Is the Martin Luther King quote about Zionism a fraud?

[Thunder]

The media watchdog CAMERA was asked to look into the famous Martin Luther King Jr. article, where he supposedly gave a long, inspiring letter about Israel and Zionism, and included the not famous line: “When people criticize Zionists they mean Jews, you are talking anti-Semitism.”

Well, CAMERA did some independent research into the quote, just because they like to investigate these kinds of things, and it turns out, the article in the August 1967 edition of "Saturday Review" simply does not exist. MLK never wrote an article for this magazine dealing with Zionism.

So, CAMERA looked further, and found that the quote about Zionism, the very short quote and NOT the very long speech, was attributed to a speech given by MLK at Harvard in 1968.

So CAMERA now admits that MLK never wrote a nice long letter about Zionism and freedom and whatnot. He simply gave a speech at Harvard that included a few lines about Zionism.

End of story? I think not!!

It turns out that, according to an investigation by the Harvard Crimson, the last time MLK gave a speech at Harvard was in April, 1967. Also, an intensive inventory of publications by Stanford University's Martin Luther King Jr. Papers Project accounts for numerous speeches in 1968. None of them are for talks in Cambridge or Boston.

So, did MLK EVER make a comment about Zionism and anti-Semitism? All the evidence seems to suggest the answer is a big......fat....NO!!!!

So, who, you ask, did in fact create this fraudulent quote by the very highly regarded Reverend Dr. Martin Luther KIng, Jr?

Who knows...and honestly...who cares. We know it to be false, and that is all that really matters.

:)

[Eyeron]

Well, I don't know if MLK did say, but it is a very true saying. The root of Zionism is the support of the creation of Israel. But, anti-semites do use the term an awful lot and misrepresent the entire Jewish population with it.

A great example of this can be found at the website called Jew Watch. It is a website that has hundreds of articles concerned the "Evil Jews" and literally blames all the worlds' evils on the Jews. And they use the term Zionists. A lot. It's a great example of woo targeted at Jews and is unique because unlike woo concerning 911 or supernatural or NWO it stems from racism.

It's one of the most sickening examples of anti-semitism and racism I've encountered next to the KKK.

But you should probably try to find the exact speech it's attributed to find the entire context.

[Thunder]

Jewwatch.com. I hate that site with a passion. really evil stuff. i wish it would be shut down by the FCC.

but anyways, CAMERA looked into the MLK article and it was never written. it is a fake.

and as for the possible speech at Harvard? that too may not have ever happened.

[tyr_13]

The media watchdog CAMERA was asked to look into the famous Martin Luther King Jr. article, where he supposedly gave a long, inspiring letter about Israel and Zionism, and included the not famous line: “When people criticize Zionists they mean Jews, you are talking anti-Semitism.”

Well, CAMERA did some independent research into the quote, just because they like to investigate these kinds of things, and it turns out, the article in the August 1967 edition of "Saturday Review" simply does not exist. MLK never wrote an article for this magazine dealing with Zionism.

So, CAMERA looked further, and found that the quote about Zionism, the very short quote and NOT the very long speech, was attributed to a speech given by MLK at Harvard in 1968.

So CAMERA now admits that MLK never wrote a nice long letter about Zionism and freedom and whatnot. He simply gave a speech at Harvard that included a few lines about Zionism.

End of story? I think not!!

It turns out that, according to an investigation by the Harvard Crimson, the last time MLK gave a speech at Harvard was in April, 1967. Also, an intensive inventory of publications by Stanford University's Martin Luther King Jr. Papers Project accounts for numerous speeches in 1968. None of them are for talks in Cambridge or Boston.

So, did MLK EVER make a comment about Zionism and anti-Semitism? All the evidence seems to suggest the answer is a big......fat....NO!!!!

So, who, you ask, did in fact create this fraudulent quote by the very highly regarded Reverend Dr. Martin Luther KIng, Jr?

