Dixie Heritage News – July 7, 2017


Connecting the Dots – Whats Next


President Donald Trump was met Thursday in Poland by cheering crowd. “Fox & Friends” approvingly noted the enthusiastic response to President Trump’s speech, including chants of “USA.”


Trump praised the Polish spirit after summing up the nation’s horrific experience in World War II as “trouble” and “tough,” as crowds cheered and chanted in approval.


A crowd shot broadcast by CNN, as the network awaited the president’s speech, clearly showed Polish crowd members waving a Confederate battle flag.


This is a lead in to another story. Remember Ernst Zuendel? The internationally renowned historian and activist who has been persecuted by a number of Western governments for his historical research suggesting that the number of Jewish victims of the holocaust may have been a tad bit under the long touted 6-million number. Zuendel, contrary to accusation, has never been a “holocaust denier.” He has simply documented that the number of Jewish deaths was far less than 6 million – he has also documented that the victims of the holocaust were not all Jewish. In other words, poles, gypsies, slavs, and communists from across eastern Europe (as well as Jews) were all in the mix. In other words, the Nazi death camps and concentration camps, labor camps, etc. Were not exclusively for Jews. Zuendel also documents that many died of illness who, after the war, were claimed to have been gassed so as to increase reparations money owed. Because such things are almost always about the $$$.


Anyway, I bring all this up, because the Yankee government has denied Zuendel’s (now 78) visa application to rejoin and care for his elderly and ailing wife in Tennessee, which had been his home for many years before the German government decided they wanted to raid his Tennessee home in order to illegally drag him to Germany and prosecute him for “thought crimes.”


American born, Ingrid Zuendel is a citizen. Under normal circumstances, Ernst’s coming to to join an American spouse would find little difficulty in obtaining the visa. However, due to Zuendel’s imprisonment for thought crimes, he was deemed “inadmissible” by Ron Rosenberg, the chief of the Administrative Appeals Office of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which decided Zuendel’s fate.


In its ruling, the Administrative Appeals Office cited Zuendel’s 2007 conviction in Germany of “violating the memory of the dead,” an Orwellian thought crime institutionalized in Germany following World War II in an effort to criminalize political dissent and historical inquiry. Zuendel served five years in prison in Germany. The DHS’s ruling also noted that Zuendel is “a historical revisionist and denier of the Holocaust….[Zuendel] has been a leader in these activities for decades and has shown no regret or remorse for his actions,” the ruling stated in an attempt to justify its decision to ban the historian from rejoining his elderly wife in Tennessee.


Of course, Zuendel’s previous political, historical, and educational activities-hysterically demonized and twisted by the Administrative Appeals Office’s characterization in its ruling-are not in any way illegal in the United States. Whatever one believes about WWII history, Zuendel, who is a pacifist, went to great lengths to document the controversial statements and perspectives he was publicly offering in a scholarly fashion.


Ingrid Zuendel, Ernst’s American wife who has long been involved with his scholarly research, and who maintains his website, denied the U.S. federal government’s characterization of her husband.


This latest legal setback for the Zuendels came as no surprise to Ingrid. They have been struggling for years now in the judicial system, only to be stymied at every opportunity. “We were not surprised by the ruling of the DHS’s Administrative Appeals Office,” Ingrid explained to this reporter. “The courts are no longer the means of last resort to get justice in America. The courts have been co-opted and are corrupted to the core. Justice can no longer be had from the bench.” She continued: “That doesn’t mean that we are giving up. There are other means than courts to win this most important battle in the courts of public opinion. The struggle for historical truth has never been just about what happened to Ernst Zuendel. It was and is about revealing false flags and self-serving lies as tools of control by the powers-that-be. It was and is about revealing historical lies as weapons of war wielded brutally by what is now referred to as the ‘deep state’ or the ‘shadow government.'”


I lead with a story such as this because what has been happening to the Zuendels is and will continue to happen to Southern historians and cultural warriors. Just as it became illegal, in Germany, to question the official narrative about the 2nd World War, and anything relating to Naziism or the holocaust, now our country has waged an all out war on all things “confederate.” Basically, our nation is attempting to take a 20 year block of history and just make it go away. Anyone daring to challenge the official line with TRUTH, say a Dr. Clyde Wilson, or the Kennedy brothers, or even myself, we could be the American Ernst Zuendels. In Germany they began with a wholesale attack on monuments. Just as we are now seeing in our country.




In his Sunday column, Chicago Tribune editor Steve Chapman criticizes Confederate monuments. In particular, he takes aim at Army bases named after Confederate generals Robert E. Lee, Henry Benning, Braxton Bragg, John Bell Hood and George Pickett.


In response, Army spokesman Major General Malcolm Frost issued a statement reiterating the stance that “every Army installation is named for a soldier who holds a place in our military history. Accordingly, these historic names represent individuals, not causes or ideologies. It should be noted that the naming occurred in the spirit of reconciliation, not division.”


And the Army has already issued a statement that it will not make any immediate changes in base names. But it is open to changing the names of streets on a bee in New York.


