See related pages and categories
The Hanging Of Mary Surratt–Judicial murder and government dirty linen–part two
Posted on December 10, 2013
by Al Benson Jr.
The “trial” of Mary Surratt and the Lincoln conspirators is still something that is debated about even today. If you want to see some of the arguments, check out the Internet. I read several articles awhile back about the involvement of Dr. Samuel Mudd, the man who set John Wilkes Booth’s broken leg. Mudd claimed he did not know Booth. He was still sent to the Dry Torgugas as a prisoner. Others have claimed that Mudd “was in it up to his eyeballs.” So the argument is anything but settled.
The question has arisen–was it even a legal trial or not? Reverdy Johnson, Mrs. Surratt’s first attorney, had contended that the military court that tried the conspirators was without proper authority to do so as long as the civil courts were sitting. This is something that was argued for nearly a century and I’ll bet you could get a heated debate about it still going in some quarters. In my opinion, Reverdy Johnson was correct. The war was over and the civil courts in the Union were all functioning and intact, so there was no reason to try this as a military case–unless it had been decided from on high that the real facts in this case should never be made public to the American people. We have already noted that Stanton wanted to make sure that Mrs. Surratt communicated with no one before she was hung. Great lengths were gone to in order to prevent that. It has also been contended in some circles that, had the trial taken place in a civil court, Mrs. Surratt would have been exonerated. You had a regime in Washington under Stanton and the revolutionary radicals in Congress that, basically, did whatever it wanted to–just like today. The Marxist regime currently in power does what it wants to. If Congress won’t pass Obama’s radical legislation he just writes an executive order and does an end run around the Congress while they sit there apparently stupified after he has presented them a fait accompli. Congress rails and complains about it–all for public consumption–because they know they will not fight it but they want to give the appearance of having done so–after all, there’s an election coming up next year.
Assistant Judge Advocate Bingham argued against this rationale and for what amounted to Stanton’s rationale for a military trial: the “rebellion” itself was considered to be a gigantic conspiracy, (a vast right-wing conspiracy?), with Jefferson Davis as the arch-conspirator. The official Washington line was that Lincoln, the Commander-in-Chief, had been assassinated by people directly connected to Jeff Davis and the Confederacy, and so on and so forth, blah, blah, blah. Current establishment “historians” are busily attempting to resurrect this 19th century attempt at political correctness. Many “historians” love a good myth parading as fact.
Theodore Roscoe in The Web of Conspiracy took note of historical opinion when he said: “By and large, history’s consensus is that Mrs. Surratt was not guilty as charged. Which is to say she knew nothing of the assassination plot and was in no way an active participant or intentional accessory. Did she carry messages from (John Wilkes) Booth to innkeeper Lloyd, and deliver to the Surratt tavern Booth’s binoculars? Possibly, even probably. But she could have done so in all innocence, merely to oblige Mr. Booth. And even if one assumes she suspected some underground project were afoot, nothing in the trial evidence proved she knew the project involved an assassination strike. A few historians concede she may have known about the abduction plot. On the surface of it, such knowledge seems likely.” In an article dealing with the authenticity of the Dahlgren Papers, historian Stephen Sears noted that: “…by the generally accepted rules of civilized warfare of the 1860s, the capture of an opposing head of state and his chief advisors was a legitimate wartime objective, and no doubt was discussed as openly in Richmond as it was in Washington. Assassination of civilian leaders, on the other hand, was regarded as beyond the pale.” At least it was for Southern leaders, as for some of the Yankees, influenced by the socialists from Europe, well, for some of them, the ends justified the means.
One of the two people chiefly responsible for testimony that was damaging to Mary Surratt was Louis Wiechmann, a government clerk who knew her son, John, and who lived at the Surratt boarding house. Lloyd Lewis, in The Assassination of Lincoln–History and Myth, wrote: “Except for two witnesses there was no case against Mrs. Surratt, but those two hanged her. One was John M. Lloyd…the other was a boarder in her own home, Louis J. Wiechmann.” There was a picture with one of the articles I read that spelled his name “Weichmann.” Note the two different spellings of the man’s last name. According to Roscoe: “Official records on Wiechmann are confusing. One might well believe them deliberately confused. In them his name is spelled at least five different ways. Dates are curiously juggled. Wiechmann’s testimony is garbled, vaguely worded, often contradictory.” And, on the other hand, Mrs. Surratt’s lawyers felt Wiechmann was way too glib and too ready to hang former associates. You have to wonder which one was the real Wiechmann, just as, according to some sources, you might have to wonder if the man in John Wilkes Booth’s grave is the real Booth.
And yet, Wiechmann may have testified as he did out of a certain amount of fear. Benjamin P. Thomas and Harold M. Hyman wrote in the standard work Stanton: The Life and Times of Lincoln’s Secretary of War that: “Weichmann, too, might very well have been accused of complicity in the plot, and two years later, at the trial of John Surratt, Lloyd not only contradicted some of the statements he had made at the conspiracy trial but admitted that he had been subjected to both promises and threats. That Weichmann was subjected to the same sort of intimidation by Stanton, in the private cross-examination seems likely from the statement made by John T. Ford, owner of the celebrated theater. Ford, imprisoned with Lloyd and Weichmann, became convinced from what they told him that Mrs. Surratt was innocent and that the two witnesses had been coerced.” Really? Would “our” government do such an underhanded thing? If they felt they had a good enough reason you better believe they would!
When Wiechmann testified at the trial of John Surratt in 1867 he said he had been “nervous” at the trial of the conspirators, and proceeded to contradict some of his former statements, “thereby putting Mrs. Surratt in a more favorable light.” It was, however, a tad bit late for that to do Mrs. Surratt any good. But Roscoe has noted that: “At the second trial, which in some respects amounted to a rehearing of Mrs. Surratt’s case, Louis Carland, a former customer at Ford’s Theater, testified that Weichmann had told him in 1865 that if he had been let alone…it would have been quite a different affair with Mrs. Surratt than it was” that his statements had been written out for him and that he had been threatened with prosecution as an accessory if he refused to swear to them. Wiechmann, when examined again, denied he ever made this confession, although he did admit talking with Mr. Carland. If this tale were false, one must wonder what Mr. Carland would have had to gain by telling it.
Roscoe also observed that: “John W. Clampitt, one of Mrs. Surratt’s lawyers, a number of years after the trial wrote that Weichmann, after testifying, had been stung with remorse because he had committed perjury in implicating Mrs. Surratt in Lincoln’s murder. Certain ‘authorities’ in the War Department had threatened to prosecute him as an accomplice in the conspiracy against Lincoln if he refused to offer testimony. Weichmann claimed, according to Clampitt, Holt had rejected the first statement Weichmann prepared with the remark that ‘it was not strong enough,’ whereupon, still under threat of prosecution, Weichmann had written a second and stronger statement, the substance of which he subsequently swore to on the witness stand. The man to whom Weichmann made this confession, wrote Clampitt, was refused permission to testify.” Almost sounds as if Wiechmann was indulged with a little “friendly persuasion” to make sure he said what the Judge Advocate and Mr. Stanton wanted him to say. And then, on his deathbed, Wiechmann signed a statement saying that all he had said at the original conspiracy trial was true after all. Will the real Louis Wiechmann (Weichmann) please stand up?
Judge Advocate Joseph Holt summed up the preconceived sentiment of the Yankee/Marxist government when he said: “There have not been enough Southern women hanged in this war.” Thus, the great compassion of the Yankee/Marxist mindset was put on display for all the world to see–and it is this same “compassion” that we still live with today–thanks to the Lincoln administration. That this is the identical mindset displayed by socialists and Communists, both in Mr. Lincoln’s government and in his rampaging armies, is one of the overriding factors that cause Donnie Kennedy and myself to write the book Lincoln’s Marxists. People need to become aware that this socialist, anti-Christ mindset is what the Lincoln administration gave us and that it has been passed down since then to us today. Now we have a Marxist in the White House that doesn’t even bother to deny his Marxism. Lincoln would be proud of him!
On The Web: http://revisedhistory.wordpress.com/2013/12/10/the-hanging-of-mary-surratt-judicial-murder-and-government-dirty-linen-part-two/
See related pages and categories
BEWARE THE "NEW LINCOLN" - THE FUTURE UNDER OBAMA
By Doug Tjaden
December 7, 2013
Throughout his political career, Barack Obama has intentionally modeled himself after President Abraham Lincoln. He uses a similar style of rhetoric, and has gone so far as to adopt some of Lincoln’s travel patterns in order to create a symbolic link to him. Obama and his handlers want the public to connect him with America’s “greatest” President.
We are now well into Obama’s second term. If he believes he is indeed the “second coming” of Lincoln, the American people should understand the truth of what the Lincoln Presidency meant to this nation. Because thus far, Obama’s presidency is paralleling that of Lincoln’s in ways the unsuspecting, Lincoln adoring, public does not comprehend.
Despite a century of monopolistic narrative that has defined the Lincoln Presidency, a small group of authors and scholars are having their voices heard above the din. The facts they are uncovering are reshaping the debate on why the states went to war under Lincoln.
Lincoln’s distaste ran deep for the existing political climate, where Jeffersonian state sovereignty dominated. Throughout his political career, Lincoln firmly advocated for a Hamiltonian, consolidated central government that would oversee a single “union” of states. Given the chance, he would do everything in his power to replace what he viewed as a destructive flaw in the Constitution.
His position added fuel to the hostile political climate present when he took office. States had been debating for decades over economic and moral issues, such as tariffs and slavery. Lincoln’s desire for a controlling central government put him at odds with Jefferson and Madison’s doctrine of state nullification, as expressed in the 1798 Kentucky and Virginia resolutions.
Both northern and southern states had engaged in nullification prior to the Lincoln presidency.
• In 1809, the Massachusetts legislature, along with other New England states, nullified President Jefferson’s embargo on trade during the conflict between France and Britain, calling it “unjust, oppressive, and unconstitutional.”
• During the War of 1812, nullification was used by the states to overturn federal conscription laws.
• During the 1830s it was used to tariffs.
• Prior to the Civil War, nullification was used to stand against the grossly immoral fugitive slave laws.
The founders’doctrine of “divided sovereignty” did not fit with Lincoln’s misguided belief that it was “the whole people” who adopted the Constitution, and that as such, once joined, a state could never leave the union. This factual error in his thinking led to his tragic insistence that the union must be “preserved at all costs.”
In Lincoln’s first inaugural address, he made his position clear; “A disruption of the Federal Union, heretofore only menaced, is now formidably attempted. I hold that in contemplation of universal law and of the Constitution the Union of these States is perpetual. Perpetuity is implied, if not expressed, in the fundamental law of all national governments.”
This is in direct contrast to the Declaration of Independence, which states, “That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends [to secure our liberty], it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”
The remainder of Lincoln’s first inaugural address is rambling prose, centered on the word “Union,” capitalized as though it were sacred text. Lincoln was obsessed with preserving his vision of a single union, to the point that,despite numerous assurances to the contrary, he took the nation to war.
Political opposition to his quest was not tolerated. During the height of Lincoln’s war, he unconstitutionally suspended the writ of habeas corpus, and without due process, imprisoned thousands of political dissenters, including politicians and those in the press. This unconstitutional act is glossed over by Lincoln “scholars” as a necessary evil that he had to impose in order to win his war and preserve the union.
Win the war he did. The states’right to self-government were annihilated by his victory, at the cost of hundreds of thousands of American lives. Dean Sprague summed it up in Freedom Under Lincoln: “States’ rights, which prior to 1860 had been as important a part of northern beliefs as southern, were overturned” by Lincoln’s victory.
But that was the point, wasn’t it? More historians are coming to that conclusion.
Parallels of Peril?
Like the mid 1850s, today we live in an era of immense division between the people of this nation. This time it is not defined as much by geography, as it is ideology. Yet, the foundational issues are the same. Moral and economic issues dominate the debate, with little common ground to be found.
Overseeing this division is a President who believes in a central government so strong and dominating, that it should control nearly every aspect of our lives. During his first term, Obama aggressively built upon the foundation his idol laid for him. Like his predecessor, he has demonstrated that he will not hesitate to use the tools at his disposal to silence political opposition. Today, that includes the mainstream media, the IRS, and the NSA.
The military chain of command is being systematically purged of those who do not align with this administration’s vision of a fascist/socalist utopia. Big business and big banks are given legal protections that act as quasi-tariffs, giving them an unfair advantage in the marketplace. Issues of morality, such as abortion and traditional marriage, are doggedly guarded as sacred, and any dissenting opinion is labeled “hate speech.” And last, but not least, just as in the 1850s, the issue of race is being used to consolidate political power.
There Is Hope
States are once again beginning to take fledgling steps to recapture the founders’ vision of “divided sovereignty” that both “Lincolns” so vehemently despise. The current occupant of the White House has obstacles that his idol didn’t have. The first Lincoln did not have the alternative media, which continues to expose the lies and hypocrisy of the second Lincoln.
The first Lincoln also did not have to deal with organizations like the Tenth Amendment Center, which has a national platform from which to educate citizens on state’s rights, and lead in the restoration of the doctrine of nullification.
Mike Maharrey, Communications Director of the Tenth Amendment Center, writes in his book, Our Last Hope, “If we ever want to wrest control and power away from Washington D.C. and place the federal government back into its properly prescribed role, the people must take control of their state governments and demand that they serve as a check on federal power, as they were intended to do.”
It is working. Federal laws ranging from REAL ID, to medical marijuana, to gun control, have been nullified by several states in the past few years. Laws to nullify Obamacare and the NSA will be introduced, and likely passed, in 2014.
However,recall that we have a President who has throughout his career, modeled himself after a president that did more to destroy states rights than any other in history. What does that say about our future?
The current pushback against nullification has only begun. Will it again lead to calls for secession? If so, President Obama has clearly signaled that he is of the same mold as the man that took this nation to war with itself in order to preserve his beloved union. For those who naively see only the parallels between Obama and Lincoln that the mainstream media wants you to see, you had better dig a little deeper into your history. You may be getting something much different than you bargained for.
© 2013 Doug Tjaden
On The Web: http://www.newswithviews.com/Tjaden/doug101.htm
See related pages and categories
Georgia park where Jefferson Davis captured may close
Tuesday, December 10, 2013
ATLANTA, December 10, 2013 — The park that commemorates the location where Confederate President Jefferson Davis was captured in 1865 may close because of a lack of revenue.
According to a report from WALB-TV, the 13-acre Jefferson Davis Memorial Historic Site in Irwinville may close by June. The park’s $10,000 in annual revenue is short of the $50,000 needed per year to fund operations.
“The revenue that come is not satisfying what the expenditures are so we’re looking at ways to keep the park open,” Joey Whitley told the station. Whitney is a descendant of James Clemens, the man who in 1920 deeded the land to the state of Georgia.
After camping in Irwinville overnight, Davis was captured early on the morning of May 10, 1865, by Union cavalry. As Davis tried to elude his pursuers, he apparently donned his wife’s overcoat or shawl to keep warm, which led to a rumor that he was wearing women’s clothing at the time of his capture.
The park, built by the Works Progress Administration in 1939, includes trails, a small museum and a memorial marking the precise location of Davis’ capture. The park was operated by the state of Georgia until 2009 when Irwin County assumed control after the state opted not to fund operations, according to a 2009 report in the Tifton Gazette newspaper.
Davis was imprisoned for two years, and his citizenship was not restored until 1978. In signing the bill to restore citizenship, President Jimmy Carter said this “officially completes the long process of reconciliation that has reunited our people following the tragic conflict between the States.”
Irwinville is located about 170 miles south of Atlanta. A community meeting to discuss the park’s future is planned for Tuesday.
© Copyright 2013 The Washington Times, LLC
On The Web: http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/sightseers-delight/2013/dec/10/georgia-park-where-jefferson-davis-captured-may-cl/
See related pages and categories
What's up with that? Flag is nod to history, exemplar of free speech
By Scott Hewitt, Columbian social issues & neighborhoods reporter
December 11, 2013
I drive past "Jefferson Davis Park" every day on my way to work at Ridgefield High School, where I teach English. Each year, I teach the memoir "Warriors Don't Cry" by Melba Patillo Beals, one of the "Little Rock Nine" who were threatened by a lynch mob while trying to attend Central High School in Little Rock, Ark.; she was injured when acid was thrown in her face.
I have trouble explaining to my students why there is a Confederate battle flag flying here. The Bonnie Blue flag, the flag of secession of the South from the Union, has been added under the stars and bars. I don't understand why these Confederate flags are being flown in Washington when the Civil War was not fought here, and Washington was not even a state at the time. I really think the "memorial" is a slap in the face to the United States and Washington.
