Current Events PAGE

HARRIS POLL  Should southern states have the right to fly confederate flags over their statehouses?

Yes

62%  =>  34160 votes

No

34%  =>  18887 votes

From the Atlanta Constitution on the Georgia Flag:   this may be a dumb question, but why do you sound so consistently hostile to the legitimate feelings of people who find the confederate emblem offensive? if the confederacy had defended the enslavement of your ancestors, how would you feel about that? -- colin campbell.

Colin,
Those lazy people should strive to learn about the history of the country they love.  Then they would know that it was their people that either killed or captured, enslaved, and sold them to the Yankees. They would learn that the Yankees later found them unsuitable and unprofitable for their factories, and sold them to Plantation owners (Yankees included) in the Southern states. They would learn that no one was placed into slavery by the Southern States.

They would learn that Lincoln's War was about tariffs, that only 6% of the Southern defenders actually owned a slave. That the Confederate constitution was the one that forbade the importation of slaves. That the flag they have been taught to hate was never a Government
flag and it never flew over slavery. It was the flag of the soldiers which included Blacks, Hispanics, Jews, Native Americans, and many other groups.

Therefore, my feelings are not for those too lazy to study. My feelings are for my Grandfathers who gave their all for their families, their homes, and their State of Georgia when invaded by Lincoln's paid invaders: murderers, looters, rapists, and arsonists. We Southerners will always honor our brave ancestors and the flags they fought under, so either go home or get used to us following the fifth commandment of God's law.

P.S. It was the USA flag that defended slavery for 89 years. When do you suggest we trash it? And do the Native Americans have feelings? Why would you not be as concerned about their feelings?
Elijah Coleman

(December 12, 2002)

It would have been much easier to have believed that all of the denunciations of Trent Lott were being spewed from the old Soviet Union’s entrenched communists than to have to come to grips with the fact that this is the dangerous climate now existing in the United States. Not only do we have Democrats, hoping they can flush Republican integrity down the drain - which paltry amount would not put a strain on the sewer pipes - but we also have Republicans in toto trouncing Senator Lott as roundly as the Democrats. (No wonder Samuel Francis calls them the Stupid Party.) Add to that the subversive media, which is virtually a carbon copy of Pravda, the official newspaper of the old Soviet Union, and you realize that we here have become what the Soviets once were.

What Trent Lott said was true. If the country had elected Strom Thurmond in 1948, we "wouldn’t have had all these problems over all these years." Instead, this country’s voters gave us Harry Truman, who had already negotiated away the rights of Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland, and Rumania, handing them over to the Soviet Union after World II. In further concession to the Soviets, Truman helped cut up Europe to the great distress of all concerned in that part of the world. Had voters elected Thurmond, there would never have been a North Korea with which we have to deal very seriously now that they have nuclear weapons.

But it is none of these arguments which captured the attention of the "thought police." It was the new American taboo of saying anything blacks do not wish to hear. Lott may never have meant, as happily charged in the press, that we would have been better off with a segregationist President, but I wish he had. It is true, and it is time someone says so.

Flippant feminist columnist Kathleen Parker went into hysterics, asking just what kind of "problems" Lott meant. Using silly references to Hitler, she wrote, "Wonder which problems Herr Lott had in mind? That darned black vote? Those integrated public schools? Hip-hop? White flight? Black crime? The blind date that darkens the door of the white family room?" Not bright enough to realize it, she was giving all the correct answers. To think that white parents are not concerned about the racial makeup of their families and passing down inherited traits from generations back, as deeply as Jews are concerned about inter-faith marriage which nearly always results in a non-Jewish household, is to exhibit a profound ignorance of the importance of race in this country and in the world.

Blacks, who are very clever, have discovered a formula which has neutralized every public official in this country. It involves intimidation, threats, retribution, incessant demands, extorting money from corporations, attempting to bankrupt companies in court, and in general making themselves as obnoxious as possible so that no one will say or do anything which might displease a black man or woman. Politicians, who make the laws, have submitted to the black agenda, and we see an increasingly socialistic government as a result. In other words, give up your liberties quietly or be prepared to suffer ignominy. There is no fight left in the white public sector. That is why we saw immediate disavowals and apologies from Trent Lott. Would that Trent Lott cared more for his integrity than his position as Senate leader. If he really believed in the things embodied in the compliment given to a 100-year-old man on his birthday, then Lott would be worth a whole lot more to Mississippi and the rest of us as a simple Senator who just might be representing a majority of white people who have no one to speak for them.

Even those who call themselves conservative were among the Lott detractors, and Armstrong Williams, considered among some as a "leading black conservative," tore into Lott in savage rhetoric. Which brings me to an observation: Some blacks find advantage in masquerading as conservatives, but when it comes to race, they are not conservative with YOUR views. You better bury your own deeply held beliefs and subscribe to their odd racial opinions or have your whole existence become a nightmare. In other words, white men should "shut up." And that is basically what we have learned from the Trent Lott Affair.

Michael Andrew Grissom

www.michaelandrewgrissom.com <http://www.michaelandrewgrissom.com>

(This column may be used for reprint free of fees and charges.)

A TRIBUTE TO THE GOOD PEOPLE OF GEORGIA

By Graham C. Owen, Commander, Sgt. Charlie Dickison Camp 534,

Florida Division December 7, 2002

"TAKE DOWN THE FLAG" GOVERNOR BARNES HAD SAID,

AND JOINING IN THE CHORUS, OTHER POLITICIANS PLED,

TO REMOVE GEORGIA'S OLD FLAG FROM ON ITS POLE,

BUT THE PEOPLE SPOKE "NAY, NOT THAT FLAG FOLD."

THE SCALIWAGS HEEDED NOT THE WORD,

THEY REMOVED THE FLAG, THE PEOPLE WERE NOT HEARD,

THEN CAME ELECTION AND ON THAT DAY,

THE PEOPLE OF GEORGIA FINALLY HAD THEIR SAY.

NOW SITTING AT HOME, THEIR POWER IS GONE,

THEY HAVE LEARNED A LESSON, ONE THAT IS STRONG.

WHENEVER A GOVERNOR OR REPRESENTATIVE STRAYS

SEND THEM HOME FROM OFFICE, TILL THEY MEND THEIR WAYS.

SO IN THE FUTURE, OUR COURSE IS CLEAR.

HOLD TO OUR VALUES AND HERITAGE DEAR.

LET NOT THE TURN-COATS ERASE OUR CAUSE

TURN THEM OUT OF OFFICE, AND CLIP THEIR CLAWS.

Blacks, Jews fight on side of the South
By Thomas C. Mandes
SPECIAL TO THE WASHINGTON TIMES

     The term "Johnny Reb" evokes an image of a white soldier, Anglo-Saxon and Protestant and from an agrarian background. Many Southern soldiers, however, did not fit this mold. A number of ethnic backgrounds were represented during the conflict.

      For example, thousands of black Americans fought as Johnny Rebs. Dr. Lewis Steiner of the U.S. Sanitary Commission observed that while the Confederate army marched through Maryland during the 1862 Sharpsburg (Antietam) campaign, "over 3,000 negroes had arms, rifles, muskets, sabers, bowie knives, dirks, etc. And were manifestly an integral portion of the Southern Confederate Army."
      There also were Hispanic Confederates. Col. Santos Benavides, a former Texas Ranger, city attorney and mayor of Laredo, Texas, commanded the 33rd Texas Cavalry, while Gen. Refugio Benavides protected what was known as the Confederacy of the Rio Grande. Recent Irish Catholic immigrants also chose to fight for the South, as did a few stalwart Chinese who served nobly in Louisiana.
     The largest ethnic group to serve the Confederacy, however, was made up of first-, second- and third-generation Jewish lads. Old Jewish families, initially Sephardic and later Ashkenazic, had settled in the South generations before the war. Jews had lived in Charleston, S.C., since 1695. By 1800, the largest Jewish community in America lived in Charleston, where the oldest synagogue in America, K.K. Beth Elohim, was founded. By 1861, a third of all the Jews in America lived in Louisiana.
      More than 10,000 Jews fought for the Confederacy. As Rabbi Korn of Charleston related, "Nowhere else in America — certainly not in the Antebellum North — had Jews been accorded such an opportunity to be complete equals as in the old South." Gen. Robert E. Lee allowed his Jewish soldiers to observe all holy days, while Gens. Ulysses S. Grant and William T. Sherman issued anti-Jewish orders.
     Many young Jews served in the ranks. There were a number of Jewish officers who were part and parcel of Southern society. They had spent their formative years in the South defensive about slavery and hostile about what they perceived as Northern aggression and condescension toward the South. Some of the more notable among the officer corps included Abraham Myers, a West Point graduate and a classmate of Lee's in the class of 1832. Myers served as quartermaster general and, before the war, fought the Indians in Florida. The city of Fort Myers was named after him.
     Another Jewish officer, Maj. Adolph Proskauer of Mobile, Ala., was wounded several times. One of his subordinate officers wrote, "I can see him now as he nobly carried himself at Gettysburg, standing coolly and calmly with a cigar in his mouth at the head of the 12th Alabama amid a perfect rain of bullets, shot, and shell. He was the personification of intrepid gallantry and imperturbable courage."
     In North Carolina, the six Cohen brothers fought in the 40th Infantry. The first Confederate Jew killed in the war was Albert Lurie Moses of Charlotte, N.C. All-Jewish companies reported to the fray from Macon and Savannah in Georgia. In Louisiana, three Jews reached the rank of colonel: S.M. Hymans, Edwin Kunsheedt and Ira Moses.
     Many Southern Jews became world-renowned during this period. Moses Jacob Ezekiel from Richmond fought at New Market with his fellow cadets from the Virginia Military Institute and became a noted sculptor. His mother, Catherine Ezekiel, said she would not tolerate a son who declined to fight for the Confederacy.
     He wrote in his memoirs, "We were not fighting for the perpetuation of slavery, but for the principle of States Rights and Free Trade, and in defense of our homes which were being ruthlessly invaded." In tribute to Ezekiel, it was written, "The eye that saw is closed, the hand that executed is still, the soldier lad who fought so well was knighted and lauded in foreign land, but dying, his last request was that he might rest among his old comrades in Arlington Cemetery."
     The most famous Southern Jew of the era was Judah Benjamin. He was the first Jewish U.S. senator and declined a seat on the Supreme Court and an offer to be ambassador to Spain. Educated in law at Yale, he was at one time or another during the war the Confederacy's attorney general, secretary of war and secretary of state. After the war, he settled in England, where he became a lawyer and wrote a seminal legal text.
     Simon Baruch, a Prussian immigrant, settled in Camden, S.C. He received his degree from the Medical College of Virginia and entered the conflict as a physician in the 3rd South Carolina Battalion, where he joined the fighting before the Battle of Second Manassas. He eventually became surgeon general of the Confederacy.
     While he was away during the war, his fiancee, Isabelle Wolfe, painted his portrait in the family home in South Carolina. It was at this time that Sherman began his March to the Sea. His raiders set the Wolfe house afire, and as she rescued the portrait, a Yankee ripped it with his bayonet and slapped her. Witnessing this, a Union officer gave the attacker a beating with his sword.
     From this, a romance began to blossom — quickly squelched by the young woman's father, who remarked: "Marriage to a gentile is bad enough, but marriage to a Yankee, never, ever, it is out of the question." Isabelle Wolfe eventually married Baruch. After the war, they moved to New York City, where he set up what became a prominent medical practice on West 57th Street.
      Mrs. Baruch became a member of the United Daughters of the Confederacy, and the couple raised their children with pro-Southern views. If a band struck up "Dixie," Dr. Baruch would jump up and give the Rebel yell, much to the chagrin of the family. A man of usual reserve and dignity, Dr. Baruch nevertheless would let loose with the piercing yell even in the Metropolitan Opera House.
     Their son Bernard became the most successful financier of his time and one of the best-known American Jews of the 20th century. Bernard Baruch was an adviser to presidents from World War I to World War II and became a confidant of President Franklin D. Roosevelt.
     Today, little remains of the Jewish Confederate South. With the mass migrations from Russia and Eastern Europe, new immigrants knew little if anything of the struggle that had ensued during the preceding half-century. Confederate Southern Jewry eventually disappeared.
     
