Featured Post

WHITE SLAVES IN AFRICA - STOPPED!

THOMAS JEFFERSON AND THE TRIPOLI PIRATES: THE FORGOTTEN WAR THAT CHANGED AMERICAN HISTORY (New York: Sentinel, 2015) by BRIAN KILMEADE ...

Showing posts with label Martin Luther King. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Martin Luther King. Show all posts

Friday, January 9, 2026

MORE ON THE INSURRECTIONS AGAINST ICE

This began as a letter to a friend, slightly modified for the blog.

  Here is my response to both of your emails.  When I first saw a video, I thought it looked as if the ICE man shot her after she passed him in the auto.  But lots of people have their cameras to their faces, taking videos.  I suspect more will become available.  But where was the shooter?  Seems he was not visible to me, as her car blocked the view.  The woman had returned to her car, and a cop was at her car door asking her to get out.  She did not.  Her car was blocking both lanes of traffic as she had parked perpendicularly, to block traffic?  And the ICE mission?  I only saw the shooter after she turned onto the traffic lane and was shot.  I did not see her car hit him.  I was told by right wing tv that the first shot hit her windshield from the front, so she was driving toward him, at least for a short time.  Then more shots and car stops.

    She claimed to be a legal observer.  I doubt if any court had given her any special privilege or position.  If one of the protest groups had given her that title, well, it would be coming from a biased group.  Liberal orgs. such as the American Civil Liberties Union try to play to the media that they are impartial, but they are a liberal organization, tho historically they have on occasions defended conservatives.  As she Mrs. Good was trained by an organization whose purpose is to disrupt any attempts to deport illegal aliens, I would  not call her impartial.
    In August 1960 I spent 3 weeks at a training institute in Miami, sponsored by CORE, the Congress of Racial Equality; one day a teacher was Jackie Robinson, first black allowed to play in Major League Baseball; another teacher, M L King.  About 40 of us from throughout the nation, 6 from New Orleans as they were hoping to make a break-through there.   Politically, most of os were mainly on the left, tho Robinson openly supported Nixon in the 1960 presidential election v JFK.  The emphasis, how to protest USING NON-VIOLENT methods.  They supplied us with a book on Gandhi, and a short one of Hindu scriptures.  We had to unlearn natural responses, basically, not to defend ourselves.
   Renee Good attended a left-wing training camp too, on how to obstruct ICE.  I suspect this is Antifa in a new uniform.  As is, ICE members are harassed going to work; their home addresses and phone #s distributed to all who can phone and insult  them, physical attacks on these law-enforcement officers continue to rise.  The ICE man who shot her had to have numerous stitches as he had been dragged 35 feet or 350 feed over the street in trying to apprehend an illegal.  The left-wing is willing to use force to get its way.  The training camps to destroy our law enforcers amounts to a revolutionary training camp.  Mrs. Good was probably trained in insurrection.  Indeed, the many protests now occurring - against enforcing the law - these are insurrections.
    America has immigration laws.  Many enter and depart legally.  But under Biden, and with the support of the Dems, and some Republicans who hope to hire cheap foreign laborers, Biden ignored American immigration laws, and encouraged perhaps 2 million illegals to come into the nation.  Trump is trying to deport most of them.  Here illegally, they should have no rights, but Fed Judges find new excuses to keep them here.  The Left wants them here to supplement the Dem vote (as our voting rolls, in theory just for citizens, now have unknown numbers of illegals voting.)  If Trump fails on this, if the Dems return to control Congress in 2026, he will be impeached again (but not convicted) and the Dems will make sure no more deportations occur, and make 20 languages the official language of the nation.  America will cease to be a nation, but a hodgepodge.  Globalists will be happy, as they generally opposed nation states anyway.  The CIA and the Dems (and a few Republicans favor globalism over nation states.  One major reason I voted for Trump was he opposes the globalists.  The nation states allow development of different paths to what we hope will be a better life.  Different experiments.  I think that better than the one-path globalists.      All the best,   Hugh Murray

Monday, January 20, 2025

JANUARY 20, 2025 -- MAKE THIS 2 HEROES DAY

 2 HEROES DAY -- MARTIN LUTHER KING DAY AND

DON J. TRUMP PRESIDENTIAL INAUGURATION DAY

Both great men, both heroes, both despised by the American establishments of their eras.

Both became convicted felons, so we recall King writing letters from the Birmingham jail.  He was convicted by fanatical Democratic District Attorneys determined to punish all who challenged racist, segregation laws.  Former Pres. Trump had to defend himself in court by a slew of fanatical Democratic Party DAs, likely coordinated by Atty. Gen. Garland's Justice Department.  If Trump would simply retire to senility, he would be no threat to the globalist order, but he was planning to run for President a 3rd time, in 2024, and the globalist elite and their coalition decided the best way to prevent him from winning would be through the courts.  Convict him in heavily Democratic areas where the juries would lean against any Republican.  Dig up old charges, some that had never been used against any other business man, or any man faced with a long past sex allegation and never before tried, and now years after the "fact," and taking documents from the National Archives, while VP Biden had also taken such documents, docs which a President could take, but a vice president could not legally do so; yet the Biden case was gently handled by Garland's attys, but they went after Trump - hard.  And, ironically, one reason the recent Democratic Party hates Trump, the Democrats are the defenders of the new racism, the anti-white, anti-male, anti- this and that bureaucratic nightmare of diversity, equity, and inclusion, which also requires inclusion of biological men in women's sports so women will have less chance of winning.  Trump and the MAGA movement stand for equal rights and merit, concepts that are now anathema to Democrats.  Prior to the 2024 election, Trump was facing up to 700 years if all those cases were resolved against him.  Trump did not yield - he fought on.

     King was threatened and assassinated.  They tried to assassinate Trump, twice, in 2 months.  He fought on, and he won the election.  Jan. 20, 2025 will be the beginning of out liberation day.  The invaders are on notice that they will have to go home.  The borders will be open for legal immigrants.  Looters and criminals will be punished, despite Soros chosen attys who fail to perform their duties.  We will have freedom of speech, freedom to question Medictators like Dr. Fauci, whose funds may have paid for the development of Covid (as part of biological warfare), and whose policies probably killed many Americans who should have survived.  Free speech will not resolve all differences, but it may clarify issues.  There will still be mistakes made, many unsolved problems, but we won't have Los Angelse burning so many homes because the Gov. refused to do his job in controlled burning of underbrush and saving record rainfalls for the non-rainy days.  It won't be perfect, for it never is here on earth, but it will be more open so we may discover our mistakes before they become catastrophes.  With luck, under Trump's leadership, America enters a new age on Jan. 20, 2025.

Tuesday, March 26, 2024

MORE THOUGHTS ON COMMUNIST INFLUENCE IN AMERICA

My previous post on CP influence in the US, brought a few more questions to mind.

1)  Martin Luther King, Jr., was gaining importance in the civil rights movement, and one of his chief advisors was Stanley Levison.  Both Pres. Kennedy and Atty. Gen. Robert Kennedy told King to drop Levison, stay away from him because he was a suspected subversive.  King lied, said he would do so, and then continued to remain in contact with his friend and advisor.  Let that seep in.  The President of the US urges King to avoid any more contact with a communist, and King listens, and then ignores/defies the wishes of the leaders of the American government.  King's action speaks - asserting his own independence, and his willingness to hear, confide, befriend, and consider the advise of a possible communist.  What would you do if the President urged you to drop connections with a friend?

2)  In the previous post I mentioned scientist J. Robert Oppenheimer and the Manhattan Project.  What inspired that project?  Who inspired it?  Refugee scientists were worried when they learned that European scientists were moving ahead with discoveries that might lead to an atomic bomb for the Nazi regime in Germany.  Some urged famed scientist, Albert Einstein, to write to President Franklin Roosevelt about the danger if German developed such a weapon, and urged him to promote development of an American weapon.  From this, the Manhattan Project emerged.  We know that Oppenheimer was eventually selected to be the lead scientist on this project.  Why Oppenheimer?  Why NOT Einstein?  Einstein was German, but not loyal the the anti-Jewish Nazi regime.  Indeed, the Nazis had enacted laws removing the citizenship of Jewish Germans.  Einstein had left for a post at Princeton even before Hitler had gained full power.  But Einstein was a left-winger.  He was not considered for the Manhattan Project because he was a security risk.  Yet, Oppenheimer, whose wife was a member of the CP, whose brother was a member of the CP, whose mistress was a member of the CP, and who according to authorities Harvey Klehr and John Earl Haynes, Oppenheimer himself was also a member of the Communist Party in the late 1930s, IS chosen as the lead scientist for the project.  Seems there should be more to this story.

