Author Topic: King Lieutenant Molests own Children  (Read 3794 times)

  • Guest
King Lieutenant Molests own Children
« on: June 18, 2007, 04:32:00 pm »
He organized the 1963 Children's Crusade in Birmingham, Ala...
   <img src="http://bestsmileys.com/lol/20.gif" alt=" - " />

  • Guest
Re: King Lieutenant Molests own Children
« Reply #1 on: June 19, 2007, 09:34:00 am »
King got Washington's birthday as a reward for  being an extremely important personage of US history.
 
 Thererfore this news story is equivilant to Ben Frankilin being caught having sex with barnyard animals...which would have been considered by reputable historians as being a shocking national disgrace, reflecting very badly on Washington and his policies of the day.
 
 I wonder how many minorities The Rev. James L. Bevel would have to molest before he would tarnish King's reputation in public school history books?  Perhaps 100?  Perhaps 1000?  10,000?
 
 This is another shocking example of media bias.
 
 MEDIA BIAS = Censorship

Jaguar

  • Member
  • Posts: 3869
    • Air Atlantic Underground
Re: King Lieutenant Molests own Children
« Reply #2 on: June 20, 2007, 02:15:00 am »
Quote
Originally posted by Surly Bonds:
  MEDIA BIAS = Censorship
Agreed. Also,
 
 POLITICAL CORRECTNESS = Censorship
 
 
 Both are very important tools commonly used by social engineers including most, if not all, governments.
 
 
 *I didn't read the article so, as a freedom lover, I'm really only commenting on the very general censorship portion and not the article itself.
#609

  • Guest
Re: King Lieutenant Molests own Children
« Reply #3 on: June 20, 2007, 08:34:00 am »
CENSORSHIP = Police State
 
 But who cares what Jag thinks anyway, right?  She's into weirdness right now. Books in all the supermarkets about Bermuda triangles, UFO's, how the Mayans invented television. That kind of thing.

Celeste

  • Guest
Re: King Lieutenant Molests own Children
« Reply #4 on: June 20, 2007, 09:11:00 am »
It's hardly censorship when it's being covered by the Associated Press...
 
 Anyway, what it reveals is not that the civil rights movement was flawed, but that there are creeps of every stripe out there, and where there is opportunity for oppression and wrong doing, it will happen. Sadly, that's human nature.

  • Guest
Re: King Lieutenant Molests own Children
« Reply #5 on: June 20, 2007, 09:34:00 am »
Quote
Originally posted by The Vessel:
  It's hardly censorship when it's being covered by the Associated Press...that's human nature
Main street USA doesn't read newspapers.  I don't remember seeing this on CNN, FOX, the networks or MSNBC? And if it indeed was on it wasn't given 1/10,000th as much attention as Paris Hilton.  BTW, whatever happened to Crystal Gail Mangum?  Oh yeah...she got off scot-free. That didn't make the news either. Some humans are more nature-like than others, I guess?!?
 
 So there!

Celeste

  • Guest
Re: King Lieutenant Molests own Children
« Reply #6 on: June 20, 2007, 09:49:00 am »
Quote
Originally posted by Surly Bonds:
 Main street USA doesn't read newspapers.
Well, you know what, that's their problem. Fucking mainstream rockheads. If people choose to live in oblivion, there's not much that can be done.

godsshoeshine

  • Member
  • Posts: 4826
Re: King Lieutenant Molests own Children
« Reply #7 on: June 20, 2007, 09:53:00 am »
definately was on the local news in dc
o/\o

Celeste

  • Guest
Re: King Lieutenant Molests own Children
« Reply #8 on: June 20, 2007, 10:04:00 am »
Quote
Originally posted by Surly Bonds:
 I don't remember seeing this on CNN, FOX, the networks or MSNBC?
40-year-old scandals aren't as exciting as more recent ones...maybe?

Mobius

  • Member
  • Posts: 1221
Re: King Lieutenant Molests own Children
« Reply #9 on: June 20, 2007, 02:47:00 pm »
Quote
Originally posted by Surly Bonds:
 
 
 Thererfore this news story is equivilant to Ben Frankilin being caught having sex with barnyard animals...which would have been considered by reputable historians as being a shocking national disgrace, reflecting very badly on Washington and his policies of the day.
 
Actually this would be the equivalent of some random guy, who no one has ever heard of, who at one time worked with Ben Franklin being involved in a scandal.  This has nothing to do with MLK.