This is one of those questions that doesn't have the kind of black-and-white answer you're after, Anonymous.
Many people find the Confederate battle flag a hateful reminder of slavery, white supremacy and Jim Crow -- that is, forced racial segregation -- while others see it as a simple shout-out to Southerners who fought what they saw as invasion by the North. Either way, the bottom line is that the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects most controversial free speech.
This issue came to Clark County in 2008, when the Sons of Confederate Veterans (scvportland.org/ jdp_park.html), a fraternal organization with a branch in Portland, held a grand opening for that diminutive quarter-acre private park, just south of the Gee Creek Rest Area on I-5 southbound. As you point out, the park has routinely displayed an American flag alongside a Confederate battle flag. The Bonnie Blue is new. The spot used to have its own website, jeffersondavispark.org, but that doesn't seem to be maintained anymore.
What still is maintained is the assertion that the Confederate stars-and-bars doesn't really represent anything racist. "We are not still fighting that war, and we're not perpetuating any racial issues," Brent Jacobs, local spokesman for the Sons of Confederate Veterans, has said. "We're just everyday folks who happen to have great-great-grandfolks who fought in that war. It's not political, it's heritage."
Six of Jacobs' ancestors fought for the Confederacy, he said, but none of them owned slaves; a farther-back ancestor "owned quite a few slaves" but would be considered an American hero nonetheless because he fought in the Revolutionary War. "It's all about perspective," he wrote in an email. "For those who do not have Confederate ancestors, they will never understand our pride … and I understand that."
Copyright 2013 columbian.com
On The Web: http://www.columbian.com/news/2013/dec/11/flag-is-nod-to-history-exemplar-of-free-speech/
See related pages and categories
Nathan B. Forrest High School name change faces crucial week
Dec 10, 2013
JACKSONVILLE, Fla. -- This week Nathan B. Forrest High School is sampling students and getting more community feedback to see whether there is support or not for a name change.
The school is named after Confederate General Nathan B. Forrest.
An online survey initiated this fall that drew national interest focused on the history of Forrest who was one of the founders of the Ku Klux Klan. Proponents of a name change say its time for change; opponents argue that Forrest is part of Southern history and that the man distanced himself from the organization he help found.
Jim Shillinglaw opposes the name change.
"The people of Westside of Jacksonville where I live want to keep the name they don't want to change it. The other people from outside want to come in and make it a political agenda," Shillinglaw said.
Omotayo Richmond sees things differently.
"We support change. We are moving the whole country is moving in the direction and all of this old paradigm of the south separate from the north and the west separate from the east. They are all melting together. We are one country," Richmond said.
This past weekend, people who live in the Forrest attendance zone had a chance to answer a survey at the school. Duval County Schools could not provide a number yet about how many people have participated. Forrest alumni who live out-of-town had to have their response post marked by Monday.
Tuesday evening there is a community meeting at the school offering people another chance to discuss a name change.
On Wednesday, students will hold a panel discussion when the school day starts and then vote.
All survey results are expected to be tabulated and forward to the superintendent on Thursday.
The Duval County School Board has scheduled a special meeting for December 16 to consider the name change.
Copyright ©2013 Multimedia Holdings Corporation
On The Web: http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/article/338061/3/Nathan-B-Forrest-name-change-faces-crucial-week
See related pages and categories
Tuesday, December 3, 2013
NC SONS OF CONFEDERATE VETERANS FUNDS CONSERVATION OF BATTLE FLAGS AT MUSEUM OF HISTORY
An exhibit highlight features a battle flag associated with the death of Lt. Gen. Thomas J. “Stonewall” Jackson. The banner was carried by the 18th Regiment North Carolina Troops, which accidentally shot the Confederate general at Chancellorsville on May 2, 1863.
On Nov. 9, 2013, the N.C. Division of the Sons of Confederate Veterans unveiled four newly conserved Civil War flags during a rededication ceremony at the N.C. Museum of History in Raleigh. These historic banners, the colors of the 24th, 34th, 38th and 39th N.C. Troops, are part of the museum’s Confederate flag collection, one of the largest in the nation.
The N.C. Division of the Sons of Confederate Veterans, with 90 camps (chapters) across the state, spent years raising funds for the expensive textile treatment required to conserve the banners. This specialized treatment ranges from $7,000 to $30,000 per item. The group also helped the museum purchase a much-needed storage unit that holds 10 conserved flags.
“The Museum of History owes a debt of gratitude to the North Carolina Division of the Sons of Confederate Veterans for its generous contribution to conserve these important artifacts,” said Jackson Marshall, Associate Director at the N.C. Museum of History. “Without the support of individual citizens and private organizations, few, if any, of the museum’s Civil War flags would be preserved for future generations to see and appreciate.”
John Campbell, the museum’s Collections Section Chief, is grateful for the new storage unit. “Each banner is mounted on a pressure mount inside a sturdy metal frame, so the heavy-duty shelving system allows us to safely store the flags flat when they are not on exhibit.”
A brief description of the conserved flags follows.
The 24th Regiment N.C. Troops was originally mustered into service as the 14th Regiment N.C. Volunteers in July 1861. The regiment’s third bunting Army of Northern Virginia-pattern battle flag was captured at Five Forks, Va., on April 1, 1865.
The 34th Regiment N.C. Troops was one of many Tar Heel regiments in the Army of Northern Virginia that fought under Gen. Robert E. Lee at the Battle of Gettysburg. The regiment’s third bunting Army of Northern Virginia-pattern battle flag was captured at Cemetery Ridge during the Battle of Gettysburg on July 3, 1863.
The 38th Regiment N.C. Troops carried this third bunting Army of Northern Virginia-pattern battle flag at the end of the Civil War. It was surrendered at Appomattox on April 12, 1865, and then sent to the U.S. War Department.
The 39th Regiment N.C. Troops, unlike most Tar Heel regiments, did not serve in the Army of Northern Virginia. It fought in the western theater and earned fame during the September 1863 battle at Chickamauga in Georgia with it capture of Federal artillery. This banner’s pattern is a variant of the McCown battle flag, which is modeled after the Scottish national flag, and is distinctive of other flags flown by the Confederate Army.
The Sons of Confederate Veterans is not a group to rest on its laurels. It has already raised funds to begin conservation of two more artifacts: a third bunting Army of Northern Virginia-pattern infantry battle flag attributed as the headquarters flag of Brig. Gen. Rufus C. Barringer and the frock coat of Lt. Col. Francis Wilder Bird of Bertie County. He was mortally wounded at the Battle of Reams Station in Virginia on Aug. 25, 1864.
“The North Carolina Division of the Sons of Confederate Veterans is honored to help the Museum of History preserve artifacts from our Confederate heritage and ancestry,” adds Craig Pippen, Communications Officer, N.C. Division of the Sons of Confederate Veterans. “Our organization is proud to work with the museum to preserve and educate others about the history of our great state. We will continue to support and grow our relationship with the museum and its staff whenever possible.”
For details about the Museum of History, call 919-807-7900 or access www.ncmuseumofhistory.org or Facebook. For information about the N.C. Civil War Sesquicentennial, access www.ncculture.com.
On The Web: http://freenorthcarolina.blogspot.com/2013/12/nc-sons-of-confederate-veterans-funds.html
See related pages and categories
Should Selma have a monument to honor Nathan Bedford Forrest? (poll)
December 02, 2013
MONTGOMERY, Alabama --- A monument to Confederate general and early Ku Klux Klan leader Nathan Bedford Forrest has caused controversy in Selma since it was erected in 2000.
Forrest fought in the Battle of Selma near the end of the Civil War and was considered a gifted cavalry leader. His ties to the KKK and work as a slave trader before the war make him a polarizing figure, especially in a city steeped in history of both the Civil War and the civil rights movement.
The Forrest monument was originally at a city-owned building and then moved to a Confederate memorial section of a city-owned cemetery in 2001.
In 2012, the bronze bust of the monument was stolen and has not been recovered.
Plans by private groups to make improvements to the monument and to Confederate Memorial Circle at Old Live Oak Cemetery last year sparked protests and a lawsuit after the city stopped the work and suspended the building permit. Under a proposed settlement to the lawsuit approved last week by the Selma City Council, the city would give Confederate Memorial Circle to the Selma chapter of the United Daughters of the Confederacy and would pay $100,000 in damages to the company doing the work.
Selma is not the only place where there have been heated disagreements about efforts to recognize Forrest.
© 2013 Alabama Media Group
On The Web: http://blog.al.com/wire/2013/12/should_selma_have_a_monument_t.html
See related pages and categories
Piece of Civil War ironclad brought to surface in Savannah
By Phil Gast, CNN
November 14, 2013
(CNN) -- She didn't have enough power to maneuver and effectively trade artillery rounds with enemy vessels in the swift Savannah River. Instead, the locally produced CSS Georgia, a one-of-a-kind ironclad produced for the Confederacy during the Civil War, became a stationary floating battery, bristling with artillery pieces.
She did her job.
The Yankees, intent on taking Savannah, Georgia, refused to take on the CSS Georgia or other nearby defense obstructions.
The CSS Georgia won the battle, but lost the war: The vessel was scuttled in December 1864 shortly before Union forces took Savannah and presented the city to President Abraham Lincoln as a Christmas present. The shipwreck has rested in the murky river since, rarely disturbed and having weathered the indignity of being hit during dredging a couple of times over the years.
This week, U.S. Navy divers, working with archaeologists for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, retrieved a 64-square-foot section of the ironclad, a precursor to the long-anticipated removal and preservation of the shipwreck so the city's vital shipping channel can be deepened.
The Corps expects to spend an estimated $9.5 million on the project. The removal is expected to begin in summer 2014, although funding has not been finalized.
"Over time the ship's casemate, the iron-covered upper portion of the warship, came apart," the Corps' Savannah District said in a statement Wednesday. "The small portion removed Tuesday will give archaeologists the ability to assess the condition of the remainder of the ship."
That remainder includes remaining cannon, pieces of the ship's power plant and propeller shaft and two chunks of the casemate.
Officials are excited because the recovery of the casemates -- the compartments where artillery pieces were housed -- is believed to be the first of a Confederate ironclad. One of the surviving casemates is huge: 68 feet by 24 feet.
Divers, who have only a few feet of visibility, have been assessing the CSS Georgia wreck, so they know what they will be facing next summer. The site is adjacent to Old Fort Jackson and the main shipping channel.
"This is just a small section. It was not cut off," Corps public affairs specialist Sandra Hudson said of the piece recovered Tuesday. "It was a small piece they found that would be the most viable to pull up."
Archaeologists have the challenge of preserving the CSS Georgia through chemical and other means, making her iron stable so that the remains one day can be displayed in museums.
This 5,000-pound chunk of casemate, lifted by crane onto a barge, is being sent to Texas A&M University for archaeological testing, Hudson said.
The remains of the CSS Georgia may answer some mysteries, including its dimensions and the manner of construction. The casemates were made of railroad iron. The vessel could handle 10 guns, though fewer were onboard when it was destroyed.
There are no known blueprints for the ironclad, which was produced in Savannah in 1862 as part of a defensive naval squadron. Its wreckage straddles the borders of Georgia and South Carolina.
According to the Corps, Savannah's harbor will be deepened from 42 feet to 47 feet, "greatly expanding its capability to handle larger cargo vessels."
The ongoing expansion of the Panama Canal means bigger ships will need deeper water at ports around the United States.
If things go as planned, the remains of the CSS Georgia and associated artifacts will be on the surface before the 150th anniversary of its sinking.
© 2013 Cable News Network
On The Web: http://edition.cnn.com/2013/11/13/us/georgia-civil-war-ironclad-ship/index.html
See related pages and categories
Thursday, December 05, 2013
74th Anniversary of ‘Gone with the Wind’ Premiere
BY CALVIN E. JOHNSON JR.
Do you remember when?
The clock was turned back in Atlanta, Georgia for the World Premiere of Gone with the Wind at the Loews Grand Theater on Peachtree Street. The beautiful theater was sadly destroyed by fire in 1978 but many folks still remember when Hollywood came to Atlanta to celebrate that wonderful movie and Atlanta’s own author Margaret Mitchell whose book about Scarlett O’Hara, the Southern people and the War Between the States would be read by millions around the world and be made into this exciting motion picture that has become a classic.
Do you remember when a movie premiere was a red carpet affair of excitement when you could take your family to the picture show without worrying about the language or sexual content of the film?
"Gone with the Wind" had its grand premiere during the Christmas Season of 1939, just 74 years after the end of the “War Between the States” and Sunday December 15, 2013 marks the 74th anniversary of that wonderful-classic movie that opens with: “There was a land of Cavaliers and Cotton Fields called the Old South. Here in this pretty world, Gallantry took its last bow. Here was the last ever to be seen of Knights and their Ladies Fair, of Master and of Slave. Look for it only in books, for it is no more than a dream remembered, a Civilization gone with the wind.”
"Gone with the Wind" won 8 Oscars for 1939, including Best Picture, and Hattie McDaniel, the first Black American to win an Academy Award, expressed her heart-felt pride with tears of joy, upon receiving the 1939 Academy Award for Best Supporting Actress for her memorable role as “Mammy.”
Victor Fleming won the Academy Award for Best Director and even though Max Steiner did not receive an award for his excellent music score, the “Gone with the Wind” theme song has become the most recognized and played tune in the world.
Vivien Leigh, who won the Academy Award for Best Actress in a leading role, humbly and eloquently summed her appreciation by thanking Producer David O. Selznick.
And, who can forget Olivia De Havilland as the pure-sweet Melanie Hamilton, Leslie Howard as Ashley Wilkes and Clark Gable as Rhett Butler, who told Scarlett: “Take a good look my dear. It's an historic moment you can tell your grandchildren about -- how you watched the Old South fall one night.”
The Old South rose again!
Friday, December 15, 1939, was an icy-cold day in Atlanta but people warmed to the excitement of the world premiere of “Gone with the Wind”--The Selznick International Pictures “Technicolor” Production of the Metro Goldwyn Mayer Release of Margaret Mitchell’s novel about the Old South at the Loews Grand Theater.
We remember Thomas Mitchell, who played Gerald O’Hara, telling daughter Scarlett:
“Do you mean to tell me, Katie Scarlett O'Hara, that Tara, that land doesn't mean anything to you? Why, land is the only thing in the world worth working for, worth fighting for, worth dying for, because it's the only thing that lasts.”
And, we cried when Bonnie Blue Butler, the daughter of Rhett and Scarlett—played by Cammie King, was killed in a pony accident.
The cast of "Gone with the Wind" stayed at the historic Georgian-Terrace Hotel.
Anne Rutherford, who played Scarlett’s sister Carreen, took time to visit the Confederate Veterans at the soldier’s home and the stars toured the famous “Cyclorama” at Grant Park.
The festivities surrounding the premiere of "Gone with the Wind" included a parade down Peachtree Street with over three hundred thousand folks cheering the playing of “Dixie”, waving Confederate flags and shouting Rebel Yells.
And, many witnessed the lighting of the “Eternal Flame of the Confederacy”, an 1855 gas lamp that survived the 1864 Battle of Atlanta. The lamp remained for many years on the northeast corner of Whitehall and Alabama Streets. Mrs. Thomas J. Ripley, President of Atlanta Chapter No. 18 United Daughters of the Confederacy, re-lit the great light with Mr. T. Guy Woolford, Commandant of the Old Guard by her side.
Time Magazine wrote: “The film has almost everything the book has in the way of spectacle, drama, practically endless story and the means to make them bigger and better. The burning of Atlanta, the great "boom" shots of the Confederate wounded lying in the streets and the hospital after the Battle of Atlanta are spectacle enough for any picture, and unequaled.”
On The Web: http://shnv.blogspot.com/2013/12/74th-anniversary-of-gone-with-wind.html
See related pages and categories
The Hanging of Mary Surratt–Judicial murder and government dirty linen–part one
Posted on December 6, 2013
by Al Benson Jr.
Awhile back Robert Redford made a movie about the hanging of Mary Surratt which was called The Conspirator. Although I have not seen it, I have been told it was fairly good. Redford, I guess, didn’t get it all right, but he got some of it right–almost a first from someone from Hollyweird. Redford has never been one of my favorite movie entertainers. I’ve always felt he was a bit left of center and I am curious as to why he chose the topic of Mary Surratt’s demise by the U.S. government to make a movie out of. When the DVD gets down to an affordable price, if I can find it, I will pick one up to see exactly what he did with Mary Surratt and her tragic story.
