Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: Billy Bearden on 05/31/2006 at 6:25 PM
God Bless you Miss Durante!
Let not the trappings of a peecee institution alter your beliefs or stance.

The law is clear, based on Tinker and thru numerous appelate court rulings, a school CANNOT ban a symbol UNLESS it can DIRECTLY be tied to violence or the immediate threat thereof.

This Ithica case is in CLEAR violation of US LAW and the 1st AMENDMENT. One or two self annointed do gooders took it upon themselves to ban what THEY deem as bad, with no moral or legal backing.

I would hope there are students who will initiate a huge fat juicy lawsuit!

Thanks!
Billy Bearden

(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: Tommy Aaron on 05/31/2006 at 6:52 PM
Miss Durante,

Equality is the greatest accomplishment and worst failure of America. It is the place where idealism and reality come to blows in American culture. "Those People have an enduring necessity for a social other." They have has chosen the Southern white as the focal scapegoat of our time. We have become the victims of our own weakness'.

"And it is not equality for everyone to have the same rewards, the same rights, and the same status; indeed, this often results in extreme inequality." ~ Erasmus, The Education of a Christian Prince

I applaud your wisdom and courage young Lady!

Blessings,

Tommy Aaron
Chattanooga, TN.
http://www.thesouthernamerican.org/


(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: Jon on 06/1/2006 at 6:59 PM
I believe we should also be banning the Dutch, Spanish, English, Greek, Cuban and Brazilian flags from public schools..all these societies either held slaves and/or trafficked slaves. We should also eliminate images of the Egyptian pyramids from our schools, since they were constructed with slave labor. It's about time we also excised all the books of the Bible that contain parables and or references dealing with slavery. Oh yeah, and the American flag, that retained slave-holding border states during the American Civil War... or we can just come up with a biased, bigoted, historically shallow solution and puts all the sins of slavery on a flag that existed a few years and congratulate ourselves on our self-righteous condemnation of the American South. peace~

(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: Robert M. Peters on 06/1/2006 at 11:38 PM
Behind the "noble cause" of prohibiting the display of a Confederate symbol is a ploy of pseudo and very cheap moralism, placating to the whims of an handful of those who leverage any imaged discord to their political advantage. Some school administrators are avowed ideologues on the matter; most are bureaucratic cowards, holding a finger in the politcially correct winds and covering their cowardice with the cloak of righteous indignation. Rather than ban a Confederate symbol, they should have the courage to use its presence as a teachable moment by inviting some of us to their school to present the facts on the issues of secession, the formation of the Confederacy, and the war from our perspective. They could become definders of academic freedom. But no, they cover themselves by citing the potential of disrupting the learning environment.

Deo vindice!

(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: Elizabeth Del Greco on 06/2/2006 at 9:34 AM
Well, what do you expect from schools who teach that Abraham Lincoln was a great president? If they are THAT stupid, they'll believe anything!

Deo vindice,

Liz

(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: William Paxton on 06/27/2006 at 10:35 PM
Well I hate to say it, but being a white guy from a southern state, there is a LOT of racism even at the subconscious level for many white people. It's kind of a wink-wink nudge-nudge thing between whites in the south. Now, to the outside world and sometimes even to each other, they cloak this racism in language that is common of conservatives and this newspaper. They always have very logical reasons why black people deserve to be discriminated against. 1. Affirmative action is reverse discrimination. 2. Blacks are lazy as a result of culture, not genetics. 3. Jews have been discriminated against and hell, look at them. 4. If I'm statistically more likely to be shot by a black person than a white person, I should watch out for those blackies.

Now in this article (and comments) we see similar arguments about how the confederate flag represents this or that, blah blah blah. First of all, my advice to people who put so much emotion into a symbol is get a life. Nobody cares what your great great great great grandfather did or didn't do. Second, based on my observations within my own group of friends in the south, most of those who wore confederate flag t-shirts or put it on their car/truck or in the room were flat out racist. Of course they wouldn't admit it in public, but get them in a room with a bunch of other whites and see what comes out of their mouths. Sometimes I think they even convince themselves that they are not racist (after all, remember all those logical reasons for thinking bad things about black people).

So I suppose we should drape the confederate flag all over the goddamn place for the 2 people in the country who actually view it as symbol of what their great great whatever did (who, by the way, they are about as genetically similar to as Janet Jackson), as opposed to the other millions who are also racist. Sure.

(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: Ronald Abrams on 06/2/2006 at 4:55 PM
BRAVO Mam

Does anyone see that the flag is a military symbol that very brave and outnumbered men of all races fought under?It should be honored and NOT PERSECUTED! The emblem has Christian influence being derived from the St Andrews Cross. Everyone that misuses this flag SHOULD BE ASHAMED!This includes the KKK as well as the NAACP to further their sick selfish agendas., let alone some panty waisted school PC corrupted official!
Brave ,dead soldiers and sailors ,and survivors that are gone now cannot defend themselves from this persecution.Would anyone of good conscience degrade our other war dead in history? Even Union veterans respected their once enemies and this flag at the many reunions of battles that they attended.
Thank you dear lady for putting forth your argument so eloquently!

Ronald Abrams-Sons of Confederrate Veterans-Sons of the American Revolution-Born in SOUTHERN Germany of Southern US parents-Southern by the GRACE of God!

(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: Edgar Hayden on 06/2/2006 at 8:45 PM
God bless you, Vanessa. Truly you are countercultural.

(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: Edgar Hayden on 06/2/2006 at 8:48 PM
More slaves were traded under the Stars & Stripes (USA) than under the Confederate flag. By far more slaves were carried into this country by Northern ships than by Southren. Perhaps we should ban Ole' Glory as well.

(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: brian ippolito on 06/3/2006 at 12:04 PM
Greetings, God bless you for having the courage to stand up to political correctness!!! The south has long been the guinea pig of " social engineering " and now the north is also experiencing this injustice as well ,i wonder what the students would think if they really knew the truth about the "War To Prevent Southern Independence" and the american flag ,the fact that there was never a slave trader that flew the Confederate flag but there were plenty that flew the american flag,and all of them the slave trader ships were owned by new england merchants and also the war like all wars was really fought over economics which is what all wars are fought over lincoln killed 600,000 men over corporate welfare( the railroads and big business ,lincoln raised the tariffs on cotton and tobacco and then use the money that was collected from these tariffs to finace the railroads and big business while the south was economically ruined. I would recommend reading the real lincoln by thomas dilorenzo it will educate you. deo vindice brian ippolito

(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: roger brinkley on 06/3/2006 at 10:52 PM
thank God for vanessa, thank you, thank you, thank you,the south has always been put down, stomped on, riduculed,called lazy, stupid,backwards,i am proud to be an american, i am prouder still of having confederate ancestors,my grandmother was born in 1866,one yr after the war of northern aggression,my great great grandfather was with lee at appomatix with the 10th ga batt. co. c macon county guards,this wasn't ancient history, this is still fresh, thank you again, vanessa for saying what so, so many southerners feel!!!!!!!!!!