In response to a letter issued to Army Secretary Robert Speer by Brooklyn politicians Yvette Clarke, Jerrold Nadler, Nydia Velazquez and Hakeem Jeffries, all Democrats who represent parts of the boroug; Stonewall Jackson Drive and General Lee Avenue are probably going to be renamed.


The roads aren’t even accessible by the general public; they run through Fort Hamilton, an active military base in southwestern Brooklyn next to the Bay Ridge and Dyker Heights neighborhoods. As part of their U.S. Army careers, both Robert E. Lee and Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson spent time at the fort – Lee in the early part of the 1840s and Jackson toward the end of that decade.


They aren’t the only military figures with street names at the fort – other roads are named for figures including World War I Gen. John Pershing and World War II Gen. George Marshall.


The Army has already renamed a road at Fort Bliss in El Paso, Texas, from Forrest Road to Cassidy Road. An Army official said complaints about the name didn’t drive the change but didn’t rule out that they were a consideration. The same procedure, says the official, will be followed in New York.


And in an unrelated dot – a story this week reminded me of something that happened to me way back, maybe 15 years ago or so.


I was eating lunch in a Bennigan’s at the Galleria mall in Houston. I was setting in a table overlooking the ice skating rink when a woman, in her late 20’s, comes up to my table and introduces herself. She said she recognized me from my picture on the back of my book The Truth About the Confederate Battle Flag. She said she had recently read my book and that it inspired her to do something to declare her heritage. She then proceeded to pull her boob out of her blouse to show me her Confederate Flag tattoo.


To put it bluntly, I can think of a number of better ways for anyone to express Southern heritage than to get a tattoo! And we wonder why our critics call us rednecks, crackers, and a few other not so kind things?


Now that I’ve just ticked off about 100 or so of our loyal readers, seriously, our heritage is not a tattoo, it is a lifestyle, a faith, a very character – and I can not imagine Mrs. Robert E. Lee, or Mrs. Thomas J. Jackson, or Mrs. J.E.B. Stuart tattooing their boobs – anymore than I can imagine J.E.B., or Stonewall having a Confederate Flag shaved into their haircuts by a barber. And then I read a news feed from Oklahoma.


He thought it was a racist thing, but…


After getting to know a man who came in for a very specific Confederate Flag haircut, a black barber says he saw things a little differently.


Oklahoma barber shop owner Corey Sutter posted a photo of a controversial haircut with a caption about customer service and started a major firestorm.


“This guy came in and wanted the Confederate flag in his head and that’s what he got. Fade N Up barbershop is all about giving you what you want,” Sutter wrote on Facebook. It didn’t take long for the backlash to pile on and photo to go viral, and that’s when barber Demontre Heard told the story on how the haircut came to be.


“I was thinking it was some racist-type stuff but, as he sat down and I was doing it and he was talking to me the whole time, and he explained to me why he was doing it, like, he was a really cool guy and I didn’t feel like he was racist at all,” Heard told Oklahoma’s News 4 KFOR.


“In Fade N Up it doesn’t matter who your favorite song artist is, or your politics, or skin color. If you’re white, Asian, Mexican, Black, Puerto Rican, whatever, you sit in my chair and I cut your hair, I hope I leave you with the best haircut you get and I hope that you come back,” Demontre Heard said.


Sutter, who is locally known as “Scissorhands” defended the shop’s decision to cut his hair. “The thing that’s really bothering me is, no matter how it may look to someone and them getting upset about it, this is what we do for a living,” Sutter said. “We provide a service for this person, and that’s what we’re supposed to do. Yeah, we could have denied it. Yes, we could have acted a fool and talked bad to him, tried to fight him or anything like that. But, he came in, he came in respectful. He wanted it.”


While Sutter continues to take an online beating for allowing the haircut, he is also seeing a lot of support and a lot of new customers.


And I’m glad that one of our compatriots was able to change the heart and mind of his barber. But the whole story just serves to remind me that we have a lot of work ahead of us, as we seek to intelligently advance the cause of our ancestors.




Workers removing the Confederate onument in St. Louis discovered a time capsule buried more than 102 years ago, the Missouri Civil War Museum said.


Mark Trout, director of the museum, said the capsule was found Thursday in a pit covered by a concrete tablet under the Confederate Monument in the city’s Forest Park.


“We knew it was in there somewhere, so we were careful as we chipped away at something like 40 tons of concrete until we got to the very bottom,” he told KTVI-St. Louis.


The museum says the time capsule should contain documents from the Daughters of the Confederacy, which funded the memorial. There could also be war medals and a magazine.


“We know the last thing put in the box was a magazine place in there by one of the soldiers of General Pickett’s [Confederate] division at Gettysburg; the famous ‘Pickett’s Charge’,” Trout said. “He held it up at the ceremony saying, ‘Hey look, we’re in the magazine. Put this in the box.’ When we open that box the first thing laying on top should be the ‘Star’ magazine that the soldier placed there.”




A Hong Kong-based archaeologist is appealing to Gov. Matt Bevin as a “last resort” because Hopkinsville officials refuse to let him dig up a metal casket containing a Confederate soldier’s remains a second time.


Archaeologist William Meacham thinks the casket of Pvt. William H. Pate in the city-owned cemetery might still be sealed and could provide evidence of the deadly epidemic that swept through a Confederate camp near the Kentucky town in the winter of 1861-1862.


