US Government Found GUILTY Of Murdering Martin Luther King Jr.

[Rubato Garcia]

Loyd Jowers said he paid Memphis police officer Earl Clark to fire the shot. I guess the Memphis PD counts as a "governmental agency." Jowers was hired by a Memphis grocery store owner with "Mafia connections" *cough*feds*cough*.

But here's another credible source

nytimes.com/1999/12/09/us/memphis-jury-sees-conspiracy-in-martin-luther-king-s-killing.html

 

[vageneral08]

A part of me is shocked but a larger part of me isn't.....why won't the media talk about this??? Even if it isn't completely true, why won't the media at least have a conversation about it?

because it's the government bruh they can get away with anything....who's gonna punish them? lol

 

[NeighborhoodNomad.]

A government might admit to being involved in x,y,z crimes, but NO government is going to actually convict itself. That would make no sense.

The only ones who can convict a government are the people/citizens of that nation.

But of course that would ultimately mean revolution, and a complete overthrowing of those in power.

Keep your guns people. Keep your guns.

 

[kingblaze84]

no of this matter to the masses until it start to happen to white people.

too many blacks dont care for life enough to care about this one. they wont read it an ask for a summary,say its fukked up then go listen to the new gucci mane.

the black pride died a while ago. only a few of us still have it and wear it proudly on our sleeve.

I partially agree and disagree, but you don't have to scapegoat Gucci Mane. Contrary to popular belief, the man is honestly a very creative and hardworking (rap) artist. And his shit go hard. Now if you want to use Trinidad James as your example, then be my guest. That nigga just looks ignorant.

LOL, very true, but I'd say 55% of Black Americans have strong pride left in them, the others I'm not so sure....

 

[ReppinTime]

They did the same exact routine when they instigated and finally let 2pac get killed. Which of course was more important than Mlk's assassination.

 

[kingblaze84]

They did the same exact routine when they instigated and finally let 2pac get killed. Which of course was more important than Mlk's assassination.

Hip-Hop did more for Civil Rights then Civil Rights leaders did true but 2pac's killing was more important then MLK's death bruh?

 

[kingblaze84]

A government might admit to being involved in x,y,z crimes, but NO government is going to actually convict itself. That would make no sense.

The only ones who can convict a government are the people/citizens of that nation.

But of course that would ultimately mean revolution, and a complete overthrowing of those in power.

Keep your guns people. Keep your guns.

YES SIR........

 

[janklow]

Keep your guns people. Keep your guns.

of course, a lot of people mistrustful of the government are going to thus need to stop voting for people who want to take your guns. i've never understood this, but here we are.

 

[mc317]

E howard hunt and Ted Shackley killed him

 

[aladdin1978]

Watch the dick Gregory video on YouTube talking about this.

 

[bbwthick23]

And it matters now why?

 

[Plutarch]

Lol, c'mon. Admittedly, everything that you said was right, but you're just scratching the surface. The government was not convicted itself, but it was found to be actively involved in the murder.

no, a civil court --which, let's remember, has a lower standard of proof to meet-- said this guy may have been connected to the government. was anyone else specifically even found liable?

Lower standard of proof to meet? C'mawwn. You're really grabbing at straws to deny this. But why?

This guy was connected to the government. This is an insightful article:http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/Unspeakable/MLKconExp.html

Said article says:

According to a Memphis jury’s verdict on December 8, 1999, in the wrongful death lawsuit of the King family versus Loyd Jowers “and other unknown co-conspirators,” Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated by a conspiracy that included agencies of his own government. Almost 32 years after King’s murder at the Lorraine Motel in Memphis on April 4, 1968, a court extended the circle of responsibility for the assassination beyond the late scapegoat James Earl Ray to the United States government.

...

The jury also heard a tape recording of a two-hour-long confession Jowers made at a fall 1998 meeting with Martin Luther King’s son Dexter and former UN Ambassador Andrew Young. On the tape Jowers says that meetings to plan the assassination occurred at Jim’s Grill. He said planners included undercover Memphis Police Department officer Marrell McCollough (who now works for the Central Intelligence Agency, and who is referenced in the trial transcript as Merrell McCullough), MPD Lieutentant Earl Clark (who died in 1987), a third police officer, and two men Jowers did not know but thought were federal agents.

...

James Lawson, King’s friend and an organizer with SCLC, testified that King’s stands on Vietnam and the Poor People’s Campaign had created enemies in Washington. He said King’s speech at New York’s Riverside Church on April 4, 1967, which condemned the Vietnam War and identified the U.S. government as "the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today," provoked intense hostility in the White House and FBI.

...

