apartment rented by Ray. The two were said to be strikingly similar in appearance, including scars on their noses and their right-hand palms. Two years earlier, the real Galt had vacationed in Tennessee. He insisted he had never met Ray, and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police could find no connection between the two....

“Ray returned to Canada [from Atlanta, after the assassination] on April 8 and during the month he lived in Toronto before fleeing to London assumed two aliases—both names of actual men who resided in Toronto, bore physical resemblance, and insisted they had neither met nor heard of him.... (p. 142)*

“Toronto seemed to play a key role [in the story of James Earl Ray]. It was also headquarters for the far-right Western Guard and home of John Ross Taylor, the sharp-faced little man I first met at Dale Reusch’s West Virginia rally and later in New Orleans at David Duke’s International Congress. The Toronto Star described Taylor as ‘Canada’s High Priest of Hate.’ In 1965, the Canadian government terminated use of the mail by him and another man because of their distribution of the Thunderbolt and other anti-Semitic literature......

“Could the Western Guard have lent a helping hand to a fellow right-winger? Could it have aided James Earl Ray in obtaining the falsified passport and his sundry identifications? As for the baffling question of where Ray got money for his extensive travels, Stoner himself had boasted that Thunderbolt subscribers would pick up the tab for his 1970 governor’s race. Over the years, the tabloid also had carried letters of appreciation from various recipients, including [Joseph] de la Beckwith, of NSRP [National States Rights Party] defense funds. Could the NSRP also have picked up Ray’s financial tab? (p. 143)

“My speculations were bolstered in January 1978 when the House Assassinations Committee indicated it would subpoena Stoner, along with several NSRP associates, to testify in its investigation into the murder of Martin Luther King, Jr. An unidentified congressional source...indicated the committee would question Stoner both about his allegations that an FBI informant had offered him twenty-five thousand dollars to have King killed and two thousand dollars to blow up the Birmingham church and about his relationship with James Earl Ray. A month later, the New York Times disclosed that Ray’s brother, Jerry, was acting as bodyguard for Stoner, who announced he would again run for governor of Georgia.” (p. 144)



*Sims' book is based on her interviews with numerous Klan people in the mid-70s, so as a source it should be handled with care (interviews, "dated" info, etc). Above all though because she gives some credence in the passages excerpted (omitted at the point of the asterisk) to an article from Inside Detective magazine (July 1968) about one of the Soviet Union's "top spies" (Yuri Nikolayevich Loginov) who had been arrested by South African authorities in the summer of '67 and during his interrogation told how his ultimate destination (posing as a Canadian journalist and/or tourist) was to enter through Canada to get to the US, where his "real work....was to do with assassination"---he "was to be a key man...not aimed at one particular man...but at a number of big men simultaneously in order to confuse, dismay, and cause panic among the people if a number of their great men died suddenly." Aside from this dubious South Africa-generated info, the only relevance of her bringing in the subject was that Loginov had compiled a list of boys born in 1933/34 who had died between 1939/41, "the information apparently intended for use in obtaining new identities and passports" (the list was discovered by South African authorities upon arresting Loginov). She also goes on to relate that Loginov also told the South African security agents that the KGB "knew thirty-six hours in advance that John F. Kennedy would be shot in Dallas" and goes on to advise that "James Venable had confirmed a tip I had received from still another Klan source that a man fitting the description of Lee Harvey Oswald had visited Venable's Atlanta law office shortly before the assassination and requested the names of right-wing leaders." (p. 143) She then goes on to talk about the importance of Toronto for Ray (and Loginov), etc.

I sometimes make the mistake of assuming that people see the same things I do in such material, so please "aks" any questions you might have. What I would point out for now is that it seems clear enough that the South African regime had some reason for promoting a particular Communist angle on the 3 major US assassinations of the sixties---they were "just being helpful" in their way, in other words. (And no, I'm not as of this moment encouraging a "South Africa did it" THEORY.) The more important point is that Ray would seem to have had some "facilitating assistance" at least in his hiding out in Canada, apparently from extreme right-wing people in the Western Guard. Think about things like that when it is proposed that, for instance, someone like Carthew may have aided someone like Ray only on the basis of "an ideological affinity." that's a much easier stance to take, since it makes "conspiracy" mean that a couple of "private citizens" might've got together to do a mis-deed---rather than there being something much more organized in terms of an overall "plan of action" undertaken by a larger group of people.............

In some parts of the United States, people would say windy when asked to talk about what they had read in the article John Simkins first posted in this thread. Mr. Ayton has a definite tendency to write a lot.

My first thought after reading the first paragraph was "a [expletive deleted] WHODUNIT!!!!!!!!!!!! A who-[expletive deleted]-dunit.....

I think "whodunits" sounds a little unserious when talking about capital murders.

I also note "Dr. King's lone assassin" and "From the start, during King's funeral, his aides voiced suspicions that a conspiracy was responsible for their leader's death." I would think those aides might need to be checked out, but lots of people would have "voiced suspicions" about that.

The sad thing about Mel's writing in this article is that once you get past his obvious bias and/or carelessness at the start, he does give a helpful historical rundown of the information. He should be commended for that, but at some point the thought arises whether the overall literary strategy is to overwhelm the potential reader with more info than they could ever have hoped to face, much less to have to read.

1.) "In some parts of the United States, people would say windy[when asked to talk about what they had read in the article John Simkins first posted in this thread."

2.) "The sad thing about Mel's writing in this article is that once you get past his obvious bias and/or carelessness at the start, he does give a helpful historical rundown of the information. He should be commended for that, but at some point the thought arises whether the overall literary strategy is to overwhelm the potential reader with more info than they could ever have hoped to face, much less to have to read."
___________________________________


1.) Your stuff isn't exactly 'breezy.' On the contrary, it's more reminiscient of intestinal gas.

