This is exactly the kind of example that tests my belief in the Constitution ~ and just like in the case where the American Nazis wanted a permit to march in Skokie [a Chicago suburb that then had a high percentage of Holocaust survivors], I pass the test ~ but it's a struggle for me ~ I know it's LEGAL ~ but this has an added element of deceit with the minor tinkering of MLK's name that makes it legal ~ in both cases, the motivation is hatred ~ and evil ~ and there's enough of both in today's world without intentionally creating more ~ Sooz
MLK heirs say can't stop racist Web site
Published: Dec. 29, 2008 at 12:06 PM
ATLANTA, Dec. 29 (UPI) -- The heirs of slain U.S. civil rights leader Martin Luther King say there's not much they can do about a white supremacist group's use of "martinlutherking.org."
The Web site, which is among the highest-ranked results for Google search engine queries on King's name, is operated by the white supremacist group Stormfront, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported Monday.
The group devotes the Web site's pages to rehashing allegations of plagiarism and adultery and accuses King of fraud, claiming he was not a "legitimate reverend" or "bona fide Ph.D." The newspaper says the site also urges visitors to learn about civil rights by reading the work of former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke.
Isaac Newton Farris Jr., King's nephew and head of the non-profit King Center in Atlanta, told the newspaper that free speech guarantees allow Stormfront to use say what it pleases about King, as long as it doesn't use his name in Web site address, which it avoids by not using "Jr."
"You can't stop people from having opinions," Farris said. "If people think my uncle was adulterous and didn't have a Ph.D., we can't do anything about that."
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2008/12/29/ ... 230570366/
Login
FAQ
Search
sooz06