After the assassination of Obama’s spiritual ancestor, Abraham Lincoln, eight people were put on trial and found guilty–four sentenced to long prison terms and the other four sentenced to hang. One of those sentenced to be hung was Mary Eugenia Jenkins Surratt, the first woman ever to be hung in the United States. John Wilkes Booth had supposedly been shot (that’s another whole story in itself) and John Surratt, Mary’s son, had escaped to Canada. Eventually he would make his way to Europe. These eight seemingly were all that were left and the government wanted to make sure they talked as little as possible to anyone.
Historical opinions have been divided as to whether Mary Surratt was really guilty as one of the Lincoln assassins. Author Nathaniel Weyl has called Mary Surratt “…an innocent woman hanged for conspiracy to assassinate Lincoln.” My own opinion is that this is pretty close to the truth. That doesn’t mean that Mrs. Surratt was totally without knowledge of all that went on. She may well have been aware of the proposed attempts to abduct Mr. Lincoln. After all, they were discussed in her rooming house. But, as far as assassination went, I don’t think she had a clue.
When it came to the conspirators’ “trial” (if such it can really be called) Mrs. Surratt had a good lawyer to start out with, Reverdy Johnson, a former U.S. senator and, in 1849, U.S. Attorney General, and at the time of her trial, a Maryland Senator. According to the book The Lincoln Conspiracy: “He was such a formidable opponent, it was immediately apparent to the prosecution that he must be removed. Johnson was to be assisted by Frederick Aiken and John W. Clampitt, each in practice only one year and each trying his first big case. Clampitt was 24 and Aiken even younger.” After some judicial maneuverings, the prosecution succeeded in getting Johnson to remove himself and so Mrs. Surratt was stuck with the two younger, more inexperienced lawyers. While they did the best the could, they were no match for the legal scalawags the federal prosecution brought forth to handle them.
The way the federal government dealt with Mrs. Surratt was strongly reminiscent of the way it would later deal with the Plains Indians in the far West–it flat out broke its word, but then, what else have we come to expect from government? In our own day “our” government (it’s not really ours) has lied to us, through the president or various other federal stooges, about Benghazi, the IRS targeting conservative political groups, the “Fast and Furious” gunrunning scandal, how much the NSA spies on its own citizens, Obamacare, and the list goes on–and on, and on.
Otto Eisenschiml wrote in The Shadow of Lincoln’s Death “When the Washington authorities put hoods over the heads of the men accused of conspiracy against Lincoln’s life, they committed a strange act. When they added stiff shackles–manacles which made writing impossible–and forbade all intercourse with the outside world, there arose a misgiving that the purpose was not punishment, but the enforcement of silence.” Eisenschiml also duly noted that the government changed the prison locations of those not hung from Albany, New York to the far-out Dry Tortugas, where the convicted men were confined,literally for years in solitary cells and were prevented from conversing with any outsiders. You really have to wonder what the government was afraid these men would have to say, and whatever that might have been, they were going to make darn sure no one ever heard it.
One man on Edwin Stanton’s staff was Colonel William P. Wood, the man who ran Old Capitol Prison. Though he worked for the federal government, it appears that Colonel Wood still had some modicum of conscience left. In 1883 he wrote a series of articles for the Washington Sunday Gazette, in which he sought to tell all he knew about the conspiracy trial, most of which, he said, had never been revealed to the public. Again, what else is new? Even today all we get are sanitized versions of everything from who killed Kennedy (it was that “lone gunman, Oswald, don’t you know”) to the War in Iraq.
Wood wrote of Mrs. Surratt that: “…there were guarantees made to her brother by the writer, upon authority of Hon. Edwin M. Stanton, that she should not be executed.” Wood hinted that such guarantees were given “…in exchange for information by Mrs. Surratt’s brother regarding (John Wilkes) Booth’s probable course of flight. The fact that the War Minister made such a promise gives food for thought. Very likely he had, at no time, intended to live up to his promise.” And Wood, calling attention to this rank betrayal, said: “…those conditions were violated, and…this deplorable execution of an innocent woman (followed).”
The court announced the guilty verdict on the morning of July 6th. Mrs. Surratt was not informed of it until the middle of the day, at which time she found out she was to be hung at noon the following day. Eisenschiml observed that “Such a short space of time between a sentence and its execution is practically unheard of.” Apparently what Mrs. Surratt and the others knew, the government was going to make sure they had no chance to pass it on to others.
John T. Ford, the owner of Ford’s Theater, followed all these events as long as he lived. I guess you could say he had somewhat of a consuming interest, so he gathered what facts he was able to. In 1889 he revealed something most people had never heard. He said that: “The very man of God who shrived her soul for eternity was said to be constrained to promise that she should not communicate with the world. Mr. Clampitt, one of her lawyers, confirmed what Ford stated. Mrs. Surratt pleaded with the priest to be allowed to tell people before she died that she was innocent of the crime of which she had been convicted. The priest refused her. It seems he had been made to tell her, after absolution and the sacrament, that she should be prevented from making any declaration as to her innocence. The priest later denied this. If Stanton and the government had nothing to cover up, allowing her to make a last statement would have hurt nothing and no one.
However, Eisenschiml has noted that: “What was vital was this: the condemned woman must not be permitted to harangue the crowd from the scaffold. There she might go beyond the mere question of her guilt, and every one of her words would be broadcast by news-hungry journalists.” The powers that be at that time could not allow that to happen. How interesting that our so-called “history” books never reveal any of this. The winners of the War of Northern Aggression have deemed that all of this is information we are much better off knowing nothing about. “Nothing to see here, folks, move along.” If the public has no clue about any of this then they can’t ask embarrassing questions about it can they? And that’s the goal of many of today’s educator/change agents–a population that knows nothing about nothing but has been taught that they are brilliant.
To be continued.
On The Web: http://revisedhistory.wordpress.com/2013/12/06/the-hanging-of-mary-surratt-judicial-murder-and-government-dirty-linen-part-one/
See related pages and categories
Marker honors Sansom
Wednesday, December 4, 2013
A monument honoring Emma Sansom recently was placed on the Black Creek Trail near Black Creek by the Alabama Flaggers.
Words chiseled on the boulder note that Sansom guided Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest across Black Creek on May 2, 1863, and call her a “heroine of the Confederacy.”
Sansom was 15 when she volunteered to show Forrest a shallow portion of Black Creek where his men could cross, so Forrest could pursue and capture Union Col. Abel Streight, who was headed to Rome, Ga., to burn Confederate supplies.
A statue honoring Sansom was dedicated in 1904 on Broad Street, on the banks of the Coosa River near the present-day City Hall.
Freda Burton worked on getting the monument placed and said she was “so proud to be leaving it for generations to come.”
Copyright © 2013 GadsdenTimes.com
On The Web: http://www.gadsdentimes.com/article/2013131209917
See related pages and categories
Not even past
A battle over bronze and over memory
Dec 7th 2013
FOR more than 80 years, a bronze statue of a stern-faced man in a frock-coat, one clenched fist at his side and one held over his head as though he were in mid-declamation, stood before the front entrance to Georgia’s capitol building. The statue is of Tom Watson, a fiery populist who in the late 19th and early 20th centuries served in Georgia’s legislature and both houses of Congress. He was also a publisher, essayist and vice-presidential candidate.
At first, Watson was a progressive agrarian populist, winning the support of rural blacks and whites alike. He came to abandon those ideals, writing vicious diatribes in his magazine against blacks (“an inferior being…not any more our brother than the apes are”), Jews (“thick-lipped rakes [who] glut their eyes upon handsome Gentile women”) and Catholics (he referred to the Pope as “a fat old Dago”). He whipped up sentiment against Leo Frank, a Jewish factory worker lynched in 1913 after having been convicted, on flimsy evidence, of killing a 13-year-old Christian girl.
On November 29th, the day after Thanksgiving, when Georgia’s government offices were closed and traffic was light, workers wrapped Watson’s statue in plastic and moved it, plinth and all, from the capitol grounds to a park across the road. There it will stay. Nathan Deal, the governor, signed an order authorising the statue’s removal in October; he said it was to allow the renovation of the capitol’s dilapidated front steps, and that moving the statue back would be much too expensive.
Not everyone believes him. Michael Hill, who heads the League of the South, a secessionist organisation, condemned Mr Deal for “caving in to political correctness”. Tommy Benton, also a state representative, introduced a bill that strongly hinders government officials from moving or hiding any historical monument or statue. He worries that “if you start taking down every monument because you find one or two things you don’t particularly like about that person, there won’t be any monuments left.” But Tyrone Brooks, the president of the Georgia Association of Black Elected Officials and a 17-term member of the Georgia House of Representatives, praised Mr Deal for deciding to “move some of these old racist artefacts” from “the people’s house”.
Similar battles over symbols have occurred across the South. They can be costly: many believe that Georgia’s last Democratic governor, Roy Barnes, lost his bid for re-election in 2002 largely because he championed the removal of the Confederate battle flag from the state flag.
Bill Haslam, Tennessee’s governor, signed into law a measure similar to the one Mr Benton proposed earlier this year, except that it also forbids the renaming of parks named after any “historical military figure”. The bill was introduced as the city of Memphis, which has a black majority, was debating renaming three city parks: Confederate Park; Jefferson Davis Park, named after the president of the Confederacy; and Nathan Bedford Forrest Park, named after a Confederate general and brilliant military strategist who made his fortune in slaves. Forrest was accused of massacring black Union troops after they had surrendered, and later was an early member of the Ku Klux Klan. Memphis got its changes in under the wire; today the parks are called Memphis Park, Mississippi River Park and Health Sciences Park.
In Selma, Alabama a bust of Forrest was stolen in 2012; it has never been recovered. Schools named after Forrest used to dot the South; today few remain, and one (in Jacksonville, Florida) is in the process of changing its name. In Tulsa, Oklahoma, Brady Street commemorates Wyatt Tate Brady, one of Tulsa’s founders and a Klansman; earlier this year Tulsa’s city council voted to keep the street’s name but changed its namesake to Mathew Brady, a renowned civil-war photographer.
Some, such as Mr Hill, see in these changes “a campaign against southerners, a campaign against whites…[and] an attempt to culturally cleanse the South of any old, white, conservative, Confederate influence.” Such concern seems twinned with deeper anxiety over changes coming to the region, which has long been rural and relatively homogeneous. Of the ten American states whose Hispanic population grew fastest between 2000 and 2011, eight are in the south—nine if you include Maryland. Among the top ten states with the fastest-growing foreign-born population between 2000 and 2011, six are southern, with Tennessee leading the country. Mr Hill’s group has staged street demonstrations against what they call “southern demographic displacement” (and others call “immigration”) around the region.
To others these changes are long overdue. Lee Harris, a Memphis city councilman who supported changing the parks’ names, distinguishes recognising Confederate history from celebrating it. He notes that the parks were named decades after the American civil war—Jefferson Davis Park did not get its statue of the former president until 1964.
Similarly, Georgia’s flag incorporated the Confederate battle flag in 1956—the same decade in which Jacksonville named a high school after Forrest and Montgomery, Alabama added the phrase “Cradle of the Confederacy” to its city seal. That also happened to be the decade in which the Supreme Court ordered schools to be desegregated, Rosa Parks refused to stand in the bus, and Jim Crow laws (the civil war’s long tail) came under sustained and ultimately fatal attack—suggesting that these symbols were less about honouring the Confederate dead than about insulting the advancing forces of racial equality.
Those symbols remained peaceably in place as long as black southerners lacked political power. Once removed, however brutal the fight, life seems to proceed as before. Despite the promises of Sonny Perdue, Mr Barnes’s successor as governor, Georgia's state flag remains free of the popular Confederate symbol. And notwithstanding a lawsuit from the Sons of Confederate Veterans, Mr Harris says most Memphians simply use the parks as they did before, indifferent to the change of name. He adds that such symbols “celebrate a part of our history that just a small minority think is honourable. That small minority is not going to be able to win at the end of the day.”
Copyright © The Economist Newspaper Limited 2013.
On The web: http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21591208-battle-over-bronze-and-over-memory-not-even-past
See related pages and categories
Stolen cross recovered after theft from Union Co. cemetery
Posted: Dec 05, 2013
By Derek Dellinger
UNION, SC (FOX Carolina) -
The Union County Sheriff said that one cross monument has been recovered after several of them were stolen from a Union County cemetery.
Sheriff David Taylor said the cross was recovered from an area scrap dealer in Union County on Friday.
Taylor said a person working at the scrap yard saw FOX Carolina's coverage of the cemetery theft and notified the sheriff's office.
Union County deputies said sometime within the past month, a thief or thieves went into the Flat Rock Cemetery in Jonesville and stole two of the metal monuments near grave sites for Confederate veterans.
Rebecca Gault, who has family buried at the cemetery, said she believes the monuments were stolen sometime between monthly visits her family makes to the cemetery.
Deputies described the cross monuments as bronze, and roughly one to two feet high, and clearly signifying them as being in honor of a Confederate soldier.
Gault said two Confederate groups have come forward to replace the monuments, and to put them into cement to prevent any further theft.
Taylor said they are working with the scrap yard to find out who brought the cross there.
Anyone with any information on the case is asked to call the Union County Sheriff's Office.
Copyright 2013 FOX Carolina
On The Web: http://www.foxcarolina.com/story/24140371/confederate-cross-monuments-stolen-from-union-co-cemetery
See related pages and categories
Another Civil War fight
December 5, 2013
Rebel and Union descendants, supporters scrap over monument
BY MARGIE MENZEL
NEWS SERVICE OF FLORIDA
LAKE CITY – The state parks system is on the hot seat and a House leader is calling for action over a proposed monument to Union soldiers at the site of the biggest Civil War battle fought in Florida.
The bid to add a Union monument to the Olustee Battlefield Historic State Park near Lake City has drawn a furious response, with about 100 people attending a Monday night public hearing at the Columbia County School District Auditorium. Representatives of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, which oversees the state parks, moderated the hearing.
Passions ran high, at one point erupting in a spontaneous chorus of “Dixie” led by a Black man, H.K. Edgerton, who called Union soldiers “rapists” and wielded his large Confederate flag like a conductor’s baton as the audience sang.
‘Rest in peace’
Speakers blasted the proposal as disturbing hallowed ground in a rural community where most families stay for generations.
“Putting a Union monument at Olustee would be like placing a memorial to Jane Fonda at the entrance to the Vietnam memorial,” said Leon Duke.
“Men died there. Let their spirits rest in peace,” said Nansea Marham Miller, who is descended from a Confederate soldier who died at Olustee. “Let my grandfather rest in peace.”
The park is in the Osceola National Forest, 50 miles west of Jacksonville and 15 miles east of Lake City. It was the site of a four-hour battle on Feb. 20, 1864, in which Union forces were routed by Confederate troops.
First state park
In 1909, the Florida Legislature acquired three acres there to build a memorial. In 1912, Olustee became the first state park in Florida, and each February, a re-enactment of the battle is staged there. There was heavy debate during Monday’s meeting about whether the already-existing memorial is a Confederate memorial or is broader in scope.
Last February, DEP received a proposal from the Sons of Union Veterans of the Civil War to add a memorial specifically for Union officers and soldiers. The agency vetted the proposal and scheduled Monday’s public hearing to discuss possible locations at the park for the memorial.
No Union memorial
Mike Farrell, a member of the Sons of Union Veterans of the Civil War, is also descended from a soldier who died at Olustee. Farrell said he’s been a historical exhibitor at the park for years and proposed the new memorial as a result.
“I always have the visiting public approach me and ask me where the Union monument is on the battlefield, and I often tell them, ‘There isn’t any…’ What I’m talking about is a battlefield monument,” Farrell said.
Many speakers said the United Daughters of the Confederacy, which generated donations to match the state’s contribution, originally secured the land on which the current memorial is placed. The United Daughters of the Confederacy also administered the site until 1949, when the state took over.
Jamie Likins, president general of the United Daughters of the Confederacy and a fifth-generation Floridian, noted that the idea for the monument had come from a member of her group whose husband had fought at Olustee.
“The Olustee monument is to the Battle of Olustee and honors all, both, Confederate and Union soldiers,” Likins said.
House Judiciary Chairman Dennis Baxley, R-Ocala, said he was concerned that no elected body had reviewed the proposal.
“There is a sacred trust that’s being violated when you go in and change an historic site from the way it was commemorated by those who established (it),” Baxley said.
He suggested getting the matter “off the table” by means of a bill that he would sponsor.
But Rep. Elizabeth Porter, a Lake City Republican, said she had spoken with DEP Secretary Herschel Vinyard and that the public hearing –by getting local reaction onto the record – would help resolve the dispute.