(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: Julia Gomez on 06/4/2006 at 12:58 PM
Utter claptrap, Virginia. What you have done is cite propaganda from white supremacist groups such as the League of the South and the Sons of Confederate Veterans, pretending it is history. There is not a mainstream historian who denies that the South's determination to continue to enslave black people was the main cause of the Civil War. The Southern leaders of the times, unabashed white supremacists, stated the truth themselves. Every one of their articles of secession from the Union says explicitly the major reason the states are seceding is to continue practicing slavery.

There are so many lies in your diatribe that I will not take the space to address them all. However, the most egregious will be debunked:

• "It is why black Southerners will proudly call themselves Southern and will fly the Confederate flag."
Other than a handful of black buffoons the neo-Confederate movement uses as pawns, African-American Southerners have made it quite clear that most are offended by displays of the Confederate flag. Even the most clueless person should realize that after the hardfought battles to remove the emblem from prominence in South Carolina and Georgia. (And, yes, Mississippi's day will come.)

• ". . .perpetuating their myth of the North as the force of good in the Civil War. . .." The North was the force of good in the Civil War. Union forces, joined by thousands of human chattel who risked their lives to flee the South, freed four million men, women and children from slavery. The Confederate Army, on the other hand, sought to continue enslaving those four million people perpetually. If the South had won the war, slavery might still exist there today. We know that if people are evil and greedy enough, profound wrongs can continue for a long time. After all, apartheid ended in South Africa within your young life time.

• "By banning the Confederate flag, the state attempts to erase from memory the Civil War." Absolutely not, Virginia. What the school systems forced to ban the Confederate flag do is prevent young racists like from using that flag or clothing bearing Confederate symbols to taunt their non-white peers. I don't know whether neo-Nazi and white supremacist Kirk Lyons, now a leader in the SCV, instigated such a situation in Ithaca as he has other places, but would not be surprised to learn he did. Extorting money from school systems after setting up such conflicts is how he supports himself. Fortunately, those of us who monitor hate groups know his game and recognize it.

The mindless babbling of you and your enablers notwithstanding, the law is clear regarding this issue. School systems can curb student behavior that is disruptive. Often Confederate symbols are used to create a hostile environment for minority students and non-minority students who oppose the message of bigotry being communicated. When that is the situation, administrators have a duty to step in and stop the abuse. The Ithaca schools appear to have met the legal requirements for eliminating the Confederate flag, an emblem of traitors and racists, from their environments.

Teaching of history in our public schools has become much more accurate than it was when most of the dyed-in-the-wool bigots applauding this ignorant piece of apologia were students, Virginia. Your peers and younger students are learning the truth about the Civil War, and that truth is not remotely flattering to the South. "Blood on the leaves and blood at the roots," as the famous song "Strange Fruit" says. Perhaps, some day, you, too, will pick up a real history book and read it instead of spouting the lies your daddy told you.




(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: Julia Gomez on 06/4/2006 at 1:04 PM
And, no, there isn't a Santa Claus anymore than there was a "honorable" South.

(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: Michael E. Yadon on 06/4/2006 at 10:45 PM
Reply to Julia Gomez

The only "diatribe" on this page so far is yours, obviously a canned "response" from the Anti-American Communist Lawyers Union. Your pathetic attempt at insult, constantly referring to Vanessa Durante as "Virginia", probably brings a smile to anyone born in the Commonwealth of Virginia. You haven't insulted her, you have praised her, by elevating her to share high status with one of the grandest of States.

I wasn't born in Virginia, I was born in SOUTH Dakota. I didn't grow up in Virginia, I grew up in SOUTHERN Kansas. I did, however, live in Virginia for a while, in 1962-1963 and again from 1975-1978. My daughter was born in Virginia in 1977. My maternal ancestors left England in 1711 and settled in northern Virginia. My paternal ancestors came from Ireland in 1763 and settled in Kain-tuck-ee. Relatives of mine fought on BOTH sides of the French and Indian War, BOTH sides of the American Revolution, and BOTH sides of the War of Federal Aggression Against the Several Southern States. I believe that each and every one of those men believed they were fighting for the right cause.

First, Julia, let me refer you to a little known book called THOSE DIRTY ROTTEN TAXES, by Charles Adams (published by Simon & Schuster, Inc., copyright 1998, ISBN 0-684-84394-3). It is a small book, only 230 pages, so it would behoove you to read it in its' entirety; but I would especially direct your attention to Chapters 6 through 12, pages 65 through 128. The facts presented are completely documented, and show that the principle upon which secession was based was known and understood, not only on this continent, but in Europe as well. [This is the only reference I will give you. If you are truly interested in knowing the truth of this matter, you will seek it out for yourself.]

Now... "There is not a mainstream historian..." that is willing to tell the truth. And you can start with Carl Sandburg. Sandburg had to know that, as a legislator, Lincoln had more than once stated his belief in the RIGHT of a State to voluntarily withdraw from the Union. Sandburg had to know that, as President, Lincoln's actions declared him to be a Marxist: Lincoln's agenda was not freeing slaves, but consolidating power in the Federal government, in open contradiction of the Constitution. Sandburg had to know that, as a private man, Lincoln disliked blacks immensely, using the issue of "Freeing Slaves" to stir up emotions when recruitment was flagging and desertions were on the rise (much like Bill Clinton grabbing the largest bible he could find and running to the nearest black church whenever he was caught in a damaging lie). Sandburg had to know that, when the brandy was poured and the cigars were lit, Lincoln's favorite pastime was swapping "nigger" jokes with his Cabinet and other close friends. Sandburg had to know, like every other "mainstream historian", that the Emancipation Proclamation DID NOT FREE ONE SINGLE SLAVE!! If you do not understand why it did not, then read it closely and think very hard about the slaves to which it purported to pertain. By the way, as poignant as it may be, the "Gettysburg Address" is nothing less than one of the most cleverly constructed pieces of Hegelian Dialectic ever devised.

"The Southern leaders of the time... ...stated the truth themselves." Yes they did, Julia. They stated over and over that the war was NOT about slavery. While Jefferson Davis was not that much of a statesman, certainly not a great orator and definitely not the best man for the job of President of the Confederacy, he absolutely spoke the truth when he said "...this war is not about slavery." Before Virginia seceded, Robert E. Lee was offered command of the entire Union Army with the rank of Major General. He refused to command an American army raised for the purpose of attacking other Americans. He believed in the sovereign States of the Constitution and chose to defend his home against Federal aggression. Lee, like nearly every other Southern officer, stated many times, in public pronouncement and private letter, that the war was not about slavery. Even Abraham Lincoln stated that a war against the South would not be a war to end slavery. But that was before he learned just how much mileage he could get out of playing the race card. Think for a moment, Julia. Less than half the Southern officers were from slave-holding families. Virtually none of the Confederate enlisted ranks were from slave-holding families. In fact, a very large proportion of these men were poor farmers that had to try to compete with slave raised crops. If this war had been to preserve the institution of slavery in America, do you really believe these men would have fought so valiantly, for so long, and so willingly given everything they had to give? If this war was fought to preserve slavery, why did more FREE BLACK men put on gray uniforms than blue?