     • Thomas C. Mandes is a physician in Vienna, Va.

 

---

MFUME QUOTE

From: nwaller@carol.net

 

For those not fully convinced of the corruption of our "compromising" state legis-traitors, consider that well before the fateful flag vote in SC the national NAACP had written a pro-flag SC organization to say the proposed compromise would not be acceptable to the hate group. It was reprinted in a recent edition of the TRUTH AT LAST newspaper (POB 1211, Marietta GA 30061):

NAACP head Kweisi Mfume wrote a letter to Oren Smith of the Southern Heritage Assn. in Columbia, S.C., dated Jan. 2, 2000. A copy is in our possession. It reads, in part:

"Our principal litigate (sic) effort has been directed to the Confederate flag as an official symbol. However, we feel we are at a crossroad and feel that a compromise would not be beneficial to anyone. In the near future, efforts will be aimed at the removal of racist names, mascots, monuments, and ending the glorification of confederate soldiers through what is termed 'reenactments.'

We also feel there could be better use of State and Federal resources by the closing of museums and battlefields, which are dedicated to the preservation of slavery. . .

 

While this may appear to be one sided, it is a start toward the injustice of the Afro-American. Once the introduction and passage of a slavery compensation bill is accomplished a serious step will have been made toward reparations. This will reflect America's stance of equality, justice and freedom to the entire world. Signed, Kweisi Mfume, Executive Director, NAACP -- TTAL early 2002

Thus we see afresh that utter fraud of the "closure" and "finality" the pols promised us as they voted to bring the flag down where the Rev. Slave could burn it. There was never to be any closure, and they knew it, the politicians knew it, the leftist pressure groups knew it, the media knew it, the Chambers of Commerce/Communism knew it, above all the black supremacists knew it. WHO ARE THESE POLITICIANS REALLY

WORKING FOR?   It doesn't add up. /\/.\/\/.

Gentlemen,
Watch out for the Police State. It's almost here.
Lijah

War on terrorism a threat to liberty?
http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20020321-90276020.htm


Paul Craig Roberts

The war on terror is creating media attention and fund-raising opportunities for conservative organizations. It is also creating confusion of thought among conservatives and, thereby, opportunities for more centralized government power and a police state.
Too many Americans are coming to accept that a successful war on terror requires a police state in whole or part.
For example, the Model State Emergency Health Powers Act would give state governors the power to order people from their homes and force them into quarantines, separate parents from children, impose price controls and rationing, and confiscate guns and other property.
Supposedly, this is to protect us from germ warfare, but herding people into confined spaces is the best way to spread disease.
The Emergency Health Powers Act is sponsored by the federal agency, Centers for Disease Control. According to Phyllis Schlafly, the bill, conveying dictatorial powers upon governors, is already moving through state legislatures.
We are in far more danger from the belief that the ends justify the means than we are from terrorists.

by Thomas J. DiLorenzo  

Every February 12 Americans think they are celebrating Lincoln’s birthday. But what they are really celebrating is the birth of the Leviathan state that Lincoln, more than anyone else, is responsible for bringing about. No wonder federal politicos have made his birth date a national holiday, engraved his face is on Mount Rushmore, built a Venus-like statue of him in Washington, D.C., and put his mugshot on the five dollar bill.

More than 130 years of government propaganda has hidden this fact from the American people by creating a Mythical Lincoln that never existed. Take, for instance, the fact that everyone supposedly knows – that Lincoln was an abolitionist. This would be a surprise to the preeminent Lincoln scholar, Pulitzer prize-winning Lincoln biographer David Donald, who in his 1961 book, Lincoln Reconsidered, wrote that "Lincoln was not an abolitionist." And he wasn’t. He was glad to accept on behalf of the Republican Party any votes from abolitionists, but real abolitionists despised him. William Lloyd Garrison, the most prominent of all abolitionists, concluded that Lincoln "had not a drop of anti-slavery blood in his veins."

Garrison knew Lincoln well. He knew that Lincoln stated over and over again for his entire adult life that he did not believe in social or political equality of the races, he opposed inter-racial marriage, supported the Illinois constitution’s prohibition of immigration of blacks into the state, once defended in court a slaveowner seeking to retrieve his runaway slaves but never defended a runaway, and that he was a lifelong advocate of colonization – of sending every last black person in the U.S. to Africa, Haiti, or central America – anywhere but in the U.S.

Thomas J. DiLorenzo [send him mail] is professor of economics at Loyola College in Maryland. His latest book is The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War (Forum/Random House, March 2002).

Copyright 2002 LewRockwell.com

We really cannot blame Americans too much for holding on to their myths, even though they can only achieve pride by putting us down. If Americans had to take a look at the real Constitution, the real Declaration of Independence, the real Abraham Lincoln, the real war for Union and emancipation, which was neither noble nor necessary, their whole national morale would start to fall apart. That is why the anti-South people have been talking less about slavery lately and starting to dismiss the Confederacy with nasty and summary charges of "treason," as if the right to secede was not what the war was all about. What else have Americans got to sustain their society which has pretensions to world domination while disintegrating from within. The Melting Pot? – only a half-truth at best. Global Democracy? – a pernicious abstraction.

Still, it is true that until a very few years ago, the Confederacy was an accepted and honored part of the American national heritage. The current jihad against our forebears indicates a radical forward step in the movement toward government suppression of free thought and expression.  Dr. Clyde Wilson

Fool’s Gold

For more than a year our Southern Heritage defenders in Texas 

have protested every week day the attack on our Confederate 

monument plaques which Gov. George Bush removed 

cowardly in the middle of the night.   Read more on this

here:  http://www.geocities.com/texansfordixie/

Appeals Court Rules On Second Amendment
BELLEVUE, WA - In a stunning decision, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals
in New Orleans has crushed over 60 years of judicial misinterpretation
and anti-gun rhetoric by finding that the Second Amendment of the U.S.
Constitution protects an individual right.
Go here for story and links:
http://disc.server.com/discussion.cgi?id=149495&article=10358

At the U.N. conference, some African leaders said that since slaves were forcibly taken from Africa, they deserve compensation for this loss. Among many problems with this argument are two that are particularly relevant. First, very few slaves were kidnapped by European slave traders. The vast majority were sold into slavery by African leaders of the time.
Second, these African leaders were paid very well for the slaves they sold. So to compensate them a second time for their loss is like paying compensation to a thief for robbing you.

A survey of slaves taken by one Sigismund Koelle in Sierra Leone in the 1850s. According to his research, which may not be typical for the whole slavery era, 34 percent of slaves had been taken prisoner in war, 30 percent had been kidnapped by Africans, 11 percent suffered enslavement as punishment for a crime, 7 percent had been sold to pay debts, and another 7 percent had been sold by relatives or friends. The rest fell into multiple categories.

Finally, it is worth noting that the U.S., against which reparations demands have been strongest, only got about 4 percent of the slaves taken from Africa. According to a careful calculation by historian P.D. Curtin, between 1500 and 1870, 399,000 slaves were brought to the U.S. Almost 10 times this number went to the Caribbean and about the same to Brazil.

Open Letter To Liberals Favoring Gun Confiscation

by Liz Michael

LizMichael.com, www.lizmichael.com

Released August 3, 2001 for immediate release

I know a lot of liberals. Hell, some of my best friends are liberals. And to those liberals, who so often favor gun control and gun confiscation, I have just one simple question....

