Tuesday, 13 January 2015

Revisionism

...And I want to quote for you, to you, from the oldest history book in Western civilization. Not just because it's a book, but I think this is a point one can make about any history course, it doesn't matter what the subject is. It can be Social History, Political History, Intellectual History, any history. It can be the History of Ancient Rome, it could be Post-1945 United States, it could be any history. But any history course ought to do the two things that Herodotus named in the opening sentence of the oldest history book we have. This is Herodotus, The History. Isn't it great when you're writing the first book, what are you going to call it? The History; no subtitles, nothing fancy, just — "I, Herodotus of Halicarnassus, am here setting forth my history, that time may not draw the color from what man has brought into being, nor those great and wonderful deeds manifested by both the Greeks and the barbarians, fail of their report, and together, with all of this, the reason why they fought one another."

I don't know how closely you listened to that, but what has Herodotus just said? He's basically said history is two things. It's the story, it's the color, it's the great deeds, it's the narrative that takes you somewhere; but it's also the reason why, it's also the explanations. That's what history does. It's supposed to do both of those things. Some of us are more into the analysis, and we're not so fond of story. Some of us just love stories and don't care about the analysis — "oh, stop giving me all that interpretation, just tell me the good story again."

This is what goes on, of course, out in public history all the time: "just tell us the old stories and just sing us the old songs, make us feel good again. Stop interpreting, you historians, and worst of all, stop revising."

You notice how that word 'revision' has crept into our political culture? When politicians don't like the arguments of people who disagree with them they accuse them of being revisionist historians. It was even a poll-tested word for a while when Condoleezza Rice was using it. "Revisionist, revisionist." As though all history isn't revisionist.

My favorite story about revisionism is my buddy, Eric Foner, was on a talk show once. About 1992. He was on one of those shouting talk shows with Lynne Cheney, who at that — Dick Cheney's wife — who was then head of the NEH. And this was a time — you won't remember this — we were having this national brouhaha over what were called National History Standards.

And Lynne Cheney, if you remember, a real critic of these National History Standards. She didn't particularly like some of the ideas that the historians were coming up with. So on this talk show — it was Firing Line where you get two people on and they just shout at each other for an hour, or a half hour, and the producers love it.

And Foner is pretty good at rapid fire coming back, he's pretty good at it. Anyway they had this set-to and she kept accusing him and other historians of being "revisionist."

And Eric says the next morning he got a phone call from a reporter atNewsweek and she said, "Professor Foner, when did all this revisionism begin?"

And Foner said, "Probably with Herodotus."

And the Newsweek reporter said, "Do you have his phone number?"

Never underestimate the ignorance — H.L. Mencken said this, I didn't — never underestimate the ignorance of the American people. Or of journalists, or of — .

Black people according to Herodotus

Herodotus, a Greek historian, wrote a history of the known world 2,440 years ago. It is the oldest book we have where a person we would call White talks at length about black-skinned people.

Three things set him apart from the way Whites talk about Blacks in our time:

He did not divide the world by race. He divided it by continent – Europe, Asia and Libya (Africa) – and by language – Greek and barbarian – but not by race. He talks about people with black skin, but not about “black people” as if they were one of the main kinds of humans. He applies the term “Ethiopian” to some black-skinned people, but not to all.
Egyptians were black. He saw Egyptians as having black skin and woolly hair (Herodotus, 2.104). He visited Egypt 75 years after the Persians had taken over but before the Greeks, Romans and Arabs had. He travelled the whole length of the country from north to south.
No colourism. In his time, people with black skin, like Egyptians and Ethiopians, were more civilized than some with white skin, like Scythians and Celts. Lighter-skinned Greeks got much of their civilization from darker-skinned Egyptians. White-skinned people were not even the most beautiful:
“The Ethiopians to whom Cambyses sent these gifts are reputed to be the tallest and most beautiful of all peoples.” (3.20)

The incomplete list of people with black skin in Herodotus:

Egyptians – seen as having the most ancient civilization, way older than Greece.
Ethiopians (Nubians, etc) – live south of Egypt. Meroe is their mother city (2.29). Civilized but not as civilized as Egypt (2.30). They once ruled Egypt (2.100, 137-139). Herodotus seems to apply the term “Ethiopian” to more than just Nubians: he also talks about long-lived Ethiopians (3.17-26, 97) and cave-dwelling Ethiopians (4.183). Most of them would have been Nilo-Saharans.
Asian Ethiopians (Dravidians?) – look just like Ethiopians but their hair is straight instead of woolly. They serve in the Persian army in their own divisions as part of the Indian contingent (7.70).
Colchians – live on the eastern shore of the Black Sea. Because they have black skin, woolly hair and practise circumcision, Herodotus says they are clearly Egyptian (2.104).
short men (Pygmies?) – live along what is probably the Niger River (2.32-33) and somewhere on the west coast of Africa (4.43). They live in cities. Those along the Niger practise sorcery. Those on the coast, called dwarfs, wear clothes made of palm leaves.

Other Africans: Herodotus talks about the people who live along the coast between Egypt and Carthage (4.168-180) and along the caravan route that goes west across the Sahara (4.181-199). He does not bring up their skin colour, but remarks on the long hair of those who live along the coast. Most of them would have been Berbers.

In Africa, Herodotus visited Egypt and, just to the west, Cyrene. The rest he knows about from asking questions, particularly in Egypt.

Cicero called Herodotus the “Father of History”. Plutarch called him the “father of lies”. Herodotus felt his duty was to report what he had seen and heard. He expresses doubts about some of what he reports, but puts it out there to let readers come to their own conclusions.

Source: Herodotus, “History” (425 BC). See above for book and section numbers.