Hugh Murray

Monday, January 15, 2024

HAPPY MARTIN LUTHER KING (Jr) DAY - 2024

 To All,   Happy Martin Luther King Day.  This is a holiday in the US, and his name is known throughout the world.  When growing up in New Orleans in the American South, I recall listening to the radio.  Sometimes they called him by all three names, plus, junior, Martin Luther King, Jr.  But some called him by a slightly different name, Martin Lucifer King, or simply Lucifer King.  Lucifer is another name of the devil, - so Martin, king of the devils.  He was not too popular in parts of the South (and not too popular is parts of the North either).

    Today, there is the attempt to make him into a saint, or even a god.  King was a man, with virtues and faults of men.  He certainly was not perfect.  He plagiarized some of his doctoral dissertation.  He had many encounters with women outside of marriage.  And I am sure other weaknesses and faults can be found.
    But there was great oppression of blacks in the South in those days.  In Alabama over 20 young blacks were murdered over a 2 year period by authorities or racists.  This occurred when the blacks sought to protest some injustices in that state.  When King came to Alabama as a minister, he was soon thrust into a leadership role of a bus boycott.  Threats against him and his family, and against all involved in the growing organization trying to get people to work without using the regular buses.  Union organizers know this kind of organizing is not easy, but add the racial element in the South, and it can be deadly dangerous.  Rosa Parks and her husband had been active two decades before she sat on the bus, and in the 1930s, their meetings had a look-out, and weapons on the table in case of a raid by sheriffs.  Now, they were using non-violence - but that did not mean the other side would be non-violent.
    The Montgomery boycott led to victory against the bus company, and against racism.  But there was much to do.  And many enemies had been made.  The daily struggle to continue a somewhat normal schedule when you know you might be beaten or shot, or your family hurt or killed, and still continue recruiting folks to strengthen the boycott.  Pressures most people seldom or never face.  Does he crumble, or stumble on?  Or stand up bravely, openly?  Sometimes one, sometimes two, but most importantly, sometimes the third.
    I attended a CORE training institute in Miami in August 1960 in Miami.  I joked, it was my first trip North.  Actually, Miami was further south than New Orleans. but, many Yanks had moved south to retire in Florida, so its political atmosphere then was more liberal, less racist, than most of the South.  We had various teachers during that 3-week institute.  One day, Jackie Robinson, the great baseball player spoke to us in the cocktail lounge of the black motel where we all stayed.  It was a lounge at night, but we used it during the day for our training sessions, without liquor.  It was an election year and Robison was openly for Nixon and the Republicans.  We were only about 40 participants, so we could ask questions and it was quite informal.  A few days later Martin Luther King spoke to us in the same lounge, but to a smaller group as half of our institute had been arrested when we sought to integrate the restaurant inside Shell's City super market.  King was, off the record, for John Kennedy and the Democrats - though his father, a prominent minister in Atlanta, was at that time for Nixon.  Like many Protestants in the South at that time, there was still much worry about having a Roman Catholic in the White House.  Interestingly, almost no one complains about Pres. Biden being America's 2nd Catholic President today.
     For the conference, we were given 2 books: the Bhagavad Gita and a biography of Gandhi to learn about non-violence elsewhere.  I speak too much and scribble too much.  Anyway,  Have a great day.
    King continued his activities to free black people even after the victory in the Montgomery bus boycott.   King was a very courageous man.  He could have sold out to the Establishment, and had a really cushy life.  Instead he pushed on.  Sometimes mistakes, sometimes defeats, but he struggled on in a general fight for freedom.  Martin Luther King was a hero; one who deserves the honor of a federal holiday.
    Hugh Murray
 Reply
 Forward
 Delete
 

Saturday, December 1, 2018

"The Green Book" movie and an earlier,1962 integrated road trip in South

To All,  I went to a movie last night and saw one I heartily recommend, The Green Book.  It is "based" on a true story.  I assume there were many, stronger, bitter words between the 2 main characters that are not mentioned in the film.  I suspect it is sanitized.  BUT IT IS STILL A GOOD FILM.  No special effects.  But the basics are there; the basics are true.  If you can, see "The Green Book."
     All that reminded me of a car trip I took in the South.  The Green Book takes place in 1962; my trip was 1960.  Hugh Murray

CAR-RIDE NEW ORLEANS TO MIAMI, AUGUST 1960
Hugh Murray
 In August 1960 the Congress of Racial Equality, which had been involved in student sit-ins that had begun earlier that year, decided to hold a training institute in Miami, Florida.  I desperately wanted to go, and the newly formed CORE chapter in New Orleans was preparing to send some people.  I assumed there would be about 1,000 people from all over the nation who would meet in Miami.  I was living with my parents who were not enthusiastic.  Would I be the only white going?  They asked.  I told them another white from Loyola U. of the South (a Jesuit institution) would be going.  He probably made it easier with his parents by telling them I was going.
8 from the NO area were finally set to go - one who was not an activist but he had a car, Marvin Robinson, a student at Southern U. (in Baton Rouge, which was then the largest Black university in the world).  I think he had been arrested in some of the SU protests in the spring of 1960, and he also had a car.  Ruth Dispenza, a young Black woman (though physically very light), from New Orleans; another young Black woman, I think it was Joyce Taylor; Rudy Lombard, leader of NO CORE, and a student at Xavier U. in NO (a Black Roman Catholic univ.), Archie Allen, a Black student at Dillard U. in NO (a Black Protestant univ.), and the 2 whites.
We were to depart from NO early in the morning.  I did not want the car to come to my parents home, where a possible argument and scene might erupt.  Oliver and I decided to stay the night NOT at our homes, but renting a room at the Negro YMCA.  He did not stay the night, but went out the the French Quarter with friends for a drinking session.  I stayed but got little sleep.  The room had a large window, it was hot, humid summer night in NO, and no air con or fan.  Just outside my window was the big lighted sign for the YMCA, the light filling my room.  Far worse, there was no screen on the window, and mosquitoes buzzed all night.  I got little sleep.
Oliver would not be driving (I learned later he was legally blind).  He would be in the car with the 2 young women and the driver (who may have been related to one of the women.  So in that car was Oliver (white), Ruth (looking, most would think who was white, though she was not), and Joyce (Black) and the driver.  I was in the car with Marvin, Archie, and Rudy (they were all Black).
In those days one could travel rather comfortably in an American car. There were 3 seats in the front, 3 in the back, and one did not worry with the discomfort and hassle of seat belts and other tortures imposed on the modern riders. In our car, Archie had brought an over-sized trunk that was too big for the automobiles boot or trunk, so it lay on the back seat, occupying what would normally be the seats of 2 people. So we only had room to seat 4 people. Archie did not drive, and since his trunk made it impossible for anyone to sleep in the back seat, he volunteered to sit in the middle front seat, least comfortable on the 22-hour journey.
I was not driving when we first had to stop for gas (petrol) in the very conservative state of Mississippi. In those days a gas station was a “service” station, and a young man would first come out to wipe the windshield, before asking how much gas to pump into your car. Before he came, I rushed out to the restroom (toilet), hoping he would not realize we were a mixed (racial) group. The others then followed. I tried to reenter the car only after the clerk was returning to the cash area of the station. We ate in Tallahassee, a diner operation, and perhaps Marvin knew of it through the Green Book, so it was mainly a Black eatery. I was driving deep into the night going south down into Florida. I went to sleep at the wheel. Happily, the car veered slightly to the right, we went only slightly off the paved highway and the right tires hit gravel, which caused noise and the car to jostle a bit waking all the occupants. Someone else decided to drive after that.
We arrived safely at the Negro motel where we would be staying and where CORE had scheduled its conference. It took 22 hours for our road trip. Not much happened to make it a topic for a movie – happily. The conference was nothing like I expected, for instead of a thousand participants, there were only about 50. It was a 3-week training session in non-violence. Most of our session were held during the day in the motel's cocktail lounge. One day our teacher was baseball legend Jackie Robinson, who was also promoting the cause of Richard Nixon and the Republicans (August of 1960 was a presidential election year). On another day, the teacher was Martin Luther King, Jr., who at that time was only quietly for John Kennedy and the Democrats. His father, an influential minister in Atlanta, had been for Nixon, as he was worried about a possible Catholic president. However, once his son was jailed and the Kennedy's made phone calls to help him, the elder King openly supported the Democratic candidate.
Part of our learning was testing. In Miami there was a major supermarket with a restaurant inside. The restaurant was segregated. We were divided into groups and entered the restaurant and took seats. Most of the CORE groups sat at tables to integrate the eatery. Police were called, and many of our group were arrested. Only 2 were at our table, Ruth and me, but as most assumed she was white, we were not arrested (though, in fact, we were integrating the restaurant).
A few Miamians joined the CORE institute, including the son of A D Moore, who was a student at Dillard in NO, and Bob Kunst, who in the 1970s would lead the campaign against Anita Bryant and for gay rights. One organization very sympathetic to ours was the Jewish Culture Society, which lent us their main room for a dance. You could easily distinguish between the 2 groups, their youngest member was about 60, while most of ours were early 20s. I do remember learning how to do the twist from Ruth at that dance.
I recall little of the return trip. I think we had more in the car, so perhaps Archie's trunk went in the other car. Coming with us was a white young woman from NY, Dottie Miller, who would later marry southern white Bob Zellner. The Zellners were leaders in the early days of the civil rights movement in SNCC and in the Mississippi Freedom Summer efforts of 1964.
Back in New Orleans, Rudy Lombard continued to lead NO CORE. NO, the largest city in the South for over a century, was soon to lose it place with the upcoming census. NO had had no sit-in. In early September 1960, Ruth was the chosen leader, as 7 of us were arrested after being read the law, literally, by the then DA of NO Dowling. Archie Allen, Joyce Taylor, me, another white from Tulane Bill Harrell, and 2 others were arrested. The local NAACP opposed us and our sit-in. But soon the Youth NAACP supported us, and more people joined CORE.
We 7 were convicted of a felony. During the trial, we had all sat together with our attorneys, who were Black. When the judge saw this, he threatened us with contempt of court for race mixing his courtroom. So Bill Harrell and I moved away from the others and from our attorneys. Our convictions were upheld on the local an state levels, but eventually, after some years, the US Supreme Court made a decision in our favor.
       In 1961 CORE would originate the Freedom Rides of the 1960s, in which integrated buses from the North were sent south to end in New Orleans, but often they were attacked along the way in Alabama or Mississippi when they sought to integrate bus terminal facilities along the way.  CORE National leader James Farmer beginning in 1961 would eventually furn for Congress in Brooklyn as a Republican, but he lost.  He then had an office in the Administration of Republican Richard Nixon.
This summary of events is written 58 years after the events, so there may be some errors.