Who knows...and honestly...who cares. We know it to be false, and that is all that really matters.

:)

From, http://www.jewish-history.com/mlk_zionism.html

Below is a January 21, 2002 op-ed by U.S. Rep. John Lewis, who worked closely with Dr. King. In the op-ed, he shares Dr. King’s views on Israel, views which stressed Israel’s democratic nature and Israel’s need for security. And he also relates that Dr. King said, “When people criticize Zionists they mean Jews, you are talking anti-Semitism.”

This quotation has been confirmed, so you should feel assured that you can use the quotation in letters. Just be sure to mention that it came from Dr. King’s 1968 Harvard University appearance, so that no one will think it is from the debunked “letter.”

The op-ed by Congressman Lewis appears below.

With our sincerest apologies,

Lee Green
Director, National Letter-Writing Group
CAMERA

[Thunder]

From, http://www.jewish-history.com/mlk_zionism.html

further investigation puts doubt on the MLK 1968 Harvard quote. it appears CAMERA failed to dig any deeper.

[quixotecoyote]

So, did MLK EVER make a comment about Zionism and anti-Semitism? All the evidence seems to suggest the answer is a big......fat....NO!!!!


If you did what I think you did, this is a new low.

Here's the CAMERA article:


We must inform you that “Letter to an Anti-Zionist Friend” (see at bottom of alert), allegedly written by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., is apparently a hoax, although the basic message of the letter was indeed, without question, spoken by Martin Luther King, Jr. in a 1968 appearance at Harvard, where he said: “When people criticize Zionists, they mean Jews. You are talking anti-Semitism.” [ from “The Socialism of Fools: The Left, the Jews and Israel” by Seymour Martin Lipset; in Encounter magazine, December 1969, p. 24. ]. http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=8&x_article=369

Here's the Harvard website saying that MLK Jr did indeed give a speech in 1968:

In March 1968, the Harvard College Class of 1968 invited Rev. King to speak at Class Day to ensure that the Vietnam War, civil rights, and urban affairs were addressed directly during Commencement week ceremonies. According to the Harvard Crimson (http://www.thecrimson.com/printerfriendly.aspx?ref=147723), this was the first time a Harvard senior class independently invited its own speaker for Class Day exercises. It is interesting to note that members of the Class of 1968 were freshmen when King delivered his 1965 Memorial Church sermon and led the marches in Selma.
http://hul.harvard.edu/huarc/MLK.shtml


So where might you have gotten the idea that Havard, specifically the student newspaper, denies the event? That would be an odd place to search for confirmation of his speaking engagement, especially as a search for 'Harvard MLK speech 1968' brings up the archive I cited and the student newspaper isn't even on the first page.

Well, here's the people who are making that argument:

Israel Lobby Watch at electronicintifada.net in a headline charmingly titled "Israel's apologists and the Martin Luther King Jr. hoax (http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article2356.shtml)"where they claim:

Soon afterwards, CAMERA, a rabidly pro-Israeli organization, published a statement declaring that the letter was "apparently" a hoax.


...

There are still, however, a few reasons for casting doubt on the authenticity of this statement. According to the Harvard Crimson, "The Rev. Martin Luther King was last in Cambridge almost exactly a year ago--April 23, 1967" ("While You Were Away" 4/8/68). If this is true, Dr. King could not have been in Cambridge in 1968.
So what do we have here? We have a situation were a cursory reading of the CAMERA article would have revealed the letter to be fabricated out of an actual quote. Where a cursory search for information would have revealed a speech was made in 1968.

We have a situation where the only simple explanation for how parky could come by the opinion he expressed in the OP is to visit the electronic intifada, home of such reasonable articles as Israeli officer promotes war crimes at Harvard (http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article10673.shtml), and simply copy pasted from a random anti-Israel article without any basic fact-checking or consideration that information from an extremist source may be biased and inaccurate.