The judge continued: “Do you also find that others, including governmental agencies, were parties to this conspiracy as alleged by the defendant?’ Your answer to that one is also ‘Yes.’” An even more heartfelt whisper: “Thank you, Jesus!”

And in regards of your previous argument:

Many qualifiers have been attached to the verdict in the King case. It came not in criminal court but in civil court, where the standards of evidence are much lower than in criminal court. (For example, the plaintiffs used unsworn testimony made on audiotapes and videotapes.) Furthermore, the King family as plaintiffs and Jowers as defendant agreed ahead of time on much of the evidence.

But these observations are not entirely to the point. Because of the government’s “sovereign immunity,” it is not possible to put a U.S. intelligence agency in the dock of a U.S. criminal court. Such a step would require authorization by the federal government, which is not likely to indict itself. Thanks to the conjunction of a civil court, an independent judge with a sense of history, and a courageous family and lawyer, a spiritual breakthrough to an unspeakable truth occurred in Memphis. It allowed at least a few people (and hopefully many more through them) to see the forces behind King’s martyrdom and to feel the responsibility we all share for it through our government. In the end, twelve jurors, six black and six white, said to everyone willing to hear: guilty as charged.

And just because Ray pleaded guilty doesn't mean that he did it. He was set up to be the scapegoat.

or he actually did it. you're saying that the plea doesn't mean he did it and then immediately taking it as a given that he was set up as a scapegoat.

False. I never stated or implied that, and still would not state or imply that. You're the one who seems to be making the rash and naive judgement that the Ray trial was an open and shut case for sure and that he did it for sure. Like I said, just because someone admitted a crime doesnt mean that they did it, and we all know that. It was also said that Ray was tricked into taking a plea bargain. Ray did recant. And MLK's own family didn't even believe he did it.

My claim that Ray was set up to be the scapegoat is one that isn't so much based on the claim that Ray might've not done it. Just because those two claims happened to have been right next to each other doesn't mean that one was based on the other. They're both just independent and hypothetical premises that lead to the same hypothetical conclusion that Ray most likely did not do it.

also, the original reason provided for his plea was to avoid the death penalty, and this is, in fact, a common reason why people accept plea deals.

Hm. So what you're saying is that the original reason for the plea bargain was to avoid the death penalty, so the original reason for the plea bargain very well might've had nothing to do with actually admitting to the crime but instead everything to do with plain old fear? Doesn't that kind of support my argument?

I'm sure that you don't deny that that bastard J. Edgar Hoover had it in him to support and execute such a planned assassination, right?

he's known to have planned other assassinations?

Huh? I'm sure you know about the Black Panthers at least. Fred Hampton and co.?

 

[And_So_It_Burns]

Wouldn't suprise me they were murdering our leaders left and right back then.

 

[marc123]

i remember hearin about the trial a couple years back. never really checked for it tho. cuz imo its pretty much knowledge James Earl Ray DID NOT kill MLK. and alotta shady shit went down. and I dont put anything past the US government.

 

[janklow]

Lower standard of proof to meet? C'mawwn. You're really grabbing at straws to deny this.

first off, it's not grabbing at straws. it's a FACT, and this was a civil trial. frankly, calling this verdict "US Government Found GUILTY Of Murdering Martin Luther King Jr" is what seems like straw-grasping to me.

This guy was connected to the government.

okay, so we have Jowers claiming in 1998 that three Memphis police officers were involved (note: not the federal government) and two mysteriously men WHO HE DID NOT KNOW who he identifies as federal. seems, well, flimsy.

And in regards of your previous argument:

Many qualifiers have been attached to the verdict in the King case. It came not in criminal court but in civil court, where the standards of evidence are much lower than in criminal court. (For example, the plaintiffs used unsworn testimony made on audiotapes and videotapes.) Furthermore, the King family as plaintiffs and Jowers as defendant agreed ahead of time on much of the evidence.

or, in other words, even your article takes it as a fact that the standards of proof are lower --something you call "grabbing at straws" if it's not said by an article you agree with, i guess-- but says it's fine because it lets people "see the forces behind King’s martyrdom." the thing is, this could ALSO be people hearing what they want to hear because "proof" of a conspiracy makes them feel better about MLK's tragic murder.

False. I never stated or implied that, and still would not state or imply that.

excuse me? let me quote you directly:

"And just because Ray pleaded guilty doesn't mean that he did it. He was set up to be the scapegoat."

so again, you start by saying the guilty plea doesn't mean he did it, and then declare him to be the scapegoat. and here, you go on about it being "rash and naive" to consider Ray's trial open and shut (and here's a good question: for all your outrage, when did i call it open and shut), and give a laundry list of reasons why you don't think Ray did it. so please, don't act outraged when someone says you said something you said.