See also:

Monday, 12 January 2015

Raul Hilberg

“He was an intensely stubborn and contrary person,”

The First Zundel Holocaust Trial in 1985
from Spike EP on Vimeo.

" It is hard now to remember that the Nazi holocaust was once a taboo subject. During the early years of the Cold War, mention of the Nazi holocaust was seen as undermining the critical U.S.-West German alliance. It was airing the dirty laundry of the barely de-Nazified West German elites and thereby playing into the hands of the Soviet Union, which didn't tire of remembering the crimes of the West German "revanchists." "

- Finkelstein

"As the Nazi regime developed over the years, the whole structure of decision-making was changed.

At first there were laws.

Then there were decrees implementing laws.

Then a law was made saying, "There shall be no laws."

Then there were orders and directives that were written down, but still published in ministerial gazettes.

Then there was government by announcement; orders appeared in newspapers.

Then there were the quiet orders, the orders that were not published, that were within the bureaucracy, that were oral.

Finally, there were no orders at all.

Everybody knew what he had to do."

- Raul Hillberg's explanation for the absence of documentation ordering or authorising the physical Destruction of the European Jews.

Wednesday, 7 January 2015

"Don't De-nut 'im" - Practical Anti-Racism with Lyndon Baines Johnson

"Aw, you guys - you fall all over these guys who went to Harvard, who went to Yale - they look down on me because I went to some crappy little college in Texas...

Lemme tell you something - you gonna find that I'm a damn sight more liberal than them Liberals you bin cottonin' up to..."

- Vice President Lyndon Johnson,

Saigon,

1961

"Don't De-nut 'im" - LBJ Forces the Dixiecrats to Accept the First Black Man in the Cabinet

from Spike EP on Vimeo.

King: Yes. Right. Well, Mr. President, I'll tell you the main thing I wanted to share with you. This really rose out of conversations that I've had with all of the civil rights leaders--I mean the heads of civil rights organizations---as well as many people around the country as I have travelled. We have a strong feeling that it would mean so much, first, to help with our whole democracy but to the Negro and to the nation, to have a Negro in the Cabinet.

We feel that this would really would be a great step forward for the nation, for the Negro, for our international image. And it would do so much to give many people a lift who need a lift now. And I'm sure that it could give a new sense of dignity and self-respect to millions of Negroes who--there are millions of Negro youth who feel that they don't have anything to look forward to in life.

President Johnson: I agree with that. I have not publicly shouted from the house top, but I have had them sit in with me. I--the first move I made was to put one [an African American] on the [National] Security Council.

King: Yes.

President Johnson: And to put one in charge of every bit of the information that went to all of the 120 nations and take him out of an important ambassador post.1 And I am trying my best to get the housing and urban and city problems [sic], which is the number one problem in America as I see it, made into a Cabinet post. I have a good chance of getting it done, unless I get tied in with the racial thing. I'm going to concentrate all of the executive power I can to get that done. I'm pretty half-way committed to putting in [Robert] Weaver, who I consider to be a very able administrator and [who has] done a good job and who we respect pretty highly.2 And I'm trying to bring in others as assistants and deputies. I talked to them no longer than two hours ago about trying to get one in charge of, maybe, African affairs if [G. Mennen] Williams left. I don't know whether you know him or not, but I'm just giving consideration. I don't want to get it around, but it's this fellow [George] Carter that runs [the] African desk for the Peace Corps.

King: Oh, yes.

President Johnson: Do you know him?

King: I just--no, I don't know him well.

President Johnson: Well--

King: [Unclear.]

President Johnson: He's very, very able and we've got George Weaver over in the Labor Department, and I'm bringing them in just as fast as I can.

I gave Carl Rowan the top job over [at the United States Information Agency] . . . I would guess that eight out of the ten people that I talked to felt like that I had problems there. But up to now, he's--he sits with the Security Council on everything. He participates just like the Secretary of State.

And I'm going to--I don't want to make a commitment on it because I don't want it to get tied down in the Congress. But I'm going to shove as strong as I can to get the biggest department there--housing, urban affairs, city, transportation--everything that comes in that department that involves the urban areas of America into one department.

And then if I can get that done without having to commit one way or the other, my hope would be that I could put the man in there and probably it would be Weaver because I think we have, more or less, a moral obligation to a fellow that's done a--

King: He's a top flight man.

President Johnson: He's done a good job, and he hasn't disappointed anybody. If we put somebody into a job and he fails, we lose three steps when we go ahead one.

King: Sure.

President Johnson: And I haven't had any of that, if you'll notice it.

King: No.

President Johnson: We haven't had any mistakes or any corruption or any scandals of any kind. And I've moved them in, I mean, by the wholesale the, both women and men.

King: Yes. Well, this--I--this is very encouraging and I was, as I said, very concerned about this and I know how others have been mentioning that--what this could mean; it would be another great step toward the Great Society.

Friday, 2 January 2015

Billie Kyles

Hollywood Acredits the Memes : Billie Kyles - The Witness in Room 306 from Spike EP on Vimeo.

"Because you know, that was a dum-dum bullet...." - The Liar Rev. Billie Kyles

"Philip Mellanson, a professor and author, testified that Memphis Police Inspector Sam Evans, now deceased, told him that he ordered tactical units away from the Lorraine at the request of a specific "Memphis Minister" associated with Dr. King, whom he named.

The notion that the "Memphis Minister" was involved in the assassination and inadvertently revealed his participation during a public speech is far-fetched.

We confronted the "Memphis Minister" with the accusation and he denied it.