Of course, I can't show that conclusively, but it's where the evidence points right now. IOW, your nasty little cut & paste job is busted.

Oh and bonus points for complaining about "jewwatch" while plagiarizing from "Israel Lobby Watch"

[Doctor Evil]

Actually, the article you cited says that MLK was invited to speak, but was murdered before the appointed day. So this does not support the claim that he gave a speech at Harvard in 1968.


Still, interesting findings concerning Parky76 sources. I would have put him on ignore, but he is already there.

[Thunder]

If you did what I think you did, this is a new low.


while i have never used the Electronic intifada as a source before, and probably won't use them again for quite some time, i did find the article about the MLK quote to be honest and thoroughly researched.

can you refute any of their pretty substantial claims?

i have yet to see evidence of MLK giving a speech about Zionism at Harvard, let alone responding to someone in the audience and giving a short lecture about being anti-Semitic.

if you can find this info, I will surely look at it.

[quixotecoyote]

And just for kicks, here's another quote:

“Peace for Israel means security, and we must stand with all our might to protect its right to exist, its territorial integrity. I see Israel as one of the great outposts of democracy in the world, and a marvelous example of what can be done, how desert land can be transformed into an oasis of brotherhood and democracy. Peace for Israel means security and that security must be a reality.”


http://books.google.com/books?id=3jjNW-_TnusC&pg=PA243&lpg=PA243&dq=%E2%80%9CPeace+for+Israel+means+security,+and+w e+must+stand+with+all+our+might+to+protect+its+rig ht+to+exist%22&source=bl&ots=ShN-iOqghE&sig=3pgq5DmEvSIhQKO3zNhvsA6ruiM&hl=en&ei=V8DbSpb1F4iIMsHkqeYH&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CAoQ6AEwATgU#v=onepage&q=%E2%80%9CPeace%20for%20Israel%20means%20security %2C%20and%20we%20must%20stand%20with%20all%20our%2 0might%20to%20protect%20its%20right%20to%20exist%2 2&f=false

[quixotecoyote]

while i have never used the Electronic intifada as a source before, and probably won't use them again for quite some time, i did find the article about the MLK quote to be honest and thoroughly researched.

can you refute any of their pretty substantial claims?

i have yet to see evidence of MLK giving a speech about Zionism at Harvard, let alone responding to someone in the audience and giving a short lecture about being anti-Semitic.

if you can find this info, I will surely look at it.

Why don't you refute the CAMERA claim (that electronic intifada twisted) that said the quote was confirmed?

[quixotecoyote]

Actually, the article you cited says that MLK was invited to speak, but was murdered before the appointed day. So this does not support the claim that he gave a speech at Harvard in 1968.


Well, I may have read it wrong, but I believe the source says that he was invited to speak in March and was killed in April.

eta: indeed I did. He was invited in March but Class Day occurred after his death. Please hold for additional verification.

[Thunder]

Why don't you refute the CAMERA claim (that electronic intifada twisted) that said the quote was confirmed?

it appears that EI already did refute it, by providing evidence that MLK never gave any Harvard speeches in 1968 and never gave any speeches dealing with Zionism before that....at Harvard.

they use the harvard crimson as their source.

now, if someone can provide evidence for the harvard speech dealing with zionism, i will surely read that evidence.

now, a Congressmen Lewis did write an article stating this:

"On March 25, 1968, less than two weeks before his tragic death, he spoke out with clarity and directness stating, “peace for Israel means security, and we must stand with all our might to protect its right to exist, its territorial integrity. I see Israel as one of the great outposts of democracy in the world, and a marvelous example of what can be done, how desert land can be transformed into an oasis of brotherhood and democracy. Peace for Israel means security and that security must be a reality.”

now, I am not gonna sit here and accuse a Congressmen of lying, so I will take his claim on face value.

but it still says nothing about "anti-Zionism=anti-Semitism".

so, as far as I know, MLK never made such a statement.