 

Have you lost your bloody minds?

 

Let me tell 'ya a little story 'bout a man named Adolf. In the 20's the National Socialists were heavily armed (heavily for that day, anyway). The Bolsheviks were also somewhat armed, not to the degree of the Nazis. They were both probably better armed than the regular army, which was through the Treaty of Versailles, rendered next to useless.

 

German gun control didn't begin under the Nazis. It began in large measure because of the Nazis. They did not demand it, though. It was being aimed AT them. Yes. You heard me right. Check your history. The political establishment of the Weimar Republic wanted gun control to control undesirables in the population. To disarm them. They all thought it was a peachy idea.

 

It didn't work. German gun control was aimed at the Nazis and the Bolsheviks, the radical parties of the day. Because the National Socialists weren't about to obey laws that were not in their interest, gun control only wound up disarming what little armory was already in public hands.

 

What happened? One of the groups who refused to disarm ultimately took over the country. And there was absolutely nothing their opponents could do about it. Because they were without an army and without many firearms.

 

Now, the Weimar Republic is not a direct comparison to today's United States. But fast forward to today. There are a lot of people, most of them liberals of some type, who say one of the major reasons they want to disarm Americans is because of guns in the hands of "them crazy rednecks", like me. (Even though I'm Black, Indian and Jewish) Well, let's assume for a minute you get your wish. Let's say that HCI and the Brady bunch get everything they want in their political agenda passed into law. Who is and is not willing to obey those laws is of prime strategic importance to the liberal agenda.

 

Under a gun confiscation, who will likely surrender arms and who will utterly refuse to, cuts sharply across political lines. The liberals will probably cooperate, for the "good of the children", or "the environment", or whatever pabulum of the day they're being fed. Maybe a few radical anarchists won't. But most of your mainstream Democrats will comply. After all, they TRUST the government to take care of them.

 

However, the groups who will not are the conservatives and the libertarians. The conservatives, who prominently feature the Religious Right caucus. The Patrick Buchanan anti-immigration caucus. The anti-gay caucus. And the libertarians who plain and simply represent the "leave me the hell alone" caucus. The libertarians who would if they had their way gut as many liberal government programs as they possibly could.

 

Of course, the criminals will not comply. Not ever. They never do. They will, of course, profit from the illicit traffic from those who feel the need to have a weapon without the permission of a government bureaucrat or local police official. But I'm not really talking about the criminals here.

 

So what would happen under strict gun control is that the political groups most likely to be armed to the teeth are the conservatives and the libertarians, and the Religious Right and Buchananites with them. To a distinctly disproportionate degree.

 

Now, if you are a liberal, ask yourself this question.... do you really feel comfortable about that. Do you really WANT the conservatives to have significantly more guns than you? Because that group of armed individuals will be able to throw out any election they wish: you all complain Bush stole the 2000 election. Well, son, under strict gun control, you ain't seen NOTHIN' yet!!!

 

And they would likely, in the case of an armed insurrection of any serious import, be the people who take over the government. Either that, or a very organized somewhat fascist element within the government will defeat them, and take power themselves. Where would the liberals fit in the picture? Disarmed, with no power, no agenda and no voice, with their pet programs likely in shambles, with both camps of a civil war who hate them.

 

The SINGLE STUPIDEST thing that liberals could do for their causes is pass gun control. They would be writing their own death warrant, just as the Weimar Republic did.

 

I reiterate the question. Does anyone here want their activist movement fully disarmed, and completely trusting the other side in power without the check and balance of the potential for armed revolt?

 

Let me guess: some of you reading this right now, are thinking with your gut. And your gut is telling you: "the more I read of your essays, Liz, the more I see the need for strict gun control. So people like YOU won't have guns."

 

People like ME won't have guns.

 

That's a real belly laugh.

 

People like me, understand, as Mao understood, that power flows from the barrel of a gun. So people like me will NEVER not have guns.

 

Your gut feeling is the same gut feeling the Weimar Republic had about the Nazis. I'm not going to challenge your feeling. If you understand my politics, REALLY, it's in fact, nearly laughable, as someone like Hitler or Stalin is practically the diametric opposite of myself.. But let's go with your feeling for a sec. Say I am the danger. Me and my "conservative libertarian anarchist radical antigovernment whatever" thugs are going to march down and destroy America. So what then.... "WE GOTTA TAKE EVERYBODY'S GUNS!", you say. And let's pretend for a bit that you manage to get legislation to that effect. Who will obey it and who won't?

 

I'll tell ya, who, my liberal friends. You will obey it. The liberals will dutifully obey.

 

I won't obey it. The libertarians won't. The radicals won't. The conservatives won't. The religious right won't. The gayhaters won't. You may think they will but you don't know them like I do.

 

I won't obey it because in the end, in addition to saving my own ass, and the asses of people who think like me, I may have to save YOUR asses as well.

 

Who will have more power, liberal friend, at that point? Who will have more power? The liberals or the conservatives? The left or the right? Because at that point, my side, and whoever happen to be my allies, whatever you think of my side, will have all the guns. Yes, the government will have them, too. But do you really think that the government agencies with the most arms give a rat's ass about the liberal agenda? Do you REALLY think the GOVERNMENT... do you really think that government agents at this point in time, care about benign things such as gay rights, women's rights, racial minority rights and human dignity?

 

At that point in time, the only real battle left will be between the government and the conservatives and their allies. Unless, the conservatives take the government and consolidate absolute power, which Hitler did. So you either will have a government dominated by the conservatives, or dominated by FBI-CIA-DEA types.... or you will have a government in shambles due to a domestic rebellion.... and remember that libertarians LIKE to see governments in shambles. And you will have encouraged the only Americans willing to oppose these people to disarm themselves.

 

At that point in the equation, liberal friend, unless your side is armed, your side won't count. Your side will not only be irrelevant, but to quote former California Governor Pete Wilson, it will be "f***ing irrelevant". And if you disarm Americans, remembering that we won't disarm, you will have no power, and we might very well have all of it.

 

In the light of what I've just written, liberal friend, let me ask you again. Do you want to disarm the American people so that they will not be able to fight back against a tyrannical government? Or do you want to trust whomever comes to power to not be a tyrant. Germany did the latter and got the Third Reich. What will YOU get?

 

By the way, lest anyone have a cow, I do not believe conservatives and libertarians can possibly be equated with the Nazis. But I'm comparing the Weimar Republic to America of today, in one aspect, and one aspect only, and that is exposing the fallacy that the political enemies of the ruling government can be successfully disarmed by disarming the society at large, which is what we're really talking about. I am responding specifically to people who say that the NRA, the GOA, myself, and many of our allies are so dangerous that we need to be disarmed, and that that could be accomplished by disarming the populace as a whole.

 

Targeting the most military styled political enemy you have in a nation with general gun control against everyone actually strengthens the political enemy.

 

I can also use Weimar Germany and probably a 100 other examples to demonstrate that in most conflicts, that when the "gunphobics" decide to square off against the "gun lovers", the gun lovers almost always win. To beat us, you have to become just like us. Ultimately, to successfully disarm us, you will have to pick up a gun and make it so. Or hire someone and pay them to do the same.

 

This is why I am so adamantly against the gun controllers. Because I know that. I know ultimately that for them to win, they will have to turn into far worse than whatever they perceive we are. You still think you all will simply talk us out of it or legislate us out of it, but I know better. I know that either you will lose to us or you will beat us by becoming monsters. And I know there will be no other choices.

 

Remember what I said, people. Nothing you do will cause the hardcore conservatives and libertarians to disarm. Probably, gun control will only cause more of us TO arm. Because we know what happens next if we don't.

 

Governments in the 20th century have killed 100 million people. Almost all of those governments had one thing in common..... they stripped their eventual victims of firearms. Almost every people who have tried to appease a tyrant have lived to regret it. There is a more important spiritual lesson, in your zest to avoid the sword, that some of you have forgotten.... "Put not your trust in princes". By disarming, you are trusting the princes.

 

I don't trust the princes. Do you?

 

Hitler probably would have come to power anyway in Germany. However, with a disarmed populace, he came to power with a minority of the vote, and without a check and balance against his power. Had there been an armed populace, he might not have been able to consolidate absolute power. Probably no World War II. Probably no Holocaust. Guns in the right hands could have stopped it all.

 

Anyone in today's political climate personally strike you as dangerous?

 

It doesn't really matter who it is, or what party they belong to. Just understand this: gun control strengthens their hand. YOU personally disarming strengthens their hand.

 

Again, I'll reask the question of those who support gun control. Have you lost your minds?

 

Copyright, 2001, LizMichael.com, www.lizmichael.com Permission to reprint granted so long as the website and the copyright remains referenced. No exclusivity may be retained by any individual or press entity which reprints.

CONFEDERATE FLAG CLAIMS FILED AGAINST GRADY Co. GEORGIA SCHOOLS

Black Mountain, NC - The Southern Legal Resource Center Inc, announces that it has filed civil rights claims against the Grady County Schools on behalf of 9 area students whose civil and constitutional rights were violated when Washington Middle School and Cairo High School officials banned Confederate symbols last February.

The claims were filed with the Department of Education, office of Civil

Rights alleging discrimination based on race and national origin.

Investigation and arbitration has been requested. Claims were also filed

with the Department of Justice, Equal Opportunity Section alleging

discrimination based on religion.

Constitutional claims and civil rights claims will be filed in Federal court

after the DOE & DOJ investigations.

The SLRC is coordinating its legal efforts with the Southern Heritage

Defense Organization, a local family support group for the Grady County students wishing to display pride in their Confederate heritage.

"This case is about justice and liberty," said SLRC Board Chairman Lourie A. Salley, III, a Lexington, SC attorney.