From the Post-King Family vs Jowers et al (1999) Justice Department Report:

Dr. King's Security

Evidence was also presented to suggest a plot to facilitate the removal of Dr. King's security. We discussed most of this trial evidence, along with other related information not presented in the trial, when we considered general accusations that security was removed in Section IV.D.2.b.(1) above. However, two additional pieces of evidence were presented in King v. Jowers in an effort to suggest that Dr. King's associates assisted the alleged plot to remove his security.

Philip Mellanson, a professor and author, testified that Memphis Police Inspector Sam Evans, now deceased, told him that he ordered tactical units away from the Lorraine at the request of a specific "Memphis Minister" associated with Dr. King, whom he named.(89) In addition, other witnesses testified about their belief that the eviction of the Invaders, a group of young Memphis, African American activists, from their room at the Lorraine minutes before the shooting facilitated the assassination. One former Invader, Charles Cabbage, testified that he was told that another minister, the "SCLC Minister," a ranking member of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, ordered that his group be immediately ejected.

We found nothing to support Mellanson's hearsay account that the "Memphis Minister" was the specific source of the request to remove tactical units. When we interviewed the "Memphis Minister," he denied ever making such a request. Moreover, the fact that TACT Unit 10 remained in the vicinity across the street at the fire station undermines the inference that the "Memphis Minister" conspired with law enforcement. See Section IV.D.2.b.(1)(a) above.

Likewise, nothing supports a conclusion that the eviction of the Invaders from the Lorraine, allegedly at the direction of the "SCLC Minister," is related to the assassination. We found no evidence that the Invaders had anything to do with Dr. King's security. Rather, according to associates of Dr. King and former Memphis police officers, the Invaders were young, African American activists who were attempting to associate with Dr. King. Accordingly, even if the Invaders were evicted from the Lorraine by the "SCLC Minister" or some other SCLC staff person, such action would not have diminished Dr. King's security.

Moreover, Charles Cabbage's recent trial testimony is inconsistent with his testimony to the HSCA. Twenty years ago, Cabbage testified that did not recollect the specific sequence of events leading to the Invaders' departure from the Lorraine but that they decided to leave on their own because the SCLC would not pay their room bill. Cabbage told the HSCA that "one of the [SCLC] staffers," whose name he did not provide, somehow advised him that "they [the SCLC] were no longer going to pay for the room, and we [the Invaders] were already overdue and that left no alternative but for us to check out."

Cabbage's recent testimony is also uncorroborated and contrary to the recollections of others.

Significantly, in Cabbage's recent testimony in King v.Jowers, he claimed that it was Reverend James Orange who evicted the Invaders, telling him that the "SCLC Minister" wanted them to leave immediately. When we spoke with Orange after the trial, he told us he did not recall receiving that instruction from the "SCLC Minister" or anyone else. Also, when we interviewed the "SCLC Minister," a friend and associate of Dr. King's, who has led a life of public service, he denied the accusation and claimed that he did not recall that the Invaders were even staying at the Lorraine. We are aware of nothing to contradict his denial. Accordingly, the record does not support the inference presented at trial that African American ministers associated with Dr. King facilitated the assassination by removing his security.

Dr. King's Presence on the Balcony

During the trial, the "Memphis Minister" was also called as a witness and questioned so as to create the impression that he had deliberately lured Dr. King to the balcony of the Lorraine at precisely 6:00 p.m. and left him exposed and alone so that he could be shot. This claim is consistent with the view expressed to us by Dr. Pepper and Dexter King prior to trial. To support this contention, the plaintiffs' attorney questioned the "Memphis Minister" regarding his conduct before the shooting and confronted him with words from his speech at ceremonies commemorating an anniversary of the assassination. In the speech, as he described the events of the assassination, the "Memphis Minister" recounted that just before the shot he "moved away [from Dr. King] so he [the assassin] could have a clear shot."

According to a number of witnesses interviewed by our investigation and previous investigations, Dr. King walked out of Room 306 onto the balcony of the Lorraine just before 6:00 p.m. in the company of the "Memphis Minister." Dr. King conversed with several of his other associates, who were assembled in the parking lot below as they all were preparing to go to dinner. When the "Memphis Minister" walked a few steps away from Dr. King, the assassin fired. As discussed in Section IV.D.1.a.(1) above, we determined that Dr. King's appearance on the balcony at 6:00 p.m. for a 5:00 p.m. dinner engagement could not have been anticipated with enough certainty to plan the time of the assassination.

The notion that the "Memphis Minister" was involved in the assassination and inadvertently revealed his participation during a public speech is far-fetched. The minister's comment, "I moved away so he could have a clear shot," considered in the context of his speech, appears nothing more than an inartful attempt to explain the sequence of events and the fact that Dr. King was shot when he moved away from the speaker's side. It hardly amounts to an inadvertent confession.In any event, we are aware of no information to support the accusation that the "Memphis Minister" led Dr. King to the balcony and moved away to allow the assassin to shoot. We confronted the "Memphis Minister" with the accusation and he denied it. We are also aware of nothing that would have motivated him to assist a conspiracy to murder a friend and associate, while his public life demonstrates his integrity and dedication to non-violence.

D. Conclusions Regarding The King v. Jowers Conspiracy Claims

The evidence introduced in King v. Jowers to support various conspiracy allegations consisted of either inaccurate and incomplete information or unsubstantiated conjecture, supplied most often by sources, many unnamed, who did not testify. Important information from the historical record and our investigation contradicts and undermines it. When considered in light of all other available relevant facts, the trial's evidence fails to establish the existence of any conspiracy to kill Dr. King. The verdict presented by the parties and adopted by the jury is incompatible with the weight of all relevant information, much of which the jury never heard. Accordingly, the conspiracy allegations presented at the trial warrant no further investigation.