She also disagreed with Baxley’s suggestion of a legislative remedy. “Does anyone here think the Legislature always has the right answer? I’m in it, and I don’t.”
DEP officials also came in for some criticism for having allowed the proposal to come as a surprise to the locals, but Porter said they were just doing their jobs.
David McAllister of Tampa, however, wasn’t reassured. He said his great-grandfather had donated four acres in Wakulla County to commemorate the Battle of Natural Bridge, and he was worried that that site would also be tampered with.
“Is Natural Bridge next?” he demanded.
Other suggestions included incorporating the Sons of Union Veterans of the Civil War as donors and collaborators in a battlefield museum, with an exhibit of their own.
On The Web: http://flcourier.com/2013/12/05/another-civil-war-fight/
See related pages and categories
Teen Won’t Stop Wearing Confederate Flag Belt Buckle to School, Despite Suspension
By Michael Allen
Wed, December 04, 2013
Cody Long has been warned by Mason High School to stop wearing a Confederate flag belt buckle to school.
The teen started wearing the controversial belt buckle to the Mason, Ohio school after the friend, who gave it to him, died (video below).
“I don’t like to pick fights that much,” Long told Fox 19. “I am not one to start them, but I am one to finish it.”
Mason High School officials suspended Long over getting into a fight over the belt buckle, but his mother, Tammy Long, defended her son, “Just because you are offended by something, doesn’t meant you have to stop someone else from using it.”
“He won’t be ‘him’ if someone continues to tell us how to be and how to dress and how to act,” she added.
Mason High School officials said in a statement: We are committed to making sure that each one of our students feels safe and eager to come to school. For that reason, we have a code that outlines the way that students and staff should dress so that distractions are minimized and we have a positive learning environment.”
WEBN, in Cincinnati, asked on its Facebook page if the teen should be allowed to wear the belt buckle and most commenters were in support:
Copyright 2008-2013, OpposingViews.com
On The Web: http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/education/teen-won-t-stop-wearing-confederate-flag-belt-buckle-school-despite-suspension#
See related pages and categories
Marshall receives Confederate collection
Dec 01, 2013
HUNTINGTON, W.Va. (AP) - A collection of Confederate items has been donated to Marshall University's Rosanna Blake Collection.
The collection given by Dr. John O'Brien and his wife includes an engraved bronze shield and an 1867 letter from Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee to the widow of one of his generals.
Blake collection curator Jack Dickinson says in a news release that the shield is the most prominent item in the collection. It was made by engraver and illustrator Adalbert J. Volck and features vignettes of Civil War scenes. The engraving says "To the Brave Women of the South."
Dicksinon says Volck made only two similar shields.
The O'Briens also donated 200 books. They previously had donated more than 100 volumes and other historical items.
Copyright 2013 The Associated Press
On The Web: http://www.wowktv.com/story/24106147/marshall-receives-confederate-collection
See related pages and categories
Monday, December 2, 2013
Ed Sebesta is all atwitter about a new book entitled Loathing Lincoln: An American Tradition from the Civil War to the Present. It's his latest secret weapon that will enable him to finally demolish those eeeevil "neo-Confederates." Ed immodestly lets it slip that the author sought him out for inspiration and advice, giving Ed the opportunity to strike poses as the godfather of the anti-neo-Confederate liberation movement, or whatever he calls it.
Brace yourselves before you read Ed's prediction about the effect this book will have on the vast neo-Confederate conspiracy he has bravely struggled against for decades:
What I think is going to be interesting is when the public realizes that there is this modern movement that hates Lincoln. Lincoln is the personification of the modern democratic egalitarian America. This is why he is hated so much by neo-Confederates who dream of a hierarchical society. The attacks on Lincoln are attacks on modern democratic egalitarian America.
Say what? Maybe the DC Empire is egalitarian on Planet Sebesta, but here on Earth, it's a snakepit of plutocratic exploitation, with the upper class playing the system to enrich itself at the expense of the middle class. This is a trend that pundits from both left and right have observed and decried for some time. For example, here's the Mercury News:
The very wealthiest Americans earned more than 19 percent of the country's household income last year -- their biggest share since 1928, the year before the stock market crash. And the top 10 percent captured a record 48.2 percent of total earnings last year.
U.S. income inequality has been growing for almost three decades. And it grew again last year, according to an analysis of Internal Revenue Service figures dating to 1913 by economists at the University of California, Berkeley, the Paris School of Economics and Oxford University.
What makes Sebesta's assertion so bizarre is that the very policies he and other leftists (and their billionaire allies) have supported are what's undermining the middle class. Their primary weapon is mass immigration, which has driven down wages by flooding the market with cheap, exploitable labor.
Obsession does funny things to one's thinking, doesn't it?
On The Web: http://www.lsrebellion.blogspot.com/2013/12/loathing-lincoln.html
See related pages and categories
City council approves settlement
Tuesday, November 26, 2013
In a 5-3 vote, the Selma City Council voted to approve a settlement in a lawsuit over a monument to Confederate general and former Klu Klux Klan leader Nathan Bedford Forrest, effectively ending the suit.
The settlement terms include giving a deed to the one-acre tract of land containing the monument in Old Live Oak Cemetery to Chapter 53 of the United Daughters of Confederacy. Other terms include allowing KTK Mining to replace the bronze bust of Forrest, but not allowing the original plans to construct a taller structure; installing cameras and lighting for security; making the circle handicap accessible; placing a cannon on a pedestal previously intended to raise the monument’s height and paying a total of $100,000 to KTK Mining for a violation of the company’s due process rights.
The city’s liability insurance will pay $50,000 of the damages. The other $50,000 will be taken from a fund set up to receive a half-cent sales tax, passed earlier this year. The fund currently contains $74,686.
Before voting in favor of the settlement, council president Corey Bowie said it was time for the city to move forward and focus on more important issues plaguing Selma.
“We have to look at the bigger picture,” Bowie said. “We are going to have to embrace both the civil war and the civil rights movement as part of our city’s history. Once we can appreciate both ends then we can move past this.”
Ward 1 councilman Cecil Williamson, Ward 2 councilwoman Susan Keith, Ward 3 councilman Greg Bjelke and Ward 6 councilman B.L. Tucker also voted in favor of a settlement. Ward 4 councilwoman Angela Benjamin, Ward 5 councilman Sam Randolph and Ward 8 councilman Michael Johnson voted against the settlement. Ward 7 councilwoman Bennie Ruth Crenshaw was absent.
Randolph said he felt the city was giving up too much in the settlement.
“We are giving them a deed to the land and $50,000 and I just think that is too much,” he said.
With the settlement approved, city attorney Jimmy Nunn said the lawsuit is effectively over.
Had the settlement not been approved, Nunn said the city faced much larger consequences, including paying nearly $300,000 in attorney’s fees.
The lawsuit began when the city suspended KTK mining’s construction permit on Sept. 25, 2012 after questions were raised about who owned Confederate Circle.
The monument was originally unveiled in 2000 at the Vaughan-Smitherman Museum. It was moved to the cemetery after the monument was vandalized.
In March 2012, the monument’s bronze bust was stolen, leading to the group Friends of Forrest developing plans for relocation. Protests began again around the monument months after construction began.
Shortly after the protests began city council members suspended the permit.
© 2013, The Selma Times-Journal
On The Web: http://www.selmatimesjournal.com/2013/11/26/selma-city-council-approves-settlement/
See related pages and categories
Selma activist Faya Rose Toure arrested after speaking out against city land donation for Nathan Bedford Forrest monument
by Mike Cason
November 27, 2013
MONTGOMERY, Alabama --- Longtime political activist Faya Rose Toure was jailed Tuesday night after speaking out against the city of Selma donating land for a monument to Nathan Bedford Forrest, according to Toure’s husband, state Sen. Hank Sanders.
Calls to the Selma Police Department and mayor's office were not returned Wednesday afternoon.
The dispute over a monument to Forrest is a long-running one in Selma, a city steeped in history of the Civil War and the civil rights movement.
Forrest was a confederate general who fought in the Battle of Selma and was the first grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, according to the Encyclopedia Brittanica.
Sanders said Toure spent Tuesday night in the Dallas County Jail and was released today after the charge of disorderly conduct was dropped.
Sanders said Selma Mayor George Evans said he wanted her removed from the city council meeting Tuesday night but had not intended for her to be charged.
The senator said Toure, also known as Rose Sanders, was arrested by Selma police and later transferred to the county jail. Before the charge was dropped and she was released, Toure had refused to pay the $1,000 bond.
“I will stay in jail as long as it takes,” Toure said in a news release from Saving Ourselves: Movement of Justice and Democracy, a coalition of civil rights groups that Toure is active in.
Sanders said there is already a small monument to Forrest on city owned property in Old Live Oak Cemetery.
Plans called for a larger monument at the cemetery, Sanders said. Sanders said for the monument to be on city property was an endorsement of what Forrest stood for.
“That’s just unacceptable for someone who built the KKK into a power and was the first grand dragon,” Sanders said. “They hung and killed black folks for a century and a half.”
“If they’re going to have a statue of him, they ought to buy land other than city owned land,” Sanders said.
According to the Selma Times-Journal, the city council on Tuesday night approved a settlement of a lawsuit involving the monument. The settlement called for, among other things, giving a deed to the one-acre site at the cemetery with the Forrest monument to Chapter 53 of the United Daughters of the Confederacy but not allowing original plans to build a taller structure.
The bronze bust of Forrest was stolen from its granite base last year.
Forrest led Confederate forces in an unsuccessful defense of Selma near the end of the Civil War. Selma was a key manufacturing site for cannons and other materials for Confederate Army, according to the Encyclopedia of Alabama.
© 2013 Alabama Media Group
On The Web: http://blog.al.com/wire/2013/11/selma_activist_faya_rose_toure.html
See related pages and categories
Wednesday, November 27, 2013
Things Are Looking Up In Selma, Alabama
by Al Benson Jr.
Back in September of 2012 I wrote two or three articles about a situation in Selma, Alabama where black domestic terrorists were trying to prevent a bust of Nathan Bedford Forrest from being put up in Live Oak Cemetery in an area called Confederate Circle. There was a big fuss over who owned the land in Confederate Circle. The United Daughters of the Confederacy noted the land had been deeded to them back in the 1880s, although there seemed to be a problem locating a copy of the deed. The local black civil rights terrorists refused to believe this and so trespassed on what would later, by court order, be deemed as the property of the UDC and they just flat out stopped the construction work, threatening to call in the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, who would, naturally, conduct a big march and demonstration which would be geared to stop any future work on the Forrest monument--with the "news" media naturally playing right along with them as they usually do.
The local UDC folks, no doubt having been labeled with the favorite Trotskyite term "racist" were all supposed to silently submit to the racial blackmail and retreat in silence.
It didn't quite work that way. The company that was doing the work on the monument, KTK Mining and the UDC took it to court and sued the City of Selma for refusing to protect their rights. Even though it's been well over a year now (so much for speedy trials) the City of Selma must, somewhere along the line, have realized that if it went to trial they would not win, and so they accepted a settlement put forth by KTK Mining for $100,000.
According to http://www.selmatimesjournal.com for November 26, 2013 we are told: "In a 5-3 vote, the Selma City Council voted to approve a settlement in a lawsuit over a monument to Confederate general and former Ku Klux Klan leader Nathan Bedford Forrect, effectively ending the suit.The settlement terms include giving a deed to the one-acre tract of land containing the monument in Old Live Oak Cemetery to Chapter 53 of the United Daughters of the Confederacy." The council president voted in favor of this, along with four other members and said it was time for the city to move forward and focus on more important issues.
However, that decision was not enough for the local civil rights terrorists, one of which, Rose Sanders, also known as Faya Rose Toure, (interesting how these black radicals, like Obama, always seem to have more than one name) managed to get herself arrested for disorderly conduct at the city council meeting. But then, this is so typical of leftist radicals. If they can't get their way they attempt to disrupt everything so that nothing can be accomplished unless everyone is willing to give in to their radical agenda. This time it didn't work. That must have been a real blow to the fragile ego of Ms. Sanders/Toure. Shouting everyone down has always worked before--this time it didn't. How sad--for her, not for the rest of the folks there.
Even though KTK Mining has the right to go on with finishing construction of the Forrest Monument, I expect there will be all manner of nit-picky things the domestic terrorists will come up with to hamper the work and if nothing else works they will resort to outright vandalism. It wouldn't be the first time.
But, for now, things are looking up in Selma. The defenders of the Confederacy finally won one, which is welcome news, because, lets face it folks, between the government, the "news" media and the dedicated leftists of various hues, we don't win too many. Thank the Lord for this victory--and strive to remain vigilant because the battle is probably not over yet.
On The Web: http://shnv.blogspot.com/2013/11/things-are-looking-up-in-selma-alabama.html
See related pages and categories
Nov 21, 2013
Arts groups, Sons of Confederate Vets wrangle over future of Jacksonville armory
Correspondent- Jacksonville Business Journal
A coalition of four Jacksonville art-based nonprofits want to turn The Armory Building at the northeast corner of State and Market Streets into a central arts hub for the city.
But they're not the only ones with plans for the building. The Sons of the Confederate Veterans, Kirby-Smith Camp 1209 — an organization of direct descendants of Confederate soldiers — wants to lease the empty historic building from the city for meetings, events and history exhibits.
City Council member Kimberly Daniels has introduced a bill to approve a license agreement between the Sons of the Confederate Veterans and the city. She plans to discuss it with Council President Bill Gulliford at 2:30 p.m. Tuesday.
The bill would authorize the Sons group to restore and manage the building for ten years, with two five-year renewal options, for a license fee of $1 a year. The group would agree to make immediate, necessary repairs, restore and maintain the facility, and mow and insure the property.
Art hub supporters plan to attend that meeting and are urging supporters to join them.
Daniels' aide said Wednesday that the councilwoman would be available to talk Thursday. However, on Thursday morning, the aide said she would have no comment.
Representatives from the Sons of Confederate Veterans could not be reached for comment.
Nearby residents have made their voices heard about the fate of the armory before: A year ago, when the city discussed turning the 88,000-square-foot historic landmark into a homeless center, resident outcry led to the idea being jettisoned.
Now, they are throwing their support behind the ARTery idea, said Springfield Preservation and Restoration President Bill Hoff. "The residents and business owners of Springfield are going to let the city council know this is an idea the community will be very enthusiastic about," he said.
The coalition consisting of The Jacksonville Centre of the Arts, The Art League of Jacksonville, The Art Center Cooperative, and The Performers Academy want to turn the property into a cultural destination featuring visual and performing arts, galleries, studio space for artists, and community educational opportunities.
Investing in the arts also "makes for a more attractive metropolitan area for tourists," said Kathryn McAvoy, executive director of The Performers Academy. "It would attract tourists and businesses to move to and invest in the city. It would be a good investment."
The arts groups all have space elsewhere in the city, and are looking at the armory because they all need additional space. The building has a stage that could be renovated and wooden floors that would be good for dancers, McAvoy said. "There's tons of room," she said.
The armory was built in 1915 to house the National Guard of Florida. The Gothic-Revival style building has a drill hall and auditorium and used to be a major community center and the city's principal public facility for social events, including a speech by First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt.
The building, which has a basement and first and second floors, needs extensive renovations, which the city has estimated would cost about $9 million, McAvoy said. The basement floods, but McAvoy said they are not aware of serious mold problems.
The coalition believes the building could be renovated for less than the city estimates, and has a plan to do it in three phases while raising funds.
© 2013 American City Business Journals
On The Web: http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2013/11/21/arts-groups-sons-of-confederate-vets.html?page=all
See related pages and categories
Secret Police and Military Prisons—Edwin Stanton Sets the Precedent
Posted on November 23, 2013
By Al Benson Jr.
About five years ago now there was a big flap over Abu Ghraib, an Iraqi prison where American soldiers practiced various forms of torture, both emotional and physical, on various Iraqi prisoners. It was all a part of George Bush’s “experiment” in “democracy” in Iraq. Some people were shocked when they read about this. They wondered how Americans could do such things—after all, aren’t we the moral leadership of the world? Sorry to say we are not. With what we have elected to the presidency for the last four or five terms, how can we claim any kind of moral leadership anywhere? You’d be surprised, but I have had Christians to defend torturing terrorists to me. They seem to feel that because they are terrorists, or have been accused of being terrorists, that to torture them is okay. My response to this is that, as Christians, if we engage in this sort of thing then we are no better than they are. I have a hard time believing that the Lord Jesus would endorse torture.