"This school needs to clean up its civil liberties act," said SLRC Chief

Trial Counsel Kirk D. Lyons. Lyons was referring to a quote by Cairo High School Principal Wayne Tootle who, when asked why the Confederate flag could not be worn on a shirt replied that: "the flag is racist" and " I’ve kept these niggers in line for 25 years and I’m not about to let you white boys have an uprising!"

Many felt the schools banned the Confederate flag because of the recent change in the Georgia state flag.

The claims will hopefully be arbitrated this summer.

The Southern Legal Resource Center, Inc. is a non-profit tax exempt Civil Rights Law Firm that specializes in Southern Heritage violations.

Please visit the Southern Legal Resource Center's web site at

<http://www.cheta.net/slrc>http://www.cheta.net/slrc .

Our address is SLRC, P.O. Box 1235, Black Mountain, NC 28711. Phone:

828-669-5189

Dr. Payne and Atty. Lyons

SCV members, I.N. Giffen,758

Black Mountain, NC

Gentleman,
This move will show the naacp as the hate mongers they really are, and the
people of Mississippi will surely stand up to their tactics now more than ever.
Actually, the boycott has increased revenue in S. Carolina.

NAACP officials have indicated that the civil
rights organization may be coming closer to a South Carolina-styled
economic boycott in Mississippi.

This after a mid-April state referendum in which citizens voted 2-1 to officially 

adopt the state's flag which bears the Confederate Saint Andrews Cross.

The oath which all commanding officers of UN deployments must take:

"I solemnly affirm to exercise in all loyalty, discretion and conscience the functions entrusted to me as a member of the international service of the United Nations, to discharge those functions and regulate my conduct with the interest of the United Nations only in view, and not to seek or accept instructions in respect to the performance of my duties from any government or other authority external to the organization."

Florida Division Headquarters
PRESS RELEASE
February 8, 2001

On February 5, 2001, the four flags that have flown over Florida were
removed from a historical display on the Capitol grounds in Tallahassee.
The Spanish, British, French, and Confederate flags have flown for many
years in this Capital display.

Inquires by the Sons of Confederate Veterans and other organizations to the
offices of Governor Jeb Bush and Secretary of State Katherine Harris,
concerning authorization for the removal of these flags have been met with
vague and contradictory statements. No state official or agency has advised
the citizens of Florida concerning the removal of these flags.

A non-profit organization, "Heritage Fountain 2000, Inc." has plans to
construct a fountain near the site of the flag display. However,
representatives of that group stated that they were not aware of any reason
to remove the flags or poles. 

Information provided to the SCV by Legislative and Executive branch
employees, indicates that these historic flags will not be returned to
their present location. 

The Sons of Confederate Veterans urge Governor Bush and Secretary Harris to
immediately advise the citizens of Florida on the status of this historic
flag display. The SCV also requests that the flags be returned to their
original site or a similarly visible outdoor location on the Capitol grounds.

Our organization is dismayed that our elected officials have acted in this
manner to remove symbols of the history, heritage, and culture of our state
with no notification to the citizens of Florida. 

The Sons of Confederate Veterans have advised diplomatic representatives of
Spain, France, and the United Kingdom concerning removal of the flags of
these sovereign nations.

For additional information contact:

John W. Adams
Commander, Florida Division
Sons of Confederate Veterans
Altamonte Springs, Florida
877-473-5237

SCV license plates have been under attack on several fronts in Virginia 
during the last few weeks. The Virginia Division was given less than 24 
hours to celebrate their Federal District Court victory when Attorney 
General Mark Earley, a Republican candidate for Governor, decided to 
appeal the decision to the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals. Many papers in 
Virginia speculated on his reasoning for such a quick appeal and most 
centered on his pandering for black votes in his future election. Most 
legal pundits felt that an appeal would be both costly and ineffective 
since the lst Amendment will not be overcome by Earley's arguments that 
the state of Virginia has the right as a government to control the 
contents of speech on vanity license plates. Earley has made it known 
which side of the issue he comes down on. Many SCV, reenactors and other 
Virginians sick of this political correctness have turned to his 
adversary in the Governor's race, John Hager, who has endorsed both 
Confederate History Month and SCV license plates during his campaign. 
People are lining up to be Hager Delegates to the June Republican 
Convention in Richmond.
Probably sensing the futility of Earley's appeal, Donald McEachin, 
a black Richmond area member of the House of Delegates, sponsored a bill 
which would repeal the SCV license plates entirely. During a televised 
interview, McEachin generously said he would withdraw his bill if the 
SCV would put a different logo on their tags. The Virginia Division 
lobbied heavily with legislators to defeat this measure and when it came 
up in front of the House Transportation Committee, McEachin withdrew the 
bill sensing that he did not have enough votes to get it through.
The Rutherford Institute has advised the Virginia Division to 
proceed with the applications for SCV license plates.
Brag Bowling       lst Lt. Commander     Virginia Division

A Judge in Maryland just ruled that the [U.S.] 

government's "continual reference to the 
Confederate flag as a symbol of racial intolerance and divisiveness 
clearly demonstrates that [those in the government] are choosing, and 
advancing, the viewpoint of those offended by the flag over the 
viewpoint of those proud of the flag."   A Southern Victory!

Reply to the Joy Franklin anti-Southern article.

Asheville Citizen-Times

Editors,

You do not tell fifty million people that you believe in inclusion or putting planks in

the bridge of fellowship while at the same time you are destroying our songs,

street names, school names, monuments, Southern history in text books, bridge

names, and memorial flags that honor our ancestors.

Our children can't wear to school pictures of Confederate American heroes without

a law suit being filed to protect them.

Add to that the Federal government's refusal to allow Battleflags in our Confederate

cemeteries, or Confederate American exhibits included on government property.

Or their refusal to recognize hate crimes and assaults on Confederate Americans.

We Confederate Americans are closing down our Southern hospitality to all you

Yankee refugees and our own Scalawags who can't honor their Confederate Fathers

and their Confederate Mothers as directed in the Christian commandments.

As far as our Georgia flag, and our other Southern flags go, they will outnumber

those being flown to further attack our heritage while calling our heroes traitors

and vile names such as Nazis. Most fools do not realize that Confederate Americans

helped defeat the Nazis, and that Confederates fought for the original Constitution

against the invaders from the North who managed to destroy our Bill of Rights.

Confederately,

Elijah S. Coleman

 

Report from the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals


The Southern heritage battle was fought in the halls of federal court today,
as the 6th Circuit heard oral arguments on the case of Castorina vs Madison
County School Board. It was a proud day for us, and our ancestors, I
believe. Chad Sayre, a Ky SCV member, presented the oral arguments to the
3-judge panel this morning. We have worked for 3 years to get to this point,
and this case is now the only Southern heritage case that is well along in
the legal system.

Trying to read the tea leaves of what the judges' questions mean is a
guessing game, so understand that most of the following are my impressions,
but who knows what will be ruled.

Our case boils down to three constitutional complaints; due process (the
parents and students were never allowed to take their grievance before the
school council or school board), freedom of speech, and equal protection
(students with Malcom X and other shirts that could be construed as racially
based were not disciplined). Primarily we are citing a case known as Tinker,
in which the 1st amendment and equal protection rights of students were
upheld. The Tinker decision recognizes that schools must maintain order and
fulfill their mission of education, which sometimes may involve curbing
first amendment rights, but those curbs must be applied evenly.

The school systems' case is based in two areas. They claim, under Tinker,
that there was an imminent potential disruption in the school due to the
t-shirts, and thus they acted appropriately. They also claim (and the
district court judge ruled in his summary judgment) that the t-shirts'
images are not protected speech. They claim that the t-shirts aren't
protected speech because they "don't carry a message". This seems to me to
be a terrible argument, because the school says that the Confederate flag is
racist and that is why they want them removed. How can they be construed as
racist if they "don't carry a message"? Even Judge Kennedy, whose questions
usually seemed to be "against" us, pointed out that the students came back
to school after their suspension wearing the shirts again specifically as a
protest. "How could that not be a message?" she asked.

Chief Judge Merritt seemed to be very sympathetic to our "equal protection"
argument. He came back to it several times, even tossing it out as a
"softball" question for our side to respond to. He explicitly pointed out
that Tinker required a neutral application of dress code rules, and that
allowing Malcom X shirts while not allowing Hank Williams shirts with flags
could not be considered neutral. "What's good for the goose under the first
amendment, must be good for the gander" he said at one point. It's
interesting to me that we've been making this argument repeatedly with
school and other officials and it's often considered a joke by the
powers-that-be. They don't seem to see the hypocrisy of banning Southern
symbols while allowing other cultural and racial symbols. It was very
refreshing to see a judge who is in a position to give our position some
"teeth" seeming to take the same side.

The judges, especially Judge Merritt, were also very interested in our first
amendment argument. Frankly, this is an argument which we have not been
prevailing on in other cases, but Judge Merritt came back to it over and
over. Judge Merritt also seemed quite perturbed that this case had been
decided in a summary judgment. He seemed to want to use that against the
opposition, by saying that he had to accept the testimony of the students as
truth, since there had only been deposition and no trial. Using that as a
basis, Judge Merritt posed a series of questions to the school board's
attorney which ended with the judge saying "it seems to me that you violated
their first amendment rights, isn't that so?". The attorney gave a vaguely
positive answer, so the judge repeated the question more directly, to which
the attorney replied, "Yes...in a general sense". To me, this was quite a
"Perry Mason" moment. We had the opposing attorney admitting that the school
system violated the student's rights!!

The judges also asked our attorney what remedy we would like, seeming to
indicate a preference for remanding the case back to the district court for
a trial. Our response was that we wanted that "at a minimum".

Interestingly, the "due process" argument wasn't touched on very much,
though it seemed to me that this was one of our strongest. Does that mean
that the judges didn't care about this aspect, or perhaps they bought our
argument in the briefs without needing further questions? Or perhaps (my
theory) the judges saw this as an interesting "equal protection" case, and
an interesting revisit to the first amendment hair-splitting of the Tinker
decision. Compared to those two, maybe the obvious lack of due process isn't
as "sexy".