[defaultdotxbe]

is it possible he wrote the speech for harvard before he was killed?

[Doctor Evil]

is it possible he wrote the speech for harvard before he was killed?

I guess it is possible. It is also possible that Congressman Lewis misremembered either the time or place. After all, his op ed is more than 30 years after the event.

I would put the whole issue under unknown until better information becomes available.

[quixotecoyote]

but it still says nothing about "anti-Zionism=anti-Semitism".

so, as far as I know, MLK never made such a statement.



Dr. Michael Lerner says he did in the book that CAMERA cited to verify the source (and which electronicintifada cut out when they used CAMERA as a source).

So it's student newspaper versus established academic.

Until further evidence comes along, I'll believe the newspaper muffed a date rather than an academic falsified a quote.

And, since unlike anti-Israel hate sites and those who plagiarize them, I actually do my best to verify the claims I'm making, I've reserved a copy of Lerner's book at the library to see what further details we can find.

It may indeed be that Lerner isn't quoting accurately, but if I find that is the case, what you pulled in the OP is still dishonest and wrong.

[Pardalis]

No evidence will change parky's mind, when it's set on something.

[Thunder]

It may indeed be that Lerner isn't quoting accurately, but if I find that is the case, what you pulled in the OP is still dishonest and wrong.

From the quote that Congressman Lewis provided, it appears that MLK never uttered any words to the extant of "anti-Zionism=anti-Semitism".

but did MLK give a short speech about Zionism at Harvard in 1968? it is indeed possible.

[Thunder]

No evidence will change parky's mind, when it's set on something.

do you want to discuss the topic or just attack me?

its amazing how some folks here truly are borrowing debate tactics from the 9-11 Truther's Guide to Debating without actually debating.

[defaultdotxbe]

Dr. Michael Lerner says he did in the book that CAMERA cited to verify the source (and which electronicintifada cut out when they used CAMERA as a source).

So it's student newspaper versus established academic.

Until further evidence comes along, I'll believe the newspaper muffed a date rather than an academic falsified a quote.
it seems the dates in the newspaper are correct and king was killed before the speech date, it also seems coretta scott king spoke in his place

http://www.commencement.harvard.edu/background/class_spk.html


unfortunately only the most recent speeches are archived online

[Thunder]

The question still remains as to who made up the idea of the false article in the Saturday Review, who wrote it, and why did they do it?

There is no doubt that this article did not exist. It is a hoax.

The speech at Harvard in 1968 is another story.

though, I have to congratulate my opponents here for not calling me an anti-Semite for daring to challenge the authenticity of the "anti-Zionism=anti-Semitism" MLK article/speech.

when justice is your goal, truth MUST be your ally.

[quixotecoyote]

From the quote that Congressman Lewis provided, it appears that MLK never uttered any words to the extant of "anti-Zionism=anti-Semitism".

Making that leap requires a jetpack fueled with confirmation bias.

but did MLK give a short speech about Zionism at Harvard in 1968? it is indeed possible.

Indeed. It is even possible he used the quote in question within it. It is also possible he didn't.

In neither case is it honest to make the claim:

So, did MLK EVER make a comment about Zionism and anti-Semitism? All the evidence seems to suggest the answer is a big......fat....NO!!!!

Nor is it ethically appropriate to take arguments from biased, innacurate sites like electronic intifada without any attempt to verify the information.

Nor is remotely ethically appropriate to do so without acknowleging that you used electronic intifada as a source.

[Thunder]

Making that leap requires a jetpack fueled with confirmation bias.

Actuaally, I find it very hard to believe that if MLK did indeed utter those few words, it would not have been included in Congressmen Lewis' article.

Very hard to believe indeed.

Do I believe that Martin Luther King was a fan of Israel? Yes.

Do I believe that Martin Luther King said that anti-Zionism is the same as anti-Semitism? I see no reason why I should.