But is the concept of torture, secret police and military prisons something new in our day and age in America? Again, sorry to say it isn’t. Americans have been partaking of torture and the secret police syndrome, in one form or another at least since the advent of the Lincoln administration. Mr. Lincoln and his associated seem to have had a paranoid fear of disloyalty to the federal government (most dictators have this) to the point where thousands upon thousands of Northern civilians were arrested and hauled off to prisons on the basis of nothing more than vague suspicion or some grumpy neighbor’s hearsay accusation.
In his book In The Shadow Of Lincoln’s Death Otto Eisenschiml noted: “In his vast arsenal of power Stanton had one weapon which was formidable beyond any other: the military prisons. Within their silent walls he could bury his enemies with no fear of consequences.” Given today’s political climate, does that sound familiar? I’m sure those FEMA camps are not being built for foreign dignitaries.
After the writ of habeas corpus had been suspended, which was a writ guaranteeing a judicial hearing to anyone arrested, according to Eisenschiml: “…those whom the military chose to arrest could be held without recourse to the courts and even without charges being preferred against them.”
Military prisoners were almost never allowed to see a lawyer to seek legal counsel. Their whereabouts was usually not even known to their families or friends and many were informed that should they attempt to seek legal counsel, such an action would go against them. In other words, defending yourself legally was out of the question. Such efforts would, according to Eisenschiml, result in “quick reprisals.” Now many will, no doubt, be tempted to think that Edwin Stanton did all this on his own—a rogue government employee. However, Eisenschiml has observed that “On September 24, 1862, Lincoln issued a proclamation giving Stanton’s promiscuous incarcerations his full backing.” So Lincoln didn’t even try, much like the head of our current Marxist regime does, to claim he had no knowledge of what was going on. That seems to be the increasing cop-out with our current Chief Commissar—all these rogue employees running around doing their thing and he knows nothing about any of it. With as little knowledge about the happenings in his administration as he seems to have you almost have to wonder why he should be president.
And Stanton, in order to solidify his control, organized a Secret Police system. Yes, folks, you read that right—secret police during the Lincoln administration. While it started out small, it grew rather quickly, as do all totalitarian schemes and eventually it morphed into something called the “National Detectives” which came under the control of one Colonel Lafayette C. Baker, another rather unsavory character. This force eventually grew to number about 2,000, and when Baker was appointed Provost Marshal of the War Department, this gave him almost unlimited and uncontrolled power. “Secret Police” in America in the 1860s! When was the last time you read about this in your “history” books? I read lots of history in my younger years and I never came across this. It almost sounds like a scenario out of some old Cold War movie about the Soviet Union. Unfortunately it isn’t. It was real and it happened right here in the United States of Amerika! And it set a precedent for what our present regime is doing in regard to our civil liberties, or rather the lack of them. If you are wondering why your “history” books never bother to mention any of this, you should (wonder). And if this slight omission leads you to do a little research to find out what other “slight omissions” have occurred in our “history’ books, so much the better.
Forty-eighter socialist Carl Schurz, one of the leading lights dealt with in our book Lincoln’s Marxists (Pelican Publishing, Gretna, Louisiana) even felt called upon to apologize for the Lincoln administration’s usurpations against U.S. citizens’ God-given rights when he wrote: “The government was under the stress of circumstances, doing things highly obnoxious to the fundamental principles of constitutional liberty. It incarcerated without warrant or due process of law, men suspected of aiding the rebellion…On the plea of urgent necessity…it adopted methods…familiar to despotic rule…” Leave it to a socialist to apologize for Lincoln’s high-handed treatment of American citizens. The leftists will always apologize for government usurpations, claiming that, due to the current situation they are “necessary.” Bovine fertilizer!
Probably one of the most infamous prisons in the federal system at that time was Old Capital prison in Washington. In 1869 a Washington resident wrote that: “Stanton was an able and true man, and a good Secretary, but he was a despot also, and too hasty to arrest men upon every slight proof; …Ex-Chief Detective Baker sent, perhaps, the majority of prisoners to this institution. He had reduced blackmailing and intimidation to a science, and those who would not comply with his unlawful demands were moderately sure of a residence in this place. These arbitrary acts are a blight upon the country…” A condemnation of the activities of Baker and Stanton, even if a moderate one.
As we go along and learn more it becomes more and more clear that the true Yankee/Marxist mindset is one with a totalitarian, collectivist worldview, where the central government is supreme in all things and all citizens are merely “cogs in the wheel” of the Yankee/Marxist empire—to be used until they wear out, and then tossed away and replaced with more government-educated cogs. Needless to say, when Northerners, mostly Democrats, protested Stanton’s dictatorial actions, Mr. Lincoln, also with a dictatorial mindset, took pains to defend those actions.
To be continued.
On The Web: http://revisedhistory.wordpress.com/2013/11/23/secret-police-and-military-prisons-edwin-stanton-sets-the-precedent/
See related pages and categories
Posted November 24, 2013
Civil war soldier receives posthumous Medal of Honor
James Breathed, a doctor who served as a soldier in the Confederate Army during the Civil War, has been posthumously awarded the Confederate Medal of Honor by the Sons of Confederate Veterans. Only 48 other Confederate soldiers have won the award.
“Breathed was a daring soldier and admired leader who never received recognition until now,” says David P. Bridges, author of two books about Breathed, most recently a historical novel titled “The Broken Circle.” The book traces Breathed’s battles during the war years and describes the heroics that earned him the medal.
On Oct. 12, a military parade honoring Breathed was held in Hancock, Md. The parade ended at Breathed’s grave for a ceremony presenting the medal. It is now on permanent display in The Museum of the Confederacy, 1201 East Clay St. in Richmond, Va.
In “The Broken Circle,” historian and professor Bridges relates how Breathed had to choose between the Union and the Confederacy. He fought valiantly for the South at great personal sacrifice and spent the rest of his short life as a doctor who cared for all people, regardless of which side they supported.
The book is available online and wherever books are sold.
David P. Bridges is a historian and works as an adjunct professor of writing at the University of Richmond, Va., and has served 25 years as a Presbyterian minister.
Bridges’ area of expertise is 1850-1950 American history. His first non-fictional historical book, “The Best Coal Company in All Chicago,” is about the Best family — coal industrialists and philanthropists who historically impacted Chicago’s history. His second book, “The Bridges of Washington County,” chronicles the Bridges family in Western Maryland. It shows how industry, politics and conservation worked together to preserve the Woodmont Rod and Gun Club, Hancock, Md. Bridges’ third book, “Fighting with Jeb Stuart: Major James Breathed and the Confederate Horse Artillery,” chronicles the life and Civil War trials and tribulations of Breathed, Stuart Horse Artillery, and the Confederate States of America. “The Broken Circle” is his fourth book. He is presently working on a new novel titled “The Thomas Brothers of Burke’s Garden Virginia.”
He resides in Richmond, Va., with his faithful birddogs Angel, Bella and Rosey.
Copyright © Stephens Media LLC 2013.
On The Web: http://columbiadailyherald.com/lifestyles/features/civil-war-soldier-receives-posthumous-medal-honor
See related pages and categories
Court of Appeals rules over Reidsville Confederate monument
By McClatchy News Service
Published: Monday, November 25, 2013
The N.C. Court of Appeals ruled against the Reidsville Confederate Monument in a decision made on Tuesday, Nov. 19.
The court decided the Historical Preservation Action Committee and the N.C. chapter of the Sons of the Confederate Veterans were not harmed by the removal of Reidsville’s monument.
“While we are disappointed with the court’s decision, we respect the opinion of the court,” HPAC wrote in a press release.
The two organization’s joint attorney brought forward four components to his appeal. He said the petitioners had standing over the matter, it impacted his clients economically, getting rid of public property hurt them and they felt harm from the removal due to the aesthetic enjoyment they got from it.
The three-person panel of judges ruled against all four of these points and said the petitions didn’t have a standing in this case.
“Where plaintiffs did not allege a sufficient injury that was fairly traceable to defendants, plaintiffs were not ‘persons aggrieved’ as defined under the Administration Procedure Act and did not have standing to seek judicial review under N.C. Gen. Stat. 150B-43,” the court document said.
The judges also denied the plaintiffs attorneys’ fees for the same reason.
HPAC and SCV came to the courts appealing a decision made by Judge Mark E. Klass in Rockingham County Superior Court in a case listing the N.C. Department of Culture Resources and the N.C. Department of Transportation as the defendants.
“We hold that plaintiffs have not demonstrated that their personal, property, employment or other legal rights have been injured by the decision of NCDOT or NCDCR,” the court documents said.
HPAC doesn’t regret the lawsuits.
“We put forth our best efforts to preserve the historical resources of the City of Reidsville and the State of North Carolina,” HPAC’s press release said. “While we are disappointed in the outcome, we do not regret doing everything we can to preserve our heritage and yours.”
As for city officials, Reidsville City Manager Michael Pearce felt the ruling, along with the decisions of an insurance company, NCDOT, NCDCR and the superior court validated the city council’s actions in handling the matter.
“Our continuing hope is that we can move beyond this issue and focus on the problems that need our communities’ attention such as education, growing our economy, providing for a second infrastructure and insuring that our citizens enjoy a safe place to live and an excellent quality of life,” Pearce said.
Pearce may not get his wish. On the “Save the Reidsville Confederate Monument” Facebook page, it’s been said HPAC isn’t done yet.
The Reidsville Confederate Monument issue became controversial in May 2011 after a Greensboro man, Mark Anthony Vincent, drove his work van into the monument early in the morning. The impact damaged the base of the monument and knocked off the confederate soldier on top, shattering it into pieces.
The monument sat at the intersection of S. Scales and W. Morehead streets. While the city has a camera in operation at that intersection city officials said a thunderstorm caused it not to work at the time of the accident.
In June 2011, the city conducted a public hearing asking residents to offer up their opinions on what to do with the monument. Later, city officials announced the monument didn’t actually belong to Reidsville but to the North Carolina chapter of the United Daughters of the Confederacy.
HPAC formed in Aug. 2011 with the goal of getting the monument placed back in the original intersection.
Ultimately, the UDC decided to place it at Greenview Cemetery, the city-owned cemetery.
Copyright © 2013 Halifax Media Group
On The Web: http://www.thetimesnews.com/news/region-state/court-of-appeals-rules-over-reidsville-confederate-monument-1.239932?page=0
See related pages and categories
Arizona high school student suspended after fight over Confederate flag
Published November 24, 2013
An Arizona teenager is protesting his school's decision to punish him after getting into a fight with another student over a Confederate flag displayed on his truck.
Jacob Green, a junior at Millennium High School in Goodyear, tells MyFoxPhoenix he was suspended for five days after defending himself against a classmate who confronted him about the flag, which has flown his truck for six months.
"I've done nothing wrong," Green told the station. "I've flown a flag on my truck. Somebody fought me because of it. I didn't fight him."
In an email to parents following the incident, school officials explained that both students were suspended and that Jason was prohibited from bringing the flag on campus.
"Open display -- bringing it in -- it has been proven to be patently offensive to certain groups and the courts recognize that," Agua Fria Unified School District Superintendent Dennis Runyan told MyFoxPhoenix.com.
Jacob said he has researched the flag's history and didn't find it offensive. His parents believe the student who attacked their son committed a hate crime and are considering filing a police report.
"The flag means basically more independence, less government. It didn't mean racism, it didn't mean slavery, it didn't mean any of that," Jason said. "It basically meant what they were fighting for was their right to be independent and not have the government control them."
©2013 FOX News Network, LLC
On The Web: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/11/24/arizona-high-school-student-suspended-after-fight-over-confederate-flag/
See related pages and categories
Arizona Educational System, Media Discriminate against Southern Heritage
November 21, 2013
Raw Story.Com is reporting about an Arizona teen that was physically attacked for flying the Confederate flag on his truck. Following the attack the school suspended teen Jacob Green and his attacker for five days. The story which contains video from Fox-10 in Phoenix , Az comes right out of the gate with its bias, the anchor woman states at the beginning of the story that the Confederate flag is a “Symbol of hate”. Later correspondent Nicole Garcia begins her coverage by stating ” The Confederate flag has been a constant symbol of controversy in this country since the Civil War and obviously to this day. It still incites alot of emotion, historically , the flag has symbolized a time of oppression and racism”
As I stated, right out of the gate it’s all hate, oppression and racism from Fox News 10 who says that you will only find this story on their station. Unfortunately you find this story in the news from stations across the country and usually they start off with the same anti-Southern bias before their “We report , you decide” policy kicks in.
Raw Story.Com reports:
An Arizona teenager says a classmate may have targeted him in a hate crime and his school has violated his free speech rights over his display of a Confederate flag.
Jacob Green, a junior at Millennium High School in Goodyear, Arizona, said he’d been driving a pickup for six months flying the Civil War flag.
The teen said it hadn’t been a problem until earlier this month, when another student confronted him, and the two wound up in a fight that led to five-day suspensions for each of them…
Green insisted he’s not a racist and researched the flag’s history and found nothing offensive.
“The flag means basically more independence, less government,” Green said. “It didn’t mean racism, it didn’t mean slavery — it didn’t mean any of that. It basically meant what they were fighting for was their right to be independent and not have the government control them.”
Young Jacob Green is correct. Recently the Constitution-News reported the discovery of an 1864 Richmond , Virginia newspaper that quoted Confederate President Jefferson Davis stating the war was not about slavery.
Mr. Green’s civil rights have been violated, he was physically attacked because of his heritage and the school punishes HIM for defending himself. None of the news outlets describe who or what race his attacker was but let us contemplate another scenario. What would have happened if Green attacked someone else? I have the feeling that Green would have already charged with a hate-crime. Clearly Southerners are the victim of discrimination and our civil rights are violated on a daily basis.
On The Web: http://mhconstitution.com/2013/11/21/arizona-educational-system-media-discriminate-against-southern-heritage/
See related pages and categories
The Battle Hymn Refuted
by David O. Jones
The “Battle Hymn of the Republic” occupies a prominent position not only within the program of nearly every nationalistic celebration, but also has become a part of many Christian services. Admittedly, the anthem sounds good, but it is far from being a “hymn” in the traditional sense of the word. Many Christians understand its stirring words to provide an image of a victorious Church, but that is just not so! The connotations of a spiritualized patriotism which have endeared it to many, result from a mistaken and cursory reading of the song.
By definition, a hymn is a song which incorporates theological truth into its text. Wonderful examples of Christian hymns are “A Mighty Fortress Is Our God,” “Great Is Thy Faithfulness” and “How Firm a Foundation.” But despite its author’s use of biblical phrasing, the “Battle Hymn of the Republic” is not about Christ “marching” against sin and the Church being “victorious” over evil. The theological truths which it expresses are anti-Christian and anti-biblical, thus it should never be sung by a Christian congregation.
The “Battle Hymn of the Republic” was written in the fall of 1861. While in Washington, D.C. with her husband, Mrs. Julia Ward Howe watched troops marching off to war singing “John Brown’s Body.”She determined to write a more inspiring war song to what was a good melody. First published in the Atlantic Monthly, she received five dollars for her literary effort.
Born into a prominent New York City family, Julia Ward was raised in a conservative, Christian home. As a young woman she rebelled against her parents’ strong Calvinism and ultimately married the Boston reformer, Dr. Samuel G. Howe. She adopted the tenants of Transcendentalism, then Unitarianism, and it was in that light that the “Battle Hymn” was written.
The Transcendentalists became the core of the radical abolitionist movement. Dr. Howe, as well as their Boston pastor, the Reverend Theodore Parker were two members of the “Secret Six” who financed and armed the anti-slavery terrorist John Brown. After his murderous rampage in Kansas and at Harper’s Ferry, Mrs. Howe lamented, “John Brown’s death will be holy and glorious. John Brown will glorify the gallows like Jesus glorified the cross.”
The “Battle Hymn of the Republic” can only be understood within the framework of the Transcendentalist-Unitarian creed. The first verse reads:
Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord.
He is trampling out the vintage where the grapes of wrath are stored;
He has loosed the fateful lightning of His terrible swift sword.
His truth is marching on.
Mrs. Howe applied the apocalyptic judgment of the Revelation (14:17-20 & 19:15) to the Confederate nation. She pictured the Union army not only as that instrument which would cause Southern blood to flow out upon the earth, but also the Union army as the very expression of His Word (sword) itself. The Transcendentalist-Unitarians believed that the evil in man could be rooted out by governmental action. The South was evil and was thus deserving of judgment of the most extreme nature—its own Armageddon.
The second verse follows the same theme by presenting the Union army as the abode of their vengeful God.