Hm. So what you're saying is that the original reason for the plea bargain was to avoid the death penalty, so the original reason for the plea bargain very well might've had nothing to do with actually admitting to the crime but instead everything to do with plain old fear? Doesn't that kind of support my argument?

let me restate, since you have your set belief in mind: people who have ACTUALLY COMMITTED the crimes in question will plead to them to avoid death penalties. this is not something that i am saying Ray alone could have done.

Huh? I'm sure you know about the Black Panthers at least. Fred Hampton and co.?

and it's established that J.Edgar planned these assassinations?

 

[And Step]

]and it's established that J.Edgar planned these assassinations?

Most definitely. If you read the cointelpro papers, the Bureau which he was over were given the OK to forment division and even facilitate killings among different nationalists group using nefarious methods. This edicts came out of his office and were set in motion by many of his aides with his full knowledge and consent. He personally had beef with Dr. King and considered the Black Panthers the most dangerous group in terms of civil unrest.

 

[janklow]

Most definitely. If you read the cointelpro papers, the Bureau which he was over were given the OK to forment division and even facilitate killings among different nationalists group using nefarious methods.

if you want be to believe it's established that J.Edgar PLANNED these assassinations, i need more than COINTELPRO indicates he wanted to foment division. i'm not disputing he did some underhanded shit, but i don't think this assassination stuff is as supported as we're claiming here.

 

[mc317]

Gary Revel: My music career and investigation into the killing of Martin Luther King | 16/05/2009

By Gary Revel, musician and MLK asassination researcher -

As negotiations for the making of a movie about my investigation of the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. proceed I have taken a moment to do some reflection. I ask myself, 'How did I get entangled in this highly controversial and emotionally impacting subject?'.

When I was a teenager my primary goal in life was to write songs and play music for other's entertainment. I had written my first song when I was ten years old, my divorced mother bought me a guitar when I was fifteen, I taught myself to play it and formed my first rock and roll band when I was sixteen. With two brothers serving in the United States Navy and our nation at war, I also enlisted in the Navy after graduating high school. I had no idea at the time where life would take me or about the dangerous journey I would take.

I was singing in a night club in San Diego, California one night and during a break a man approached me and began a conversation. He ended it by handing me his business card and asking me to come to see him when I got out of the Navy. I looked at the card and he was with a big talent agency in Hollywood, California.

After I was honorably discharged from the Navy I went to Hollywood and lived with a friend. One night we were walking to an audition that I had read about in The Hollywood Reporter, when a Rolls Royce pulled over and the man in the driver's seat said, "Do you need a ride?" I was running late so I quickly accepted the ride and told the driver that I was going to an audition and I was running late. There were two men in the car, one was a Vice President of a major movie studio and the other was an entertainment attorney. I played them a song on the way to the audition and they told me that I was going to be a star. I didn't go to that audition, instead we all went to a party at the Vice President's huge mansion in the Hollywood hills where the VP asked me to play some more songs for everyone.

A few days later my first recording session was in the famed Capitol Records studios on Hollywood and Vine in the midst of the glamor and excitement of the movie capital of the world.

My music was a hybrid of rock, pop, funk, country and things in between that I still have trouble describing. I recorded a lot of songs, but when I was offered a contract with Capitol Records I did not go through with it. We have all heard about the sex, drugs, and rock & roll associated with the music industry and Hollywood. It was very true and at that time it was just so much a part of that lifestyle that I could not see how anyone got their job done. So, Instead of taking their offer, I released my own singles on small independent labels. I also wrote and recorded songs for a soundtrack album for a movie called ,"The Last of the American Hobos".

 

[mc317]

A few years later I was offered a job in New York City to collaborate on some songs and I took it. While there a friend of mine, Jud Phillips, asked me to come to Memphis, Tennessee. I soon found myself writing songs for the number one country music publisher of that time, Acuff-Rose Music, in Nashville, Tennessee.

It was there that I began an association with a lawyer, Jack Kershaw, that would change my life and the lives of my wife and children. He was hired by James Earl Ray, the convicted killer of Martin Luther King Jr. to be his legal counsel during the US Government House Select Committee on Assassination Investigations. I had done some private investigative work for him and he asked me to help him with the investigation. It was agreed that my work on the case would be top secret and when I met with HSCA Chief Counsel Richard Sprague he agreed that the government would never release information on my role in the case. Later I would learn that the government didn't stand by it's duty to keep my job confidential.

As far as the public was to know I was a singer/songwriter who happened to be a friend of James Earl Ray's attorney Jack Kershaw and that was all. Still it became clear that great risk to myself and my family had developed because of my work on the case.