However, Meacham stirred up some bad feelings among city officials when he first excavated the burial site about two years ago and then removed the casket without permission, saying he wanted to protect it from gravediggers and vandals.


He was forced to return it and has been banned from the cemetery.


The Hopkinsville City Council this year decided not to allow any more bodies to be exhumed out of respect for the dead, said the Hopkinsville city administrator, Nate Pagen.


The city’s Riverside Cemetery is not far from the U.S. Army’s Fort Campbell, and some veterans in the area said there’d been enough intrusion from Meacham’s project, according to Pagen.


The coffin, Meacham argued, could be a rare “time capsule holding the key to a historical mystery illness that killed hundreds of soldiers at Hopkinsville, and thousands generally,” including Union soldiers.


University of Louisville archaeologist Philip J. DiBlasi said Meacham had “a good idea” and proposed “a good project.” But he said “it’s become extremely political. I am having a hard time sorting out what’s reality and what’s not.”


Meacham said he wants to try to make Pate famous as “the Hopkinsville soldier,” a potential new draw to the Civil War cemetery in the southwest Kentucky community. Pate also could become famous in scientific circles, Meacham said, through research on his remains.


In his letter to the governor, Meacham wrote that “it is not often that an individual or town can make a decision that, even in a small increment, advances bio-medical knowledge, and possibly solves a historical mystery as well.”


“Hence this appeal to you to use your influence to get the study approved,” he wrote. “I am sure a simple email or phone call from you to the Mayor (of Hopkinsville) expressing interest would go a long way to achieving that!”


Bevin did not return requests for comment sent to his spokeswoman, Amanda Stamper.


Meacham, a longtime research fellow in the Centre of Asia Studies at the University of Hong Kong, published a 2013 scientific paper on the medical mystery in the Journal of Civil War Medicine.


William Turner, the historian at the Christian County Historical Society, holds out hope that that officials’ minds can be changed so scientists can find out more about Pate. “I think it’s still an open issue,” he said. “Those of us who are in favor are remaining quiet for now.”


Various groups have come out in support or against his study.


The Sons of the Confederate Veterans wrote letters backing the initial research but have since registered their opposition. “It seemed like it started out good,” said John Suttles, Kentucky Division Commander. “But the feeling was they shouldn’t disturb any more of the graves.”


Turner said much could be learned if Pate’s body could be exhumed, including details about clothing, boots, buttons and belt buckles. The coffin and Pate’s untouched remains were reburied at the cemetery with no special markings in a locked cement vault to keep them safe, Meacham said.


Meacham said he’s discovered a lot about Pate, who was a 16-year-old private. He said Pate’s father was moderately wealthy. Pate married Ann E. Warren on June 27, 1861 – she had been listed as being only 13 years old in the 1860 Census – and he enlisted in the “Tippah Rifles” in August 1861 and died Oct. 30, 1861, according to Meacham


Meachman said Ann Pate gave birth to a son, William B. Pate, who was listed as 7 years old in the 1870 census. There was no record that year of what happened to the boy’s mother, Meacham said.




Members of a Caddo Parish Commission panel were expected to make their recommendation Thursday about what to do with the Confederate monument outside the Parish Courthouse in downtown Shreveport.


The Caddo Parish Long-Range Planning/Special Projects Citizen Advisory Committee and its monument advisory subcommittee have been working to craft their recommendations for almost a year.


At one point, there were four different recommendations regarding placement of the monument, whether it should stay or be moved, said Gary Joiner, vice chairman of the panel’s monument advisory subcommittee.


Joiner has confirmed that there is a recommendation on the table to move the monument somewhere else. However, he says the cost of moving the monument would be prohibitive, ranging from $500,000 to more than $1 million.


According to the subcommittee vice chairman, other recommendations include leaving the monument where it is as well as constructing other monuments to stand beside it.


Joiner said these additional monuments would be dedicated in memory of Reconstruction and the Civil Rights Movement in Caddo Parish.


Ultimately, whatever recommendation is made will be submitted to the Caddo Parish Commission, which will make any final decision.


But tensions rose after the committee voted to adjourn just a few minutes into its meeting. With Secretary Jackie Nichols absent, a motion was made to adjourn and reschedule the meeting for a time when she could be present. That vote passed 5-3.


At present, the monument is maintained by members of Chapter 237 of the United Daughters of the Confederacy in Shreveport.




In Texas, San Antonians eager to spend their Fourth of July picnicking were laying down blankets and unpacking snacks as Black Lives Matter demonstrators gathered in front of the Confederate monument in Travis Park.


Their purpose was to demand that Mayor Ron Nirenberg and the City of San Antonio remove the monument “immediately.” The demonstration included numerous speeches at the park and a march through downtown to the steps of the Bexar County Courthouse.


Atop the monument to fallen soldiers in the WBTS stands a granite figure of a Confederate soldier pointing to the sky. At its base, a two-part inscription reads, “Lest We Forget” and “Our Confederate Dead.”


Only 50 people showed up to protest the monument. When local media reported the protest, 8 members of the Sons of Confederate Veterans quickly arrived to protect the monument. Six dressed in WBTS period attire.


