The U.S. media are silent as a graveyard about the surprising, staggering, even sickening revelations surrounding Martin Luther King, Jr. made by his prize-winning biographer David Garrow. Inquiring people want to know if the media, academia, and the entertainment industry will treat King the way they treated other men who fought, fondled, and fornicated with women. Some of his relationships were with men and women—again natural and unnatural.
New revelations reveal that King had sexual relations with as many as 45 prostitutes, mistresses, and girlfriends. He was especially violent with some of them knocking one across the motel bed the night before he was shot.
Such reluctance of the media to deal honestly with King reminds me of my MLK experience while writing columns for USA Today for 8 years until I resigned in disgust. At the beginning of each year, I wrote a column dealing with an MLK theme since his birthday was now celebrated as a national holiday. Each year, the editor refused my MLK column without comment. Of course, I knew why.
Some readers will remember in those days USA Today was really rocking the newspaper boat. Each day their editorial page dealt with a single controversial issue from four or five different perspectives. For some reason, the editor always rejected my columns dealing with King but accepted my other columns! I still have one USA Today issue that dealt with King from five perspectives and not one negative word was on that page!
Then, I took another group to Israel, Syria, Jordan, etc., and spent a couple days in London on my return trip. During that time, I read about King’s massive plagiarism of his university papers, his Ph.D. dissertation, his “I Have a Dream” speech, his “Letter from a Birmingham Jail,” and some of his books. It was big news in the United Kingdom.
Upon my return to the states, discovering that the King scandal had not reached America, I wrote a column dealing with King’s thievery, convinced that no dedicated editor would reject it; but he did. A few months later, another journal broke the story and USA Today lost a scoop!
Progressives must never tarnish the brilliant image of King however distorted, discredited, and degraded the reality.
Soon thereafter, the paper published a full page ad of a man totally naked with his hands over his genitals. The two incidents ended my stint with the nation’s largest newspaper. In March, I told them not to send the annual agreement for me to sign.
That cowardly editorial philosophy is still rampant today in the era of fake news, false stories, and fabricated history. The nation’s press and the broadcast outlets who record world history are without class, courage, or commitment. They obviously do not subscribe to Roman statesman and historian Cicero: “The first law for the historian [or journalist] is that he shall never dare write an untruth. The second is that he shall suppress nothing that is true.”
It seems David Garrow is such a person.
Referring to his 1981 King biography, Garrow declared, “I have been the King guy for 40 years and I wrote a book on exactly this 38 years ago [that won him the Pulitzer Prize]. I felt a complete obligation to confront this stuff. I did not feel I had a choice. I have always felt spiritually informed by King and yes, this changed it. I have not heard his voice much the past year.”
Wow, sounds like a conversion, at least in this matter. I salute his late-in-life epiphany.
Garrow reported on FBI surveillance tapes of King’s hotel rooms that, along with other evidence, reveal that King had 40 to 45 mistresses, girlfriends, and prostitutes. Of course, the number of one-night stands is simply a guess from the FBI files and other sources. Frankly, whether he had 45 or 4 illicit affairs is irrelevant except for the degree of his degeneracy.
It seems Baltimore Pastor Logan Kearse and some of his female parishioners stayed at the historic Willard Hotel near the White House where King was staying in January 1964. King and others were invited to Kearse’s room where they discussed as to which of the women would be more suitable for natural and unnatural sex acts. One woman said she did not approve and “the Baptist minister immediately and forcefully raped her as King watched.” The deplorable news is that King “looked on, laughed and offered advice” while Kearse raped this parishioner from his Baltimore Church!
Kearse did the world a favour when he pointed his toes skyward and turned cold in 1991.
Many are overlooking the multi-faceted aspect of this scandal. Of course, King was culpable in not defending the woman and for sure by laughing and encouraging the reverend rapist, but it gets worse because the FBI agents in the next room did nothing! So, there is plenty of blameworthiness to go around. What man, whatever his position, could permit a woman to be raped without trying to help her?
The day following the rape, “King and a dozen others allegedly participated in a ‘sex orgy’ engaging in ‘acts of degeneracy and depravity.’” When one woman “shied away” from the sex orgy, King told her that “it would be good for your soul.” Hypocrite!
In another incident, King was in a sexual threesome that included a famous gospel singer. The prostitute involved said that it was the “worst orgy” she had ever been in.
However, with this new revelation of King’s encouragement of a rape, what will the screaming ladies of the left do since they are supposed to be female supporters? It must be emphasized that the screaming feminists crucified Senator Al Franken for much less egregious sexual activity. Many women accused Al of unwanted kissing, attempted kissing, and touching of breasts. Well, that is no surprise since Franken came from the depraved entertainment industry. Yet, the Democrat legislators wanted his scalp and got it. Note, a U.S. Senator was forced to resign but King was a serial “john” who took advantage of innocent and many not-so-innocent women and encouraged a rapist.
What will the leftist ladies demand upon hearing of these revelations since the ladies are so sensitive to southern statues and slave holders such as Washington, Jefferson, and Lee? In the name of consistency (honesty), will they take a sledge hammer to King’s bust in Washington and statues around the nation? Will they rename all the streets named for King? What will they do about the puff pieces in the public school textbooks? Will they demand his national holiday be changed to National Civil Rights Day?
Race baiter Shaun King said he understands the “vital role” Jefferson played in the nation’s founding, but still contends he “should not be celebrated” in any way. “He should not have statues, or be on money, or even have a monument celebrating his positive contributions.” Now we will see what Shaun does about these new King revelations. While Jefferson is accused of sexual relations with his slave (and it may be true), there is no suggestion that violent rape was involved.
Will Shaun be fair, honest, and consistent by demanding MLK be treated as he demanded Jefferson be treated? Don’t count on it.
MLK was neither a saint nor a savior but for sure a sinner—like all of us. However, every person is born a sinner but not all of us climb into bed with Communists or prostitutes. And even principled sinners attempt to keep their marriage vows and not visit prostitutes—male or female.
What do I really expect to see? Nothing, since Liberals are generally the biggest hypocrites alive—Republicans and Democrats. Most people will continue to pretend that King was a good, great, if not godly man.
Trying to defend Martin Luther King is like pouring expensive French perfume over a healthy skunk. The results will only be temporary.
Dr. Don Boys is a former member of the Indiana House of Representatives who ran a large Christian school in Indianapolis and wrote columns for USA Today for eight years and authored 18 books. His eBook Martin Luther King, Jr.: Judged by His Character, Not His Color! can be viewed and purchased here. Follow Dr. Boys on Facebook at Don Boys, Ph.D. and TheGodHaters, Twitter, and visit his blog.
Fact, Fraud or Faith?
by Don Boys, Ph.D.
Only an uninformed fanatic says that evolution or creation can be proved scientifically. Christians believe in creationism because we believe in the veracity of the Bible but we also have scientific evidence to support our position. In every debate I’ve had with evolutionary scientists, the arrogant, asinine accusation is made, “Well, evolution is scientific while creationism is religion.” Evolution is about as scientific as a voodoo rooster plucking ceremony in Haiti. Almost.