VIII. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

After reviewing all available materials from prior official investigations and other sources, including the evidence from King v. Jowers, and after conducting a year and a half of original investigation, we have concluded that the allegations originating with Loyd Jowers and Donald Wilson are not credible.

We found no reliable evidence to support Jowers' allegations that he conspired with others to shoot Dr. King from behind Jim's Grill. In fact, credible evidence contradicting his allegations, as well as material inconsistencies among his accounts and his own repudiations of them, demonstrate that Jowers has not been truthful. Rather, it appears that Jowers contrived and promoted a sensational story of a plot to kill Dr. King. See Sections IV.F. and G. above.

Likewise, we do not credit Donald Wilson's claim that he took papers from Ray's abandoned car. Wilson has made significant contradictory statements and otherwise behaved in a duplicitous manner, inconsistent with his professed interest in seeking the truth. Important evidence contradicting Wilson's claims, including the failure of James Earl Ray to support Wilson's revelation, further undermines his account. Although we were unable to determine the true origin of the Wilson documents, his inconsistent statements, his conduct, and substantial evidence refuting his claims all demonstrate that his implausible account is not worthy of belief. Accordingly, we have concluded that the documents do not constitute evidence relevant to the King assassination. See Section V.K. above.

The weight of the evidence available to our investigation also establishes that Raoul is merely the creation of James Earl Ray. We found no evidence to support the claims that a Raoul participated in the assassination. Rather, a review of 30 years of speculation about his identity presents a convincing case that no Raoul was involved in a conspiracy to kill Dr. King.

See Section VI.G. above.

In accordance with our mandate, we confined our investigation to the Jowers and the Wilson allegations and logical investigative leads suggested by them, including those concerning Raoul, who is central to both allegations. We however considered other allegations, including the unsubstantiated claims made during the trial of King v. Jowers that government agencies and African American ministers associated with Dr. King conspired to kill him. Where warranted, we conducted limited additional investigation. Thus, we evaluated all additional allegations brought to our attention to determine whether any reliable substantiation exists to credit them or warrant further inquiry. We found none.

See Section VII above.

Similarly, we considered the suggestion of the House Select Committee on Assassinations and the Shelby County District Attorney General to investigate whether James Earl Ray's surviving brothers may have been his co-conspirators. We found insufficient evidentiary leads remaining after 30 years to justify further investigation. Finally, while we conducted no original investigation specifically directed at determining whether James Earl Ray killed Dr. King, we found no credible evidence to disturb past judicial determinations that he did.

Questions and speculation may always surround the assassination of Dr. King and other national tragedies. Our investigation of these most recent allegations, as well as several exhaustive previous official investigations, found no reliable evidence that Dr. King was killed by conspirators who framed James Earl Ray.

Nor have any of the conspiracy theories advanced in the last 30 years, including the Jowers and the Wilson allegations, survived critical examination.

We recommend no further federal investigation of the Jowers allegations, the Wilson allegations, or any other allegations related to the assassination unless and until reliable substantiating facts are presented.

At this time, we are aware of no information to warrant any further investigation of the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

The Ka

Ka-(ba)

Ka-(ba)-Lah

Wednesday, 31 December 2014

Selma

Johnson Conversation with Martin Luther King on Jan 15, 1965 (WH6501.04)

Listen:

Download: WAV MP3

Browse Johnson Finding Aids

Tape: WH6501.04

Conversation: 6736

Date: January 15, 1965

Details: Martin Luther King

Transcript:

In responding to Dr. King's suggestion for the appointment of African American to a Cabinet-level post, Johnson laid out his priorities on racial matters, particularly in legislation and in Cabinet-level appointments. Johnson and King discuss the importance of the Voting Rights Act in the context of much broader legislation to help black Americans, especially poor black Americans.

Operator: Dr. King?

Martin Luther King, Jr.: Yes?

Operator: The President will be right with you. He's outside. We're getting him. Just a moment.

King: Thank you.

Pause.

President Johnson: Hello?

King: Hello?

President Johnson: This is Lyndon Johnson. I had a call--

King: [Unclear.]

President Johnson: --from you and I tried to reply to it a couple times--Savannah and different places--and they said you were traveling [chuckles] and I got to traveling last night. [Unclear comment by King] Just got down here to meet the Prime Minister of Canada this morning. And I had a moment and I thought maybe we better try to--I'd better try to reply to your call.

King: Well, I certainly appreciate your returning the call, and I don't want to take but just a minute or two of your time. First, I want to thank you for that great State of the Union message. It was really a marvelous presentation. And I think we're on the way now toward the Great Society.

President Johnson: I'll tell you what our problem is. We've got to try with every force at our command--and I mean every force--to get these education bills that go to those people [with] under $2,000 a year [of] income, 1.5 billion [dollars]. And this poverty [bill] that's a billion, and a half and this health [bill] that's going to be 900 million [dollars] next year right at the bottom. We've to get them passed before the vicious forces concentrate and get them a coalition that can block them. Then we have got to--so we won't divide them all and get them hung up in a filibuster. We've got to--when we get these big things through that we need--Medicare, education--I've already got that hearing started the 22nd in the House and 26th in the Senate. Your people ought to be very, very diligent in looking at those committee members that come from urban areas that are friendly to you to see that those bills get reported right out, because you have no idea--it's shocking to you--how much benefits they will get. There's 8.5 billion [dollars] this year for education, compared to 700 million [dollars] when I started. So you can imagine what effort that's going to be. And this one bill is a 1.5 billion [dollars]. Now, if we can get that and we can get a Medicare [bill]--we ought to get that by February--then we get our poverty [bill], that will be more than double what it was last year.

King: Yes.

President Johnson: Then we've got to come up with the qualification of voters. That will answer 70 percent of your problems.