Tuesday, May 23, 2017

SMOTHERED BY QUOTATION MARKS?

     Sheriff David Clarke, an elected Democrat for Milwaukee County, is often in conflict with the Mayor, a white liberal Democrat, and his appointed Chief of Police, a white who is probably liberal too.  Clarke is a Democrat, a Black but also for law and order.  He opposes gun control efforts and has urged the law-abiding to try to protect themselves.  He spoke at the 2016 GOP Convention and supported Republican Donald Trump for President.  Most Milwaukee Left-winger despise him.  On Sunday 21 May 2017 the Milw. Journal Sentinel ran an article discussing Clarke's "plagiarism", which I discuss below.  --  Hugh Murray

             In his article, “Clarke accused of plagiarism,” (Sun. 21 May 2017, p. 17A) John Fauber discusses the latest charge against Milwaukee Sheriff David Clarke.  Fauber quotes the original CNN story, which conceded: “In all instances…Clarke credits [his sources] with a footnote, but does not indicate with quotation marks that he is taking the words verbatim.”  Clarke thus failed to conform to academic rules by omitting quotation marks.  Should Clarke be barred from a post with the Dept. of Homeland Security because he missed the marks?
            When it comes to plagiarism, there is little doubt that Rev. Martin Luther King plagiarized large parts of his doctoral dissertation.  No one noted it at the time.  Did anyone outside of his committee even read King’s dissertation back then?  Today, does anyone beside the small number on the academic committees ever read the dissertations and theses?  (Science and math dissertations may be the exception where new experimental knowledge can be advanced within dissertations.) 
            Should King have been barred from leading the Montgomery bus boycott movement because he had plagiarized?  Of course, not.  At that time, no one was aware of the plagiarism, but had they known, so what?  Today, we judge King not on his plagiarism – or other human failings – but on his great strength and courage to stand up for freedom when much of the government was adhered to oppression.  Indeed, it is only after King became prominent that anyone bothered to read and analyze his dissertation to discover plagiarism.
            Clarke should not be judged on his missing quotation marks – unless he is applying for a post to teach academic writing.  If CNN were not liberal, and Clarke not conservative, would CNN have bothered to dissect Clarke’s thesis?  (When Obama became President, many of his records, grades, and papers were removed from public scrutiny.  How would his work fare under critical testing?)

            Clarke should be judged as a lawman, as a sheriff who has inspired citizens to defend themselves, even arming themselves.  By contrast, our liberal mayor and police chief have pandered to mobs and sought to disarm law-abiding citizens, while excusing violent criminals.  Sheriff Clarke is a role-model for law-enforcement throughout the land.  The soft-on-crime crowd will use anything to discredit him, even smearing him with quotation marks.

Thursday, May 8, 2014

SECRET TAPES: Gerry Adams, JFK, Martin Luther King

My comment about a story re Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams who allegedly ordered the murder of a mother of 10 in 1972 for the Irish Republican Army.  Historians at Boston College interviewed many involved in a project to discover what when on in Northern Ireland during the IRA-Protestant conflict; those interviewed were promised their tapes would remain secret until all involved were dead.  Those guarantees were violated when the British heard of the tapes, and asked the US govt. to get them.  The US govt. and Boston College complied.  Here follows my comment:

Sadly, the university caved to the feds. True, one issue was murder, that occurred decades ago in another country during heavy violence. But political events have changed since then, and the release of the info may not change the relative peace now in N. Ireland. Worse, it will make people less likely to cooperate with historians to ascertain the truth of the past. If the US feds are so interested in releasing historical documents, why not begin with the release of everything about the JFK assassination? And what about all the documents on Martin Luther King still hidden from the public? King is the only individual for whom the US has a holiday. Is it not time to learn more of the man and not the myth of Martin Luther King?----Hugh Murray