“Sons of Confederate Veterans is opposed to removing any monuments to Confederate heroes from Texas,” SCV Public Information Officer Marshall Davis stated. “The men honored with these memorials fought nobly and bravely for their country, and many of them never came home. The Confederate Monument in Travis Park, as well as other monuments throughout Texas and the South, honor the brave deeds done by these men.”


Response to the protest has been rapid. Former City Councilman and University of Texas at San Antonio professor Mario Salas called the monument “racist, disgusting, and vile.” On Thursday, District 1 Councilman Roberto Trevino released a statement saying that he and District 2 Councilman William Cruz Shaw have had positive talks about removing the monument with Mayor Nirenberg.


The next step will be for the City Council to work with the Department of Arts and Culture and the Office of Historic Preservation to come up with a “plan” for the monument.




One of the Hillsborough County commissioners who voted last month against removing the Confederate monument from downtown Tampa is now open to relocating it. Commissioner Victor Crist said Wednesday he wants to move the statue to Oaklawn Cemetery, Tampa’s oldest public burial ground and the final resting place of the city’s pioneers, 13 mayors, and several Confederate soldiers.


If he gets his way, it would be a major shift for the commission, which voted 4-3 on June 21 to keep the monument outside the old county courthouse, where it has stood since 1932.


But his idea earned a quick rebuke from Tampa officials who want no part of the controversial statue and last month ripped the Republican-led commission for not getting it out of the progressive city’s downtown.


Meanwhile, Hillsborough County Commissioner Les Miller said Wednesday he will once again ask his colleagues to remove the statue when they meet July 19.


Miller wants to give the statue back to the United Daughters of the Confederacy, who paid for it and dedicated it on county land in 1911.


Since the vote, Miller said he has seen a “major groundswell of elected officials, and [black] activists…calling for commissioners to reconsider.”


Commissioners Crist, Ken Hagan, Sandy Murman and Stacy White voted against removal, while Miller and Commissioners Al Higginbotham and Pat Kemp wanted it gone.


At that meeting, Crist won support for putting a mural that promotes diversity on a 10-foot wall behind the monument. But the attempt at a compromise did not appease opponents. Crist hopes Oaklawn Cemetery will. The cemetery is a few blocks northwest of the monument’s current location and its grounds include a marker honoring Confederate soldiers and sailors. There, Crist said, it would be “out of sight, out of mind” for people who want it removed, but still accessible for those who want it prominently displayed.


Tampa Mayor Bob Buckhorn scoffed at the idea as inappropriate. City-owned Oaklawn, opened in 1850, is historically significant as a mass grave of the city’s earliest residents. It is also close to St. Paul AME church and Greater Bethel Missionary Baptist Church, a large, black Church. “I don’t want members of Greater Bethel to be worshiping in the shadow of a Confederate memorial,” Buckhorn said.


City Councilman Frank Reddick said he would “do everything within my means to make sure the city doesn’t allow that to happen.”


Crist also floated Hillsborough’s Veterans Memorial Park off Highway 301 and the 100-year-old Myrtle Hill Memorial Park in east Tampa, as potential locations for the monument.


Those destinations pose their own challenges. Myrtle Hill is a privately owned cemetery. For years, fights over Confederate symbols bogged down efforts to build a Civil War monument at Veterans Memorial Park.


“Both sides are going to have to be willing to give a little,” Crist said. “I want to bring a resolve that everyone can live with and I’m confident that is possible.”




City commissioners in Hollywood, Florida have agreed to begin the process of changing the names of streets named after Confederate generals. During a contentious three-hour meeting Monday night, the Hollywood City Commission voted 5-2 to begin renaming Lee Street, Hood Street, and Forrest Street.




The head of the Alachua County NAACP, Evelyn Foxx, woke up Monday morning to go for a walk with her friend, and found a Confederate Flag lying outside in front of her home, reported The Gainesville Sun.


The 66-year-old Foxx at first thought it was an American flag and walked over to pick it up – but called police after realizing it was a Confederate Flag.


Friend Meg Niederhofer told the newspaper that Foxx had been reporting threatening calls to police since the election of President Trump. She and Foxx attributed the phone calls to KKK supporters of Donald Trump.


Police are investigating the incident, and they’ve been investigating alleged “threats” against Foxx since November 2016. No arrests have been made in either case.


Niederhofer’s husband is Alachua County Commissioner Robert Hutchinson.


Lincoln Unvarnished:
Maryland, My Maryland! ‘The Despot’s Heel Is on Thy Shore.’
By Mike Scruggs


Following the bombardment and surrender of Fort Sumter at Charleston to Confederate forces on April 9, 1861, Lincoln ordered the Governors of the remaining Union states to call up their state militias and supply an army of 75,000 to invade and subdue the seven Southern states that had seceded. While this was received enthusiastically in many northern states, the Border States viewed this order as a tyranny they would not follow. As Union sentiment in the Border States evaporated, Virginia, Tennessee, North Carolina, and Arkansas seceded, and secession efforts were underway in Missouri and Kentucky.