2.) Well, now that that's cleared up...

JG

Tee hee hee..... Really got me a good one there, didn't ya, buddy? Got all that off your chest and feel better now? Jesus, John, it took over a month and that's all ya got? Your li'l buddy Brendan doesn't wait so long to come up with piddles like this....

Why not stick to your Watergate section where you and il duce "Ashton" have so much truth to impart to the masses? Eventually it might pay off, getting Joseph Wilson and Valerie Plame (along with Caddy and Baldwin) shot for TREASON in time of war.

Ding-dong, the CIA's here,

they're the ones

responsible....

Me, I'm still looking forward to the inclusion in the forum of some "darkies" to see if they have opinions on the curriculum being studied.......

William C. Sullivan, who investigated the murder of MKL, wrote this in his book, The Bureau: My Thirty Years in Hoover's FBI (1979):

I was convinced that James Earl Ray killed Martin Luther King, but I doubt if he acted alone. Ray was so stupid that I don't think he could have robbed a five- and ten-cent store. He was not only stupid, he was sloppy. He left the rifle he used to shoot King in an alley, and he left beer cans covered with his fingerprints in the tnmk of his abandoned car. Ray could have left the gun in his room, or if he was smart he could have opened a hole in the wall and hid it there. He could even have broken the gun down into two pieces and carried it out in a small box, but he was sloppy. And stupid.

Someone, I feel sure, taught Ray how to get a false Canadian passport, how to get out of the country, and how to travel to Europe because he could never have managed it alone. And how did Ray pay for the passport and the airline tickets? Ray's brother told the FBI, "My brother would never do anything unless he was richly paid."

Thanks to all the clues he'd left we knew we were after Ray, but we had a hell of a time finding his whereabouts. As the weeks passed, the pressure on the FBI to find him grew. Johnson was giving us hell because Ray was a political liability and would remain so until he was in custody. There were rumors about Ray and the FBI: first, people said that we didn't want to find Ray; then they started saying that the FBI itself had a hand in King's murder. We had a lead that Ray had gone to Mexico, but we couldn't find him there or anywhere else.

As a matter of course, I had asked the Royal Canadian Mounted Police to help us find Ray. One night in early June, two months after King was shot, I got a call at home at eleven at night from Bill Kelly, deputy commissioner of the RCMP and a close friend. "I think we've solved your case," he said. The RCMP had painstakingly gone
through 250,000 passport applications, checking pictures and hand writing, until they came up with Ray's alias. It worked; they traced him for us from Canada to Portugal (where he had been living with prostitutes) to England. He had tried to rob a bank in England to get some money, but naturally he bungled the job. We asked the British to move in and pick him up, which they did.

At our request, the British forgot about the bank robbery attempt so that we could bring him back to the United States on a murder charge.

Ray was in custody in London for two days before Hoover released the story to the press. He waited until the day of Bobby Kennedy's funeral to break the news so that the FBI could steal the headline from Kennedy one last time. I told Hoover that we should give the credit for Ray's capture to the RCMP. Hoover said no and the FBI falsely got the credit.

According to this transcript of a speech by Michael Collins Piper presented to the Zayed Centre crica 2003:


Piper has a radio program, and repeated this claim on air on Mon., January 15, 2007:

Listen to it HERE (click on the link for the date and locate the discussion between Piper and 'Gene from Texas' - about 4/5ths of the way through the program).

Piper says James Earl Ray initiated correspondence with Piper, had strong views on the Martin Luther King assassination - and that Ray believed the "Mossad and American Jewish elements were those who orchestrated the assassination".

Anyone on the forum like to confirm, deny or amplify?

Of course, an alleged assassin's opinion about who orchestrated a murder is not put forward here as decisive evidence.

However, there's an interesting twist. In my previous post, I cited the claim that MLK may have been about to come out strongly against Israel and equate Zionism with Racism.

That would have been big news in the late 60s - and might well have influenced millions to take another look at Israel and the USA's deepening 'friendship'.

When I first began looking into these matters a few years ago, it seemed there was no chance MLK was - even pontetially - anti-Zionist.

After all, he was the author of this widely reported statement, wasn't he?

Just one problem... apparently King never wrote that letter.

According to Camera and Tim Wise writing in ZNet, the Letter by Martin Luther King a Hoax.

True to character, Camera covers for the offficial Zionist line - even at it admits the hoax. Congressman John Lewis apparently thinks King might have wanted to say what he never actually wrote - and Lewis comes up with alternative pro-Zionist quotations . Does anyone know if they're accurate and/or confirmed by other sources?



The Lewis statement, which Camera asssures us IS accurate AND may BE CITED, is reproduced below, after opening comments from Camera:

Some folk sure seem to be working VERY hard to keep alive Martin Luther King's alleged infatuation with Zionism - despite a diminishing stock of (real) evidence.

Sid,
Ray never mentioned any of this to his attorney Dr.William Pepper, nor did he make any such claims in his book 'Who killed Martin Luther King junior'. I think there are a lot of ifs and buts involved to point the finger as Mossad. All the evidence points to military intel, the FBI and a few men in the Memphis police daprtment, not to mention the possibility of Robert Emmet Johnson and Mario Tauler Sague's possible involvement.

I understand that you are only raising this point for the sake of discussion, but the evidence does not point anywhere near to Mossad and frankly I don't hold much faith in Collins Pipers assertions.
There is nothing in MLK's character that would lead us to believe that he would tackle such a divisve issue as Israeli relations with the US. He was far more concerned, at that point, with the Vietnam war and was most likely killed because of his opposition to it.

For an excellent read on the MLK assassination I would suggest 'An Act of State: The execution of Martin Luther King', which I am told will be coming out in a revised paperback edition soon.

All the best,
John