Monday, October 21, 2013

HIGH-POWERED BOOK SHOOTS DOWN WARREN REPORT

From an Office Building with a High-Powered Rifle: A Report to the Public
From an FBI Agent…(Walterville, OR: TrineDay, 2012) by DON ADAMS
Rev. by Hugh Murray
            Don Adams has written a short, repetitious, extremely important book.  The repetition stems from the many FBI documents which support and expand upon material described in the text.
            Why is the book important?  Don Adams was an FBI agent who interviewed a character who may have been involved in the Kennedy assassination.  Adams queried him a week before, and then several days following, the murders in Dallas.  Adams knows what he did and what he was ordered to do.  Yet, it was not until some three decades after the assassination of Pres. Kennedy that Adams began to study some of the FBI documents; only then did he become aware of how his own information, his reports, had been revised, distorted, and falsified.  True, from November 1963 Adams was aware of pressures placed upon him and other agents from supervisors to avoid certain questions and to silence doubts about the official line on the Kennedy assassination.  Only later, however, did he begin to read critics of the Warren Report, and only after that, did he become aware of how his own FBI reports had been warped by his superiors.
            Adams wrote this book from personal experience.  In 1963, as an FBI rookie agent, he was assigned to the small FBI office in Thomasville, Georgia.  Soon after arriving in town, he overheard his local FBI chief warn the sheriff that Adams was “a Catholic, a Republican, and a Yankee.”(p. 30)  On 13 November 1963 Adams was assigned to interview a right-wing, racist, crank, Joseph Adams Milteer of Quitman, Ga.  This was a high priority assignment, for the agency had been alerted that Milteer had threatened President Kennedy.    On Saturday 16 November Adams spoke with Milteer as he distributed right-wing literature on the street.  Milteer quickly disclosed that he hated the Kennedys, Blacks and Yankees, but he issued no threats.  A week later when Adams heard the news from Dallas, Adams worried that Milteer might have been involved, and that he, the FBI agent, might have failed to prevent the murder.
            Adams was not the only FBI agent concerned about the local Kennedy-hating crank.  By 5 pm on 22 November 1963, Adams received orders to locate Milteer immediately, interview him and then hold him for the Secret Service.(8)  Adams rode to Milteer’s home, then to that of his lady friend and all his usual haunts, searching for his VW bus which was covered with right-wing signs.  Neither Milteer nor his vehicle were to be found.  Days passed.  Finally, Adams spotted the propaganda bus, but then, following FBI procedure, had to get another agent to accompany him.  The interview with Milteer began on the night of Wednesday 27 November into the early hours of Thursday the 28th.  By this time, his superiors had commanded that he ask Milteer five, and only five questions.  Adams wanted to ask many more, but his boss made it clear, these five questions only.  Adams (with his silent colleague present) interrogated Milteer.  One question was, did Milteer have knowledge of the bombing of the 16th Street Church in Birmingham on 15 September 1963.  Milteer denied any such knowledge.  The fifth question Adams was assigned to ask was, did Milteer ever make threats to assassinate the President, or had he participated in a plot to kill Kennedy.  Milteer adamantly denied ever making such threats or conspiring with others to kill the President.(42)  Case closed, as a prominent author might conclude.
            What Adams did not know at that time was that both the Miami Police Dept. and the FBI knew that Milteer had in October and November 1963 spoken with others on ways to assassinate the President.  Some of these threats were tape recorded on 9 November 1963.  The agency clearly knew of Milteer’s threats.  That is why they dispatched Agent Adams to locate Milteer both in mid-November and again on the day of the assassination.  Yet, the FBI did not inform Adams that the FBI had a copy of the tape of Milteer speaking with an informant and discussing how to take out the president with a high-powered rifle from an office building.  Adams was not informed about the tape, or the threats that Milteer had made, and he was constricted as to what he was allowed to ask Milteer by his FBI superiors.   Thus, when Milteer denied making threats or conspiring, Adams had no information with which to dispute Milteer.  And even if he had had the information, his superiors ordered him not to ask any more questions than the original five.
            Just what kind of investigation of the assassination was this?  It was one in which the FBI chief, J. Edgar Hoover, conferred by phone on 22 Nov. 1963 with newly sworn in President Lyndon Johnson and by 9 pm they had decided that Oswald was guilty and he had performed the deed alone, without conspirators.  Once the FBI Chief had made that decision, all information from the FBI agents was to bolster that view, and any evidence to the contrary was to be dismissed, denigrated, destroyed, forged, or falsified in order to promote the lone-nut Oswald theory.  Adams’ book is an indictment of the FBI in the case of the Kennedy assassination.
            Adams was not the only FBI agent to break ranks.  I recall at the time of the Garrison investigation, an FBI man appeared on local New Orleans television asserting that there had been FBI teletypes warning of an assassination soon before the deed in Dallas.  This was being exposed about the same time as the FBI’s destruction of a note hand-delivered to the Dallas FBI office in November 1963 by Lee Oswald.(52, 94)  Yet, the agency did nothing to reveal that Oswald might be dangerous.  Later, it was revealed that even a page of Oswald’s address book had been removed because it contained information about FBI agent James Hosty.  The page had been removed so the Warren Commission would not see it.
            Adams was slow to publicly question the FBI’s Kennedy investigation.  The FBI was the agency for which he worked for decades, and which he still holds in high esteem.  Yet, he is convinced it failed on this, its most important case.  The Adams’ book is more like the reluctant good soldier who grows to doubt, to question, and then to condemn, his commanders.  Adams condemns the FBI leadership on this most crucial case, crucial for Adams, for the FBI, and for the nation.
            Yet, Adams’ writing style and organization leave many loose ends.  For example, in a memo from the FBI’s Civil Rights Div., the SAC of Atlanta (the larger dist. which included both Agent Adams and the extreme racist Milteer) requested to have Milteer’s long distance phone checked “to ascertain if there were any calls to Dallas or New Orleans, during pertinent period.”(77)  Why the inquiry regarding calls to New Orleans, specifically?   Did the FBI have someone in mind in New Orleans with whom it thought Milteer was conspiring?  If so, who?  Oswald seemingly left NO in September 1963.  If the pertinent period is narrow, and closer to the assassination, who in New Orleans did the FBI have in mind?  (Recall, shortly after NO DA Jim Garrison arrested Clay Shaw, US Attorney General Ramsey Clark proclaimed that the Feds had already investigated Shaw and found no conspiracy.  Might the FBI have been thinking of Shaw in 1963?  Of Banister?  Of whom?)