King: That's right.

President Johnson: If you just clear it out everywhere, make it age and [the ability to] read about write. No tests on what [Geoffrey] Chaucer said or [Robert] Browning's poetry or constitutions or memorizing or anything else.

King: Yes.

President Johnson: And then you may have to put them in the post office. Let the Postmaster--that's a federal employee that I control who they can say is local. He's recommended by the Congressmen, he's approved by the Senator. But if he doesn't register everybody I can put a new one in.

King: Yes.

President Johnson: And it's not an outside Washington influence. It's a local man but they can all just to go the post office like they buy stamps. Now, I haven't thought this through but that's my general feeling, and I've talked to the Attorney General, and I've got them working on it. I don't want to start off with that any more than I do with 14-B because I wouldn't get anything else.

King: Yes. Yes. [Unclear.]

President Johnson: Do you--And I don't want to publicize it, but I want--that's--I wanted you to know the outline of what I had in mind.

King: Yes. Well, I remember that you mentioned it to me the other day when we met at the White House, and I have been very diligent in not . . . making this statement.

President Johnson: Well, your statement was perfect about the vote's important, very important. And I think it's good to talk about that. And I just don't see how anybody can say that a man can fight in Vietnam but he can't vote in the post office.

King: Yes. Right. Well, Mr. President, I'll tell you the main thing I wanted to share with you. This really rose out of conversations that I've had with all of the civil rights leaders--I mean the heads of civil rights organizations--

President Johnson: Yeah.

King: --as well as many people around the country as I have traveled. We have a strong feeling that it would mean so much, first, to help with our whole democracy but to the Negro and to the nation, to have a Negro in the Cabinet. We feel that this would really would be a great step forward for the nation, for the Negro, for our international image. And it would do so much to give many people a lift who need a lift now. And I'm sure that it could give a new sense of dignity and self-respect to millions of Negroes who--there are millions of Negro youth who feel that they don't have anything to look forward to in life.

President Johnson: I agree with that. I have not publicly shouted from the house top, but I have had them sit in with me. I--the first move I made was to put one [an African American] on the [National] Security Council.

King: Yes.

President Johnson: And to put one in charge of every bit of the information that went to all of the 120 nations and take him out of an important ambassador post.1 And I am trying my best to get the housing and urban and city problems [sic], which is the number one problem in America as I see it, made into a Cabinet post. I have a good chance of getting it done, unless I get tied in with the racial thing. I'm going to concentrate all of the executive power I can to get that done. I'm pretty half-way committed to putting in [Robert] Weaver, who I consider to be a very able administrator and [who has] done a good job and who we respect pretty highly.2 And I'm trying to bring in others as assistants and deputies. I talked to them no longer than two hours ago about trying to get one in charge of, maybe, African affairs if [G. Mennen] Williams left. I don't know whether you know him or not, but I'm just giving consideration. I don't want to get it around, but it's this fellow [George] Carter that runs [the] African desk for the Peace Corps.

King: Oh, yes.

President Johnson: Do you know him?

King: I just--no, I don't know him well.

President Johnson: Well--

King: [Unclear.]

President Johnson: He's very, very able and we've got George Weaver over in the Labor Department, and I'm bringing them in just as fast as I can. I gave Carl Rowan the top job over [at the United States Information Agency] . . . I would guess that eight out of the ten people that I talked to felt like that I had problems there. But up to now, he's--he sits with the Security Council on everything. He participates just like the Secretary of State. And I'm going to--I don't want to make a commitment on it because I don't want it to get tied down in the Congress. But I'm going to shove as strong as I can to get the biggest department there--housing, urban affairs, city, transportation--everything that comes in that department that involves the urban areas of America into one department. And then if I can get that done without having to commit one way or the other, my hope would be that I could put the man in there and probably it would be Weaver because I think we have, more or less, a moral obligation to a fellow that's done a--

King: He's a top flight man.

President Johnson: He's done a good job, and he hasn't disappointed anybody. If we put somebody into a job and he fails, we lose three steps when we go ahead one.

King: Sure.

President Johnson: And I haven't had any of that, if you'll notice it.

King: No.

President Johnson: We haven't had any mistakes or any corruption or any scandals of any kind. And I've moved them in, I mean, by the wholesale the, both women and men.

King: Yes. Well, this--I--this is very encouraging and I was, as I said, very concerned about this and I know how others have been mentioning that--what this could mean; it would be another great step toward the Great Society.

President Johnson: I have seen where they considered Whitney for--Whitney Young--for a place with [a] top job with [Sargent] Shriver. He's running two shows, and maybe as a kind of associate director with Shriver with the poverty group. I thought that ought to get under way a little bit. I don't know what Shriver's said about it. I have a very high regard for Whitney. I like him. I don't feel--I honestly don't feel that with Roy Wilkins or with you or with [A. Philip] Randolph or with the man from CORE [James Farmer] that meets with us, I really don't think I have a moral obligation to any of them like I have to Weaver, who has been in there. And it's kind of like you being assistant pastor of your church for ten years with the understanding of your deacons that you would be--take over and then you--they lose and they don't get to make a pastor, and then you continue to carry on, and then finally when the good day comes, they say, "Well, you get back [and] sit at the second table." I just don't feel like saying that to Weaver.

King: Yes.

President Johnson: Now, Weaver's not my man. I didn't bring him in. He's a [John F.] Kennedy man, but I just think that there'd be a pretty revolutionary feeling about him. I--Carl Rowan's not my man. He's a Kennedy man. But he's got the biggest job in government, and it's a Cabinet job. He sits with the Cabinet every time. He sits with the [National] Security Council every time. And I did it the first month I was in office.

King: Yes.