I have seen Him in the watch fires of a hundred circling camps;
They have builded Him an altar in the evening dews and damps;
I can read His righteous sentence by the dim and flaring lamps.
His day is marching on.
The third verse is so contrary of the Gospel of Jesus Christ that many hymnals leave it out altogether.
I have read the fiery gospel writ in burnished rows of steel.
As ye deal with My contempters, so with you My grace shall deal;
Let the hero born of woman crush the serpent with his heel.
Since God is marching on.
Mrs. Howe proclaimed a gospel of judgment pictured by rows of affixed bayonets. Taking God’s promise of deliverance from Genesis 3:15, she applied it not to Christ, but to the Union soldier who would receive God’s grace by killing Southerners. This was certainly a different gospel; the kind of which the Apostle Paul said, “But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed.” (Galatians 1:8)
Verse four returns to the prose of the Apocalypse with trumpet and judgment seat imagery:
He has sounded forth the trumpet that shall never sound retreat;
He is sifting out the hearts of men before His judgment seat.
O be swift, my soul, to answer Him! Be jubilant, my feet!
Our God is marching on.
The problem again is that civil warfare was the instrument being promoted for determining the hearts of men. A man’s positive response to the call for enlistment in the Union army was the action which would reveal their standing before God.
The fifth and final verse gives the ultimate expression of the warped and anti-biblical theology which possessed the radical abolitionists.
In the beauty of the lilies, Christ was born across the sea,
With a glory in His bosom that transfigures you and me.
As He died to make men holy, let us die to make men free,
While God is marching on.
To Julia Ward Howe the work of Christ was incomplete. It was up to men through civil government to bring about a utopian society. She was quoted in her biography, “Not until the Civil War did I officially join the Unitarian church and accept the fact the Christ was merely a great teacher with no higher claim to preeminence in wisdom, goodness, and power than any other man.” (emphasis mine)
The “Battle Hymn” theme has nothing to do with Christianity or God. It is a political-patriotic song about the destruction of the South, written in religious terminology. It is a clever product. Howe deliberately created the idea that the North was doing God’s work. It paints a picture of a vengeful God destroying His enemies—the South, and elevating the North’s cause to that of a “holy war.” In doing so, Howe portrayed the South and its people as evil and the enemy of God. Outrageous, but it worked.
As a Unitarian, Julia Ward Howe believed the Unitarian doctrine that man is characteristically good and he can redeem himself by his own merits without any help from a saviour. She rejected basic biblical truths such as a literal hell—“I threw away, once and forever, the thought of the terrible hell which appears to me impossible.”
Mrs. Howe also refuted the exclusive claim of Jesus, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.” (John 14:6) by saying, “Having rejected the exclusive doctrine that made Christianity and special forms of it the only way of spiritual redemption, I now accept the belief that not only Christians but all human beings, no matter what their religion, are capable of redemption. Christianity was but one of God’s plans for bringing all of humanity to a state of ultimate perfection.”
Our challenge is to bring a proper understanding of the nature of this battle anthem to the leadership of the Christian church. No Christian church would intentionally sing a song of praise to Satan’s doctrines, nor would any pastor or elder lead their flock into rebellion against true biblical doctrine. Yet by ignorance, is has been done on a regular basis in the American church. The “Battle Hymn of the Republic” is apostasy. It promotes hatred and vengeful destruction. It has no place in a worship service.
On The Web: http://www.freetennessee.org/custpage.cfm/frm/46357/sec_id/46357
See related pages and categories
Christmas parade controversy
Reported by: Leslie Coursey
BRUNSWICK, Ga. -- Every year on the streets of Brunswick, the Sons of Confederate Veterans march in the Christmas parade.
But Pastor Kenneth Adkins said it needs to stop.
"The city of Brunswick is 67 percent African-American," he said. "It just seems to be a little insensitive."
He's asking the community to reconsider the tradition.
"It is offensive," he said.
Jim Shillinglaw, a member of Sons of Confederate Veterans, said it shouldn't be.
"Well, it's part of American culture," he said. "It's part of my culture. It's part of what makes me an American."
Shillinglaw said what's offensive is people insinuating the organization is racist.
"It really hurts my feelings because we really do have many diversified backgrounds in the Sons of Confederate Veterans. We have black members," he said.
Adkins agrees the organization has a right to march. But he's asking city leaders if it's the best idea in a city that's predominately black.
He said he thinks "people need to be aware that sometimes there certain themes might offend certain people."
The Christmas parade in Brunswick is scheduled for Dec. 7.
Copyright 2013 Cox Media Group, Inc.
On The Web: http://www.actionnewsjax.com/content/topstories/story/Christmas-parade-controversy/Gba0Fl1CzU6OHVYcPHz4jg.cspx
See related pages and categories
Council adjourns without action on Lundy memorial flag issue
By BRIAN HUGHES/News Bulletin
Published: Thursday, November 14, 2013
CRESTVIEW — After an hour and a half of often impassioned addresses before the Crestview City Council, city leaders adjourned without discussion regarding the "Uncle Bill" Lundy memorial.
At issue was the Confederate battle flag flying above the memorial on city-owned land at the intersection of First Street and State Road 85.
Several Tallahassee-based Sons of Confederate Veterans representatives praised Lundy's service in the Confederacy, which some historians have questioned.
Bob Hurst, commander of the organization's Florida division, said the battle flag is an integral component of the memorial.
"It is not fitting and proper to honor Uncle Bill Lundy and not have the flag that he honored and revered," Hurst said.
"It is not a sign of evil," he said. "It is not a symbol of anything bad. It is a symbol of a group of people who fought for their honor and independence."
Speakers who oppose displaying the flag were exclusively from Crestview.
"I believe it is time for the Confederate flag to be lowered and stored away with other items of the time. A museum is a suitable place for it," Okaloosa NAACP President Raymond Nelson said, reading from a letter sent by former president Sabu Williams.
Nelson compared the Confederate battle flag's symbolism to the Nazi swastika and SS runes.
"These symbols have been associated with racial superiority and intimidation," Nelson said. "Allowing it to remain on the streets sends a clear message to the people of Crestview that the leaders of our city couldn't care less about their citizens."
Lundy's great-granddaughter, Cheryl Ferdon, countered their arguments, saying feelings about the flag are "just a matter of perspective."
"Unfortunately, a lot of bad groups have taken that flag and used it in a derogatory manner in the past," she said.
Bill Lee, who identified himself as a descendant of Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee, questioned whether the battle flag is the correct banner for the Lundy monument at all.
"The flag that flies over the Lundy memorial is the flag of Northern Virginia," he said. "My point is this, that the flag that flies over the memorial is not the flag of the Confederate States."
Community activist Mae Retha Coleman cited census data that suggest Lundy wasn't old enough to have served in the Civil War. She suggested removing the entire monument until the historic questions are resolved.
"I am still trying to figure out how a five-year-old boy can be in the service. I'd like to see us get this straight," Coleman said. "Was he really in the service? Until we find out, I want all of it moved, flag and all."
After the public comment period, Council President Robyn Helt called for fellow council members' action. When no discussion ensued, she gaveled the meeting closed.
Several residents were upset by the lack of action as Crestview policemen and county sheriff's deputies immediately escorted the council members out a side door.
"They allowed all those people to speak for nothing," former councilman Charles Baugh Jr. said. "They did a bad job tonight."
Copyright © 2013 Halifax Media Group
On The Web: http://www.crestviewbulletin.com/news/government/council-adjourns-without-action-on-lundy-memorial-flag-issue-1.235118?page=0
See related pages and categories
Monday, November 18, 2013
The Attacks Continue
By Bob Hurst
I believe that there has been more misinformation promulgated about the Confederacy than any other subject in this nation's history. Many of these untruths originated during the War of 1861-1865 and were used as propaganda by northern newspapers in an attempt to demonize the South and many individual Southern heroes.
Unfortunately, many of these untruths have survived right into the current period in which we find ourselves. Much of this is because of the fact that "the victor writes the history" and, unfortunately, the North emerged victorious in the great conflict.
While there are millions of us in the South (and even some in the North) who honor and revere our Southern history, heritage and culture, there are many detractors (often northern transplants, which I find ironically humorous) who just don't seem to ever tire in their attempts to denigrate our people, our speech, our religious ways, our attitudes toward life and, especially, our history.
These attacks on us have been occurring for decades but seem to be increasing in recent years as the "progressives" have come to the fore in the politics of this country. I have noticed what seems to be a sharp increase in the volume of negative actions taken toward our history and, especially, our Confederate history. The latest example occurred just last night (I am writing this on November 15) in Crestview, a nice Florida city in the western part of the Panhandle not far from Pensacola.
First, some background on the situation. In 1957 an elderly gentleman named William Lundy passed away (or "passed over the river" as good Confederates say). Mr. Lundy, affectionately known as "Uncle Bill”, was reportedly 109 years old and was acknowledged as the last Confederate veteran in Florida.
A few years later a civic club in Crestview was instrumental in the creation of a small park on Highway 85 at East 1st Avenue which was dedicated as "Confederate Park". It is a nice small park with two attractive decorative benches and a headstone-sized monument with a plaque acknowledging Uncle Bill Lundy as the last Florida Confederate veteran. In 1958 a Confederate Battle Flag atop an approximately 20-foot flagpole was added to the park.
The park and flag remained without controversy until 1996 when the NAACP, under an activist local president, began protesting the CBF. The NAACP was unsuccessful in its attempts to have the CBF removed just as the organization was unsuccessful in an attempt to have the CBF removed from the lawn of the Walton County Courthouse in nearby Defuniak Springs where it flies atop a tall pole near the oldest Confederate monument in the state.
Subsequent attempts in Crestview to have the flag removed have also been unsuccessful and this leads us to last night.
The NAACP has recently launched another effort to have the CBF removed from the park. The issue had become so heated that the City Council scheduled a special meeting to discuss only this single issue and to get input on the matter from the general public.
This resulted in the meeting last night and the crowd was large. The Sons of Confederate Veterans had about 15 people in attendance coming from as far as Pensacola to the west and Tallahassee to the east. There were also about 50 local citizens who were seated on our side of the room and about 40 individuals on the NAACP side. These figures are just my estimates and the crowd well could have been larger. The SCV and the NAACP were the only groups recognized by the council to offer statements. After the two groups had completed their presentations the floor was open for individuals to offer comments - and did they. It seemed that almost everyone in attendance had something to say about the situation.
I have to say that I was impressed with the council members and other city representatives present who sat for more than two hours listening to the many statements made by those wishing to speak. I was also a bit irritated by the pejorative nature and inaccurate content of many of the presentations from the NAACP group.
When the chairperson called an end to the discussion and asked the council members if there was a motion to remove the flag from Confederate Park, not a single council member responded - not even the black member of the council who will likely catch some flack from the people of the NAACP. So, the good guys won this round but I have no doubt that this same issue will again raise its ugly head some time in the future.
Also of interest is that this incident in Crestview comes on the heels of another attack by the NAACP on another iconic Southern/Confederate symbol. That event occurred over several weeks and involved an attempt by the NAACP to have the portrait of Robert E. Lee removed from the county commission chamber in the Lee County Courthouse in Ft. Myers, Florida. In case you don't know, Lee County is named for General Robert E. Lee and his portrait has hung in that location for 84 years. The SCV in that area of southwest Florida and many supporters were very active in defense of the portrait remaining as is and the Lee County Commission would have none of this nonsense about removing the portrait so the visage of this great man remains where it has been proudly displayed for more than eight decades.
By the way, during this month-long episode in Lee County, there was even a suggestion made by some on the other side to rename the county. If this is a game that everyone can play then I would suggest we change the name on the almost 1000 streets in this country that bear the moniker of a certain individual who was a proven plagiarizer, exposed womanizer and known Communist sympathizer. I won't even mention the name but I think you know to whom I am referring. (Hint: his FBI files are sealed by judicial order until 2027.)
Although the good guys were successful in Crestview and Ft. Myers, it doesn't always turn out that way. Just this past month the school board of Jacksonville/Duval voted to change the name of Nathan Bedford Forrest High School. While I hate to see the name of any Confederate hero removed from any public building, I have mixed emotions about this situation.
I have three art prints of General Forrest on walls of my house. My Confederate uniform is patterned after one he wore. I have at least four other Forrest art prints that are unframed and in a storage case because there is no more wall space available. As you might surmise, I truly admire the man. I'm not sure, though, if having his name attached to this high school in Jacksonville is truly honoring General Forrest. While years ago Forrest High was a fine school, in recent years it has become a typical urban school beset with all the problems that implies. In fact, in recent years the state has frequently rated Forrest HS as a D or F school. As I see it, this is not a proper school to bear such an exalted name. Just my opinion, you understand, and many of my SCV compatriots disagree with me.
These attacks on Southern icons have all occurred in Florida and just in the last few months. I haven't even touched on so many other similar situations in other states such as changing the historic names of parks, removing statues, changing the names of college buildings, and the list goes on. Political correctness really stinks!
I have found through my involvement in a number of challenges against our Confederate ancestry that the best way to refute the inaccurate rantings of the Southern-haters is with facts, so I would like to conclude this article with some facts that you, as a good Southerner, can use to rebut some of the attacks on our ancestors.
It always gets my dander up when some semi-educated type tries to characterize Confederates as "traitors". Traitors? Really? Then how could the following have happened?
--- At the beginning of the Spanish-American War, President William McKinley appointed four former Confederate generals and one former Confederate colonel to the rank of brigadier general in the U.S. Army. The generals were Fitzhugh Lee (R.E. Lee's nephew), Tom Rosser, Matthew C. Butler and Joe Wheeler. The colonel was William Oates. Lee had been governor of Virginia and Oates, governor of Alabama. It is hard to imagine that a U.S. president would appoint "traitors" to the rank of general in the U.S. Army.
--- It is also hard to imagine that the U.S. Military would sanction the naming of major U.S. military installations for "traitors" so how do the South-haters explain that the following major U.S. forts are named for Confederates?
Fort Hood (General John Bell Hood), Fort Polk (General Leonidas Polk), Fort Benning (General Henry Benning),
Fort Gordon (General John B. Gordon), Fort Bragg (General Braxton Bragg), Fort Lee (General Robert E. Lee),
Fort A.P. Hill (General A.P. Hill), Fort Rucker (Colonel Edmund Rucker).
--- If all Confederates were traitors then why did President Dwight Eisenhower keep a portrait of General Robert E. Lee in his office (that would be the "Oval Office") during his presidency?
--- If all Confederates were traitors then why did the U.S. Congress in 1958 enact P.L. 85-425 which recognizes Confederate veterans as American veterans entitled to all rights and privileges thereof.
Well, there is so much more but there is no more space. I hope this bit of information helps you to defend our Confederate ancestors against the nonsensical charge that they were traitors. I hope many of you will do some research into other issues concerning our Confederate ancestors. Oh, by the way, from a Southern viewpoint, the main reason the South fought was NOT to protect slavery. That was just another of the many northern prevarications about the South.
Just Remember, the South was Right! (Thank you, Donnie and Ron)
On The Web: http://shnv.blogspot.com/2013/11/the-attacks-continue.html
See related pages and categories
Gibbes exhibit offers real picture of war
Posted: Sunday, November 10, 2013
It’s easy to romanticize the Civil War, especially around here.
Some people consider Our Late Unpleasantness a gallant time, tragic to be sure, but an era when brother fought against brother for lofty notions about honor and home.
There were, of course, other, nefarious reasons behind the war — but that isn’t why the men in the field were fighting. The politics of the day mattered little to them; they simply answered the call of their country.
And they paid for it dearly.
If you visit the Gibbes Museum of Art’s “Photography and the American Civil War” exhibition — and you really should — you may come away with a different view of this country’s defining moment.
In one photo, a woman holds a photo of a soldier, a subtle sadness in her eyes. Is it her husband? Her son? Will he come back? She doesn’t know, and neither do we.
Then there are the photos of the injured soldiers, some of them missing part of their hands or an entire leg, or with gaping wounds in their heads.
And then there is the image of a young Confederate soldier, his twisted, lifeless body lying on the battlefield at Antietam.
These images tell the sad, unvarnished truth: There is nothing glorious about war.
This exhibit — some 240 tin types, amber types, carte-de-visites and glass negatives — was organized by New York City’s Metropolitan Museum of Art, and is on display at the Gibbes through Jan. 5.
The Met gathered these photos from several sources, including private collections, for a look at the war that is personal and epic. Charleston is one of only three cities to host this exhibit.