"Every one of their (A)rticles of (S)ecession from the Union says explicitly the major reason the (S)tates (were) seceeding..." was because the Federal government had usurped powers in excess of those authorized in the Constitutuion or later acquiesced to it by the States. Southerners had, and still have today, an abiding love for the Constitution, AS WRITTEN. Julia, you need to learn a little about the ORIGINAL INTENT of the framers of the Constitution. And contrary to what you've been told by all your socialist, globalist friends, it isn't difficult to find out EXACTLY what the founding fathers meant with regard to any constitutional issue. They wrote reams and reams about it in books, pamphlets, letters, magazine and newspaper articles. They gave speeches and lectures about what everything MEANT. Some of them were really windbags about it, but my point is, original intent is not, and never was, a secret. They meant what they said, they said what they meant, and they said it in PLAIN ENGLISH. By the way, the Founding Fathers did vote on the official language for the United States of America: English won over German by one vote.

"...black buffoons..."? Really Ms. Garcia, I think YOUR racism is showing. Why didn't you just go ahead and use the word "baboons"? It's the word you really wanted to use, isn't it? If you will do a little research, you will find all the push, all the money, all the "offended sensibilities" in the anti- Confederate emblem movement comes from racist Northern hate groups such as the NAACP, ACLU, Congressional Black Caucus, CFR, etc. Unless by "African-American Southerners" you meant south Detroit, or south Chicago, or south Queens, or maybe south D.C., which almost is south, I can't imagine who you might be talking about. Are you speaking of South Africans, many of whom are white, of Dutch and English ancestry? Or are you speaking of southern Americans, many of whom are also white, of Irish and Scottish ancestry, among many others? Southern blacks may be of African ancestry, but they are not African. If you have any doubts, just ask an African; they will let you know in very short order, in no uncertain terms. My father's ancestors came to America from Ireland in 1763. To the best of my knowledge, no one of the family has been back to Ireland since. I've certainly never been there. It would be laughable to anyone born in Ireland if I were to call myself Irish. What would be the purpose, then, were I to refer to myself as Irish-American? Would it mean that I think of myself as Irish first and American second? Two-hundred and fifty years away from Ireland, why would I think of myself as Irish at all? Who stands to benefit from all these hyphenated Americans? Remember - a hyphen is a DIVISION sign, just missing a couple of dots.

"The North was the force of good..." For more than five years before the shelling of Fort Sumpter, the part of America where I grew up was known across the nation as "Bloody Kansas". Hundreds of unarmed or poorly armed, men, women and children were slaughtered in the name of Abolition by John Brown and others without regard to their personal beliefs about slavery. And Yes, this spawned reprisals by those claiming to espouse State's Rights. There always have been men willing to exploit any issue for their personal gain, but it was the Union Army which fought, captured, tried and executed the Abolitionist John Brown. It was natural for Northern industrialists to use slavery as an excuse... er, I mean issue in instigating such a War of Federal Aggression. Northern bankers owned, operated, financed and insured many of the ships used, regardless of the nationality of the captain and crew, to bring African slaves to the Americas. Let us take a moment to reflect on the enormity of "the slave trade". Slavery has existed in the world since one human being decided he had the power, the "right", to force another human being to be in subjection to his will. Any notion that slavery in America was somehow more horrible, more degrading, more dehumanizing, than slavery in any other place or time is utter nonsense. Being enslaved means being enslaved. Period. And when the Bible says slave, it means slave. When it means servant, or employee, it says servant or employee. So, the process went something like this, unchanged for thousands of years: impress gangs of Arabs and blacks would go into the bush to find slaves. Most of these gangs were captained by an Arab, and after the days of Mohammed, a muslim (remember, Mohammed was a slave trader. That's how he financed his life. Don't believe it? Read the holy books of Islam to find out just how Mohammed lived and gained influence). Men would sell their wives, parents would sell their children. Tribal chiefs and village leaders would sell whole families or even larger groups. If the impress gang was large enough, and the village small enough, they would simply take the whole village and pay no one. When the impress gang had all the captives they could deal with, they would return to whatever city their employer was located in. Very few impress gangs were free lancers. In the ancient times, most of these dealers were Arab and a few "middle eastern". By the time of the American slave trade, many of these dealers were Chinese or Indian. Some slave traders were affluent enough to have prearranged contracts for most of their captures, but most traders sold at open auction. Captains of slave ships occasionally acted as agents and purchased slaves at auction, but most were never involved in the actual purchase of slaves. Many Captains were (northern) American, but most were European; English, Spanish, French and Dutch especially. Slavery has never ended; it probably will continue until the end of time. It is unofficially allowed in most Muslim nations, officially sanctioned in a few. It exists in all communist countries, and most former communist countries. It exists in nearly every country in both North and South America. In the Sudan, during the past dozen or more years, the black Muslim government has murdered more than two million black Christian men, and enslaved more than four million black Christian women and children. Now don't ask Jesse Jackson about this, he doesn't know about it. Of course, the black Muslim government of the Sudan has fully signed on with the UN globalist agenda. And we all know Jesse is a UN Poster Boy. All right, back to slavery in the South of 1850's America. Northern bankers/industrialists, and a few foresighted Southern plantation owners (remember, now, many Southern plantations were underwritten [that is, financed/insured] by Northern bankers) already knew that slavery was dead. That's right: long before Fort Sumpter, slavery was dead. Oh, it hadn't stopped kicking yet, but it was dead, all right. The illegal tariffs which had made so many Northern bankers, and their puppet politicians, rich enough to buy railroads and shipping lines, had mortally wounded it by destroying the cotton trade. The Northern industrialists, with their new cotton processing machinery would kick the last gasps of life right out of it. One way or another, cotton would have no value, there would be no point to slavery, and the enrichening tariffs would be ended. Slave holders would free their slaves; after all, they wouldn't be able to feed themselves, much less slaves that couldn't produce a salable crop. What's a poor banker to do? They did what bankers always do when they want more money: they hired a corrupt politician to start a war so they could make lots of money selling guns and ammunition to both sides (and tanks and airplanes and helicopters and jungle boots and HumVees). Just ask George's granddaddy what he did during WWII. And they claimed it was all to end slavery. The TRUTH, of course, is, it was to make up for the money they would lose because slavery was going to end all by itself, anyway. Now, if you didn't follow all of that, it's OK. It is pretty complicated (nobody ever really said "Life is simple"). I know lots of fellas with multiple PhD's that can't figure this stuff out.