Governor J. W. Ellis of North Carolina declared that North Carolina would “be no party to this wicked violation of the laws of the country and this war upon the liberties of a free people.” Governor Beriah Magoffin of Kentucky responded to Lincoln: “I say emphatically Kentucky will furnish no troops for the wicked purpose of subduing her sister Southern states.” Missouri Governor Claiborne Jackson responded harshly to Lincoln: “Your requisition is illegal, unconstitutional, revolutionary, inhuman, [and] diabolical, and cannot be complied with.” The order was likewise not well received in Maryland.


Although the Southern states wished to secede peacefully and had indicated no aggressive intentions against the Northern capitol, one of the first steps of the Lincoln Administration was to secure the capitol in Washington. In order to get to Washington, the mustered Union regiments had to come through Baltimore. As the railroad did not go through the city of Baltimore, they had to disembark from their troop trains north of the city and proceed by wagon, horse, and foot through the city, and then embark by train again on the other side. Unfortunately, on April 19th, the 6th Massachusetts chose to march through the city fully armed and in military formation. They were jeered by unsympathetic crowds of bystanders. Furthering the misfortune, the troops fired on the crowds killing twelve people. Fire then began to be returned from the crowd, and four soldiers were killed.


These twelve civilians and four Union soldiers, whose blood flecked the streets of Baltimore, were the first battle deaths of a war that would take the lives of 620,000 Union and Confederate soldiers and an estimated 50,000 Southern civilians.


By May of 1861, Lincoln, his cabinet, and generals had already begun to close down dissenting newspapers all over the country from Chicago to New York. Lincoln also took it upon himself to suspend the Writ of Habeas Corpus, a constitutional guarantee of the Bill of Rights with precedent dating back to the English Magna Carta. Habeas Corpus is a fundamental liberty, which prevents arbitrary arrest and imprisonment indefinitely without defined charges, trial, or means of release. Suspension of Habeas Corpus under conditions of civil disorder can only be temporary and must be authorized by Congress within 30 days.


In that same month of May, a resident of Baltimore, John Merryman, who had been arrested on the order of Union General George Cadwallader and held at Fort McHenry without charges or trial, petitioned U. S. Chief Justice Roger B. Taney for a Writ of Habeas Corpus. Taney granted a writ and set a date for a hearing, but it was ignored by Lincoln and his generals. Cadwallader responded by letter that Lincoln had suspended Habeas Corpus, so there would be no compliance with the Supreme Court. Taney ordered a federal marshal to Fort McHenry to enforce the writ, but Union Army officials refused his entrance.


Taney responded by writing a blistering court opinion, a constitutional classic, that held Merryman’s arrest to be unlawful and a violation of the Constitution, and that only Congress could suspend the Writ of Habeas Corpus. The Chief Justice stated that if Lincoln’s actions were allowed to stand, “…the people of the United States are no longer living under a government of laws, but every citizen holds, life, liberty, and property at the will and pleasure of the army officer in whose military district he may happen to be found.”


Lincoln not only ignored the Supreme Court’s ruling, he wrote out an order for the arrest of Chief Justice Taney. This arrest, however, was in the end not actually carried out for fear of extremely adverse public opinion and political consequences.


With these developments, a sizeable portion of the Maryland public was becoming sympathetic not only to the South, but even secession. Therefore, there was much talk of it among Maryland State Legislators. Consequently, Northern informers were asked to identify members of the Maryland Legislature that might support secession in the coming legislative session. Secretary of War Simon Cameron then issued an order to Major General Banks in Maryland that “all or any part of the Legislative members must be arrested to prevent secession.”


On the night of September 12-13, all suspected Southern sympathizers in the Maryland Legislature were arrested and imprisoned in Fort McHenry. In all, fifty-one persons were arrested and imprisoned. Ironically, among those arrested and imprisoned was the grandson of Francis Scott Key, the author of the Star Spangled Banner.


To further tighten Union political hold on Maryland, all members of the Union armed forces were allowed to vote in the November election, although they were citizens of other states. Voters had to walk through platoons of soldiers with rifles and fixed bayonets to reach their polling place. The London Saturday Review noted: “It was as perfect an act of despotism as can be conceived. It was a coup d’etat in every essential feature.”


These events inspired the lines of Maryland’s state song from the poem written by James Ryder Randall in 1861, that few now realize were directed against Abraham Lincoln, his cabinet, and generals. These are the most famous verses:


“The despot’s heel is on thy shore,
Maryland, My Maryland!
His torch is at thy temple door,
Maryland, My Maryland!
Avenge the patriotic gore,
That flecked the streets of Baltimore,
And be the battle queen of yore,
Maryland, My Maryland!
Dear Mother! Burst the tyrant’s chain,
Maryland, My Maryland!
Virginia should not call in vain,
Maryland, My Maryland!
She meets her sisters on the plain,
‘Sic simper!’ ‘Tis the proud refrain
That baffles minions back amain,
Maryland, My Maryland!
Arise in majesty again,
Maryland, My Maryland!


Twenty thousand of Maryland’s sons were able to escape the Union occupation of their mother state and distinguish themselves in the Confederate Army.


Genuine unity and patriotism must always be based on truth and pointed toward justice. They cannot be sustained by coercion or deception, however modest.