Pam Wall, curator of exhibitions at the Gibbes, was struck by the emotional impact of the portraits in the collection. There are, to be sure, photos of famous figures from the war — Abraham Lincoln, Jefferson Davis, even Gen. George Custer — but it is the family portraits of rank-and-file soldiers, young and old, that make the conflict come alive.
In one photo, two brothers from Georgia pose together in their Confederate uniforms — uniforms not yet stained from battle.
Other photographs are simply documentary. A man named Alma A. Pelot lugged his camera gear to Fort Sumter just days after the first battle of the Civil War and captured images that show a place unlike the national monument that exists today.
This was before Sumter was reduced to rubble, when it was still a three-story fort. Those photos alone are worth the price of admission to the museum, which is $9 for adults and $5 for children 6-12 years old.
“This is really the advent of photojournalism,” Wall says. “We are looking at a history of photography. It’s remarkable this many photos were taken. Photography was barely 20 years old.”
And, as the exhibition shows, the war was the first historical event to be recorded on film.
There are disturbing images in this collection.
A series of photos show the execution of the Lincoln conspirators, up to the moment they were hanged.
The most gruesome series of photos were shot by a doctor named Reed Brockway Bontecou to document the traumatic injuries soldiers suffered on the battlefield.
Surgeons were going into the field unprepared for the horrors they would witness, so Bontecou documented what he saw for other physicians. Today, his photos offer different insights into the war.
At 6 p.m. Tuesday, Wall and a panel of surgeons and historians will discuss these photos, and on Thursday, Lt. Gov. Glenn McConnell, chairman of the state Hunley Commission, will talk about the images in the gallery at 2:30 p.m. Go to gibbesmuseum.org for more information about these talks.
Those are two good chances to take in the exhibition and appreciate its relevance.
A century and a half later, the war continues to fascinate many people, and with good reason.
The Gibbes exhibition goes a long way toward making sure we never forget that horrible period in our history.
On The web: http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20131110/PC16/131119963/1009/gibbes-exhibit-offers-real-picture-of-war&source=RSS
See related pages and categories
Battle of Battery Wagner comes to life at Boone Hall Plantation for 150th anniversary
Posted: Saturday, November 9, 2013
Sulfur scented cannon blasts and a relentless staccato of gunfire echoed across Boone Hall Plantation on Saturday as re-enactors commemorated the 150th anniversary of the Civil War’s Battle of Battery Wagner.
The Union Army’s unsuccessful storming of the fort on Morris Island on July 18, 1863, and was led by the famed 54th Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry, one of the first units to utilize black soldiers.
The battle was depicted in the critically acclaimed film “Glory,” starring Denzel Washington, Morgan Freeman and Matthew Broderick.
Re-enactors at Boone Hall marched to the cadence of drums as they brought the historic battle to life. Attendees shrieked and covered their ears at the sounds of the cannons as the soldiers played out the age-old conflict before them.
The group will remain camped through today to take part in a number of scheduled events, including story telling, a social at the Cotton Dock, and weaponry demonstrations.
Portraying the role of provost, John “Garfield” Nolon, 53, of Myrtle Beach, oversaw the Confederate camp from his tent on the sidelines.
Saturday’s battle marked Nolon’s 21st year as a re-enactor. Ironic, he said, considering he hated history as a kid. It wasn’t until he got older that the significance of it all suddenly clicked.
“When I’m sitting out here looking at the sky at night time, I’m looking at the same stars that they looked at all those years ago. We’re all the same. We live life as best we can,” Nolon said. “We follow the paths that they took and we try to get it right as best we can.”
Nolon said he didn’t agree with everything the Confederates had come to be known for, citing the brutality of slavery, but that there’s still a lesson to be learned in the nation having gone through the experience.
“How do you move on to your future if you don’t look to the past? We’re supposed to learn from our mistakes,” Nolon said.
Black men who portrayed Union solders of the 54th Massachusetts told tales of former slaves who fought and died on the North’s behalf.
“Before I be a slave, I’ll be buried in my grave and go home to my Lord and be free,” the group sang before marching to the battlefield.
Ernest Parks, 58, of James Island, said the infantry helped pave the way for racial equality long before the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s.
“As black men, we helped free this country. We helped make America what she is today. It’s all of our responsibility to research and tell the untold stories of those who helped make us what we are,” Parks said.
Battery Wagner activities will continue today. Visit http://boonehallplantation.com/The_Battle_Of_Fort_Wagner for the day’s events.
On The Web: http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20131109/PC16/131109337/1009/battle-of-battery-wagner-comes-to-life-at-boone-hall-plantation-for-150th-anniversary&source=RSS
See related pages and categories
Florida School Board Votes To Remove Name Of Civil War General Tied To Ku Klux Klan
Susan Cooper Eastman
Reuters Nov. 9, 2013
JACKSONVILLE, Florida (Reuters) - A north Florida school board has voted unanimously to change the name of a local high school honoring a Confederate general who made a fortune as a slave trader and was linked to the Ku Klux Klan.
"It's time to move forward with the renaming of Nathan B. Forrest High ... it's time to really put it to bed," said School Board member Constance Hall, who asked the Board to finally begin the process of changing the name on Friday.
Hall and the board's other African American member were joined in the 7-0 vote by four whites and a Hispanic member in voting to change the name.Four Jacksonville schools are named after Confederate heroes, including Robert E. Lee High School, as well as the city's downtown square.
The school's name was chosen in 1959 at the suggestion of the Daughters of the Confederacy as the group readied for the 100th anniversary of Florida joining the Confederacy, at the start of the Civil War that pitted the pro-slavery southern states against President Abraham Lincoln and the Union army.
Changing the name of Nathan B. Forrest High School has come up several times. In 2008, the vote to keep the name broke along racial lines with two black members voting to change the name and five white board members voting against.
This time, a Jacksonville parent, Omotayo Richmond, took up the cause on social media with a change.org petition signed by more than 176,000 people, generating widespread media coverage and support from civil rights groups.
"Now is the time to right a historical wrong. African-American Jacksonville students shouldn't have to attend a high school named for someone who slaughtered and terrorized their ancestors for one more school year," Richmond wrote in his petition appeal.
Forrest made a fortune as a slave trader in Tennessee before joining the Confederacy. Troops under his command massacred more than 400 Union soldiers who surrendered at Fort Pillow,Tennessee. A Congressional inquiry in 1871 looked into Forrest's association with the white supremacist Ku Klux Klan.
The school's future name now lies in the hands of the Duval County Superintendent of Schools,Nikolai Vitti, due to report to the school board in December or January with a recommendation on changing the name, as well as present possible alternatives.
Forrest's defenders call the effort to change the name part of a wider move to erase all remnants of the Confederacy. They say slavery was legal in Forrest's day and he was pardoned for his part in the war, and that at the end of his life his views on blacks changed and he supported black suffrage and freedom.
"Where will this ever end?" Bodie Catlin, a member of the Sons of Confederate Veterans, asked the School Board, raising his hands in the air for emphasis.
"If you all go along with this, believe me, they are going to go after every Confederate general name in Jacksonville," he told the School Board. "It's not going to stop there. There are people who want to change the name of Jacksonville," he added, noting that Andrew Jackson owned slaves and led the slaughter of Seminole Indians.
Other schools named for Confederate heroes in Virginia, Tennessee, Louisiana and Alabama have taken steps toward renaming. In February, the Memphis City Council renamed three downtown parks to remove the Confederate association, including Nathan B. Forrest Park where the general is buried.
Copyright © 2013 Business Insider, Inc.
On The Web: http://www.businessinsider.com/florida-high-school-changes-name-2013-11
See related pages and categories
Don’t You Get It Yet? This Is What Public Schools Are All About
Posted on November 7, 2013
By Al Benson Jr.
You sometimes wonder just how much it takes to get people’s attention With all the accurate information out there on the Internet about public schools (along with a certain amount of liberal drivel) people still don’t seem to be able to grasp where the public schools have been going for the last 150 or so years. And when I say that I am not criticizing every public school teacher out there, but rather the system they are, unfortunately, a part of.
It’s not that difficult anymore to trace where public education has been going in this country, and elsewhere, since its inception. Its founders and promoters in the United States were Unitarians and socialists of the stripe of Horace Mann, Robert Owen, and later, John Dewey. These folks all love public education because (they hope) it takes kids out of Christian and home schools and works to make them mere cogs in the machinery of the New World Order, incapable of discernment, and therefore, incapable of resistance to tyranny.
Once in awhile the anti-Christ One World crowd shoots from the hip and messes up like they did in Kanawha County, West Virginia back in the 1970s and what they are trying to do in the schools gets out around the country and so they are forced to enact “damage control” any way they have to. In West Virginia in 1975 they did it with “law enforcement” officers with billy clubs. When all else failed in that situation the billy clubs were brutal, but effective. Will they ever be used again? Will the sun rise in the East tomorrow?
Next year it will be forty years since the textbook protest started in Kanawha County, West Virginia, and parents who have never been told about it still flock to the public schools to submit their kids in a chaotic sort of child sacrifice ritual every year. What’s sacrificed is their souls and minds and they are, mostly, never quite the same afterwards.
I won’t call the public school system anti-god because it isn’t, but it is anti-Christ. Any other “god’ will do, including “omnipotent” man, who is the “god” of secular humanism. This account of what is now going on in Volusia County, Florida will bear this out. Someone sent me this article from http://www.conservativeactionalerts.com and the headline reads: “Florida Parents Protest pro-Islam Textbook in Volusia County.”
The article started off: “Concerned parents of Volusia County, Florida last night stood in protest against a textbook used to teach world history to public high school students across the state.” According to the article this book is World History published by Prentiss Hall, which the Florida Department of Education has adopted. The main parental complaint about this book is that it devotes a full chapter to Islam, “while failing to offer the same attention to any other world religion.” To those who understand where the public school system is coming from this will be no surprise. Right now Islam is the politically correct “religion of choice” to be pushed in this country in public schools. After all, hasn’t our President stated plainly that this is not a Christian country and hasn’t he listed all the contributions to our national culture that have been handed to us by Muslims? If you follow his radical rationale we should all have asked for the adoption of Sharia Law on his second day in office.
Apparently there were lots of people that protested the use of this book because the article noted: “Due to the number of protesters, the Volusia County School Board cancelled yesterday’s scheduled meeting for the interest of ‘public safety’ according to Wftv9news. “ In the interest of “public safety” probably could be translated to mean that the county Board of Education did not want to have to deal with all the protesters so they just cancelled the meeting in the hope that most of them would cool down before the next meeting. Does any of this scenario sound familiar? To anyone that has ever protested lousy public school texts it should. A commissioner from Deltona observed that parents just want some balance when it comes to their kids’ books. In fact, he asked the question: “Why relegate Christianity to a footnote in an entire history book, and you give an entire chapter on the teachings of Islam?” Well, yes, if, again, you understand where the public school system is coming from, this is entirely consistent with their agenda.
You denigrate the Christian faith and promote whatever else happens to be handy at the moment—just as long as it has no connection to anything remotely Christian. They use the exact same principle in regard to Confederate flags and symbols, some of which are Christian in origin.
Parents, especially Christian parents, have got to start rethinking their love affair with an anti-Christ public school system. They have got to begin to grasp the concept that their children need a Christian education and they have got to start realizing that they won’t get that in the public school system—even if little Johnny has a teacher that is a Christian. Little Johnny’s teacher won’t dare talk about her Christian faith for fear of losing her job. Now if she were a Muslim Imam that would be fine—she could proselytize in class and the school system would laud her for her contribution to “diversity” but as a Christian to speak out is to forfeit your job. That’s what you are dealing with in public school folks. Get used to the idea.
And if at all possible, pray and ask the Lord to help you find a viable alternative to public schools. There are many out there for those willing to look. It will be interesting to see what happens in Volusia County, Florida—if the “news” media is allowed to deal with it.
If you want to find out what happens when parents in a particular county start resisting anti-Christ curriculum in public schools read Karl Priest’s book Protester Voices–The 1974 Textbook Tea Party which is on Amazon.com or you can order it directly from Karl at 141 Karmel Lane, Poca, West Virginia 25159. The book costs $14.95 plus about $5.00 for shipping.
On The Web: http://revisedhistory.wordpress.com/2013/11/07/dont-you-get-it-yet-this-is-what-public-schools-are-all-about/
See related pages and categories
The Confederate Constitution: What your elementary school didn’t teach you
David John Marotta and Megan Russell
At the start of 1861, several Southern states seceded to form their own union under the Constitution of the Confederate States. The Confederate Constitution was just a modified version of the original U.S. Constitution, but the edits were significant.
The South seceded largely over economic issues. Heavy-hitting tariffs on manufactured goods protected Northern industries while making Southern costs skyrocket. Meanwhile, 90 percent of the Union’s revenue came from those tariffs and then was spent to help the North.
Slavery certainly was a factor in the Civil War. But it was partly the economic pressures on the South that made slavery an issue.
Other countries were compensating slave owners, using government revenue to ease the transition away from slavery. In the United States, however, the North was tightening the economic screws. It exploited the South with tariffs and spent the revenue on its own largess.
Two days before Lincoln’s inauguration in March 1861, Northern congressmen passed the Morrill Tariff. It steeply raised tariffs on politically popular Northern manufactured goods.
Previous tariffs had been a percentage of the purchase price. The practice of providing a phony invoice for a lower amount alleviated much of the tariff’s harm. The Morrill Tariff removed this possibility. It required a specific duty per quantity of the imported item regardless of the purchase price.
With the South peacefully seceded, it was impossible to count on its cooperation. But Lincoln was expected to enforce the Morrill Tariff. A group of Virginian commissioners were deputized to determine if Lincoln would use force and suggested he abandon Fort Sumter.
Lincoln responded, “If I do that, what would become of my revenue? I might as well shut up housekeeping [a euphemism for federal spending] at once!” With 90 percent of his revenue coming from tariffs collected in the South, the Southern secession meant the union’s budget would take a cut.
He went on to say, “But what am I to do in the meantime with those men at Montgomery?” — meaning the Confederate constitutional convention. “Am I to let them go on... [a]nd open Charleston, etc., as ports of entry, with their ten-percent tariff? What, then, would become of my tariff?” Just a month before the start of the hostilities of the Civil War, Lincoln had tariff revenue on his mind.
Meanwhile, the Confederate states correctly judged the need for additional checks on the federal government’s power to tax some while benefiting others. The Confederacy is often portrayed as the villain in popular media. But the Confederate edits to the Constitution would have helped prevent a lot of the federal mischief we’ve experienced.
The Confederate states added a prohibition on tariffs protecting specific industries and required all such taxes to be uniform throughout the country. Such a law removed the special-interest lobbying and patronage that elected Lincoln. It was based on the more general principle that if the power doesn’t exist to discriminate among specific industries, there is no incentive to buy the right to wield that power for your own industry’s benefit.
They also removed the general welfare justification for collecting taxes; only providing for the common defense remained.
The general welfare clause was originally intended to limit the power of Congress and prohibit it from providing for special interest groups. It was included as a summary version of the 17 specific powers immediately following it. James Madison, principal author of the Constitution, argued that no one would misunderstand the general welfare clause and give Congress unlimited power. The specific limited powers, he argued, were “not even separated by a longer pause than a semicolon.”
Prior to 1936, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed in multiple cases. Then Franklin D. Roosevelt packed the Supreme Court with six extra justices. The court finally justified his 1937 Social Security Act and a host of other New Deal legislation under the misunderstanding that Madison had thought impossible. Since then, the general welfare clause has been used to justify nearly every aspect of the federal budget.
The Confederate Constitution added much language to block any laws intended to “facilitate commerce.” Much of the tariff revenue collected from the South had been used to build railroads and canals in the North. In other words, one man’s money was being used to better another man’s state. The Confederate Constitution solved this problem as well.
To the article giving Congress the power to regulate commerce, the Confederate Constitution added “but neither this, nor any other clause contained in the constitution, shall ever be construed to delegate the power to Congress to appropriate money for any internal improvement intended to facilitate commerce.”
This additional clause was intended to stop the federal government from taking the money collected from everyone and use it to pay for one region’s development.
The only internal improvement the Confederate Constitution justified was work on harbors and rivers. However, such improvements had to be paid for using money collected from the people navigating them.
In the U.S. Congress, congressional favors were and still are passed by the slimmest of majorities. However, the Confederate Constitution solved this by requiring a two-thirds super-majority of a congressional vote before any federal funds could be spent. Its framers believed that the more impediments to legislative spending, the better. If spending were disliked by as many as a third of Congress today, it is likely we would be better off.