Julia, mindless, bigoted babbling is what you have engaged in. If I were to say all Mexicans are murderous, child molesting homosexuals, just because Santa Ana was, you would be incensed, and rightly so. But you have just said, quite plainly, that you consider anyone that knows the truth about events in the United States of America during the Nineteenth century and believes the struggle of a few sovereign States against an illegal and unconstitutional Federal government is worthy of rememberance is a bigoted, racist, neo-Nazi, white supremacist, hate mongering traitor, just because a few morons, as mindless as yourself, that like to goose-step around behind Hitler's swatiska also like to hide behind the much more worthy banner of the former Southern nation. Wow! What a condemnation! And I am incensed. And you are a snotty nosed little kid, not long out of diapers, without the slightest clue to what it means to take a sacred oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America from all enemies, both foreign and domestic; and to put your life on the line day in and day out, year after year, to back up that commitment, all the while watching people such as those you idolize destroy the country from within. Don't you ever again disparage Southern honor, you cowardly little snippet; you aren't worthy of having the word HONOR in your filthy mouth.

Julia, YOU are the bigot. YOU are the racist. YOU are the hate monger. YOU are the traitor. I can't imagine that you will ever be able to get the taste of all that lieing, hateful, anti-American, Globalist male bovine feces out of your mouth. You are despicable. There was nothing new about your slobberings. Except that idiocy at the end about "Teaching of history in our public schools is more accurate..." Where on earth did you come up with that bit of drivel? History hasn't been taught in public schools for years! It was one of the first victims of your beloved communist propaganda! Right after arithmatic courses that taught 2+2=4 ALWAYS.

As a final note: as Sherman burned his way across Georgia, his men killed almost as many black slaves as they did white civilian men, women and children; as President, U.S. Grant ordered the extermination of the buffalo - it was his way of enslaving the American Indian by depriving them of food, shelter, clothing and weapons. If it doesn't make you wonder, it sure ought to.

(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: Billy Bearden on 06/4/2006 at 10:59 PM
Julia Gomez,

What gives at Sayreville High School ? Why do you try to disrespect Miss Durante by refusing to call her by her real name, instead calling her "Virginia"?

Her name of course is Vanessa, but you saw fit to use "Virginia" 3 times. Is that what your high school taught you? Or was that hate and disrespect from your daddy?

Seems you are full of biterness and misinformation, Miss Gomez. Please seek Jesus first and anger managment second. Together along with your submission to Higher Authority will calm the nerves and sooth the soul.

As for the Sons of Confederate Veterans, please list here for all to see at least 5 things that warrants your charge of them being a 'White Supremist Group' . Hard documented proof with links and tangible evidence. Since you won't be able to list 1, I expect you won't answer that query.

A little history lesson, you decide who is good and who is bad.

Slavery gained a legal foothold in America in 1655, when a wealthy Black man named Anthony Johnson had arrested his Indentured Servant, named John Casor, for running away. Taken before the court, the Judge awarded 'Lifetime Servtitude' of Casor to Johnson. The precedent was then set.

Slavery was legal and a way of life from then until 1784 - until the US Constitution took effect. Then Slavery was legal and a way of life in the United States under the US Constitution until the Confederate States of America were formed in February 1861

Slavery was legal in the CSA from Feb 1861 until April 1865, when the Government dissolved

Slavery was still legal under the US Constitution and practiced in the United States in New Jersey, Delaware, West Virginia, Missouri, Kentucky, and Maryland from Feb 1861 until December 1865, upon the passage of the 13th Amendment.

Sorry, the War Between the States was not fought to either free the slaves, nor to keep them in bondage.

You call the Confederates 'Traitors' But yet ex President Jefferson Davis sat in a jail cell for 2 years and not a single charge was pressed nor prosecuted. Why is that I wonder.....

You say that every one of the southern leaders used slavery as the reason for secession? It wasn't an issue with many articles of secession like Virginia, Arizona, or even the various Indian Nations. Seems your truth is full of lies miss Gomez. Why is that I wonder....

How do the Black Confederates, the Jewish Confederates, or even the Indian Confederates fit in with white supremecy?

If the removal of aparthied was such a good thing, why then has South African that at one time had the highest standard of living fo rall now has 20x fold higher rape, robbery, murder, theft, guns, and drug crime rates
They are now no better than the surrounding black run countries, but at least the evil whitey form of government is gone, and Winnie "put a flaming tire around your enemies' neck while handcuffed" Mandela is happy.

Miss Gomez, seems Michael Piccuirro filled your head with utter claptrap. You are just so full of bigotry and hate. You stereotype, generalize, and accuse with words to which you don't know the meaning of.

May God touch your heart, and Bless you.
Peace
Billy Bearden



(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: Tony on 06/5/2006 at 2:42 AM
All Southeners want is the same privilege that everyone else apparently has: to express their unique identity. Some people who fly Confederate flags are indeed racists. Many are not. It is unfortunate that we do yet live in a world where we can all be included. Perhaps more tolerant attitudes will prevail once our pre-occupation with symbols becomes a pre-occupation with the human condition.

(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: Julia Gomez on 06/6/2006 at 2:42 AM
Michael Yadon has proven that a racist can come from South Dakota. Perhaps that impresses someone somewhere. If such a person exists, she definitely isn't me. Like 'Virginia' Yadon confuses a barrel of neo-Confederate propaganda and apologia with real history. The latter wins. The major reason for the Civil War was the South's determination to continue enslaving people. There is not a real historian anywhere in the world who disagrees.

The invariably clownish Billy Bearden claims that not only was fighting a war to maintain slavery a good thing, but apartheid in South Africa, which deprived 90 percent of the population of anything but the most rudimentary of lives while the white majority wallowed in immorally obtained wealth, should have been maintained. His name should be next to 'white supremacist' in the dictionary.

Tony, perhaps there are people somewhere who support the Confederate flag for some reason that has nothing to do with racism. But the history of the flag movement suggests otherwise. It became popular to fly the Confederate flag not soon after the Civil War, but during resistance to desegregation in the 1950s and '60s. It was flown as a symbol of resistance to racial equality then and still serves that purpose today. The organizations supporting the flying of the Confederate flag -- the League of the South, Council of Conservative Citizens and Sons of Confederate Veterans -- are all segregationist. In addition, the LOS is secessionist. (Yes, there are fools who think what failed in 1860 would succeed now.) In additon to its support of segregation, the SCV has aligned itself with neo-Nazi and white supremacist Kirk Lyons, and is now increasingly segregationist and anti-Semitic. The trouble in Ithaca was likely initiated by Lyons, who goes from place too place setting up conflicts in hope of extorting money from school systems by doing so.