If he did indeed say these words, it would not take a damn wild goose chase through the Wild World of the Web to find out.

[quixotecoyote]

though, I have to congratulate my opponents here for not calling me an anti-Semite for daring to challenge the authenticity of the "anti-Zionism=anti-Semitism" MLK article/speech.

I haven't called you an anti-semite, but if I did, it would be for the use of a rabidly biased sources, willingness to plagiarize to avoid citing said source, and preferring to believe that source rather than do your own fact-checking.

But not because you questioned the quote. That actually might be a legitimate criticism.

[Whiplash]

Parky, it's amazing how hard you'll dig when something fits into your world view, and how quickly you'll handwave and run for the hills when it doesn't.

[Thunder]

I haven't called you an anti-semite, but if I did, it would be for the use of a rabidly biased sources, willingness to plagiarize to avoid citing said source, and preferring to believe that source rather than do your own fact-checking.

But not because you questioned the quote. That actually might be a legitimate criticism.

The Jewish people have a long tradition of anti-Zionism. As soon as the first Jew said "we should go back to Israel!!", another Jew said "are you nuts???".

Zionism has clearly become part of the mainstream of Jewish life in the world. But that does not change the fact that many Jews 60 years ago and today viewed and still view the creation of a separate Jewish nation-state in Palestine as counter to 2,000 years of Jewish religious and cultural beliefs.

[quixotecoyote]

it seems the dates in the newspaper are correct and king was killed before the speech date, it also seems coretta scott king spoke in his place

Yah, I acknowledged that in post 11.

Actuaally, I find it very hard to believe that if MLK did indeed utter those few words, it would not have been included in Congressmen Lewis' article.

Very hard to believe indeed.


You just assume that the speech quoted by Lewis was the same as the Harvard speech in question. There's no reason to assume that. No evidence to support it. Yet you make that leap and then use it as evidence for your argument.

The quote may yet be proven never to have been said, but you just used another shady argument.

Do I believe that Martin Luther King was a fan of Israel? Yes.

Do I believe that Martin Luther King said that anti-Zionism is the same as anti-Semitism? I see no reason why I should.

Because at the moment, you have exactly two sources regarding this. You have a book that says the speech happened and the quote was said, and you have a student newspaper that implied no speech was given.

You are choosing to run with the newspaper as regurgitated by an rabid anti-Israel site.

If he did indeed say these words, it would not take a damn wild goose chase through the Wild World of the Web to find out.

In 1968, not everything was immediately recorded on the internet. In fact, many things were not. Events, speeches, and historical happenings prior to the widespread digitization of everything from Obama's State of the Union speech to Joe McBlogger's bowel moments may occasionally require a degree of research to be informed about.

[Thunder]

You just assume that the speech quoted by Lewis was the same as the Harvard speech in question. There's no reason to assume that. No evidence to support it. Yet you make that leap and then use it as evidence for your argument.

Because at the moment, you have exactly two sources regarding this. You have a book that says the speech happened and the quote was said, and you have a student newspaper that implied no speech was given.

In 1968, not everything was immediately recorded on the internet. In fact, many things were not. Events, speeches, and historical happenings prior to the widespread digitization of everything from Obama's State of the Union speech to Joe McBlogger's bowel moments may occasionally require a degree of research to be informed about.

will alllllll of this in mind, it appears to me that it is pretty equally valid to both believe and disbelieve the quote is legit.

so, in essence, we are all both right, and we are all both wrong.

:D

[quixotecoyote]

will alllllll of this in mind, it appears to me that it is pretty equally valid to both believe and disbelieve the quote is legit.

so, in essence, we are all both right, and we are all both wrong.

:D

Is that more or less like how we can all be right and all be wrong when one of us thinks that photos are doctored because something doesn't feel right and the other notes that there is no evidence of any kind that the photos were altered?