Overall, the feeling was very positive for our side. I realize that the
judges could have been playing "devil's advocate", but at several points
they didn't ask questions but made statements of their opinion ("I think
that violates equal protection", etc.). Guessing what judges might do is
impossible, but I'm pretty sure anyone sitting there had the feeling that
the judges were very familiar with the case (they rattled off details of the
case with great ease), and that they seem to be leaning toward remanding the
case back. If they do, depending on how the opinion is written, that alone
could result in positive "case law" for our cause, as well as finally
getting our day in court. That would be a huge victory.

The Kentucky Post ran an article today (hopefully someone can track that
down), and the Lexington Herald-Leader sent a reporter. I don't know if they
will run an article, but he did briefly interview several of us.

I would like to thank Ron Huff for making the journey to lend moral support,
and of course thanks to Chad Sayre and his father (who also came to
support), and Kirk Lyons. Kirk spend two days in Cincinnati, researching the
court, getting to know the clerks (and they are really the ones who write
the opinions), etc. etc. Do the judges pay attention to our "delegation"?
No, but while encouraging our legal reps, it communicated very well to the
school board's attorney that our side has organized support, and it doesn't
look like were going away any time soon.

It will be weeks or months before a decision is handed down; we need to
prepare. If it is remanded or overturned, the school board has vowed to
appeal. If it is remanded, then we will have the expenses of putting on a
trial to prepare for. If we lose, we will appeal. All of these are going to
require some more money. This oral argument phase cost us about $1,800 (of
course, that's with the attorneys working pro bono). This is the leading
Southern heritage case in the country right now; please let our supporters
know that now is the time to put their money where their hearts are!
(donations can be sent to: 

David Harbolt, KY Div. Adjutant, 614 Ben Ali
Drive Apartment # 301, Danville, KY 40422 and mark them Heritage).
In Service to the South
Don Shelton, Cmdr.

On Nov. 20, Judge Jackson Kiser of the Roanoke Va. Federal 
District Court heard competing Motions for Summary Judgment regarding 
the lawsuit instituted by the Virginia Division of the Sons of 
Confederate Veterans to place the SCV Battleflag logo on specialty 
plates already granted by the Virginia legislature. Despite what reports 
said to the contrary, the Virginia Attorney General, Mark Earley, was 
not about to give in and sent the Solicitor General of Virginia, William 
Hurd, to represent the Commonwealth. The A team representation did not 
fare particularly well against the Rutherford Institute and attorney Art 
Strickland. Peppered with questions by the Judge, Hurd was constantly 
backed against the wall. The Judge said he would not rule on such an 
important case with a verbal opinion from the bench that day and would 
issue a written ruling. The Rutherford Institute felt that this ruling 
would come anytime within two weeks to two months, judging from Kiser's 
prior rulings in other cases.
One note for concern is the feeling by Rutherford that should the 
Commonwealth lose the case they would most likely appeal the outcome, 
thus making the Division members wait even longer for their plates with 
logos. Also, a case is on the horizon which all SCV members should watch 
out for. Appeal has been made to the US Supreme Court of a Missouri case 
involving their highway clean-up program. The KKK has sued Missouri for 
dropping them from this clean-up program. The KKK feels this is an 
example of "viewpoint discrimination" under the 1st Amendment, the same 
legal doctrine which the SCV has used successfully in a variety of 
cases. The federal appeals court ruled for the Klan. The US Supreme 
Court has not said whether they will hear this case or not. Hopefully, 
they will let the appeals ruling stand. A variety of state Attorney 
Generals including Mark Earley of Virginia, have filed amicus briefs in 
this case, supporting the right of Missouri to remove the KKK from this 
program. This is a case which all SCV members should watch closely for 
an adverse ruling would be very detrimental to many of our lawsuits.

Brag Bowling

To: Anti-Defamation League

Cc: ABC News@ABC.com ; NBC News@NBC.com ; CBS News@CBS.com ; Associated Press@AP.com ; Reuters News Service@Reuters.com ; PBS News@PBS.org

Sent: Friday, October 20, 2000 4:42 PM

Subject: Inclusion of the Confederate Flag in your online list of "hate symbols"

Your web page "Hate on Display" shows the Confederate battle flag and classifies it as a "General Racist Symbol" associated with "White Supremacists" and denoting "Southern white pride." You allege that this flag "is often used by racists to represent white domination of African-Americans." You further allege that it is "also used by racists as an alternative to the American flag, which they consider to be an emblem of what they describe as the Jewish-controlled government.

 

The Sons of Confederate Veterans, founded in 1896, is comprised of the descendants of Confederate servicemen. We are therefore the closest thing there is to legal custodians of this flag, which is otherwise in the public domain. On behalf of the millions of living descendants of men who fought and died in the defense of their homes and their belief in self determination, thousands of whom were Jewish; on behalf of all the decent men and women who in recent years have been persecuted for openly expressing their pride in their heritage; and above all on behalf of the unborn generations who are entitled to that same heritage; we call upon you to remove this honorable emblem from your publication at once.

 

Since about 1988 there has arisen in this country a tide of anti-Southern sentiment which has as its focal point our Confederate experience. A cartel of individuals and organizations who stand to benefit, politically and economically, from the de-Southernization of the South has enacted a cultural pogrom that has resulted in some of the most egregious violations of individual civil rights ever recorded in the United States of America. Southern citizens are threatened and harassed, our livelihoods endangered and our children bullied and intimidated for displaying a flag that former president Jimmy Carter has called "a legitimate American icon."

 

To us it is astonishing that the Anti-Defamation League, which of all organizations on earth should be able to empathize with our plight, should acquiesce in our further persecution by publishing this ill-informed and derogatory material.

 

There is no basis in fact for your assertions in connection with this flag. It has not been adopted as the emblem of any so-called hate group or radical organization, even though it may be flaunted individually by members of such groups, whose presence appears to mesmerize the media. Anyone can go into a store and buy a Confederate flag. On the other hand, these hate groups almost unilaterally fly the American flag; yet no one has called for the abolishment of the Stars and Stripes.

 

Accordingly, the Sons of Confederate Veterans demands:

 

1. That the Anti-Defamation League at once delete all reference, both verbal and graphic, to the Confederate flag from its "Hate on Display" web page and from any other context describing it as a symbol of hatred or divisiveness;

 

2. That you issue a statement apologizing for having included this flag in your hate symbols catalog in the first place; and

 

3. That you encourage your readership to remember and honor the Jewish soldiers, sailors and statesmen who served the Confederacy, from Judah P. Benjamin, the Confederate Secretary of State, to those interred in the Hebrew Cemetery in Richmond (the largest Jewish military burial site outside of Israel), to those known only to their families and to God, whose descendants deserve better from you than this.

 

Roger W. McCredie

Chief of Heritage Defense

Sons of Confederate Veterans

NATIONAL ORIGIN SUIT FILED BY CONFEDERATE -AMERICAN

In what may be a first, an employee of the Department of Labor has filed a
discrimination lawsuit against Dept of Labor Secretary Alexis Herman, based
on his national origin status of Confederate-American.

Don C. Terrill, a 35-year career federal employee, filed the complaint in
the US District Court in Alexandria, Virginia on September 1st, after being
denied permission to participate as a Confederate-American in a Diversity
Days Celebration put on by the Dept of Labor in Sept 1998.

"There were so few participants coming forward that the DOL had to solicit
participation from the Embassies, but somehow there was no room for me,"
stated Terrill.

Terrill prepared the lawsuit with the help of the Southern Legal Resource
Center, Inc. who intends to provide Kirk D. Lyons as counsel of record as
soon as local counsel can be secured.

"This anti-Confederate madness will continue and increase in intensity until
Confederate- Americans enjoy the benefits of ALL civil rights laws," said
Kirk D. Lyons, Chief Trial Counsel of the SLRC. "we are proud of Mr..
Terrill for having the courage to stand up," Lyons added.

"Whichever way the case goes, the case will be appealed to the 4th Circuit,
United States Court of Appeal. We look forward to arguing the case in the
Capital of the Old Confederacy: Richmond, Virginia," said Lourie A. Salley,
III, Chairman of the Board of the SLRC. "Don't you just love the
symbolism?" Salley added.

---

Roger Waring McCredie FSA (Scot.)

Chief of Heritage Defense

wrote to the naacp

 

"We put it to you that your organization's war against Confederate symbols and those who cherish them ... is a well executed negative public relations campaign with a very specific end in mind: to jump-start your fading relevance in a post-civil rights-era world that has begun to pass you by. To divert public attention from your own internal corruption, to demonstrate that you still have some political clout, and indeed to justify your continued existence, you decided to mount an all-out campaign against an inanimate object: a 138-year-old square of red and blue cloth.

" ... [we] have been greatly dismayed to see the NAACP degenerate into a cynical, vindictive and self-serving caricature of itself. And we are deeply angered by your attempts to deny us the very same rights you claim to champion. In fact,

in order to placate the NAACP in its scorched-earth policy of cultural destuction, some of the most egregious violations of civil rights ever recorded in the United States of America have taken place ."

"...it requires courage for us to stand against the onslaught of the NAACP's campaign of ethnic cleansing. Nor will our task be easy, because you have done your work well. You have locks on the curricula of our schools. You have ready access to the media, who ignore us except to vilify us. You national organization has a multimillion-dollar was chest underwritten in large part by huge corporations; we have only our own shallow pockets to draw upon.

"And yet I tell you that from this day we will be in your face. You shall no longer with impunity cause us to be harassed, our children to be bullied, or our livelihoods to be endangered because we seek merely to honor and celebrate who we are. You shall no longer point the accusatory psitol of racism at our heads and say, 'Hand over your heritage.'