            Even more intriguing, Adams reveals more about the informant, William Somersett, who spoke with Milteer in Florida where the conversation was taped on 9 November 1963.  This taped discussion provides the title of Adams’ book, for then Milteer spoke of killing the President by using a high-powered rifle from an office building.  He also said a patsy would be quickly arrested to divert the authorities from the real perpetrators.  Adams reports that the same informant, Somersett, continued his contacts with extremists and authorities later in the 1960s.  Writes Adams: “On April 3, 1968, Somersett called the Miami Police Dept. to alert them that he had obtained reliable information that Martin Luther King, Jr. was to be assassinated the next day.  Somersett’s information was ignored.”(117)  King was assassinated 4 April 1968.  One wishes Adams would have written more about Somersett.
            What Adams does expose is how the FBI “mistreated” Somersett.  Somersett not only spoke with Milteer on 9 November concerning the method to kill Kennedy, he met Milteer in Jacksonville on 23 November, where Milteer was “jubilant” about Dallas.  “Everything went true to form.  I guess you thought I was kidding when I said he would be killed from a window with a high-powered rifle.”  Somersett asked if Milteer had been guessing when he had predicted the assassination earlier in the month.  Milteer snapped, “I don’t do any guessing.”(103)
            Milteer’s jubilation and bragging that he predicted the Kennedy assassination reminded me of a personal incident.  I had swum against the stream in high school and college in my native New Orleans.  In 1960 I was one of the early members of New Orleans CORE (Congress of Racial Equality), and in September of that year was arrested in the city’s first lunch-counter sit-in.  Some of my relatives were horrified, and to restore honor to the family, one uncle sent money to George Lincoln Rockwell and the American Nazi Party.  I rarely saw this uncle, but he would occasionally stop by my parents’ when I was there.  His usual greeting to me was, “How are the burr heads doing?”  This teasing would annoy me, which is what he wanted.  But, in time, the shock wore off, and I shrugged it off as his “hello.”  Nevertheless, there were serious differences between our world views.   In the early 1960s, if he had a few drinks, he would groan, “Ouuu, that Bobby [Kennedy]!  They’re going to get that Bobby.”  I tried to ignore that comment, too.  It was probably in early 1964, the first time I had seen him for awhile.  At some point in the visit, he smiled and said, “Didn’t I tell you!  Didn’t I tell you they were going to get him?!”  It took a moment for his comment to register with me, for at first I did not comprehend his reference.  Then my jaw dropped when I understood.  I replied, “You said they were going to get Bobby.”  “Well, they got the other one instead.”  Exasperated, I finally asked, “Who is this ‘they’ you keep talking about?”  Nonchalantly, he answered, “The mob, out in the parish.”  Out in the parish meant Jefferson Parish, adjacent to New Orleans, and the leader of the mob there was Carlos Marcello.  In early 1964 no one else was linking the Mafia to the Kennedy assassination.  So, in 1964 that remark only confirmed my view that politically my uncle was on another planet.
            Milteer’s teasing and bragging, like my uncle’s, may have been simple bluffing, braggadocio, bull s***, or it might have been…
            Informant Somersett also told the FBI that he received a phone call at 10:30am on Friday 22 November from Milteer calling from Dallas!  Milteer then assured Somersett that Kennedy would never return to Miami.  At 5:30 pm that day, the FBI assigned Agent Adams to locate and interrogate Milteer with only five approved questions.  Adams searched, but was unable to find Milteer at his home in Quitman or at his lady friend’s, driving by many times.  He could not locate Milteer in his Georgia locale until several days later.  However, unbeknownst to Adams, the local FBI office reported that Milteer was in Quitman on 22 November.  Adams maintains that he was the agent assigned to find Milteer, and the vocal racist was not there.  Recall, Somersett had reported that Milteer had called him from Dallas.  Because Somersett’s information contradicted the official FBI story, Adams discloses how the FBI began to undermine Somersett, inserting comments into his files that Somersett was not a reliable informant.  This discrediting of Somersett BEGAN only with the Kennedy assassination.
            The point is that Milteer was let off the hook by the FBI that declared (without good reason to do so) that Milteer was in Quitman, Georgia on 22 November 1963.  This attempt to deflect suspicion from Milteer was in direct conflict with the reliable information supplied by Somersett.  Therefore, Somersett had to be discredited.
            There is a minor discrepancy I should mention in this book.  On Sunday morning 24 November 1963 a young woman rang the doorbell of the Adams’ home in Georgia, and after some fearful misunderstanding, she identified herself as a student at Tulane/Newcomb Univ. in New Orleans.  “Ms. [Vereen} Alexander told me she had come to me because she knew Lee Harvey Oswald…”(39)  Yet, Adams, in his FBI report of the discussion does not report that.  He writes that there was a party in the summer of 1963 at the home of Dave Hoffman, at which Ms. Alexander “had the strong belief that Lee Harvey Oswald was also possibly present at the party.”(70)
            Ms. Alexander identified Al Peccarero as “a leader” and member of a local socialist group in New Orleans.”  Peccarero, in another FBI report, (not in this book), was also presented as the publicity director of the New Orleans Council on Peaceful Alternatives.  Yet, the same Al Peccarero, during the early 1960s, presented a speech before a large audience of the local White Citizens’ Council.  Which side was Al on?  I suspect he may have been on the payroll of Guy Banister, Kent Courtney, or some agency to spy on the student and university left.  (Admittedly, one may change views.  I have changed, and am now a conservative.  But this change took time.  One does not actively partake at the same time in integrationist and segregationist organizations, or, like Oswald, pro-Castro and anti-Castro, unless for covert reasons.)
            There are many other tidbits in this book that provoke thought, and illustrate that even with excellent agents on the ground, the FBI investigation of the Kennedy assassination was flawed, forged, and distorted to support the instantly fossilized presupposition that Oswald was the lone-nut assassin; to do this the FBI ignored, warped, and buried in trivia evidence to the contrary.
            Here are some revelations from Adams’ book, which is excellent for several reasons.  It includes a transcription of the tape in which Milteer on 9 November speaks to informant Somersett on how to kill the President using a  high-power rifle from an office building and then having a patsy arrested while the real culprits escape.  Milteer’s threats were taken seriously enough by the Miami Police Dept. that Kennedy’s itinerary was changed when he visited Miami on 18 Nov. 1963.  The FBI had a copy of the tape, but it did not push any change in the itinerary when Kennedy visited Dallas a few days later.  And when Oswald visited the FBI office to deliver a threatening note, the FBI did nothing to watch Oswald; it did nothing except destroy his note after the assassination!
            On the morning of 22 Nov. Milteer phoned William Somersett from Dallas who assured him that Kennedy would never again return to Miami.  On 23 Nov. the exuberant Milteer met Somersett in Jacksonville, assuring the informant that his prediction of how to take out the President was no guess work.  Receiving such reports from Somersett, the FBI decided to destroy the informant’s credibility.  3 April 1968 Somersett alerted authorities that Martin Luther King would be assassinated the next day.  The warning by the discredited informant was ignored.  King was killed the 4 April 1968.