President Johnson: I don't throw it around to cause him to be attacked by his appropriations [committees] because the Southerners handle them. [John] McClellan handles his appropriations. But after we get by pretty well this year and I can get this reorganization through, why, we'll not only have people like Weaver and Carter and undersecretary's places, but we'll have Rowan head there, and we'll have Weaver and perhaps some other folks on the order of Whitney and whoever you-all think's good.

King: Well, we think very highly of Whitney and--

President Johnson: I do, too.

King: --that he can play a role in--

President Johnson: [with King acknowledging] I do, too. You know, he's worked very closely in our Equal Employment [Office], and he's done a very good job in about 60 cities, where his people have branches on employment. And I rather think that there's been substantial progress--not enough--but I rather think there's been substantial progress with industry on a higher level. Don't you?

King: I think so. There's no doubt about it.

President Johnson: Every corporation I talk to--and I talked to 30 of them yesterday--they are looking for Negroes that can do the job that a George Weaver does or Carl Rowan does or a fellow like Weaver does. If we have some of them, and if you have some of them, and you get them to Hobart Taylor, we can find companies that will use men of that quality.3Then when they get in, they can look after the ones below them like you're looking after your people.

King: Well, I think you're right, and we're certainly going to continue to work in that area.

President Johnson: There's not going to be anything though, Dr., as effective as all of them voting.

King: That's right. Nothing--

President Johnson: That'll get you a message that all the eloquence in the world won't bring, because the fellow will be coming to you then instead of you calling him.

King: And it's very interesting, Mr. President, to notice that the only states that you didn't carry in the South, the five Southern states,have less than 40 percent of the Negroes registered to vote.4 It's very interesting to notice. And I think a professor at the University of Texas, in a recent article, brought this out very clearly. So it demonstrates that it's so important to get Negroes registered to vote in large numbers in the South. And it would be this coalition of the Negro vote and the moderate white vote that will really make the new South.

President Johnson: That's exactly right. I think it's very important that we not say that we're doing this, and we not do it just because it's negroes or whites. But we take the position that every person born in this country and when they reach a certain age, that he have a right to vote, just like he has a right to fight. And that we just extend it whether it's a Negro or whether it's a Mexican or who it is.

King: That's right.

President Johnson: And number two, I think that we don't want special privilege for anybody. We want equality for all, and we can stand on that principle. But I think that you can contribute a great deal by getting your leaders and you yourself, taking very simple examples of discrimination where a man's got to memorize [Henry Wadsworth] Longfellow or whether he's got to quote the first 10 Amendments or he's got to tell you what amendment 15 and 16 and 17 is, and then ask them if they know and show what happens. And some people don't have to do that. But when a Negro comes in, he's got to do it. And we can just repeat and repeat and repeat. I don't want to follow [Adolph] Hitler, but he had a--he had a[n] idea--

King: Yeah.

President Johnson: --that if you just take a simple thing and repeat it often enough, even if it wasn't true, why, people accept it. Well, now, this is true, and if you can find the worst condition that you run into in Alabama, Mississippi, or Louisiana, or South Carolina, where--well, I think one of the worst I ever heard of is the president of the school at Tuskegee or the head of the government department there or something being denied the right to a cast a vote. And if you just take that one illustration and get it on radio and get it on television and get it in the pulpits, get it in the meetings, get it every place you can, pretty soon the fellow that didn't do anything but follow--drive a tractor, he's say, "Well, that's not right. That's not fair."

King: Yes.

President Johnson: And then that will help us on what we're going to shove through in the end.

King: Yes. You're exactly right about that.

President Johnson: And if we do that, we'll break through as--it'll be the greatest breakthrough of anything, not even excepting this [19]64 [Civil Rights] Act. I think the greatest achievement of my administration, I think the great achievement in foreign policy, I said to a group yesterday, was the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. But I think this will be bigger because it'll do things that even that '64 Act couldn't do.

King: That's right. That's right. Yes, that's right.

Well, Mr. President, I certainly appreciate your giving me this time and I certainly appreciate getting your ideas on these things, but that I just wanted to share it with you, and I wanted you to know we have thisfeeling but we have not set on any particular person.We felt that Bob Weaver, Whitney Young, or Ralph Bunche, somebody like that [unclear]--

President Johnson: Every one of those people have my respect. And what you do is this: you just say to them that I'm not going to send a message to the Congress. And say that if you will give me this power, I will do this as a trade, because I think that would do us all damage. But if I can get my urban and housing affair[s] [bill], you know what my intentions are.

King: Yes.

President Johnson: And I've got a pretty good Cabinet. As far as I know, I'm going to keep them all, probably, except maybe the Secretary of the Treasury, perhaps. I don't know what's going to happen to the Attorney General. I've given a good deal of thought to folks like Abe Fortas, a good deal of thought to folks like Clark Clifford, a good deal thought to [Nicholas] Katzenbach, a good deal of thought to . . . all those folks are pretty liberal and they're right on our question. I've appointed John Doar in charge of the problem over there.5 But I think most of the others are planning to stay, and I need them on these big programs--health and education and defense and state. But the one thing we want to do is shove through our housing reorganization and put them in charge of the cities.

King: Yes.

President Johnson: Then New York City has got to come, sit down, and talk to these people. Chicago has got to come. New Orleans has got to come. Atlanta has got to come. If they don't, they just can't move.

King: Yes.

President Johnson: And then I think we'll have a good man who's trained that's come up through the ranks, that's married, that's not on account of color, not on account of anything else, but he'll be there.