"The bitter irony of your vendetta against us is its irrelevance. You can confiscate all out flags; you can make the playing of "Dixie" a felony; you can (as you are seeking to do) rename all the streets, towns and public places named for Confederate heroes; you can pull down every marble soldier from every Confederate memorial on every courthouse square in every sleepy crossroads town across the South; you can do all that and still not have advanced your people's cause one millimeter along the continum of human progress. Nor is moral correctness on your side. Slavery was wrong. Your cultural persecution of us is wrong. And the cosmic arithmetic still applies: two wrongs still do not make a right.

"If and when the NAACP searches its heart and decides to set aside this unworthy course of action, we will extend to you the hand of friendship ... until then we will oppose your oppressive actions and policies to the limits that our energies and resources will allow. For our forefathers, for ourselves and for our children, we have absolutely no other choice."

I find that I really do not have anything further to add to that.

Deo vindice,

Roger Waring McCredie FSA (Scot.)

Chief of Heritage Defense

Sons of Confederate Veterans

---

Nelson Waller's Correspondence with:

 

Dear Dr. Krise:

>> I would like to urge you to refrain from changing anything about Haralson

>> High School relating to the old South. Have been following the story via

>> email including transcribed news reports.

>> I have been active in the fight for Southern heritage here in South

>> Carolina for seven years. And I assure you that no attempt to satisfy the

>> critics will work. In fact it only encourages them. This whole conflict

>(at

>> Haralson) started with an act of vandalism. If the result is removal of

>the

>> flag mural in question and the "cultural cleansing" of the "rebels"

>motif,

>> , etc., I'd say it speaks pretty well for vandalism as a political tool,

>> wouldn't you? Only for "politically correct" vandals, of course!

>> It profoundly disturbs me as a Southerner and an American to see schools

>> even consider changing their identity as a concession to the political

>> froth of the hour. When I was in school Orwell's *1984* was widely taught.

>> Now it appears that it is acted out. Please don't involve your school in

>> this fad, Sir.

>>

>> Respectfully,

>> Randolph Nelson Waller, M.Mus.

 

Dr. Krise writes:

>The fad I respond to is the use of the battle flag by hate groups. The KKK,

>neo-Nazi groups, and the Georgia legislature in 1956 used the battle flag

>not as a symbol of the Old South or the heritage of those who fought with

>honor for their beliefs, but as a symbol that they would never give the

>rights guaranteed by our constitution to some of our own citizens. Those

>citizens have a right to their own feelings about what message the flag

>delivers. Some of them are required by law to attend this school. Do they

>need to be coerced into accepting a symbol that is offensive because of how

>it has been used? If another symbol that has not been adopted by those who

>hate is available (and it is) why not embrace it as a statement of unity?

>Richard M. Krise, EdD

 

 

 

Dr. Krise -- Thanks so much for your reply. Are you prepared to lower the

American flag as well? It flew over a slave state much longer than the CBF

(indeed, ALL American slave ships sailed under its registry) and it has

been used been abused by KKK and neo-Nazis infinitely more than the CBF. Do

you think the thought police will not eventually demand its removal also?

Let's not be naive.

Please find me one black person who was offended by the CBF before leftist

hate factions started deliberately stoking up strife over it a few years

ago. I'm a long way from Haralson High but I'll be you dollars to doughnuts

there was no problem about it at your school until the crybabies tuned up

here in South Carolina. More blacks are deserting the NAACP approach to

life every day. We had two of them passionately defend the CBF at a flag

rally in Pickens, SC last Saturday. One was former President of the

Asheville NAACP. The other works for Maurice Bessinger!

Here's another friendly challenge for you: prove what you say about

Georgia's reasons for changing its flag in 1956. The same complaints are

heard here but the legislation totally belies it, and moreover it was the

federal government that encouraged the several states to memorialize the

un-Civil War in exactly that fashion.

And to answer your question, the CBF should be retained because there is

no other symbol like it for *genuine* unity. Yet more importantly, it sends

a message to the ideological vandals dominating the public arena at this

time that crime doesn't pay.

I'm telling you based on my experience, the only thing these wild dogs

understand is firm resolve on our part. Show them the door now and you

stand a good chance of putting this all behind you. Try to be nice to them

and they'll eat you alive. Oh, they'll be so nice about it you'll think

it's a real privilege, but there will be nothing left of you, nor me, nor

the free country we once knew.

/\/.\/\/.

---

An excerpt from Southern Partisan Vol XX First Quarter 2000 regarding the Confederate Flag

 

The Universal Symbol of the Spirit of Liberty

 

But why it really gets so much attention is this: it is the most potent symbol in the world today of brave resistance to authoritarian government. That is why it was unfurled by the Eastern Europeans a few years ago when they were liberated. This is why it is hated by every New World Order flunky in the universe. That is why it is now banned from the public space

of the world, though it appeared with honor as an American symbol until very recently.

 

Dr. Clyde Wilson University of South Carolina

 

---

Gentlemen,
You magnificent seven will be remembered throughout the South for your stand for our people on this day of reckoning in South Carolina. Your fortitude in this fight against the anti-Southern NAACP, the Yankee owned media, the communist professors, the Yankee led money grubbing Chambers of Commerce, and the non-religious, political church leaches. This has been a long struggle and we couldn't be prouder that you fought all the way, just like our honored Grandfathers.  Always remember you are our Brothers who have stood up for our proud ancestors every time they were attacked.

Now the next contest will be in the House where "those people" lost the last attack. Whatever happens next, we all wish to thank you seven for standing up for those who gave more than any for their beloved Carolina. I'm listing your names below to be forever honored. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Elijah Coleman


William S. "Bill" Branton, Jr. 
William Clarence Mescher 
David L. Thomas 
Michael L. Fair 
Lawrence K. "Larry" Grooms  (has opposition this year) Please send aid to   P.O. Box 355  Bonneau, S.C.  29431
Addison G. "Joe" Wilson
Harvey S. Peeler, Jr.

And we support Danny Verdin for Senator

And now let's support our Stalwarts in the S.C. House:

John Graham Altman 119 In Primary against William Lawrence -needs contributions 

Liston D. Barfield 58 
J. Gresham Barrett 1 
Harry Cato 17 
Converse Chellis 94 
Dan Cooper 10 
Patrick Coxe 54 
Thomas M. Dantzler 117 
Guy Ralph Davenport 37 
Tracy R. Edge 104 
Ronald Fleming 42 
Margaret Gamble 89 
Shirley Hinson 92 In Primary against Cook - Rep Hinson needs contributions 
Chip Huggins 85 
Larry L. Koon 87 
Lanny Littlejohn, Sr 33 
Dwight A. Loftis 19 
Becky Martin 8 
Becky Meacham-Richardson 48 
Jim McGee 63 
Rex F. Rice 26 
Bill Riser 69 In Primary against Billy Oswald - Rep Riser needs contributions
Charles Sharpe 86 
James Roland Smith 84 
Adam Taylor 16 
Ronald P. Townsend 7 
Teddy Trotter 4 In Primary against Larry Madden - Rep Trotter needs contributions 
Annette Young-Brickell 98 

---

Maurice Bessinger's  Statement:

    Now that the Confederate flag has been taken down from the State House dome there should be some lessening of the heated rhetoric that surrounded its removal.  Now we can move on to a genuine discussion of flag symbolism and meaning.

           

            The U.S. Constitution was written in 1787 by Southerners; in particular James Madison of Virginia, (who is called the Father of the Constitution), and Charles Pinckney of South Carolina.  The Constitution is the product of the Southern mind and the work of Southern political leaders.  It was Southerners who first presented to the the world a written governmental guarantee of freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom of the press in the Constitution’s Bill of Rights.  That document, now over 210 years old, still embodies the hopes of all the world’s subjugated people

 

            In the Constitution the proper relationship between the several states and the United States government is clearly spelled out.  The U. S. government is clearly a product of the states and the recipient of only a few powers that were delegated to it by the states.  Those powers are detailed in that document in the 9^th and 10^th Amendments in the Bill of Rights.  However, since the end of the War for Southern Independence in 1865 the people who control the U.S. government have slowly, but insidiously, taken power from the states and vested it in a centralized federal government.  The fact that this action is strictly forbidden by the Bill of Rights has made no difference to those who seek to centralize all political power under their control.  They should reflect that South Carolina was an independent nation long before the federal government existed.

 

            The United States flag is a symbol of the federal government and it has become the symbol of those who wish to continue to increase its centralized power.  It should not fly over any state property at all.  It should fly only over federal property.  As long as it flies over any state property the wrong impression is given to the people and the incorrect conclusion is drawn; that is, that the federal government is sovereign over state governments.  States are the sovereign power in the United States and the federal government is the child of the states, not their master.  The insistence by our federal masters that all powers should be transferred to their hands has already lead us a long way down the road to tyranny, and this centralization of power continues, unabated, every day.

           

Since the South Carolina legislature seems to have forgotten this simple principle of separation of sovereignty and shows its forgetfulness by allowing the federal flag to fly at the top of their flagpole, it is time for the people to remind them of the proper relationship between the states and the centralized federal government.  I have taken this first step in an effort to remind them of not only the proper relationship of the states to the centralized federal government, but also the history of the Constitution and the role it plays in human betterment and as a guarantee against a growing centralized tyranny.

 

            You will note that on federal government property, such as military bases and even the post office, that there are not state flags flying.  The federal government flies only its own flag on its own property.  The state of South Carolina should follow suit and fly only its own state flag on its property.  It is important for the people of South Carolina to know that the states are sovereign over the federal government.  It is especially important that the federal flags be removed from all schools in South Carolina.  By flying the federal flags, we are sending the wrong message to our students.   Our young people should be correctly informed of the proper, constitutional, political relationship between the states and Washington.  They should not be taught that the federal government is dominant to the state governments.