'Virgina' is 'Virginia' because that name has come to mean a person who is credulous -- a believer in foolish things. V. Durante has proven herself to be a 'Virginia.'

(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: Tommy Aaron on 06/6/2006 at 11:59 AM
It has been estimated that over 65,000 Southern blacks were in the Confederate ranks. Over 13,000 of these, "saw the elephant" also known as meeting the enemy in combat. These Black Confederates included both slave and free. The Confederate Congress did not approve blacks to be officially enlisted as soldiers (except as musicians), until late in the war. But in the ranks it was a different story. Many Confederate officers did not obey the mandates of politicians, they frequently enlisted blacks with the simple criteria, "Will you fight?" Historian Ervin Jordan, explains that "biracial units" were frequently organized "by local Confederate and State militia Commanders in response to immediate threats in the form of Union raids". Dr. Leonard Haynes, a African-American professor at Southern University, stated, "When you eliminate the black Confederate soldier, you've eliminated the history of the South."


BROTHERS of COLOUR
Some are SCV members.
http://www.thesouthernamerican.org/colour.html

(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: Michael E. Yadon on 06/6/2006 at 7:47 PM
Dearest Julia:

I'm quite certain the only person on this entire planet that cares in the slightest if you are impressed with anything, is you. And you, obviously, are not qualified to determine with what you should, or should not, be impressed.

Substance, sweetheart, substance. Your rantings have no substance. What constitutes a "real historian" in your mind? Anyone that agrees with your Globalist propaganda, I suspect, and no one else; without regard to their actual experience, expertise or credentials. Obstinance is not substance. Refusing to accept even the possibility that your beliefs are based on lies, and that you are being manipulated by and for an Evil you apparently neither comprehend nor recognize as existing, is not an attribute of an intelligent person. Your arguments not only defy logic, they deny the existence of logic. When the preponderance of evidence presented to you says "Open your eyes and look around, you just might be wrong.", you screw your eyes more tightly shut, club your fists over your ears, and scream "RACIST!!" As if doing that somehow proves you to be correct.

I am not a racist, dear, and I think you know that. There was not one single word, phrase, sentence or paragraph anywhere in my previous posting which would warrant any such accusation. Nor am I a sexist. I have never been willing to accept the premise that anyone should be categorized, characterized, demonized, denigrated or condemned because of conditions over which they had no control, and in which, they had no choice. Criticizing someone for the color of their skin is as silly as criticizing someone for the name their parents gave them. I fully admit that I have always preferred females to males for serious friendship, but I've always been far more interested in what was between a person's ears than what might be other places.

I grew up with Jim Crow. And by the time I was five years old, I knew those signs that said "Whites Only", "No Colored Allowed", "Colored Entrance" etc., were not right. It had nothing to do with not being racist, or not being bigoted; I had never heard those words and wouldn't have known what they meant. But I understood the meaning of those signs, and I knew they were wrong. So... I broke the law as often as I could: which was mostly when I went to the train depot: which was fairly often as I rode the train a lot back then. I went in the "Colored Entrance" and I bought my ticket at the "Colored" ticket window. I sat in the "Colored Waiting Room" and used the "Colored Rest Room". I had to use the "Whites Only" drinking fountain because the one marked "Colored", didn't work. It didn't matter that most of the adults that came and went through the depot, both white and black, universally ignored all those signs. It didn't matter that most people that saw me probably thought I just couldn't read the signs. I could read the signs; I was five years old, I was defying what I believed to be a bad law, and it made me feel good. And all of those signs, in my hometown, were gone long before Brown vs. the Topeka Board of Education went to the U.S. Supreme Court. And I like to think that maybe, just maybe, that little five year old boy, defying the law, somehow helped to bring them down.

Julia, dearest, where were your "real historians" when the blood was still hot on the steel? I didn't see any around me in the Gulf of Tonkin on the 5th of August, 1964, yet they all wrote exactly what Lyndon Johnson wanted you to believe. Where WERE all your "real historians", November 22nd, 1963, when Lee Harvey Oswald, a mediocre marksman at best, supposedly used a much less than mediocre rifle, to make a shot which would have been extremely difficult, if not absolutely impossible, for Carlos Hathcock using a real sniper rifle? Where WERE your "real historians" when American GIs, coming ashore at Normandy on the 6th of June, 1944, encountered German military trucks and artillary equipment with fresh, new, Made in the USA rubber tires? And why did those GIs have their cameras confiscated if they were caught taking pictures of those tires? Where WERE your "real historians" then? I suspect they were safely tucked away in the same hole that little Georgie, Al, Billie and the rest of the good little globalists were hiding in. And that's where they were in April, 1855, and that's where they were in April, 1861, and that's where they were in April, 1865. And you would rather believe their little feel good dime novels than to get down, get dirty, and dig through all the muck and the mire and the gore and the blood to get at the TRUTH. If it ain't the TRUTH, it ain't nothin', baby. And right now, you're holdin' nothin'.

Your public school education has not stood you in good stead. The vituperative nature of your remarks betrays the desperate barrenness of your position. Since you are unable to support your position with documentable, objective SUBSTANCE, you resort to name calling, demonization, and childish tantrums. THIS IS ABSOLUTELY TEXTBOOK ANTI-CONSTITUTIONAL, ANTI-FREEDOM, ANTI-AMERICAN, GLOBALISM. I believe you've gotten yourself in the deep end of the pool, honey, and I fear you don't know how to swim. I am unabashedly American; a devout Nationalist. I love my country more than life, and have taken an oath to that effect several times. I am a strict constitutionalist; the original form of American government, as provided for in that document, is still the very best form of government ever devised by man. I love my country's flags; every one of them: I am not embarrassed by, nor ashamed of any one of them; BECAUSE I HAVE SHARED IN THE SWEAT AND THE TEARS, THE SACRIFICE AND THE BLOOD, THE AGONY AND THE HONOR required to keep them valiantly flying above YOUR head, keeping YOU and all your America bashing friends safe.

I'm just an old truck driver with five college degrees, but we have a saying I think pertains to you: "Ifn yu cain't run wif da big dogs, kepe yore butt unter da porche!"

With utmost sincerity, if not respect:
Michael


(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: Larry R. Fairfax on 06/6/2006 at 10:48 PM
Thank you Miss Durante for defending
Southern Heritage and
the brave men who fought under that Confederate Battle Flag to defend their homes and families from the barbarians.It seems that some of their kin like Julia still plagues us. It is a waste of time and effort to try to teach the truth to them as they are too full of hate. Even our good friend H.K. Edgerton would have no luck as truth is a
stranger to these folks. It is sad for
everyone!

(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: Julia Gomez on 06/7/2006 at 3:21 AM
Perhaps the most ridiculous of the claims made by the neo-Confederate movement is that black people joined the Confederates and fought to keep themselves enslaved. There's not an iota of truth to it. The keystone of the Confederacy was white supremacy. The Confederate constitution guaranteed slavery perpetually.

