King On the Middle East From a March 1968 interview MLK:“On the middle East crisis, we have had various responses. The response of some of the so-called young militants again does not represent the position of the vast majority of black people. There are some who are color-consumed and they see a kind of mystique in being colored, and anything non-colored is condemned. We do not follow that course in the southern Christian Leadership Conference, and certainly most of the organizations in the Civil Rights movement do not follow that course. I think it is necessary to say that what is basic and what is needed in the Middle East is peace. Peace for Israel is one thing. Peace for the Arab side of that world is another thing. Peace for Israel means security, and we must stand with all of our might to protect its right to exist, its territorial integrity. I see Israel, and never mind saying it, as one of the great outpost of democracy in the world, and a marvelous example of what can be done, how desert land almost can be transformed into an oasis of brotherhood and democracy. Peace for Israel means security and that security must be a reality. On the other hand, we must see what peace for the Arabs means in a real sense of security on another level. Peace for the Arabs means the kind of economic security that they so desperately need”- A Testament of Hope It seems to me King could of said this in 2002. In my early years I favored Malcolm X over King. Now that I’ve gotten older the scale has tipped over to King. I think the book of Isaiah 53: 9 “He was assigned a grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death, though he had done no violence”. It was too bad that it was violence of 4 little girls being killed and John F. Kennedy being assassinated all in 1963 caused Congress to pass Kennedy’s civil rights bill in 1964. President Johnson who took JFK’s place said he wanted to get it passed for Kennedy’s memory. Mrs. King wrote her assesment of the situation: “ Months later when Martin and I assessed the situation, we realized that President Kennedy had faced a great deal of opposition in Congress to his Civil Rights Bill. But his death moved the nation in such a way that the people felt that the legislation must be passed as a tribute to his memory. This should have been done because it was right, but also for the sake of the entire nation, which had continued to backslide on its promise of democracy for black people” My life with Martin Luther King Jr p.228 In my opinion I don’t have too much faith in politicians. Johnson passed the bill because it was in his self-interest. The evidence comes from Ronald Kessler book Inside The White House p33. Kessler: stated “During one trip, Johnson was discussing his proposed Civil Rights Bill with two governors. Explaining why it was so important to him, he said it was simple: I ‘ll have them n.iggers voting Democratic for two hundred years”. People need to understand that Johnson wasn’t a friend to Martin Luther King. In fact Johnson sicked the military on King with surveillance along with the FBI. Johnson was already alarmed by an incipient “dump Johnson” movement within the Democratic party, the President fulminated against King’s anti war stance-“Goddamnit” he raged at an assistant, “if only you could hear what that hypocritical preacher does sexually”-and let the FBI step up its vendetta against him.” –Let the Trumpet Sound p.428. As a matter of fact the government wanted King and Malcolm X killed both in February 1965. They wanted King to commit suicide. Johnson himself was a big sex freak “The day to-day sexual activities of the president. In the case of Lyndon Johnson, they were extensive. Johnson would pick women out of a crowd…he would spot them and send an aide to be the pimp…of the eight secretaries around him, only three were not having sex with the president”-Inside the White House p.13 When Kennedy spoke out against the war in 1967 in April he would be killed exactly a year later in 1968. King himself was aware of the FBI’s escalating campaign against him, and he and his advisers were convinced that Johnson was behind it, convinced that the President himself was now collaborating with the un-American Hoover to thwart his Poor Peoples Washington campaign and turn the country so completely against King that he would be driven scorned and hated from public life. It depressed King that his relationship with Johnson had degenerated to such a hostile state. What new stories about his faults-his “sins”, as he called them –were Johnson and Hoover whispering into the ears of America? Despite Johnson and Hoover wide scale public disfavor King didn’t slow down his movement. Why are politicians and the media so obsessed with each other’s sex lives? The same thing that was going on in the 60’s went on in the White House during the 90’s. I thought it was crazy that Republicans wanted to impeach and overthrow an election because Clinton lied about seeing Monica’s thong and playing with a cigar with her. It proved my suspicion that the RNC would do anything to advance their party for the Rich guy’s club. For all the Democrats who voted against the impeachment were acting in the spirit of Edmund G. Ross who casted the deciding vote against President Andrew Johnson being impeached. Although I’m no fan of Johnson who vetoed the Civil Rights Bill of 1866. His life story as told by JFK in Profiles in Courage was extremely well written. King was a hero to me. I liked his nonviolent approach to international and national problems. Its too bad his advocacy against violence was the cause of him being killed. His extra sex life shouldn’t of been exposed by Hoover. All the illegally taping was wrong. He had a right to privacy and his “sins” were between him and his god. I could understand some of the things King went through. The lies Hoover fed the public. I’ve been myself accused of being gay, which is false. King had a trusted adviser at his side Bayard Rustin who was homosexual. I guess King didn’t believe in any type of discrimination.