King: Yes. Yes. Well, this is wonderful, and I certainly appreciate your--

President Johnson: The two things you do for us, now. You find the most ridiculous illustration you can on voting and point it up and repeat it and get everybody else to do it. Second thing is please look at that labor committee in the House and Senate. Please look at that health committee. Please look at that immigration committee. And let us try to get health and education and poverty through the first 90 days.

King: Yes. Well, we're going to be doing that. You can depend on our absolute support.

President Johnson: Whitney's group can go to talking to them and Roy's group can and your group can and they ought to tell [William F.] Ryan of New York and they ought to tell so-and-so in Philadelphia and they ought to tell so-and-so from Atlanta, "Please get this bill reported."

King: Yes.

President Johnson: Because I don't think you have any conception of the proportion of assistance that comes to your people in these bills. I haven't pointed that out. I haven't stressed it.

King: Right. Well, I know they will be--they have been and will be even more tremendous help and--

President Johnson: You can figure out though what $8 billion in education, what $1 billion in health, and what $1.5 billion in poverty will do if it goes to people who earn less than $2,000 a year.

King: Um-hmm.

President Johnson: Now, you know who earns less than 2,000, don't you? [chuckles]

King: That's right. Yes, sir. Well, it will certainly be a great movement. We've just got to work hard at it. [Unclear.]

President Johnson: And I'm part of this administration, but we talked about what we're going to do [for] three years and we had to do it the fourth. We passed 51 bills last year. Now, I've got those messages up there. [It is the] first time by January 15 any President has ever had a half a dozen messages before the Congress. Most of them don't even have their State of the Union until after the inauguration.

King: Yeah, that's right.

President Johnson: But they're there and they're ready for them to go to work, and we're not just going to talk. If they'll vote, I'm ready. We've got our recommendations. And we talked the first three years of our administration. We promised, and we held it up and people were getting to be pretty disillusioned, I think, when I finally beat the Rules Committee and got [the] Civil Rights [Act of 1964] out.

King: Yeah. Well, I know.

President Johnson: I think you might had a lot more revolution in this country than you could handle if we had had that Civil Rights [bill] stay in the Rules Committee under Judge Smith.

King: That's right. Oh, that's--that's such a disillusion [unclear].

President Johnson: Well, we talked about it [for] three years, you know. [Unclear comment by King] But we just did something about it. So that's what we got to do now, and you get in there and help us.

King: Well, I certainly will, and you know you can always count on that.

President Johnson: Thank you so much.

King: All right. God bless you. Thank you, Mr. President.

President Johnson: Bye. Bye.

1.Carl Rowan was Ambassador to Finland from 21 May 1963 to 8 February 1964 and in 1964 became Director of the United States Information Agency [USIA].

2.Robert C. Weaver became the first African American to be appointed to a Cabinet-level position in 1966 when President Johnson made him the first Secretary of Housing and Urban Development.

3.Hobart Taylor, Jr., Special Counsel to the President's Commission on Equal Employment Opportunity during the Kennedy Administration and Director of the Export-Import Bank of the United States during the Johnson Administration.

4.President Johnson won the 1964 Presidential election in a landslide, carrying all but six states, five of which were in the Deep South (the sixth was Nevada)--South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana.

5. John Doar was Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights. President Johnson likely meant hte Division of Civil Rights in the Justice Department.

Saturday, 27 December 2014

The Magister's Apprentice : Clara Oswin/Oswald and the Secret WarInside Freemasonry

Magician, Magickian, Mage, Magus or Magister...?

"You know what's even rarer in this world? Second chances - I don't even know who to thank..."

The Reverand Mr Magister.

Magister, High Priest of Azæl the Fallen Angel,

Practioner of the Black Arts and Occult Science of the Dæmons of Dæmos

Magickian.

The Twelth Doctor - Who Dresses like a Magician.

Honking, Great, Unfinished Pyramid, situated right in the middle of Central London...

...and situated in direct opposition to the 3 W Offices...

Aka, The Master's TARDIS, aka Cyber-Control.

"On his return, Wren submitted his plans for old St.Paul’s, which were accepted in principle on 27 August 1666. One week later London was on fire. On 2 September a fire accidentally broke out in a baker’s shop in Pudding Lane. Fanned by strong east winds the fire raged for three days and destroyed two-thirds of the City of London. St.Paul’s Cathedral, 88 churches, 44 halls, the Royal Exchange, the Guildhall, the Customs House and 13,200 houses were destroyed. Between 5 and 11 September Wren ascertained the precise area of devastation, worked out a plan for rebuilding the city and submitted it to King Charles. There were five other proposals. On 20 October King Charles appointed Hugh May, Sir Roger Pratt and Christopher Wren as King’s Commissioners for the rebuilding of London. No radical replanning eventuated due to difficulties redistributing old land titles and compensation issues, so most of the old streets were retained. But the streets were made wider and the new buildings were constructed of brick or stone

In 1669 Sir John Denham, the King’s Surveyor of Works died and Christopher Wren was appointed in his stead. The job entailed looking after the fabric of all the Royal buildings apart from Windsor Castle, which had it’s own surveyor, and the Tower of London, which came under the Office of Ordinance. At that time Whitehall was the main palace. The Office of Works comprised the King’s Surveyor, the Comptroller, the Paymaster, Master Mason, and Master Carpenter. All of the above served on the Board of Works. In addition there were the Master Joiner, Plumber, Glazier, Sculptor, Blacksmith, the Sergeant Painter, Sergeant Plumber and a Clerk of Works for each Royal building. Wren received an annual salary of L382 5s 8d, a rent-free house with garden, coach-house and office at Scotland Yard and an official residence in Hampton Court Palace. No wonder he married his old sweetheart Faith Coghill the same year. His first job as Surveyor was to design the new Custom’s House, which he did in twenty-four hours!