"No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed." [Section 9]

To increase the property value of current slaves and future offspring, the Confederate constitution forbade importation of more slaves from abroad.

Allowing blacks to fight for the Confederacy if any had wanted to would have implied equality with whites. For that reason, even near the end of the war, when the Confederacy was depleted by casualites and a high rate of desertion, its leadership rejected desperate pleas from a few in the military to use slaves as soldiers.

The Confederacy did use blacks in the one role Confederates considered acceptable for them -- as slaves. They served as cooks, builders of fortifications, body servants, etc. A main effect of the use of slaves in the Confederate forces was to provide soldiers to the Union. Many of the slaves serving Confederate units fled across Union lines. After training, they fought as black regiments of the U.S. Army. The former slaves helped end slavery by defeating the Confederates -- quite the opposite of neo-Confederate propaganda.

The neo-Confederate movement has found a black person with a mental disability and used him for its purposes from time to time. A few years ago, that role was filled by two brothers in Mississippi. Both were eventually institutionalized or incarcerated and haven't been heard from since. The current pawn is a disabled veteran from North Carolina named H.K. Edgerton. He takes orders from the forementioned neo-Nazi and white supremacist, Kirk Lyons. The neo-Confederates deceive themselves that by promoting these discordant and disturbed persons as representative of people of color they can convince the general public that their white supremacist, secessionist and anti-Semitic beliefs are acceptable. However, the only people they fool are themselves.

Read the Confederate Constitution:

http://www.usconstitution.net/csa.html

(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: Steve Elkin on 06/7/2006 at 9:56 AM
It is YOU who needs a history book to read! May I suggest The South was Right by the Kennedy Bros. Slavery was NOT the cause of the WBTS and you know it!

(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: Michael E. Yadon on 06/7/2006 at 10:04 AM
Julia:

You are definitely far over the edge. You are so rabid, if you were a dog, you would have to be shot. It is simply incredible to me, that someone so young and inexperienced as your self, could be so full of blind hatred for a people that lived in a time and place about which you know absolutely nothing.

Mr. Walter Williams is a black professor of economics at George Mason University, a nationally syndicated newspaper columnist, and frequent talk radio host. He is vastly more experienced and intelligent than any of your globalist mentors, or unnamed "mainstream historians". A few years back, the Washington Times published a small column of his concerning black "soldiers" in the Confederate Army. You probably won't read it, as you have proven yourself to be quite averse to avail yourself of the truth, but it can be found at http://www.civilwarhome.com/blacks.htm.

I will respond no further to your imbecility, as you have shown yourself to have no more functioning brain cells than the average brick wall. Whether you ever acknowledge it or not, the TRUTH will prevail: you and your Godless globalists will be destroyed.

DEO VINDICE

(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: Julia Gomez on 06/7/2006 at 10:40 PM
You are right about one thing, Kluxy. The truth will prevail. We saw an example of that in yesterday's elections. Reactionary white Southerners promoting the ludicrous claim that state courts can ignore U.S. Supreme Court decisions, which dates back to the Civil War, were soundly defeated in Alabama. Another rejection for you and your kind.

Walter Williams, a self-hating professional lackey, has his salary paid by far Right foundations. But for his usefulness as a pawn he would be panhandling on a street corner somewhere. Historians dismiss the kind of silly babble he engages in with facts. As previously stated, the people neo-Confederates falsely claim were black Confederate soliders were actually slaves. They had no choice but to serve the Confederacy until they were able to escape, as thousands did. Once they had a choice, they fought for the U.S. Army.

(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: Bill Stubbs on 06/8/2006 at 10:23 AM
My dear Miss Gomez, Please allow me to give you a bit of constructive criticism; I hope you will take the same in the kindly spirit in which it is given. There is, after all, much in your writings deserving of approval, just as there is much worthy of censure. Let me first congratulate you on your ability to express yourself coherently; you write well, and I therefore assume you are a well-educated young lady. I say young, because you exhibit in your writings the passion and the sense of absolute righteousness common to those beginning their educational journey (you will find that undergraduate and even graduate learning is but the beginning of a life-long quest). I believe I am correct in this assumption, but am quite willing to apologise if I am not. In any case, passion for what you believe is a good thing, and I have no wish to discourage it.

While your devotion to your ideals is admirable, I am sorry to say your manner and method of argumentation is not. Oversimplifications, false generalisations, and name-calling are not worthy of anyone of your intellect, and such tactics tend to cause others not to take one seriously. I do hope that someday, you may acquire the wisdom and maturity to understand that in fighting for any cause, passion must be tempered with reason and understanding. To reduce discussion to a shrill diatribe serves no one's interest, including your own, yet as this particular discussion has proceeded, I note that your tone has become even more strident and less civil than it was in the beginning. While not everything that has been presented by those opposed to your point of view here is of intellectual merit, much of it is, and a stubborn refusal to admit that diminishes your own credbility considerably.

I do not propose to argue with you here the history of the Late Unpleasantness; others have already done that. I will simply note, in passing that to reduce The War, along with its antecedents and its aftermath, to a simple morality play, with the "good" North and "evil" South as protagonists, is a gross oversimplification of the first order. This is a fact which most mainstream historians have regularly acknowledged, and you would do well to do likewise. History presented without nuance or context is at best incomplete , and at worst fallacious.

Then there is the matter of the sweeping generalisations of which you make such frequent use. You are obviously intelligent enough to know that attributing to all members of a group the attributes of a small subset thereof is a specious method of argument, (as well as the root of all prejudice and bigotry). I must confess that I find it ironic that you thus engage in the very sort of stereotyping you so vehemently despise in others. I assume you justify this on the ground that those you thus attack are somehow your moral inferiors, and therefore deserving of such treatment. History has taught us just how pernicious that sort of thinking is, and to what evils it leads, including racism and genocide. Pardon me for saying this, my dear, but your hatred is showing.

As for the practice of applying various nastt sobriquets to all who dare to disagree with your own point of view, I should advise you that the use of such intemperate language is neither pursuasive nor effective. It may serve to further inflame the passions of those of your own side, but I seriously doubt it will win you any converts. Name-calling is the last resort of the immature and the ignorant, and only serves to make you appear small-minded and petty. It is a childish thing, really, and I believe you must surely be better than that.

You see, just because you hate me, I am not required to hate you, and as a Southron and a gentleman, I refuse to do so, even as you disparage my heritage, my ancestors and my region. This sort of thing is not at all new to us in the South, as anti-Southern bigotry has been around in this nation for two hundred years or more (ample evidence of this can be found in Northern newspapers and other sources as far back as the early years of the nineteenth century). I really find it a pity that a bright young intellect and its attendant idealism are put to such execrable use.