[Thunder]

Is that more or less like how we can all be right and all be wrong when one of us thinks that photos are doctored because something doesn't feel right and the other notes that there is no evidence of any kind that the photos were altered?

lets stick to the topic at hand, shall we?

[quixotecoyote]

lets stick to the topic at hand, shall we?

I'm sorry, I thought we were attempting to move into the "I have a right to my own opinion" territory. Are we not doing that?

[Thunder]

I'm sorry, I thought we were attempting to move into the "I have a right to my own opinion" territory. Are we not doing that?

of course you have the right to your own opinion. as long as it is not regarding another thread. that is called derailing and it is a violation of the JREF rules and regulations.

[quixotecoyote]

of course you have the right to your own opinion. as long as it is not regarding another thread. that is called derailing and it is a violation of the JREF rules and regulations.

I don't believe I was discussing the contents of another thread at all. I merely draw an analogy to see in what situations you'd like to apply the "we can all be right, let's disagree to disagree, please respect my opinions" mantra.

If you've moved into that stage with this thread already, I'll just consider it done and move on.

[Tin Foil Timothy]

is it possible he wrote the speech for harvard before he was killed?

Well he certainly couldn't have written it after he was killed.

[Tin Foil Timothy]

The root of Zionism is the support of the creation of Israel. But, anti-semites do use the term an awful lot and misrepresent the entire Jewish population with it.

A great example of this can be found at the website called Jew Watch. It is a website that has hundreds of articles concerned the "Evil Jews" and literally blames all the worlds' evils on the Jews. And they use the term Zionists. A lot.

True.

However that doesn't mean criticism of the methods the Zionist Movement has used to create and expand the state of Israel is racist. What is both sad and childish is the tedious pulling out of the race card when right wing Zionists have no other argument against those are criticizing the behavior of the Zionist movement.

And MLK? Well if he really did say “When people criticize Zionists they mean Jews, you are talking anti-Semitism.” then he discredited himself.

[Brainster]

I am thrilled to hear that MLK was an anti-Zionist! Imagine him speaking to us through the decades by not speaking, that it was okay to be anti-Zionist! I can almost hear him not saying "I have a dream, that all men may live to be anti-Zionists without fear of being called anti-Semitic."

Unfortunately the Jews killed him before he could deliver that speech to the IHR conference.

[Puppycow]

The whole point of the OP is a quibble over a factual basis for an appeal to authority.

I'm a huge admirer of MLK, but it makes not much more sense for either side to claim posthumous support from MLK as to make the proverbial "God is on our side" claim. Even if his views on the subject at the particular time could be clearly established, it would still be an appeal to authority at best. And who knows what he would think about it today, were he still alive.

[quixotecoyote]

The whole point of the OP is a quibble over a factual basis for an appeal to authority.

I'm a huge admirer of MLK, but it makes not much more sense for either side to claim posthumous support from MLK as to make the proverbial "God is on our side" claim. Even if his views on the subject at the particular time could be clearly established, it would still be an appeal to authority at best. And who knows what he would think about it today, were he still alive.

I've stated before that I'm continually surprised at how the support for Israel has shaken out along the left/right axis. I would expect the left to support Israel as the most liberal country in the region, but they tend to be very much against Israel.

In light of that, taking a liberal progressive icon like King and showing that he supported Israel, saying in an uncontested quote that "peace for Israel means security, and we must stand with all our might to protect its right to exist" shows that it's ok to support Israel.

Because the only reason I can think of for a left liberal to support groups like Hamas and not support Israel is that it's become one of the tribal banners of the two-party system regardless of how it fits in with the rest of the ideology, sort of how the right can grab the Christian bloc and still promote a 'corporate Jesus (http://patriotboy.blogspot.com/2005_02_20_patriotboy_archive.html#110940550000381 824)' model.

The quote from King is less an attempt to appeal to authority for support in the argument as it is to tear down the banner that declares it a 'right' position.