 

            Our people should be able to tell at a glance whether a court is a state court of a federal court – they should be able to tell by the flag that flies on the pole outside the building. Our people should know if a park is a state park or a federal park – they should be able to tell at a glance at the flag on the pole outside the gate.  This simple example should follow for all state and federal institutions.

 

            I am lowering the federal flag on my properties in an effort to open this discussion.  I would hope that members of the S.C. Legislature would open a dialogue among themselves that would lead to the proper understanding of the states as still sovereign over the federal government.  I am sure that a proper, reasonable, and intelligent discussion will lead to the removal of the federal flag from all state property.

 

As I am lowering the federal flag on my properties and raising the state flag, I’m also raising the Confederate flag as a companion flag, but in a subordinate position.  The state flag is the flag that represents our highest sovereignty.  The Confederate flag is to both remind people that Southerners wrote the Constitution and that Southerners continue to be its most loyal defenders, plus the Confederate flag is recognized as the universal symbol of resistance to centralized tyranny.

 

            I call on the South Carolina Legislature to reassert the proper, historic relationship of state sovereignty and I suggest that their first step be the removal of the federal flag. From the State House dome and from all state property.  I call on the South Carolina Legislature to raise the flag of the Sovereign state of South Carolina in every proper place.

COLUMBUS , GA-- During the Civil War, schooners like The Virginia made history
running the Union blockade to transport goods to and from the Confederate
states.

Now believed to be the sole surviving vessel of its kind, The Virginia has
found a home at the Port Columbus Civil War Naval Center.

The museum purchased the schooner from a Jacksonville, Fla., man who
previously used the 140-plus-year-old boat for fishing.

Because of its ability to sail in shallow water, the two-mast schooner was
ideal for moving tons of cargo along the Gulf Coast while evading larger
enemy ships.

The cargo ship hauled cotton out of the South and brought war goods back,
theorizes Bruce Smith, executive director of Port Columbus.

''The Virginia is in very good condition and contains about 80 percent 19th
Century materials from the deck down,'' Smith said.

(The following was written by Arthur Kemp, a White South
African, but it is equally applicable to the racial situation here in
North America.)

AN APOLOGY TO THE BLACK MAN FROM THE WHITE RACE

We apologize for giving you doctors and free medical care, as
a result of which you have been able to survive plagues and catastrophes
and grow in numbers;

We apologize for teaching you to read and write, and for
building you thousands of schools which we have repaired after you
vandalized them and burned them down, After all, if you could not read
how could you have learned the words of Karl Marx, Mao Tse-tung, and
others who taught you how evil we are and how oppressed you are?

We apologize for building factories and highways and buildings
that gave you employment;

We apologize for developing farms which to this day feed the
bulk of Africa;

We apologize for providing you with warm clothing made of
fabric instead of leaving you wearing the animal skins which you wore
before our arrival;

We apologize for taking minerals from the earth which you
neither used, nor wanted, nor even knew were there;

We apologize for those among us who have established welfare
organizations and have devoted their entire life towards making life
richer and better for your people;

We apologize that we have built roads and railroad tracks
between towns and cities which you now use every day without thinking;

We apologize for paying the lion's share of taxation while
spending less on ourselves than on you;

We apologize for giving you law and order and a strong central
government which prevented your own warrior nations like the Zulu and
the Matabele from slaughtering black people by the hundreds of thousands
as they did year in and year out before we came;

We apologize for teaching you the English language which has
opened to you the entire world of European thought, culture, and
commerce;

For all these sins we humbly beg forgiveness, and if you will
only accept our apology we will be happy to take back all of the above
evil and horrible things we have done to you and return to our European
homeland.

Anti-flag groups miffed at each other  "If you want to pick a fight with me, go right ahead. But you got to bring ass to kick ass." --Kevin Gray to James Gallman, president of the South Carolina branch of the NAACP

 The letter is curt, direct and was never meant for public view. It states  that the South Carolina branch of the NAACP wants nothing to do with either the S.C. Assembly of African American Leaders or a local flag-burning activist, Kevin Gray.

Is it acceptable to wage war

on people to protect for example, U.S. "economic interests"? Whose economic

interests are we talking about anyway? Do we really mean multi-national

corporations with a great deal of political influence? What else are we

willing to sacrifice our children's lives for? Personally, I'm not willing

to let the government use my children as part of some globalist police force.

To do so is not "patriotism" as I understand the term. If others disagree,

that is their prerogative and I suppose in that case we will see many more

instances of U.S. led NATO or UN conflicts just down the road.  W. Carlson

Here we have a victory.  The flags are back up! Compatriots,
Help us out here in North Alabama. The Von Braun Center in Huntsville
had a display of the 50 state flags. Now they have taken down the Mississippi and Georgia state flags from display because they incorporate the Confederate Battle Flag. I realize that these are not our state flags but we need to defend the Confederate Battle Flag where ever it is displayed in an honorable manner. The reason they
give for removing the flags is "because they resemble the Confederate
Battle Flag". This, to me, appears
to be a direct attack on our heritage. We need to send a message that
Alabamians will not stand for
these attacks on the symbols of our
heritage.

Jim Hardin wrote:
But, since this is the Black
Panthers, no action was taken. The national media is not
reporting this and the federal government "looks the other
way". You might note that this was in Texas, the same
state where men, women and children were tortured and
killed because the government "said" there "may" have been
automatic weapons. However, this was not proven in court and
the jury confirmed this with their verdict.

Yet, the Black Panthers can openly carry automatic weapons
in public and no action is taken. Of course, the government
does not oppose this "religion". And, if this had been even a single
member of a Constitutional militia, there would have been
hundreds of "law enforcement" agents ready to "take him down".

An Ohio state judge has thrown out a case against a 29-year-old pizza delivery driver arrested last fall for carrying a concealed handgun, ruling that the state's law governing the right to use and carry a handgun for protection is flawed and "unconstitutional."

In his May 22 decision, Judge Thomas Crush said delivery man Patrick Feely -- arrested last September for carrying a gun under his shirt -- had a constitutional right to protect himself while working a job with a high risk for robbery. He then threw out the charges against Feely.

South Carolina Attorney General Charlie Condon is launching 

an investigation into the legality of the NAACP economic sanctions 

against the state.  Condon has written Governor Jim Hodges a letter 

citing the need for the investigation.   Condon's letter says the state 

must not allow the NAACP to use the Statehouse as, "Its own political

 playground."

Sometimes the spirit of the age, or at least the century, can be compressed into a single sentence.

The other day, a senior at the University of Maryland was explaining why he downloads movies free on his computer. "I feel if movies weren't so expensive," he said, "there'd be no need to steal them."

Each age amends the Commandments in its own way:

Thou shalt not steal unless the stuff is too expensive to buy.

Thou shalt not kill unless the baby's head is still in the womb.

Thou shalt not bear false witness except in sexual harassment cases.

Thou shalt not envy unless you

really, really want the golden calf of the moment . . . .

It's an old, old story. The supposedly hip new morality of each age sounds an awful lot like the old immorality.

JESSE JACKSON "REPUDIATED" IN LOS ANGELES
January 18, 2000
Rev. Peterson Leads Charge, Announces Further Protests Los Angeles - 
Brotherhood Organization of a New Destiny (B.O.N.D.) Founder Rev. Jesse Lee 
Peterson led a protest against Jesse Jackson in Westwood, California 
yesterday on the Dr. Martin Luther King holiday. Billed as "The
National Repudiation of Jesse Jackson", Rev. Peterson spoke out boldly 
against Jesse Jackson, as did fellow speakers Ezola Foster, President of 
Americans for Family Values; Joyce "Rejoyce" Smith of Hope Ministries, 
Houston, Texas; Wiley Drake, controversial homeless advocate; and Bob 
Enyart, Founder of Shadowgov.com and Denver radio host. Hoping to underscore 
the difference between Dr. King and Jesse Jackson, speaker after speaker 
hammered the Rainbow/Push leader. "Jesse Jackson has corrupted the dream of 
Dr. King and turned it into a nightmare", said Rev. Peterson. "Dr. King 
asked that we judge each other by our character - yet Jesse Jackson wants 
to continue to judge us by our color. 
"Rev. Peterson stated that "The National Day of

Repudiation of Jesse Jackson" will be
held annually or "until Jesse Jackson repents". Rev. Peterson also 
announced that he is planning a press conference in Decatur, Illinois to 
support a judge's upholding of the local school board's right to expel six 
black students (who have been supported by Jesse Jackson) for fighting at a 
football game. "This event was a tremendous success", said Rev. Peterson. 
"The support we have received from people across this country has been 
mind-blowing.

The message has definitely gone out loud and clear: Americans are sick of 
Jesse Jackson and his tired racial games."

A son of NAACP president Kweisi Mfume was sentenced Friday to
four years and nine months in prison for federal drug and weapons
convictions.

Ronald T. Gray, 29, pleaded guilty last October, admitting he sold cocaine
in Washington for more than two years. At his arrest last May, federal Drug
Enforcement Administration officers found cocaine, a scale, packaging
materials and $8,500 cash at his District of Columbia home.

Resaca Battlefield To Be Acquired by State of Georgia

After several years of intense negotiations, the highly sought after Resaca Civil War 

Battlefield in Gordon County, site of the first battle in General Sherman's 

Campaign for Atlanta, will be preserved for eventual development and interpretation as

 Georgia's newest state historic site. 

Under the agreement, the state of Georgia will purchase in fee simple 505 
acres which will include all of the Confederate trenches, a conservation 
easement on approximately 60 acres that will protect about 90% of the 
remaining Union trenches, and an outstanding timber contract for standing 
timber on the property. The state will also receive a recordable right of 
first refusal to purchase the balance of Mr. Fletcher's property in the 
future if he decides to sell it. 