I must close for now, but I have more to say, and will take up the subject again in a later post. Meanwhile, do try to put aside some of your hatred; it can do you no good, and wiil inevitably do harm to you and others.





(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: Bill Stubbs on 06/8/2006 at 1:52 PM
My dear Miss Gomez, As I promised, I should like to share with you some additional thoughts on the subject at hand.

As to the subject of bigotry, I will readily conced that the people of the South have been guilty of precisely that in the past, and some few still are at present. In fairness, however, I should also point out that we, ourselves, have been on the receiving end of no small amount of the same. We of the South have been mocked, cursed, derided, ridiculed, defamed,and slandered for many years now; as I noted in my earlier post, this began long before the War Between the States, and has only intensified in recent years. Our Southern accent, which falls so melodiously on the ear, has been labeled as the hallmark of ignorance and illiteracy. Our culture has been made the butt of jokes and ridicule. In your great cities our people are made to feel unwelcome. We have even been the subject of the most scurrilous personal invective, delivered to us on the soil of our own homeland by those newly arrived there from other parts of the country. As a matter of fact, if there is one ugly word we Southrons have not been called, or any form of attempted humiliation to which we have not, at one time or another, been subjected, I do not know what it might be. One would think that by now, the North would have had its bloodlust and appetite for revenge thouroughly satiated, but that appears not to be the case. We have borne it all with a surprising level of good humor, (which is our nature), but that does not mean we like it. When you attack the honor, valor, sacrifice and devotion of our ancestors who are not here to defend themselves, you should not take it ill when we rise to their defense-we would be faithless sons and daughters indeed if we did not do so. For this, you call us "segregationists", despite the fact that the SCV has a firm and consistent policy against discriminating against any member or prospective member on the basis of race, as well as the fact that we count among our Compatriots black men who are the proud descendants of black Confederate soldiers (and yes, I know this history is inconvenient to your point of view, but facts are facts, whether or not you choose to acknowledge them). Are you quite unable to see that if you subjected any other group in this nation to the insults and invective you routinely fling at white Southerners, you would quite justly be called a bigot of the worst sort? Prejudice takes many forms, of which racism is only one; the others, whether they pertain to culture, religion, region, or origin, are just as ugly, you may be sure of it.

I rather get the impression that your problems with the South and its heritage come not so much from past history as from the present. I say that because you have so far cited only one historical source to back up your assertions. The rest of your historical claims are not supported by your presentment of any documentation therefor; from that, I presume you have no deep interest in the subject, save for those selected portions of it which you may believe will help advance your political agenda. Believe me when I tell you that many of us in the South have re-examined our history over and over, (from both Northern and Southern sources, by the way), in a rather rational reaction to having it constantly attacked and criticised. Until you are willing to devote the same time and effort to such study, I hope you will not be offended if I suggest you refrain from lecturing those of us who have. I perceive from your writings that your mindset may somewhat resemble that of Mr. Bob Beckel, a rather well-known Northern liberal political commentator and operative. On the morning after the 2004 election, Mr.Beckel appeared on one of the cable networks and offered the following (his first words): "I HATE THE SOUTH!" He the went on to suggest that perhaps the nation should rid itself of us, so that, in his words, "... the rest of us can have the government we want." He went on to say something about us "forming a new Confederacy, or something...". I cannot say I was surprised he felt that way, as the South ovewhelmingly had rejected his candidate of choice, though I was a bit taken aback that he actually articulated the thought. Is this, perchance your own problem with us, Miss Gomez-that we are not so amenable to your liberal political agenda as you might like? If so, I'm afraid I can offer you little consolation, as I think that state of affairs is unlikely to change in the forseeable future. I might observe here that there have been numerous attempts by more able and powerful souls than yourself to break the spirit of the Southern people. Trust me on this one, my dear; if the horrors of reconstruction failed to do that, you certainly cannot. We do not and will not think like you, for the simplest of reasons-we are not you. I am sorry this so enrages you, but I am afraid you wiil just have to deal with reality. Even if you could get rid of all the symbols of our heritage, that would not change our fundamental beliefs or principles. Of course, a little thing called the Constitution of the United States prevents your would-be cultural genocide, unless you are willing to shred that, too, in your quest for your vision of "social justice".

The Confederate battle flag may be, like any other symbol, used in an offensive fashion by those disposed to do so. It may interest you to know that I am as opposed to that usage as you are. The flag should never be used as a taunt, nor should it be displayed along with patently offensive slogans on t-shirts, caps, bumper stickers, etc. An example would be "If I'd know this, I would've picked my own cotton". Such usage is revolting, tawdry, and disrespectful to the memory of the brave men who fought, bled, suffered and died beneath it. I am one proud Southerner who has no use whatever for dishonorable and disreputable expressions or behavior, just as I have no use for hatred, personal invective, or any other form of incivility. My personal code of honor forbids those things; Whether or not my standards are higher than your own, they are different from them.

In closing, let me once again remind you that not one word I have written here is intended as a personal attack. My critcisms are aimed entirely at your ideas and arguments, and I do hope you will take them in the spirit in which they were intended. My desire is to inform, not to offend.




(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: Billy Bearden on 06/8/2006 at 3:11 PM
Dear Miss Gomez

Thanks for calling names. Lets me know your out of arguments :-)
Yeah, I can see where telling the facts that because crime is thru the roof and quality of life in South Africa really sucks because blacks are in charge, and reflects the same mentality of their neighboring black run countries. When you move there to celebrate their great way of life, enjoy these cultural pleasures - and tell them Billy said hello!

Crime increased by as much as 75% the first year after Nelson Mandela became president.

There were nearly 250,000 home burglaries in South Africa in 1997.

In South Africa, a murder is attempted every 12 minutes, and a rape attempted every 26 seconds.
(Perhaps you might want the black South African rapists celebrate their newfound freedom!)

More than 230 policemen were killed in South Africa in 1998, prompting Police Service Chief Executive Officer Meyer Kahn to say "Killing policemen in our country has almost become a national sport."
(http://www.cnn.com/specials/1999/safrican.elections/stories/crime)

In 1998, a survey found that nearly three-fourths of South African skilled or professional workers were considering leaving the country because of rampant crime and violence.

Excluding countries at war, South Africa has the highest per capita crime rate.

In 1995, only half of South Africa's crimes, including 36,888 rapes, 18,983 murders, and 66,939 armed robberies, were solved.

For every 4,000 South African crimes committed, only eight people are jailed for more than two years.

More cars are stolen in South Africa annually than in the U.S. and Great Britain combined.

Over 1,000 people emigrate from South Africa each month. Since 1994, between 65,000 and 195,000 people emigrated from South Africa. (http://www.southafricanemigration.com/)

South African unemployment is above 40%.