            Adams produced a short book with numerous photographs and copies of official documents making the text even shorter.  It is repetitious.  There should have been an expanded index.  Yet, this is a book essential to all interested in the assassination of President John Kennedy.     

Friday, July 26, 2013

DEMOCRATIC PARTY PROPAGANDA POSING AS HISTORY

HARRY TRUMAN AND THE STRUGGLE FOR RACIAL JUSTICE
By Robert Shogan (Lawrence: U. Press of Kansas, 2013)

Rev. by Hugh Murray

            In April 1965 former Pres. Harry Truman received the annual award from Freedom House at a dinner attended by 1,200 in the Grand Ball Room of the Waldorf Astoria.  Pres. Johnson sent a telegram calling Truman “the man to whom the cause of freedom owes the greatest debt.”(NYT, 14 April 1965)  Earlier in the day Truman called Rev. Martin Luther King a “’rabble-rouser’ who has hurt the Negroes’ cause ‘because he hasn’t got any sense.’”(ibid.)  The day before, he referred to King as a “troublemaker.…When reminded that the civil rights leader had won a Nobel Peace Prize, Mr. Truman replied: ‘I didn’t give it to him.’”(NYT, 13 April 65)  In the 1960s Truman was no longer running for office and no longer needed Black votes.  The “civil rights President” was showing different colors.  In March 1960, a month after the first modern sit-ins, Truman declared: “If anybody came to my store and tried to stop business, I’d throw him out.”(NYT, 25 March 60)  In April 1960, Truman was the first guest invited for Cornell University’s “distinguished visitors’ program” where he asserted that “Communists were engineering the student sit-downs at lunch counters in the South…You can never tell,…where you’ll find their fine Italian hand, and it’s not Italian – it’s Russian”(19 April 60)
            It was not only sit-ins that riled the former President.  “Truman…criticized Northerners who have gone South as Freedom Riders as meddlesome intruders.  ‘They stir up trouble…they ought to stay here and attend to their own business and work through the people who are interested in the Negro’s welfare…(NYT 6 June 61)  Two years later, in a talk at a dinner for a Democratic Senator from Ohio, Truman elaborated on his view, “the argument on civil rights has been stirred up by Boston and New England demagogues just as the War Between the States was brought about by Harriet Beecher Stowe and William Lloyd Garrison.  If the Northern busybodies would stay at home and clean up their own back yard, the rest of the country will obey the laws.”(NYT 15 Sept. 63)  Nevertheless, Truman insisted in 1965 that he had “done more for Negroes than any other President,”(13 April 65) and Shogan and other prominent historians appear to agree with him. Indeed, a back-cover blurb by History Channel’s Steven Gillon states: “[Shogan]…tells the story of how Harry Truman overcame the prejudice of his youth to become a powerful force in the struggle for civil rights.”  Shogan, a journalist, is like many academics whose narrative is an endorsement for the Democratic Party.
            Shogan writes well and makes his points.  The problem is what he omits from his history.  True, in the 195 pages of text, he concedes in one paragraph that Truman opposed the sit-ins.  Shogan even cites NYT stories, but few readers will bother to check how important Truman was in the early 60s in labeling sit-ins and other protest actions as Communist directed.
            Shogan rightly notes how little FDR did for Black civil rights in the 1930s.  The creation of the Fair Employment Practices Committee was forced upon Roosevelt by the threat to stage a March on Washington by A. Philip Randolph (whose organization was not the NAACP).  Truman became president upon the death of Roosevelt in spring 1945.  He had won Black votes in Missouri by being fair, honest, efficient, and by supporting creation of a home for wayward Black girls and other local improvements.  He opposed lynching, beating of Black service men home from the war, and general discrimination, but even as Senator, Truman may have favored segregation.  Certainly, he was not in favor of social mixing.  Over time, that may or may not have changed.
            As president, Truman surely hoped to get the Black vote.  And he did think that some features of American society should be reformed.  He favored FEPC, but knew Congress would not make it permanent.  He did appoint a commission to report on the race problem, and it produced a liberal report, To Secure These Rights.  Truman was the first President to address the NAACP, and even in the 1960s was praising the NAACP, while in effect smearing all the other civil rights groups, like King’s SCLC, and CORE, SNCC, etc.  Truman did use his power as Commander in Chief to push for integration of the armed services.  Moreover, Shogan demonstrates how Truman used his Department of Justice to become involved in cases pressing for the end of segregation through “friend-of-the-court” briefs, trying to influence the judges by indicating that the government had taken a side in these cases.
            Yes, Truman was the first president to address the NAACP.  But when one of the founders of the organization refused to support Truman in the campaign of 1948, and instead endorsed Henry Wallace and the Progressives, the NAACP fired W. E. B. Du Bois.  In effect, that was the beginning of the NAACP as a Democratic-Party front group.  And two years later, Truman’s Department of Justice arrested Du Bois as a foreign agent.  Though Shogan discusses Du Bois in the era of Democrat President Woodrow Wilson, especially when Wilson segregated the civil service, Shogan omits how Du Bois was treated by Truman.
            Truman praised the NAACP in the 60s.  But Shogan never mentions what Truman’s Administration did to other civil rights organizations.  The NAACP was certainly not the only major civil rights group.  For example, in the 1930s it was the International Labor Defense that led the struggle to free the Scottsboro boys in Alabama.  Later in the 1930s a plethora of new groups formed like the first snick, the Southern Negro Youth Congress, the Southern Conference on Human Welfare, the National Negro Congress, the Civil Rights Congress, the Council on African Affairs, etc.  All these groups were placed on Truman’s Attorney General’s list of subversive organizations.  By the mid-1950s, all of these had been destroyed.  If the NAACP had not fired Du Bois, and become a Democratic-Party front group, might it not have been placed on the Attorney General’s list for destruction, too?
            In many ways, the Southern civil rights movement did NOT begin with sit-ins in 1960.  I would argue it began in with the campaign throughout the South to elect Henry Wallace and the Progressives in 1948.  When Sen. Glen Taylor of Idaho (the Prog. VP candidate) went to Birmingham to address the SNYC, Sheriff Bull Connor arrested him for entering through the Negro entrance.  Henry Wallace spoke at mixed rallies in the South, often receiving rotten eggs and tomatoes hurled by segregationists.  The PP efforts in Georgia were akin to the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party efforts in the 1960s. 
            Some of the PP figures would re-emerge in the 1950s;  the Black woman who pushed the NAACP to integrate Central High in Little Rock; and the white women who, in the midst of the threatening white mobs, sought to shield a Black teen seeking to integrate Central High.  Is it a coincidence that SNCC in 1960 became the new “snick”?  There were people in the 1930s and 40s who were dissatisfied with the NAACP’s law-suit approach.  They were not sending atomic secrets to Moscow.  They were sick of the Democratic Party that ruled the South.  They were subversive to the system of segregation.  They formed some of the links between the PP and the civil rights movement of the 50s and 60s.
            There are other flaws in Shogan’s volume.  He discusses Truman and Israel and how Sec. of State Marshall was strongly opposed to recognizing the Zionist state.  Yet, Shogan never mentions that in two bi-elections in NYC the American Labor Party (by 1948 the NY branch of Wallace’s Progressive Party) won election to Congress by demanding recognition of Israel.  Did Truman “believe” recognition was good policy?  Or did he realize he needed the Jewish vote?  How much did Truman believe in civil rights?  Or did he realize he needed the Black vote?
            When Shogan discusses the importance of Justice Dept. attorney Philip Elman, Shogan incredibly omits the revelations that Justice Frankfurter was colluding with Elman concerning the school segregation cases bundled in Brown v. Board of Ed.  If another Supreme Court Justice had been discussing with the attorney for the segregationists, former Democratic candidate for President, John W. Davis, on what would be the best arguments to convince all the court of the legality and fairness of segregation, you can imagine the outcry of cheating, foul, corruption, etc.!  They would have demanded the impeachment of the Judge.  Yet, Frankfurter informed Elman that some of Thurgood Marshall’s arguments were unconvincing, and how other integrationist presentations might better sway the court – thus tainting of the court process.  This goes unmentioned in Shogan’s book.
            Truman was an excellent politician.  Yet he did much to retard and destroy the civil rights movement developing in the South in the 1940s and 50s; and he denounced it once in was underway in the 1960s.  Moreover, one can argue that the man most involved in the friend-of-court suits, praised by Shogan, was literally corrupting the Supreme Court.  Meanwhile the Attorney General was heading the campaign against the integration movement (destroying all except the Dem. Party approved NAACP).
            Shogan even criticizes Republican Eisenhower!  In Little Rock, Ike was the first president since Grant to send troops to the South to defend Blacks.  What Democrat would do that?  Shogan is impressed by speeches.  Henry Wallace acted.  President Eisenhower acted.
            Shogan has written a pro-Democratic Party account of civil rights history.  The academedia complex will be satisfied.  Because of the major omissions, this book is an utterly distorted narrative. 