The CSA founders also anticipated the congressional shenanigans of hiding large special-interest spending projects inside otherwise helpful legislation. They added a presidential line-item veto, writing, “The President may approve any appropriation and disapprove any other appropriation in the same bill.”
Finally, the Confederate Constitution changed the term of the president to six years but prohibited the chief executive from serving two terms. Many of our former presidents have agreed with this idea.
In his first year, a president is trying to learn the job. The next three years he is running for re-election. Only in his second term, if then, is he taking the long view and thinking about his place in history.
We are thankful the Civil War ended the abominable practice of slavery in the United States. However, our gratitude for this social change causes us to overlook what the Confederate Constitution had to offer.
The Civil War began over exploitive protectionist tariffs. On this specific issue, the South might very well have had the higher moral ground. Southerners wove some of their improvements into the Confederate Constitution. Our slavery-focused retelling of the Civil War loses sight of issues of freedom we’ve lost with the Confederate Constitution.
© Copyright 2013, The Daily Progress
On The Web: http://www.dailyprogress.com/opinion/guest_columnists/the-confederate-constitution-what-your-elementary-school-didn-t-teach/article_0caceeaa-e18d-11e2-b6d6-001a4bcf6878.html#.UnpW6ELfufY.facebook
See related pages and categories
Groups honor Confederate Camp Sumter Commander Henry Wirz
Andersonville prsion camp commander hanged after Civil War for war crimes
By Carlton Fletcher
Thursday, November 7, 2013
© Copyright 2013 Albany Herald
ANDERSONVILLE — A memorial service honoring Capt. Henry Wirz, Prisoner of War Camp Commander of the Confederate Camp Sumter here, will be held Sunday starting at 2 p.m.
Period music from the Civil War era will be played by the Lee County band A Joyful Noise, and the memorial service will feature a speech by the Rev. John Weaver of Fitzgerald. The annual service is presented by the Capt. Wirz Memorial Committee and by the Sons of Confederate Veterans Alex H. Stephens Camp in Americus.
Wirz, a Swiss-born soldier who fought with the Confederacy and was later named commander of the POW camp in Andersonville, was charged with war crimes at the conclusion of the Civil War. His charges were based on the more than 12,000 deaths at the notorious camp, most from malnutrition and dysentery. Records from the era show that Wirz, concerned over the lack of food and medication available for Union prisoners, tried to exchange them for Confederate prisoners and eventually offered to release them without exchange if the Union provided transport to take them out of the South.
Union Gen. Ulysses S. Grant had, however, enacted a nationwide ban on prisoner exchanges and refused all requests to exchange or transport the prisoners.
Wirz was taken to Washington, D.C. after the war, tried and sentenced to death. He was hanged on Nov. 10, 1865.
SCV members and other Southern heritage groups have long decried Wirz’s execution.
“For the last 150 years, both Captain Wirz and the South have been blamed for the death of the prisoners who fell at Andersonville, but little has been said of his efforts to save them or of the same percentage of Confederate guards who died at the camp,” Wirz Memorial Committee Chairman James Gaston said. “Still less is reported of atrocities which occurred against Confederate POWs in Union prison camps such as Elmira Prison, New York, where 25 percent of the prisoners died, or Camp Douglas, Illinois, where more than 25 percent of the Confederate prisoners died as compared to less than 5 percent of the guards stationed there throughout the war.”
James King, commander of the Albany SCV Camp 141, which is involved this year in the Wirz memorial, called the hanging of the Camp Sumter POW camp commander a “travesty.”
“The trial of Andersonville POW Camp Commander Henry Wirz was a travesty of American justice and a complete farce in which the outcome of being found guilty was predetermined,” King said. “This trial remains a dark chapter in the American justice system and especially highlights immoral and unethical proceedings and conduct by military courts of this time period.
For additional information about Sunday’s memorial service, contact Gaston (firstname.lastname@example.org), Americus SCV Camp Commander John Carroll (email@example.com) or King (firstname.lastname@example.org).
On The Web: http://www.albanyherald.com/news/2013/nov/07/groups-honor-confederate-camp-sumter-commander/
See related pages and categories
Home of Confederate hero struggles to stay open
By Linda Wheeler
The Sam Davis Home in Smyrna, Tenn., is trying to survive financially as it approaches a sesquicentennial commemoration this month of the death of one of the South’s favorite martyrs.
Davis refused to name names after he was captured carrying stolen Union documents and dramatically chose a death by hanging over betraying his friends. Davis’s heroic act will be remembered at the pillared, two-story house and museum over a three-day weekend, Nov. 22 to 24.
The state-owned Davis home, run on an annual $200,000 budget, has long been supported by the town, but that contribution has been slashed by 60 percent over the past seven years. In response, the museum has reduced hours and recently decided to close for the month of January. The commemoration is taking place on the weekend before the actual anniversary date of Davis’s death on Nov. 27, 1863, and officials are hopeful it will bring in much-needed money and a new base of support. They are planning for a crowd of as many as 100,000.
Events include a bus trip to Nashville to see the Davis memorial on the capital grounds, a banquet with keynote speaker, a guided tour of the home, performance of a play about Davis, a Sam Davis Memorial Ball and a Sunday morning service at Davis’s grave. Of particular interest to Davis fans will be an exhibit of artifacts loaned to the museum for the event that include the shackles Davis wore as a prisoner as well as the overcoat and one of the boots he was wearing when captured.
Davis left school to join the 1st Tennessee Volunteer Infantry, and by 1863 had been recruited to work as a scout, disrupting Union communications and reporting on troop movements. He was working behind enemy lines when he was captured carrying stolen papers and a map of fortifications. Although he said he was a mere courier, Union officials decided he was a spy. He refused to say who had given him the documents, was tried by court martial and sentenced to be hanged. When given a last chance to save himself by identifying those who had helped him, he refused, reportedly saying “You may hang me a thousand times and I would not betray my friends.”
His story had a powerful appeal and overnight Davis became the “Boy Hero of the Confederacy,” although he was 21 when he died.
© 1996-2013 The Washington Post
On The Web: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/house-divided/post/home-of-confederate-hero-struggles-to-stay-open/2013/11/08/d6ec90a0-488d-11e3-bf0c-cebf37c6f484_blog.html
See related pages and categories
Group pushes to feature Confederate flag on Texas license plates
Reported by: Bailey Miller
Mike Walker is part of the push to feature the Confederate flag on Texas license plates. For him, the fight hits close to home.
"Every male, three generations back in my family, fought in the civil war, and they fought for what they believed in," Walker said. "They fought for states' rights, and I believe that I have to have the initiative to respect them, and honor what they did, and carry forward the legacy that they left me."
Walker is part of the Sons of Confederate Veterans. The organization has asked the federal appeals court to revive its lawsuit against the Department of Motor Vehicles Board. That suit was thrown out in 2011.
"We feel that that is a violation of our First Amendment right," Walker said. "Because we have the right, as does the Buffalo soldiers, the NAACP, and various other organizations who already have these distinctive license plates."
"I would say to those people, think of something that really would affect them, would offend them," Cosby Morton, a member of Lubbock's Roots Historical Arts Council, said. "How would they like it if I put that slogan on a flag, and flew it in their neighborhood right next to them? To see it every day, to have my kids see that, to ask me questions about that. I'm not against free speech, but you have to understand that you can't say everything you want to say. There are people that you hurt."
Morton said he understands the need to pay tribute to southern heritage, but said the flag represents a time period he would rather forget.
"This was a time that a race of people, an ethnic group, remembers," Morton said. "There was no happiness there. And I understand all the arguments, and all the debate about it. That there were people that were free in the south, and I understand there were also slaves in the north, I understand that. But the flag is symbolic, it's been picked up by hate groups."
Texas Tech law professor Arnold Loewy said it is not likely the court will rule in favor of free speech.
"It's very clear that if this First Amendment claim prevailed, it would mean that anybody who wanted to have a license plate for anybody could do it," Loewy said. "I could have one that said, 'Shop at Joe's Pizza', almost anything you can imagine. So, it seems to me that the state has to have limitations on it."
A three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments Wednesday, but did not give a timeline for a ruling.
At least nine states have allowed the sale of Confederate license plates. Florida is in the process of deciding.
© 2013 Ramar Communications
On The Web: http://www.myfoxlubbock.com/news/local/story/confederate-flag-sons-of-confederate-veterans/Tb9SPRqUukqLEprdU7jCVQ.cspx
See related pages and categories
School Named For Former KKK Leader Reconsiders Its Legacy
By Karen Feagins
Thursday, November 7, 2013
Duval County Public Schools is considering a name change for Nathan Bedford Forrest High School in Jacksonville, Fla. The school is named for a Confederate hero who was the first grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan — and after five decades of debate, there appears to be momentum for change.
The long-simmering controversy was reignited this year when Jacksonville resident Omotayo Richmond posted a petition on Change.org, urging the district superintendent to change the name. He started gathering signatures because his family was moving across town, where his fiancee's daughter would attend Forrest High School.
"I didn't think it would make a huge wave like it did," Richmond says. "At the most, I figured if I got a couple hundred people to sign it, I could have enough leverage that I could go to the school board and be like, 'Hey, what are you guys going to do about this?' "
To date, the petition has garnered more than 160,000 signatures — enough to catch the attention of the school board and the Klan itself. A Missouri-based chapter of the KKK sent a letter to the board encouraging it to reject a name change.
At a Duval County School Board meeting this week, the naming debate was the subject of several dozen passionate speeches. Civil War buffs call Forrest a military genius. Some claim modern critics have distorted the facts about his involvement with the Klan.
Barbie Langdon Ratliff, Forrest High Class of 1976, was one of several alumni to speak in support of keeping the name.
"We'll never know everything about Mr. Forrest, but the speeches that I've read and the attendance at his funeral by hundreds of African-Americans lead me to believe he was not the racist monster that the media would lead us to believe that he was," Ratliff told the board.
Others, including Opio Sokoni, the president of the local chapter of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, argued that honoring Forrest sends the wrong message at a school that is now majority African-American.
"Our children and our city deserve better than to have a school named after this immoral man," Sokoni said. "He had no connection to this city and his name was placed on the school out of spite."
Those who remember say the 1959 school board chose to honor Forrest at the behest of the Daughters of the Confederacy, as a statement against school desegregation.
Six years ago, the Duval County School Board voted 5-2, along racial lines, to keep the name. The new superintendent, Nikolai Vitti, says he's in favor of a change — but, he says, the board needs to get community buy-in first. On Friday, the School Board is scheduled to vote on whether to officially start the process of exploring a new name.
"When I speak nationally and people stop me, the first thing they say is, 'Don't you have a high school named after a former leader of the KKK?' " Vitti says. "And I want Jacksonville to be known for what we're doing regarding children's outcomes, not the name of a school."
Copyright 2013 WJCT-FM.
On The web: http://www.capradio.org/news/npr/story?storyid=243713441
See related pages and categories
Forrest Monument case might be near resolution
Saturday, November 9, 2013
by Josh Bergeron
A settlement option may be presented to the Selma City Council in a lawsuit over a monument to Confederate general and Klu Klux Klan leader Nathan Bedford Forrest.
Seven members of the Selma City Council and Selma Mayor George Evans met with KTK Mining and its attorneys Friday in a settlement conference that lasted seven hours.
A gag order prevented attorneys, city officials and KTK Mining from talking about specifics of the conference, but John W. Kelly III said a settlement proposal might have been reached and the lawsuit dropped.
“Everything is confidential, but there may be an agreement presented in the next 30 days to the city council,” Kelly said. “If the council approves an agreement, that could lead to a resolution.”
The lawsuit arose from a 2012 decision by the Selma City Council to suspend KTK Mining’s construction permit on the Forrest monument after questions were raised about who owned Confederate Circle — a tract of land containing the monument.
The monument was originally unveiled in 2000 at the Vaughan-Smitherman Museum. It was moved to the cemetery after the monument was vandalized and defaced.
In March 2012, the monument’s bronze bust was stolen, which led to the group Friends of Forrest developing plans for the monument’s relocation.
Protests began again after construction to replace the bust and construct a more secure display started. Shortly after the protests began, the council suspended the permit after questions arose about who owned the property and the legitimacy of the issued building permit.
© 2013, The Selma Times-Journal
On The Web: http://www.selmatimesjournal.com/2013/11/09/forrest-monument-case-might-be-near-resolution
See related pages and categories
Excavator stolen in protest of Virginia group’s Confederate flag memorial
November 08, 2013
Typically, construction equipment is stolen for its resale value. But in the case of this missing excavator, it appears that it was stolen for what it was being used for, according to a report from NBC 12.
The group Virginia Flaggers met considerable opposition when they announced plans to fly a large Confederate flag on private property near Interstate 95 in Chesterfield, Virginia. More than 24,000 people signed an online petition opposing the Confederate flag memorial site.
Despite the opposition, the group began clearing the property of trees so the flag could be seen from the highway. But before they could finish, the excavator they were using to clear trees from the site was stolen.
The machine is valued at $20,000, according to the Virginia Flaggers website. Based on tracks left at the site, a truck and trailer were used to steal the machine.
“This is not going to stop,” Virginia Flaggers member Grayson Jennings told the TV station. “We better not catch whoever is doing it. That is all I have to say.”
© Copyright 2013 Randall-Reilly
On The Web: http://www.equipmentworld.com/excavator-stolen-in-protest-to-virginia-groups-confederate-flag-memorial/
See related pages and categories
Sabotage reported at I-95 Battle Flag site
November 4, 2013
Last month the Constitution-News reported the successful raising of a 15 x 15' Confederate Battle Flag on Interstate -95 just south of Richmond, Va. The project was the brain child of a Confederate heritage group called The Virginia Flaggers and made both national and international news headlines.
The project was heavily criticized by liberal / progressive groups but was welcomed by people from across the South.
Is it any surprise that today Susan Hathaway, of the Virginia Flaggers reports the theft of a $20,000 piece of equipment at the site? Hathaway writes:
Sometime between the morning of Thursday, October 31st and the morning of Friday, November 1st, an Hitachi excavator was stolen from the RVA Battle Flag Memorial Site in Chester. On September 28, the Va Flaggers raised a 15×15 Battle Flag to honor the memory of Confederate Soldiers who died defending Virginia in the War Between the States.
The equipment, valued at $20,000 was an orange Hitachi EX 100, and had a few strips of red tape on the dented engine compartment door. “Excellent Excavator” is also written on the side of the cab.
Evidence has been collected on the site, and the thieves apparently used a truck and trailer to steal the machinery.
As Chesterfield police officers investigated this afternoon, nearby residents who support the project came out and volunteered to clean up the brush that was to be removed today. They rolled up their sleeves and quickly completed the work. The Virginia Flaggers are very thankful for their support and help, as well as the quick response from the Chesterfield County Police.
This is a minor setback and delay in the scheduled completion of the project, which includes tree removal, lighting, and a security fence.
Anyone with information on this crime is asked to call Chesterfield Police at 748-1251.
On The Web: http://mhconstitution.com/2013/11/04/sabotage-reported-at-i-95-battle-flag-site/
See related pages and categories
Battle lines drawn over Union monument at Olustee
Reported by: Ryan Smith
OLUSTEE, Fla. -- A new battle is brewing between Yankees and Rebels over our local history and it's happening right in our own backyard.
Union and Confederate troops clashed at the Battle of Olustee on the now hallowed ground outside of Lake City.
It marked the only major civil war battle fought on Florida soil.
As passionate re-enactors prepare to play out the deadly exchange for its 150th anniversary in February, there's a new fight between the two factions.
"If you have an Iraq war monument, you don't want to put a Muslim/jihadist monument right in front of it," said Jim Shillinglaw with the Sons of Confederate Veterans.
That's how some are comparing a proposal to place a monument memorializing Union soldiers at the state park.
Florida's Sons of Union Veterans of the Civil War charge there are three Confederate monuments and no Union memorial at Olustee.
Their mission states, "As Sons of Union Veterans we seek to balance the cultural representation by placing a monument there.”
They recently won state approval to build their own structure in what confederate legacies call rebel territory.
Specifically in front of a massive Confederate monument built in 1912.
"It's really a thumb in the face of the other monument and the people who put it there," said Shillinglaw.
So the Sons of Confederate Veterans are on the attack -- circulating a statewide petition -- soon to invade the Florida Parks and Recreation Department in Tallahassee.
"It'd be a clash because people are passionate about their ancestors and their history.
Copyright 2013 Cox Media Group, Inc.
On The Web: http://www.actionnewsjax.com/mostpopular/story/Battle-lines-drawn-over-Union-monument-at-Olustee/KM1RYwDiVEOExcER12_MFA.cspx