(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: Anonymous on 06/10/2006 at 11:09 PM
I am a Black man who finished high school in Rome, NY and graduated from college at The College of William & Mary in Virginia. I had this discussion with several naive classmates during my college years. Regardless of the interpretation of Civil War history, the Confederate flag is a symbol that is generally offensive to educated Blacks. It is viewed no differently than a Nazi flag is to a Jew. I was born in what was once a confederate state so that makes me a southerner too. It boggles my mind how many "proud southerners" who are not of my race would never think of disrespecting a Jew by displaying a Nazi flag yet they have no problem rationalizing their behavior when they display the confederate flag in front of people who look like me.

(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: Tony on 06/11/2006 at 1:37 AM
You know, what boggles my mind is the notion that anyone has the right to dictate to a particular group what symbols it can and cannot choose to identify itself with. Who are any of us to arrogate to ourselves the right to pick what a group's identifies itself with for them? And the comparisons to Nazi Germany are unfounded. Right or wrong, the South simply wanted to go its own way. Was slavery a part of that equation? Absolutely. But extermination and world dominance never was, and it is ridiculous to suggest otherwise. Did the South want expansion? Yes. So did the North. The North was far more concerned with racial homogeny than the South. It was the North that gave us "Sundown Towns" and the North that gave us the "Know-Nothings." Read this:

http://www.crisismagazine.com/hogan.htm

Santa Anna asked the Irish: "Can you fight by the side of those who put fire to your temples in Boston and Philadelphia?"

Now he ain't talking about Boston, Georgia and Philadelphia, Mississippi, mind you.

Let's not place all of the blame for racism in America on the South. I'm pro-South, it doesn't mean i'm anti-Black anymore than being pro-Black makes you anti-White. I support people being allowed to have an identity that is not dictated to them.

And as far as the popularity of the Confederate flag is concerned:
it was very popular in the 70s and 80s with bands like Lynyrd Skynyrd and the Marshall Tucker Band and TV shows like The Dukes of Hazzard. Heck, even Ron Howard starred in a movie about stock car racing where he posed on the poster wearing a cap with a rebel flag on it. He a racist too?
In World War II it was popular for Southern sailors in the Pacific to fly Confederate flags from thier ships and soldiers flew them in combat on land. Was that racially motivated as well?

(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: Paul Taulbee on 06/11/2006 at 7:50 PM
Yes, we know that those southern boys who did the dying and the fighting were not slave owners;but, had they had the opportunity they would have been slave owners. No matter how you go about it slavery was at the bottom of the disagreement that brought the country to war in 1861, and most southerners wil not admit that simple truth.

(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: C. Urlacher on 06/12/2006 at 1:39 AM
zzzzzzzz
Well as an admirer of some of the American's articles I must say this one falls terribly short.
But what's the big deal? The good guys won. The South lost.
And should the South rise again we can only pray that God gives us men of the calibre of William Tecumseh Sherman and Phil Sheridan.

We'll do it so bad a crow will have to pack a...

(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: Julia Gomez on 06/12/2006 at 6:12 AM
"And the comparisons to Nazi Germany are unfounded. Right or wrong, the South simply wanted to go its own way."

The white South wanted to 'go its own way' with four million black human chattel. Again, that is why there is no way to rationalize the Confederacy's goals. People seeking freedom don't do it by writing a Constitution that allows slavery perpetually and fighting a war in hope of achieving that goal. The Confederates were seeking to continue to prosper by exploiting the black people who lives they were destroying. As Paul Taulbee pointed out, the ultimate desire of the white Southerner was to own slaves, whether he was able to accomplish it or not. About half of white Southern households owned at least one slave. Most of those who didn't would have liked to. Slavery was so lucrative that most of the wealthiest men in the U.S. on the eve of the Civil War were slaveowners.

As further proof of what the Confederates were about, one need only look at the years between the end of Reconstruction and the 1960s. More than 5,000 people, mainly black, are known to have been lynched by white Southerners. Separation of whites from nonwhites was the law. Second and third-rate education for nonwhites was the norm. People who were interested in something other than white supremacy would not have created such a legacy.

Nor is the ban of the Confederate flag in a school really a freedom of speech issue. The First Amendment is not absolute and that is particularly so in education. Any speech or action that disrupts the educational environment can be excluded legally. Confederate symbols, which are likely to be disruptive, fall squarely within that rule.

I urge people to read Billy Bearden's remarks if they haven't. His racist ranting is typical of neo-Confederates and should leave no doubt regarding what the neo-Confederate movement is about.

I notice that 'Virginia' has not returned to try to defend her piece. Maybe she is already learning common sense.



(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: www on 01/8/2007 at 5:26 PM
mamme sexi comico cameriera celestiale cielo rosse fotografia famoso ragazze sesso sentimento cowgirl fotti nicer cameriera inculate culo gratis buono orientale giff animate sexsi scopare ragazze asiatiche amichevole fighetta g spot vibrator fica rasatawerrp segretaria inculata desiderare ragazze fottilo belleze russe miss culo nudi neri videos pronograficos

(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: bocchini-rosse@wotyko86.info on 05/22/2007 at 10:23 AM
sublime grandezza pompini di bionde sorche free rumene famose regno nere gratis cognata porca sexy cameriere eva robbins foto festa di bikini fighe peludas trailers lesbiche vecchie donne formose vecchi donne calde inculate esagerate cute brunete brunette sexuploader stravagantemente bionde fotti sexa nuova esperienza bulma kamasutra friendly teen sesso

(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: An American on 06/19/2007 at 1:33 AM
Comment: I understand that the first bill passed by the US Congress after Southern Succession - meaning passed solely by representatives of Union, Northern states was one on behalf of the Railroad Industrialists, giving them the right to claim the land to the west (I apologize for not remembering the details)…..it was not the 13th Ammendment, freeing slaves, passed in DECEMBER 1865, AFTER the war. It is a sad legacy of the Northern-only US Congress of 1861-1865 that they NEVER passed a bill or an ammendment freeing slaves, despite ample opportunity to have done so. The WBTS was OVER and done before any slave was freed. If freeing slaves was the unanimous, driving purpose of war for the North, why did they not free the slaves as soon as they had the votes to do so, which would have been by mid 1861? What purpose would there have been to keep black persons enslaved in the Union states until after the war's end?
Thanks for considering this question when forming opinions concerning the perceived morality of the the North. 



(Reply to this)

Re: Old Times Here Are Apparently Forgotten

By: WWW on 07/21/2007 at 8:46 AM
latex negre tettine nera rosso vergine abrianna masturbate comico tette donnine vogliose uomini gay nudi sborrare dentro vecchie grasse troie abrianna porno foto mutande bagnate foto cartoni minigonna mogli foto foto vecchie tardone sexy bulma pretty tedesco amore amichevole fighetta dildo paris hilton succhiasciero filmati scopate gratis ninfomani segretarie

(Reply to this)