Saturday, April 6, 2013

MY NEW ORLEANS STORY - Part 3

Please read Parts 1 and 2 before Part 3.-----Hugh Murray
            I got to know Oliver better in 1960 as the integration crises heated up.  In February of that year students in North Carolina began the modern sit-in movement.  (It was not “the first,” but it was the spark that set the movement aflame.  Columbus was not the first to discover America, but his voyages would thoroughly change both the New World and the Old.)  In response to the Carolina sit-ins, similar demonstrations spread in many areas of the South.  In New Orleans too, some of us wanted to join the protests.  This was especially important because before the 1960 census figures were calculated, New Orleans was still the largest city in the South – as it had been for over a century.  It was also a vanilla city, too, though barely.  Soon Houston, Dallas, Atlanta, Miami, and other Southern cities would outrank New Orleans, but in 1960, the Crescent City was still the most populous one in the South.
            Lanny Goldfinch, son of a Baptist minister, and a Tulane graduate student in philosophy, told me one spring day that there would be a meeting at Dillard U. (one of the Black colleges in the city) to plan for a sit-in.  I was familiar with Dillard because of my involvement with the Unitarian Church.  American Unitarians were a small denomination, numbering fewer than 100,000 in 1960.  Although both the Washington, D.C., and the Charleston, S.C., churches were established by Vice President John C. Calhoun, by 1860 the religion was associated with Abolition and questioning entrenched institutions.  At the end of the Civil War only two Unitarian Churches survived in the South – those in Charleston and New Orleans.  The New Orleans church continued in that tradition of radicalism on race, and after WWII it was a center of the Henry Wallace Progressive Party in the Louisiana.  In the 1950s its minister, Rev. Albert D’Orlando was summoned before the national House on Un-American Activities, and his wife admitted to have been a member of the CP around 1940.  Herbert Philbrick of “I Led Three Lives” fame, alleged that the minister was still a secret Communist.  At one point, a small bomb exploded at his residence, but no one was hurt.  By the early 1960s, with the mounting struggles against segregation, the church required a 24-hour guard.  To be a Unitarian in the 1950s was to be an integrationist.
            But as a high school student around 1955, I was unaware of this background when I first attended the Unitarian service.  It was an old church building that looked like many other Protestant Churches.  President Taft, a Unitarian, had attended the church when he visited New Orleans in the early 20th century.  It appeared as a typical Protestant church, except the stained glass windows included signs of the zodiac, and there was no cross.
            Not knowing anyone, I sat on a small side pew near the back, one that had room only for 3, with a wall on one side.  Shortly after the service began, a couple arrived late, and desiring not to disrupt the general service, they moved to enter the pew with me.  To make room for them, I pushed toward the wall and suddenly realized, they are Black!  What are they doing in a white church?  I had never sat beside Blacks as equals before.  Isn’t this against the law?  I began to breathe with difficulty, and I felt the blood as it rushed to my face and undoubtedly reddened by appearance.  Sure, Blacks might attend a Roman Catholic mass, but they would know enough to sit on the last rows and not with whites.  Moreover, they would wait till all the whites had received communion before they would go to the rail to receive theirs.  And almost all the Protestant churches were segregated.  Even at the Billy Graham Crusade for Christ that I attended at Pelican Stadium in the mid-50s, the audience was segregated.  What was this couple doing beside me?  My father would soon be referring to this as “that Bolshevik church.”  I continued to attend this church.  I was not reborn in Christ, but I was becoming reborn on the race issue and shedding my segregationist world-view.
            At the Unitarian Church in 1957 I met Dr. Georg Iggers and his wife Dr. Wilma Iggers.  They alternated between the synagogue and the Unitarian Church.  Both had fled Hitler’s Europe in the late 1930s, met and married in the New World.  They had only recently arrived in New Orleans from the north – Little Rock, where they had taught at Philander Smith College, a Black institution.  In NO, Wilma was teaching at Xavier (the Black Catholic college) and Georg at Dillard.  He also taught a course at Tulane, where I also knew him.  Georg had been on the board of the Little Rock NAACP, and he was quite surprised by the mobs then erupting at Central High.  He had thought the integration would go smoothly.  After all, Arkansas Gov. Faubus was a liberal Democrat.  It took Republican Pres. Eisenhower to send troops to quell the disorders, perhaps the first time troops were sent South to insure the safety of Blacks since Reconstruction.
            I asked if I could sit in one of his history classes at Dillard, and he agreed.  (I do not want to repeat everything covered in my article published in 1978 in the J. of Ethnic Studies, “The Struggle for Civil Rights in New Orleans in 1960.”  This is available on line at http://www.anthonyflood.com/murray.htm.  For more details on some items discussed here, you might consult that article.)  I did go to Dillard for a number of weeks and attended his class.  No one was rude to me, and I made a few friends, including Shirley, who was active in the local NAACP.  I also joined.  But in the late 1950s, the NAACP was outlawed in Louisiana because it refused to disclose its membership list.  To do so would have resulted in intimidation and possible firings of any teachers who were discovered to be members.  While appeals were in the courts, the New Orleans Improvement Assn. was established, basically as a front-group for the NAACP.
            In the spring 1960 Lanny Goldfinch and I went across town to Dillard to the meeting to energize action against segregation.  I was surprised at the large crowd of hundreds in the auditorium.  I arrived after the meeting had begun, and a number of speakers told of the protests then occurring in many areas of the South, including Baton Rouge, and that now Dillard students must do their part.  There were loud cheers.  Several speakers made the same point, to roaring applause.  Then, Rev. Gandy, the university’s chaplain spoke.  He was a rousing speaker and agreed that Dillard should take a stand for freedom.  But why imitate others?  The others had sat-in.  That was now old hat.  Dillard should take a unique, Dillard approach – do something special to Dillard.  He too gained enormous applause.  In effect, he had defused the call for a sit-in, and likely arrests – and trouble for students, parents, and the college.  Instead of sit-ins, Dillard students would march on campus (where no whites would see them), and then march carrying signs on the sidewalks facing the street in front of the campus.  Arrests would be unlikely for such a demonstration, and Dillard could say that it had done its part.
            Neither Lanny nor I decided to join the specifically Dillard march.  Soon thereafter, Lanny told me of a group picketing on Dryades Street because the A & P supermarket refused to hire any Black clerks.  Not at the same time, but both Lanny and I did join the small picket line of two permitted by law.  The sponsoring group was the Consumers League, a Black organization.  It was my first picket line, and not a very pleasant experience.           
            National CORE (Congress of Racial Equality) desperately sought to expand in the South, and its recruiters met with some from the Consumers League and expanded.  Rudy Lombard a Xavier student, Oliver St. Pe from Loyola, Archie Allen, from Dillard, myself, and others were interested.  We met at the Negro YMCA on Dryades St. and soon the organizers were seeking volunteers to go to a CORE training institute to be held in late summer in Miami.  CORE had been founded in the early 1940s, but it was quite small and usually limited to cities in the North or West.  With the sit-ins, its philosophy of non-violent resistance to oppression was being practiced.  It had made some inroads in 1960 into the South, but was now competing with SNCC, the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee.  A CORE chapter in New Orleans would greatly strengthen the organization.
            I wanted to go to the training session.  My parents wanted to know more.  Would I be the only white?  No there will be perhaps a thousand people from all over the nation, most of whom would be white.  Would I be the only white from New Orleans?  I probably would not be able to go unless another white from the city attended too.  Oliver was going!  I could persuade my folks.
            In two cars, eight of us drove the 22 hours in non-air-conditioned discomfort in August 1960 to arrive at a Black motel.  I was stunned to discover there were no thousands – for this was no convention but a training institute in non-violence.  There were only about 50 of us, 8 arriving from New Orleans.  Our training sessions were conducted by day in the Sir John’s Motel lounge where we sat around small cocktail tables and learned about non-violence,  We also engaged in practice protests whereby some held picket signs, and others in our group would act as the segregationist hecklers, or attackers.  We were trained not curse back, not to insult back, not to hit back, not to…
            Our sessions drew some prominent instructors.  One day our teacher was Jackie Robinson, the baseball legend.  August 1960 was an election year, and he informed us that he supported Nixon and the Republicans.  Another day, the teacher was Rev. Martin Luther King.  He told us he was supporting Democrat John Kennedy, but was not doing so publicly, or not at that moment.
            One day the leaders divided us into small groups to test the restaurant inside Shell’s City supermarket.  I was partnered with another New Orleanian, Ruth Dispenza, a very light-skinned Black.  We were at a table for two, and other CORE testers were scattered in groups of  two, three, or four in the restaurant.  The manager responded by turning up the air-conditioning.  When Ruth and I complained of the cold, they told us it was to get the niggers out.  (Clearly, they assumed we were a white couple.)  Later 16 members of our group, from tables obviously integrated, were arrested.  Oliver was among them.  (I will have a footnote about the dates of this training institute)
            When we returned to New Orleans, rumors circulated that CORE was planning a sit-in in New Orleans – which it was.  Tulane sent emissaries to warn Lanny, Bill Harrell, and myself that the university policy was that anyone arrested would be suspended from the university until proven innocent.  Because a sit-in case would probably be judged guilty on the local and state levels, we might have to await a US Supreme Court decision, which, if it ever came, might take several years. (Which it did.) Meanwhile, we would be suspended from the university.  As I had my small job at the university library, I would also lose my employment.  And I would have to move from my parents’ home.  All of us were facing difficult decisions.  Oliver would not be participating in this action, for he had already been arrested in Miami.