[Whiplash]

The whole point of the OP is a quibble over a factual basis for an appeal to authority.

I'm a huge admirer of MLK, but it makes not much more sense for either side to claim posthumous support from MLK as to make the proverbial "God is on our side" claim. Even if his views on the subject at the particular time could be clearly established, it would still be an appeal to authority at best. And who knows what he would think about it today, were he still alive.


I'm not so sure that it was a case of someone desperately wanting MLK to be in their side of anything.

I think it's more simply a case that the quote came up, Parky didn't like it because it doesn't fit his world view, and so he went about to find proof that MLK didn't even say it. And he dug deep and hard, and took whatever he could find. Because he doesn't agree that saying "Zionist" is code for Jews. Because he believes that there are evil Jews. And that it's perfectly fair to call them out and attack them.

And now he's complaining about the subject of the other thread coming up. He's terrified of it, because it made him look foolish. And his ego prevents him from being able to so "ok, you know what, I was wrong" and move forward. Instead he's going to ignore it, but if it comes up he'll bluster and threaten to report rules violations. When he could garner infinitely more respect from everyone by just admitting he was wrong. Nope, that's not an option!

I'm certain this post will get reported to the mods as well. As a personal attack on him. Hello Tricky, Lisa.. whoever happens to get the report! How are you?

[Thunder]

I think it's more simply a case that the quote came up, Parky didn't like it because it doesn't fit his world view, and so he went about to find proof that MLK didn't even say it. And he dug deep and hard, and took whatever he could find. Because he doesn't agree that saying "Zionist" is code for Jews. Because he believes that there are evil Jews.

r u suggesting that there are no bad Jews?

[Thunder]

I am thrilled to hear that MLK was an anti-Zionist! Imagine him speaking to us through the decades by not speaking, that it was okay to be anti-Zionist! I can almost hear him not saying "I have a dream, that all men may live to be anti-Zionists without fear of being called anti-Semitic."

Unfortunately the Jews killed him before he could deliver that speech to the IHR conference.

holy ****!! when did you become such a conspiracy theorist???

wow.

[defaultdotxbe]

Well he certainly couldn't have written it after he was killed.
well of course the logical alternative would be he never wrote the speech at all, but since when are you prone to logical alternatives?

[Sunray Breaker]

I know that Christopher Hitchens has been hobbying as a quote collector lately. He's a pretty good source to verify quotes with. He fixes a lot of false attributions on wikiquote.

[Thunder]

I know that Christopher Hitchens has been hobbying as a quote collector lately. He's a pretty good source to verify quotes with. He fixes a lot of false attributions on wikiquote.

can you ask him to verify the MLK quote from the supposed 1968 Harvard speech?

[Brainster]

holy ****!! when did you become such a conspiracy theorist???

wow.

That "whoosh" you heard was my sarcasm going right over your head.

[MaGZ]

I doubt if MLK had much respect for the Jews. At the time the Jews were running the NAACP. It had a Jewish president.

[tyr_13]

The whole point of the OP is a quibble over a factual basis for an appeal to authority.

I'm a huge admirer of MLK, but it makes not much more sense for either side to claim posthumous support from MLK as to make the proverbial "God is on our side" claim. Even if his views on the subject at the particular time could be clearly established, it would still be an appeal to authority at best. And who knows what he would think about it today, were he still alive.

Seconded. I'm just frankly curious if he said it for historical reasons.

[quixotecoyote]

So, I just got the book "The Socialism of Fools: Anti-Semitism on the Left" by Michael Lerner. It's a great read, and I'll probably be starting a thread on his criteria for identifying anti-semitism in the near future.

Unfortunately, it's the wrong source. I should have been looking for "The Socialism of Fools: The Left, the Jews and Israel” by Seymour Martin Lipset; in Encounter magazine, December 1969, p. 24.

My bad, I'll see if I can get that article.