ABOUT THE AUTHOR – Mike Scruggs, a.k.a. Leonard M. Scruggs


Mike Scruggs is the author of two books: The Un-Civil War: Shattering the Historical Myths; and Lessons from the Vietnam War: Truths the Media Never Told You, and over 600 articles on military history, national security, intelligent design, genealogical genetics, immigration, current political affairs, Islam, and the Middle East.


He holds a BS degree from the University of Georgia and an MBA from Stanford University. A former USAF intelligence officer and Air Commando, he is a decorated combat veteran of the Vietnam War, and holds the Distinguished Flying Cross, Purple Heart, and Air Medal. He is a retired First Vice President for a major national financial services firm and former Chairman of the Board of a classical Christian school.


Click the website below to order books:


A reader in Georgia submits:


American Independence Won In The South
by SCV Commander James King


In snow shoe mouth deep they came that 27th day of September 1780, a long column of mounted riflemen full of wrath and anger. The long slender rifles of the frontier (aka Flintlock American Long Rifle, Pennsylvania Rifle, Kentucky Rifle) were balanced across their saddles and knives strapped on their belts. They were “Over Mountain Men” from western North Carolina in the area that would later become northeast Tennessee in 1796. Several years earlier they had formed little settlements along the Watauga, Holston, and Nolichunky rivers on the western side of the Appalachian mountains.


The Revolutionary War for American Independence had not affected them until earlier in this year and due to their remote location they were virtually independent of British and American government. But the war in the north which had been ongoing since 1775 had been fought to a stalemate. Now England had decided upon a Southern Strategy and the war moved from the north to the south. Georgia, the youngest and weakest of the 13 American colonies had fallen to the British with the capture of Savannah on Dec. 29,1778. The British and their loyalist American Tory forces had moved into South Carolina and American Continentals and Whig militia patriots had suffered devastating defeats at Charleston, Waxhaws, and Camden.


British Major Patrick Ferguson had been ordered by British General Charles Cornwallis to invade the South Carolina back country between the Catawba and Saluda rivers and recruit Loyalists and suppress Whig Patriots. Within days of his invasion of the Carolina up country Ferguson had recruited many Loyalist Tory British sympathizers and had began to hunt down and punish Whig Patriots. During the summer of 1780 “Over Mountain Men” militia had swept eastward and engaged Ferguson and his Loyalist Tories in fierce little engagements at Woffords Iron Works, Musgrove’s Mill, Thicketty Fort, and Cedar Springs. Now they had recrossed the mountains back to their homes planning to resume resistance at a later time.


Ferguson made a decision that would prove fatal to him and his Loyalists. He paroled a Whig prisoner and sent him inform Col. Isaac Shelby whom he considered the titular head of the “Over Mountain Men” or “Back Water Men” informing them that if they did not cease resistance to the British Crown that he would cross the mountains and hang the leaders, burn their houses, and lay waste to the area with “fire and sword”. Col. Shelby met with Col.John Sevier (Nolichunky Jack) and a meeting of the mountain men took place at Sycamore Shoals on the Watauga river. A decision was made to carry the battle to Ferguson and it was to be a fight to the finish. They rode eastward, a column of about 450 men, and were joined by North Carolina, Virginia, South Carolina and Georgia militia and now numbered over 1000.


Ferguson and his 1100 Loyalist Tories took up a position on top of King’s Mountain on the NC. and SC. line. The Patriot army had selected 900 of the best rifleman and best horses. All through the night they advanced toward King’s Mountain and at 3 PM on October 7 they totally surprised the Loyalists. The Colonels on horseback horseshoed around the mountain and led the men fighting tree to tree to the top. Ferguson was killed and the battle was a total Patriot victory.


Then at Cowpens South Carolina on Jan.17,1781 General Daniel Morgan and American Patriots defeated British Col..Banastre Tarlton. The victories of these two battles caused a British retreat to North Carolina where the American army engaged and bloodied them severely at Guilford Courthouse. With the help of the French fleet this led to surrender by the British at Yorktown Virginia on Oct. 19, 1781. On Sept. 3, 1783 England granted Independence to each of the 13 sovereign American colonies.


James W. King
Commander SCV Camp 141


A reader in Montana submits:


A Tribute To America’s Patriot Pastors And Stalwart Statesmen
By Chuck Baldwin


In honor of Independence Day, I want to devote this column to the brave men of Colonial America who were most responsible for our country’s successful separation from Great Britain: namely, the patriot pastors and stalwart statesmen of 1775 and 1776. It was the pulpit as much as the politician and soldier that birthed this great country. Without the Black Regiment–the mostly Protestant pulpits of Colonial America–there would never have been a Lexington Green, Concord Bridge, or Bunker Hill. Of course, the moniker “Black Regiment” or “Black Robed Regiment” was given by the British Crown, which demonstrated how important and effective the Crown believed the pulpits of Colonial America were to the cause of independence.


The names John Witherspoon, John Leland, Jonathan Mayhew, Isaac Backus, Samuel Cooper, and Ebenezer Baldwin are as important to the success of the American Revolution as are the names of Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, Josiah Quincy, Dr. Joseph Warren, John Hancock, and Richard Henry Lee.