A second rebuilding Act in 1670 paved the way for rebuilding 51 of the 88 churches lost in the Great Fire and Wren was put in charge. The rebuilding commenced with St.Dunstan-in-the-East in 1670 and finished with the steeple of St.Stephen Walbrook in 1717. But what should an Anglican Church be like? No new churches had been built for a very long time and there had been recent arguments over the position of the altar. Fortunately, since the Civil War the Anglican Church had decided on a middle path between the Arminian and Puritan extremes. Thus Wren designed most of the churches on simple rectangular plan. The altar was placed behind a low railing on the east wall and the pulpit in a prominent position between the congregation and the choir. Everything was planned so that the congregation could hear and see and participate in the service and upstairs galleries were often featured. Large windows allowed excellent natural light and the walls and ceilings were usually plain white. Nearly every church had a belltower with steeple. Only six of the churches were designed entirely by Wren, but he had overall responsibility for them all.

We now come to the extraordinary story of the building of the new St.Paul’s Cathedral. In July 1668, Wren got the call to design a new St.Paul’s, at the same time there was a Royal Order to demolish the old cathedral. Wren was provided with a suite of rooms in the Chapter House. Henry Woodroffe was appointed Assistant Surveyor and John Tillison Paymaster and Clerk of Works. Some of the stones and the lead were recycled and eventually 45,000 tons of rubble were carted away for use on the roads. The First Model for St.Paul’s was completed in the winter of 1669/70 but the design was not considered stately enough, so a new design was prepared over the winter of 1671/72. The new design featured a massive circular central area beneath a huge dome. Four equal sized naves or wings spread out from the central area forming a Greek cross. St.Peter’s Basilica in Rome was built on a similar plan until Carlo Maderna reluctantly extended the nave. King Charles finally approved the Greek Cross design a year later, with instructions to build a large model.

In the meantime demolition of old St.Paul’s had reached a standstill. The four pillars of the crossing-tower, each 14ft across, were proving impervious. Wren brought in a gunner from the Tower of London and having got labourers to hack out a recess in the base of the northwest tower, packed the hole with 18lb of gunpowder. The powder train was lit and the resultant explosion brought down the whole northwest angle of the tower along with the two arches that rested on it and parts of the adjoining aisles – some 3000 tons of masonry! Delighted, Wren left Woodroffe to blow up the rest of the tower, but Woodroffe overdid the gunpowder, sending showers of masonry into the surrounding houses. Dean Sancroft forbade any further explosions, so Wren came up with battering rams, which worked very well.

In November 1673, King Charles warranted the appointment of a Royal Commission for the Rebuilding of St.Paul’s Cathedral. The Commission consisted of the Dean and three residentiary canons of the chapter, the Archbishops of Canterbury and York and five other bishops, the Lord Chancellor, Lord Treasurer, two Secretaries of State, Christopher Wren, The Lord Mayor London, City Chamberlain, City Recorder and the Aldermen, plus a long list of Privy Councilors, Judges and Officers of the Royal Household. The quorum was six. On 14 November King Charles knighted Wren at five in the morning. Wren duly stood for the Oxford University Parliamentary seat, but lost.

Wren completed his Great Model of a modified Greek Cross design in October 1674. The model was large enough to walk through and can still be viewed at St.Paul’s. To Wren’s surprise and disappointment, the clergy didn’t like it! The Bishops and Canons were used Gothic cathedrals with long naves and choirs for processions and a fair bit of separation between congregation and clergy. They weren’t ready for a ‘church-in-the-round’ concept. Besides they liked to have two towers at the west front (Jachin and Boaz?) and a steeple. Wren accordingly came up with a new design in the spring of 1675. Called the ‘Warrant Design’, the plan features a long nave with parallel aisles, a long choir with the altar on the east wall and two transepts, thus forming a Latin Cross. There was a large circular space at the crossing under an interesting double dome topped by a tall pagoda-like steeple. The west front had a portico flanked by two towers. The clergy liked it and King Charles quickly issued a warrant for the design on 14 May 1675 but “the King was pleased to allow Wren the liberty in the prosecution of his work, to make variations, rather ornamental than essential, as from time to time he should see proper’. It is hard to believe Wren intended to carry out the Warrant Design and that the King was not in on the scam.

The foundation stone was laid by master mason Thomas Strong on 21 June 1675; the second foundation stone by master carpenter John Langland. The edifice that gradually rose behind the hoarding and scaffolding bore little resemblance to the warrant design, but it retained the Latin Cross plan, the central dome and the towers and portico to the west front. The great dome is a wonder of engineering. The inner dome or ceiling of stone has a circular opening that admits light from skylights in the outer dome high above. Above the inner dome, a brick cone supports the 850 ton stone lantern whilst the outer dome of lead is supported by timber framework. On 26 October 1708 Christopher Wren junior, witnessed by Edward Strong along with other ‘Free and Accepted Masons’ set the final stone in place on top of the lantern. Sir Christopher Wren remained on the ground 360 feet below – he was seventy-six.

Other monuments to Wren’s genius are to be found in the Emmanuel College Chapel and Trinity College Library at Cambridge, The Monument, The Royal Observatory, Chelsea Hospital, Greenwich Hospital and major extensions to Hampton Court Palace and Kensington Palace. A new palace at Winchester was nearing completion when Charles II died. Of the many houses attributed to Wren, only Marlborough House in London can be definitely attributed to him, but his pupil Nicholas Hawksmoor was to design some of the greatest houses in England. Wren kept up his interest in the Royal Society and served as President 1681-82. In 1677 he and Robert Hooke founded a new philosophical club that became known as the ‘Saturday Club’ which met in secret. He was the Member of Parliament for Old Windsor in1680, 1689 and 1690.