            On Friday 9 September 1960 seven of us entered the large Woolworths at Canal and N. Rampart Streets.  Light-skinned Ruth was our leader, and we were seated dark, light, dark, light, etc.  Bill Harrell, a graduate student in sociology at Tulane, and I, a 21-year-old grad student in History at Tulane, were the only whites.  Archie Allen from Dillard, Joyce Taylor, Jerome Smith and another were the seven.  We were not served.  I was not wearing my glasses as a precaution, for if attacked I did not want glass in my eye.  After an hour, the area of our counter was closed, and we were roped off from the general public.  Someone said my father was there to get me out of the demonstration, but without my glasses when I turned to see, I was not certain it was him.  I suddenly panicked at the thought of a possible headline, “The only violence, a father beats son out of demonstration.”  One more possibility to worry about.  The police would not allow him through.  Eventually, the New Orleans District Attorney Richard Dowling arrived, read us the law on segregation, and had us arrested.  (Dowling was predecessor to Jim Garrison.)
            We were taken to a police station on N. Rampart, then to the main jail on Tulane Ave, where Bill Harrell and I were questioned by the NOPD Red Squad, and then transferred once again to Rampart St.  Because of the transfers, we missed all the meals.  We were released on bail around 9 pm.  Archie Allen and I had not eaten so, joined by Carlos Zervigon (of Mexican and Cuban heritage), we went to a Black restaurant, Whitey’s, on either Louisiana or Napoleon Ave.  The waiter approached: “I can serve you (pointing to Archie), but not you two (indicating Carlos and me.)”  What??  Then he revised, “Well I can serve you two (Archie and Carlos), but not you (me).”  We were all dumbfounded.  Archie and I had been arrested earlier that day when Woolworths would not serve Blacks.  Should we be arrested that very night because Whitey’s would not serve whites?  None of us wanted another round of arrests.  We left.
            I stayed over with different friends for a few days – at the home of Carlos, then at the home of Oliver, then…The Tulane Board quickly met and changed its policy.  It judged the arrest of Bill and myself to be political and not criminal, so we would not be suspended.  Also, I could keep my part-time, low-paying job in the library.  Terrific news.
            Because of the threats, my father had to borrow a gun and bullets to protect his home – even though I was not living there.  He borrowed them from a co-worker on the water front.  When things finally quieted down, and my dad returned the weapon, his co-worker asked, “Why did you borrow so many bullets?  Only one would have done the job.”  Meaning, shoot me.  I was not a popular figure.
            I could not continue to live as a gypsy, from one friend to another each night.  Oliver lived with his parents in a far-out burb and wanted to move closer to Loyola for his senior year.  We agreed to share an apartment.  We found one, large, furnished, just two blocks from the St. Charles street car line, which wobbled leisurely to both Loyola and Tulane.  Touro Infirmary was nearby, and it was a safe neighborhood.  We were on the 3rd floor of a 4-storey old building.  The total rent was $45 a month, or $22.50 each.  To save money, we decided not to get a phone.
            Oliver was a handsome, 23-year-old senior studying sociology at Loyola.  He had had troubles in school and beyond when he was younger, but that was all in the past.  He did have one disconcerting habit, however; he never looked directly when he spoke to you.  Only when I roomed with him did I discover that Oliver was legally blind!  But I had never seen him wear glasses.  He knew I was somewhere out there, but did not look at a person’s eyes.  He received heavy LP records of books that he could listen to.  I even earned small sums by reading to him some of his assigned books in sociology.  He could read, but only after inserting hard contact lenses in each eye, and then wearing extremely thick glasses.  I suspect that with such magnification, he could only read part of a word at a time.
            The neighborhood was safe, but was it safe for us?  Oliver had been arrested with CORE in August, but that was in Miami.  I had been arrested in September in New Orleans.  It had been shown on Huntley-Brinkley’s NBC Nightly News (I did not see it because we were still in jail then), and was big news locally.  Not having a telephone, we were not victims of harassing phone calls, but what if we were attacked?  From his parent’s home, Oliver brought his Ruger, a pistol similar to the German Luger.  He wanted me to learn how to use it, just in case there was trouble.  I was most reticent, having accepted the non-violent, pacifistic approach of CORE.  But he insisted.  And if we were attacked, should I allow the defense of both of us to be in the hands of a blind man?  I learned how to use the weapon.
            The apartment was large, furnished, and quiet.  No one resided in the flat above, and I don’t recall any noise from the one below.  There was only one, large bed, so we shared it.  After a month or two, my hand began to roam over his privates; I began to jerk him off.  First, part of him woke, and then the rest of him, and he started shouting, “What the fuck are you doing?”  He was angry.  I was emotionally crushed.  Yet we continued to sleep together after that and my hands continued to roam.  He would physically move my arm, and then lie in such a way that I could not reach.  After a month, he suggested we get into the vacant flat above.  We carried down the two single beds from that apartment to ours, and replaced them above with our large bed.  After that, my hands did not touch him in such areas.
            Oliver had rejected my sexual advances, but he did not reject me.  From December through May we continued to room together, and to sleep in the same room together, but in separate beds.  Oliver and I remained close, we were friends, even though we were very different.  He told me that as a kid he had been a hell-raiser.  He was older than I because he had school troubles.  While considering dropping out of school altogether, he was saved.  He joined a group whose leader provided him with new direction.  He joined the Civil Air Patrol, and the leader was David Ferrie.  Oliver would speak of David while he and I roomed together.  I remembered the name vividly, because I thought it a terrible name, like being David Fruit (perhaps the most common term for homosexual in NO at that time) or David Queer.  But Oliver always spoke of him with respect and even thankfulness.  In early 1961 Oliver said he would be going to a party at David’s home, for he had not seen him in awhile, and he looked forward to it.  I was not invited, for Oliver and I had separate social lives.  When I next saw Oliver, I asked about the party.  His reply was not enthusiastic – “Oh, David was playing soldier.  There were many dressed up as soldiers and with weapons.”  Only much later would I realize that this must have been a gathering in preparation for the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba.
            At the end of May 1961 Oliver graduated with his BA from Loyola, and soon thereafter would be off to Laos, working with the International Voluntary Service agency or ws it the US Agency for International Development?.  He was there in 1963 when I sent him the clipping about David Ferrie and the Kennedy assassination.  When Oliver returned to New Orleans I noticed he had a large scar on his face.  What happened?  He was still something of a risk-taker.  In Laos, he bought a motor bike and drove it around.  One day he was riding and there was this water buffalo, and…  He returned to New Orleans, married, and had two children.  He continued to work for civil rights, especially those of the disabled.  He died in the 1990s, and there is a building on the campus of the Univ. of New Orleans named after him.
            Why do I include this story?  If Oliver had been gay, we could have engaged in lots of sex in our apartment and no one would have known.  I may not have been handsome, but I was not the ugliest person around.  Oliver rejected me because he was not gay.  Yet, the man who saved him, David Ferrie, clearly was.  Ferrie and the CAP provided Oliver with survival skills so he could return to school and thrive.  Oliver was still a risk-taker: just going to Laos in the early 1960s was a risk, and they driving a motor bike!  Oliver gained confidence to accomplish so much.  Certainly others helped too, Father Fichter at Loyola, and who knows how many others.  But David Ferrie was an important mentor for Oliver.  Did Ferrie also inspire Oswald – another member of Ferrie’s CAP?
            Might Oliver have been sent to infiltrate the integration movement by Ferrie, Banister, or others?  I find nothing to support this.  Oliver was very religious, teaching catechism each week, the Baltimore Catechism at a nearby school.  He partook in a passion play during that year also.  Oliver was in some ways like President Kennedy, a social conservative and an anti-Communist.  He was a Kennedy Democrat.  But perhaps Oliver was more willing to risk more than Pres. Kennedy on the questions of civil rights for Blacks and the disabled  Simply put – Oliver was a good man.  And a hero.  And possibly a saint.  
            And what was my social life like during that year?  I had to work at the library, Friday nights, and 8-5 on Saturdays.  I then taught at the Unit. Sunday School around 9:30 am.  My weekends were busy.  Because of me weekend job, I was unable to attend gatherings as when James Baldwin visited NO.  I also missed the visit of Lillian Smith.  But even today I am still proud of what I taught to the teens on Sundays – What is Justice, using Book 1 and part of Book 2 of Plato’s Republic; then What Happens to the Just Man?, using Job, and then What Does Man Want?, using “The Grand Inquisitor” chapter from Dostoyevsky’s Brothers Karamazov.  I attended CORE meetings and a whole new crop of people at Tulane/Newcomb were interested.  Indeed, that year, I would estimate that half of New Orleans CORE members were white.  One member, Margaret Leonard, a blond from Atlanta and a student then at Newcomb, was the subject of a story in Look Magazine, “The Diary of a Sit In.”  My main accomplishment that year was that I survived.
            Lee Harvey once said that if he and Marina had had a boy, they would have named him David.
            One of Oliver's sons was named David.
              
  
++++++++++++++++++++++++                                                 

A photo from the CORE training institute in Miami, summer 1960.  In this picture I am seated on the far right.  In the 2nd photo, Martin Luther King speaks to the group.  There is a question as to when this occurred.  The website for the King papers states he spoke at the first day of the conference, August 31, 1960.  This cannot have been accurate, for it was a 3-week conference, and I was back in NO and arrested on 9 September.  Moreover, 16 members of the CORE institute were arrested at Shell's City in Miami in mid-August 1960.  King did speak to the group on 31 August, but it was not the 1st day of the comference.---Hugh Murray