On the occasion of our celebration of Independence Day this week, I want to honor these great men by sharing with readers some examples of their nobility and sacrifice.


Patriot Pastors


James Caldwell


James Caldwell was called the “Rebel High Priest” or the “Fighting Chaplain.” Caldwell is most famous for the “Give ’em Watts!” story.


During the Springfield (New Jersey) engagement, the Colonial militia ran out of wadding for their muskets. Quickly, Caldwell galloped to the Presbyterian church, and, returning with an armload of hymnals, he threw them to the ground and hollered, “Now, boys, give ’em Watts!” He was referring to the famous hymn writer, Isaac Watts, of course.


American Tories burned Caldwell’s house and church. He and his wife Hannah then moved to a farm house about four miles away. British troops murdered Hannah in the farm house as she sat with her children on her bed. They then burned down the farm house in an attempt to cover up their murder of Mrs. Caldwell. Later, a fellow American was bribed by the British to assassinate Pastor Caldwell–which is exactly what he did. No less than three cities, two public schools, and an entire school district in the State of New Jersey bear his name.


John Peter Muhlenberg


John Peter Muhlenberg was pastor of a Lutheran church in Woodstock, Virginia, when hostilities erupted between Great Britain and the American colonies. When news of Bunker Hill reached Virginia, Muhlenberg preached a sermon from Ecclesiastes 3 to his congregation. He reminded his parishioners that there was a time to preach and a time to fight. He said that for him the time to preach was past and it was time to fight. He then threw off his vestments and stood before his congregants in the uniform of a Virginia colonel.


Muhlenberg later was promoted to brigadier general in the Continental Army and later to major general. He participated in the battles of Brandywine, Germantown, Monmouth, and Yorktown. He went on to serve in both the US House of Representatives and US Senate.


Joab Houghton


Joab Houghton was a Christian attorney and judge and also a lay preacher at the Hopewell [New Jersey] Baptist Meeting House. Colonel Houghton was in the Meeting House at worship when he received the first information of Concord and Lexington. His great-grandson gives the following eloquent description of the way he treated the tidings:


“[M]ounting the great stone block in front of the meeting-house, he beckoned the people to stop. Men and women paused to hear, curious to know what so unusual a sequel to the service of the day could mean. At the first words a silence, stern as death, fell over all. The Sabbath quiet of the hour and of the place was deepened into a terrible solemnity. He told them all the story of the cowardly murder at Lexington by the royal troops; the heroic vengeance following hard upon it; the retreat of Percy; the gathering of the children of the Pilgrims round the beleaguered hills of Boston: then pausing, and looking over the silent throng, he said slowly: ‘Men of New Jersey, the red coats are murdering our brethren of New England! Who follows me to Boston?’ and every man in that audience stepped out of line, and answered, ‘I!’ There was not a coward or a traitor in old Hopewell Baptist Meeting-house that day.” (William Cathcart, D.D., Baptists and the American Revolution, Second Edition, S.A. George & Co., Philadelphia, 1876, pp. 56-57)


Jonas Clark


Jonas Clark was pastor of the Church of Lexington, Massachusetts, on April 19, 1775, the day that British troops marched on Concord with orders to arrest Sam Adams and John Hancock and to seize a cache of firearms. It was Pastor Clark’s male congregants who were the first ones to face off against the British troops as they marched through Lexington on their way to Concord. When you hear the story of the Minutemen at the Battle of Lexington, remember those Minutemen were Pastor Jonas Clark and the brave men of his congregation.


On the one year anniversary of the Battle of Lexington (April 19, 1776), Clark preached a sermon based upon his eyewitness testimony of the event. He called his sermon “The Fate of Blood-Thirsty Oppressors and God’s Tender Care of His Distressed People.”


On Sunday, April 19, 2015, I delivered this famous message by Jonas Clark to my folks at Liberty Fellowship. This message was delivered word-for-word as preached by Pastor Clark. I invite readers to watch this message. And when you do, you will see the kind of preaching Colonial pastors delivered to their congregations, and you will understand how the American colonists were spiritually and morally prepared to fight the War of Independence. You will also realize that it is the absence of this kind of preaching that is directly causing America’s current plight.


Of course, these four brave preachers were not the only ones to participate in America’s fight for independence. There were Episcopalian ministers such as Dr. Samuel Provoost of New York, Dr. John Croes of New Jersey, and Robert Smith of South Carolina. Presbyterian ministers such as Adam Boyd of North Carolina and James Armstrong of Maryland, along with many others, also took part.


So many Baptist preachers participated in America’s War for Independence that at the conclusion of the war President George Washington wrote a personal letter to the Baptist people saying, “I recollect with satisfaction that the religious Society of which you are Members, have been, throughout America, uniformly, and almost unanimously, the firm friends to civil liberty, and the preserving Promoters of our glorious revolution.” It also explains how Thomas Jefferson could write on April 13, 1809, to Albemarle Buckmountain Baptist Church in Virginia and say, “We have acted together from the origin to the end of a memorable Revolution.”


Without question, the courageous preaching and example of Colonial America’s patriot pastors provided the colonists with the inspiration and resolve to resist the tyranny of the Crown and win America’s freedom and independence.