Here is something found in an 1850 South Carolina newspaper, that is as
timely as can be.
Definitions:
COMPROMISE; A bargain in which Southern rights are sacrificed to Northern
prejudices.
NATIONALIST: One who contends zealously for the interests of the North.
SECTIONALIST: one who advocates the constitutional rights of Southerners.
STATES RIGHTS; O)ld doctrine believed in the dark ages, now considered
part of the mistaken education of backward sections.
ECONOMICS: The art of making money flow, like the Gulf Stream, from the
South to the North.

Report: Slaves Helped Build Capitol

 Some workers who helped build the White House and Capitol, two national landmarks of democracy and freedom, weren't free at all. They were slaves, and a local television station reported Thursday that it has obtained the pay slips to prove it.

SPOTSYLVANIA -- Congress has earmarked $1 million for the purchase of Civil 
War battlefield land in Spotsylvania County. 

Sandy Rives, superintendent of the Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania National 
Military Park, said the money will be used to buy private land within the 
park's boundaries.  Negotiations are being conducted to buy land where Stonewall

Jackson was accidently killed.

Update:

A soldier with 20 years service who claimed he was a "slave" of the U.S. Army due to its new "indefinite re-enlistment" policy will soon be "free at last."

Indefinite reenlistment went into effect in October 1999, and Garrett says it is "one of the Army's best initiatives to support retention of our career noncommissioned officers."

Sgt.  David Gloer says it is slavery.

"I hope that anyone considering indefinite reenlistment will think twice. Once you sign that paper, you're not giving up two or three years of your life. It's 'till death do us part,' baby. And you can't quit -- ever. Slaves can't quit -- they must be sold," said Gloer.

NAACP boycott fails while South Carolina tourism booms
 The Edgefield Journal
http://www.dixienews.com/news010001.htm

Bill Johnston, the federal prosecutor who complained to Attorney General Janet Reno last fall about a possible cover-up of information about government actions in the Branch Davidian siege, is leaving the Justice Department. 

"I have a hard time working for people that I don't respect. I've had a harder and harder time within this organization," he said. "The vast majority of people at the Department of Justice and the FBI are fine people. But in terms of leadership and policy and direction, I've had an increasingly hard time working within the current framework." 

Brag Bowling Reports

The Richmond Historic Riverfront Foundation in a press release announced 
that the Lee Mural replacement will return to the Floodwall in Richmond 
in two to three weeks. The Mural was firebombed and destroyed on January 
l7. The Foundation announced that not restoring the mural "would condone 
that act of vandalism and ignore the city's public review and approval 
process for the floodwall gallery that took place last year".
It was also announced that the Foundation had received a donation 
from the Wednesday Morning Fellowship to help pay for replacing the 
Mural. It is estimated that the cost will be $4500. The Wednesday 
Morning Fellowship is a bi-racial, nondenominational group in Richmond.
Sa'ad El-Amin condemned the burning but warned that there could be 
further trouble if it was replaced. He said the Foundation should be 
doing "what is in the best interests of tranquility in the City". He 
said the Mural should not go back up. "The question is, what is in the 
best interest of the community? If this is going to be a flashpoint, why 
put it back up?"
Mayor Timothy M. Kaine said the Foundation had no choice. "It has 
to go back up," he said. "Having made the decision, you can't back down 
to vandals". 
Brag Bowling    2nd Brigade Commander   Virginia Division

From Andy Jackson of the Palmetto Insider: Numbers off at both flag rallies?

The "official" estimates for the January 8 pro-flag rally were 6,000-7,000 and for Monday's anti-flag rally 46,000.

The State was reporting 46,000 before it was even over Monday while at the same time WIS-TV was reporting 10,000.

Our law enforcement sources told us that the numbers for both rallies were actually similar, around 9,000-10,000 for both rallies.

Apparently the NAACP itself was the source of the 46,000 figure.

The Lee Mural Torched.    Richmond, Virginia
It is a tragedy that on the day that we celebrate the nobility of our 
Christian Generals Lee and Jackson, that someone has committed 
this obvious HATE CRIME. General Lee held no animosities or hatred 
in his heart for anyone. We must continue to preach the good virtues 
of General Lee and not sink to the level of our antagonists. We must 
use this as a rallying cry to defend our heritage.

God Bless the South and God Bless General Lee
Henry Kidd
Lt. Commander, VA. Division SCV

Mr. William Chaney, a descendant of Robert E. Lee, has just outbid the National
Park Service and purchased 101 acres of the Sharpsburg Battlefield in Maryland.

On that hallowed ground, Chaney has announced he will build three 
towering monuments to Confederate heroes – notable additions on a Civil War 
battlefield where only two of the 104 statues pay tribute to Southerners.

Despite a moratorium on monuments at the 3,245-acre site, the National Park 
Service concluded it has "no authority to deny permission" to Chaney to erect 
30-foot-high sculptures of Lee, Thomas J. "Stonewall" Jackson and J.E.B. 
Stuart. 

This is a great turn of events for the South, for the National Park Service is turning
the National Parks into slave exhibits, and showing (for example) 20 to one U.S. flags
to Confederate flags at the Chickamauga Battlefield Park Museum. Forget fair 
treatment from the U.S. Park Service.

All Of Our Rights Are Not Lost!

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has reinstated a civil rights lawsuit against a California child welfare employee and two sheriff's deputies who threatened a woman in order to gain access to her home without a search warrant.  The landmark case, Calabretta v. Floyd, et al, which states that the "reasonable expectation of privacy of individuals in their homes includes the interests of both parents and children in not having government officials coerce entry in violation of the Fourth Amendment and humiliate the parents in front of the children."

Mike Weatherford reports:

NAACP demands removal of Mark Twain's "Huckleberry Finn" 

from local schools in

Pennsylvania . The charge claims "tax dollars should not be used to perpetuate a stereo-

type that has psychologically damaging effects on the self-esteem of Black children."

In 1998, Judge Stephen Reinhardt, writing for a unanimous three-judge panel of the Ninth

Circuit Court of Appeals, rejected a lawsuit by an African American parent, who is also

a teacher, asking that Huckleberry Finn be removed from mandatory reading lists in the

schools of Phoenix, AZ.

"Words can hurt, particularly racist epithets," Reinhardt wrote. "but a necessary component

of any education is learning to think critically about offensive ideas. Without that ability,

one can do little to respond to them." Julian Bond might inform them of a book entitled

"The Jim Dilemma: Reading Race in Huckleberry Finn" by Jocelyyn Chadwick-Joshua, a Black.

Update     FILMED BY ABC and NBC

NAACP  "NOT IN"  WHEN H. K. EDGERTON, KIRK LYONS, DR. NEILL PAYNE, JIM DEAN, MIKE HANNERS, AND ELIJAH COLEMAN RALLIED AT BOTH ATLANTA NAACP OFFICES!
FORMER NAACP BRANCH PRESIDENT ISSUES CHALLENGE FOR CONFEDERATE DEBATE

Asheville- H.K. Edgerton, Immediate past President of the Asheville, NC
Branch NAACP will travel to Atlanta on Wednesday, December 8, 1999 to issue
challenges for a debate on the legitimacy of Confederate symbols to Atlanta
NAACP, civic and media leaders. Edgerton also plans to debate the
illegitimacy of the NAACP boycott of South Carolina.

Edgerton will be accompanied by SLRC Chief Trial Counsel Kirk D. Lyons, SLRC
Executive Director Dr. Neill H. Payne and flag carrying supporters.

Edgerton is a Life Member of the NAACP and also serves as Chairman of the
Board of Advisors for the Southern Legal Resource Center, Inc, a tax-exempt
South Carolina Civil Rights Law Firm that specializes in representing the
victims of Southern Heritage violations.

"Protection of Confederate symbols is THE civil rights issue of the new
millennium, " said Edgerton. "And this debate is long overdue," he added.
"We must address this issue with peaceful, non-violent means like debate
before agitation over the flag gets out of hand," Edgerton concluded.

"Much of anti-flag hysteria is based on bigotry or ignorance," said Chief
Trial Counsel Kirk D. Lyons, "A healthy debate could clear up many of these
misconceptions" he concluded.

The Pro Flag team proposed for the debate will include Edgerton, Payne and
Lyons. Edgerton hopes that Dr. Julian Bond and Kweise M'Fume will serve on
the other team "so they can get a good education on the legitimacy of
Confederate symbols to African-Americans."

The SLRC will start issuing their challenges at around 1PM.

The trio will issue a similar challenge in Columbia, South Carolina on
Thursday.

Jesse Jackson Jr. pushes:

Declaring that federally owned Civil War battlefield parks fail to 
adequately address the “proper historical context” of the battles, congress 
is urging them to expand interpretation to highlight slavery and the other 
forces that brought the war about.

The assertion is part of the so-called “language” in a joint House-Senate 
conference report released in October. The report accompanies the huge 
appropriations bill that includes the National Park Service (NPS) budget for 
fiscal year 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Turning our Battlefield Parks into slavery exhibits?  It might be a good

idea if it asserted that the slaves were captured and sold by their own people

to Northern slave traders on ships flying the U.S. Flag for 89 years in the North.

Also to include that everyone on Earth had ancestors who were slaves.  Next

include that a black, through a court case started the institution of slavery

in America, and that thousands of Blacks owned slaves.  Then we could 

mention that slaves in the South considered themselves Southerners and

approximately 93,000 served  and fought for the South.   Also that generally

slaves in the South were treated better than immigrants in the North.  I would

never wish to leave out that only the C.S.A  constitution forbade the importation 

of slaves.   But somehow all the above will be omitted!

Are there more?

Atlanta police officers who guard Mayor Bill Campbell's home have been ordered to stop checking the license tags of visitors after an officer discovered a friend of the mayor's son was driving a stolen vehicle.