It didn't take very long for me to attain secret documents that proved to me the innocence of James Earl Ray. I wrote a song titled, "They Slew the Dreamer" released it as a single on a small independent label. The song told the story of how they slew the dreamer instead of he slew the dreamer. I had come to believe that a great injustice had been done to Martin Luther King Jr. and James Earl Ray also the truth was covered up and hidden from the American people. Disturbing events began to take place in my life that I had never experienced or ever imagined could happen.

At that point my chances of ever having a successful music career were very slim. I had gotten entangled in a big political controversial mess. I had stood up for something I believed in and tried to bring attention to it with my song only to be knocked down and trampled over by the powers that existed at that time. They wanted to hide the truth and bury it, but I survived the cover-up and I think the time is right to bring this to light. I have met many people that even to this very day want to know the truth about MLK's murder; who did it, how they did it, and why. The Government does not want to say that they had any part in it, they would rather blame rogue CIA or FBI agents who conspired with the Mafia. The best chance they had was to blame it on a convict and torture him with psychological pressure to make him confess. However, James Earl Ray never confessed and never had a fair trial. Supposedly in our country one is innocent until proven guilty, but James Earl Ray died in prison trying to prove his innocence.

I disentangled myself from the investigation and moved back to Hollywood California to continue my music career without the complication of dangerous part-time jobs. Now a movie about the story of my investigation is being developed for film and my music is finally distributed around the world through iTunes, Rhapsody, Emusic and other distributors. I feel like times are changing in a good way, controversial subjects are talked about in the media and debated more today than before. If they are not talked about they are easier to hide and easier to forget. I think the US Government owes it to everyone to confess to their role in this cover up. That will give new hope that tragedies like this will never happen again and it will restore trust in the US Government. The most important thing about my story is that it is true. Unfortunately, young people can t read about it in their history books, but I hope someday it will be brought to light.

 

[Plutarch]

Lower standard of proof to meet? C'mawwn. You're really grabbing at straws to deny this.

first off, it's not grabbing at straws. it's a FACT, and this was a civil trial. frankly, calling this verdict "US Government Found GUILTY Of Murdering Martin Luther King Jr" is what seems like straw-grasping to me.

Lol, okay I used the wrong phrase. “Grabbing at straws” wasn’t accurate. I couldn’t think of the right phrase to represent what I saw as you going through any and every possibility to suggest or prove that the government did not have a hand in MLK’s death. And yes, I agree that the thread title (or rather the youtube video title that the thread title is based on) is a bit inaccurate, but I chalk that up to journalistic tactics.

This guy was connected to the government.

okay, so we have Jowers claiming in 1998 that three Memphis police officers were involved (note: not the federal government) and two mysteriously men WHO HE DID NOT KNOW who he identifies as federal. seems, well, flimsy.

Okay, then I presume that we can first at least agree that the local and/or state government was most likely involved. Are you willing to go further and say that there is a possibility that the federal government was involved? It’s clear that you don’t think that the federal government was involved, but I’m not sure whether you are saying that the federal government certainly wasn’t involved or saying that the federal government most likely wasn’t involved. But just because Jowers didn’t personally know the men (which would make sense, since they wouldn’t want to be known if they were federal agents), doesn’t necessarily mean that they weren’t federal agents. Of course, this doesn’t mean the opposite as well, but why and how do you think he came to the conclusion that they were federal agents? It could very well have been badges that he saw, standard uniforms that they wore, things that they did or day, etc. Isn’t it at least possible that they were federal agents? Doesn’t seem far-fetched to me.

And in regards of your previous argument:

Many qualifiers have been attached to the verdict in the King case. It came not in criminal court but in civil court, where the standards of evidence are much lower than in criminal court. (For example, the plaintiffs used unsworn testimony made on audiotapes and videotapes.) Furthermore, the King family as plaintiffs and Jowers as defendant agreed ahead of time on much of the evidence.

or, in other words, even your article takes it as a fact that the standards of proof are lower --something you call "grabbing at straws" if it's not said by an article you agree with, i guess-- but says it's fine because it lets people "see the forces behind King’s martyrdom." the thing is, this could ALSO be people hearing what they want to hear because "proof" of a conspiracy makes them feel better about MLK's tragic murder.

I cited the article precisely because it said the same thing that you said, but it also provided a counterclaim to that point – a counterclaim that I share. That counterclaim is, first, that the trial was fair and just and, second, that part of the reason why the trial was a civil case in the first place was because the federal government would never indict itself for the death of MLK. Regardless of whether or not a conspiracy brings closure to people, the fact that there is suggestive evidence is sufficient enough to at least strongly consider the possibility that a conspiracy is true.