I invite readers to visit my Black Regiment web page to learn more about my attempt to resurrect America’s Black Robed Regiment. Go to:


The Black Regiment


This is the fighting heritage of America’s pastors and preachers. So, what has happened? What has happened to that fighting spirit that once existed, almost universally, throughout America’s Christian denominations? How have preachers become so timid, so shy, and so cowardly that they will stand apathetic and mute as America faces the destruction of its liberties? Where are the preachers today to explain, expound, and extrapolate the principles of liberty from Holy Writ?


Stalwart Statesmen


George Washington


Called the “Father of His Country,” George Washington was perhaps the most important man of the founding era. Supernaturally spared during the Indian wars, Washington became the military leader who held the Continental Army together when it was virtually impossible for any man to do so. Without his leadership at Valley Forge and elsewhere, there is absolutely no doubt that the Continental Army would have fallen apart and the fight for independence would have been lost.


Equally significant is the leadership that George Washington demonstrated in the Continental Congress. Without question, Washington was the glue that held the political bodies of the colonies together. Then, add the fact that George Washington was America’s first President (whose leadership solidified the colonies into a new United States), and his value to the cause of American independence cannot be in any way overstated.


Think of it: George Washington was the commander-in-chief of the Continental Army. And he led that inferior army to victory over the greatest military force in the world at the time: Great Britain. Afterward, Washington rebuffed a strong effort to inaugurate him as America’s king and led the fledgling nation to embrace republican government instead. Washington presided over the Constitutional Convention that drafted the US Constitution. He was America’s first President. Washington’s Farewell Address formed the compass and rudder of America for at least the next 75 years; and in many respects, its influence is felt even today. In my opinion, this address is the greatest political dissertation ever submitted to the American people.


Thomas Jefferson


Thomas Jefferson was the principal author of America’s birth certificate: the Declaration of Independence. In my mind, there is no greater document of liberty ever written by man. When it came to the understanding of human rights, individual liberty, states’ rights, and enlightenment philosophy, Jefferson had no peer.


President John F. Kennedy once held a dinner at the White House for a group of the brightest minds in the nation at that time. He made this statement: “I think this is the most extraordinary collection of talent, of human knowledge, that has ever been gathered together at the White House, with the possible exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone.” He was probably right.


Jefferson served in the Continental Congress; he was the first Secretary of State; he was the third President of the United States; he commissioned the Lewis and Clark expedition; he was the author of the Virginia Statute For Religious Freedom, which is regarded as one of the greatest declarations of religious liberty ever written; he could speak and read six languages; he knew and influenced virtually every man who would be regarded as a Founding Father today; and he wrote over 18,000 personal letters. Had not the British burned much of it in the War of 1812, his library would probably go down as the greatest personal collection of literary works ever collected by one man.


Patrick Henry


Patrick Henry was the colonies’ most ardent advocate of liberty–bar none. In oratorical genius, he has never had an equal. Henry was a farmer and lawyer, a devoted father of 17 children, and five-term governor of Virginia. Henry was the first Founding Father to defy British taxes and, in so doing, was the first who was willing to risk death as a traitor.


Patrick Henry’s immortal speech at St. John’s Church in Richmond to a gathering of the Virginia legislators in 1775 is regarded yet today as the most influential speech ever delivered on American soil. Probably more people are acquainted with that “Give Me Liberty, Or Give Me Death!” speech than any other public address ever delivered.


Henry’s contribution to the War for Independence cannot be overestimated. As Governor of Virginia (the richest and most populated of the 13 colonies), he supplied the largest share of arms and munitions to the outnumbered and poorly provisioned Continental Army. It was also Patrick Henry and his fellow Anti-Federalists who were primarily responsible for the Bill of Rights being added to the Constitution.


Samuel Adams


Samuel Adams is rightly called the “Father of the American Revolution.” He was a cousin to President John Adams and a graduate of Harvard. He was perhaps the most influential member of the Massachusetts State legislature. He succeeded John Hancock as Governor of Massachusetts. He was a delegate to the Continental Congress and a signer of the Declaration of Independence. He, along with men such as Dr. Joseph Warren, Patrick Henry, Thomas Jefferson, Richard Henry Lee, and Josiah Quincy, Jr., created the “Committees of Correspondence,” which became the principal conduit of articles and letters of pro-revolution, pro-liberty, and pro-independence communication between the colonies. Adams was also very influential in the now famous Boston Tea Party.


Sam Adams was so hated by the British government that they used military force to try and apprehend him, which led to both the Boston Massacre on March 5, 1770, and the “Shot Heard ‘Round The World” at Lexington Green and Concord Bridge on April 19, 1775.


James Madison


James Madison is properly called the “Father of The US Constitution.” He was the fourth President of the United States and was the principal author of the Bill of Rights. Madison authored more than a third of the Federalist Papers. Thomas Jefferson referred to the Federalist Papers as “the best commentary on the principles of government, which ever was written.” Madison served as US Representative from Virginia and as Secretary of State under Jefferson. George Washington considered Madison to be the preeminent authority on the US Constitution in the entire country.


Madison was a fervent proponent of the principle of divided power. He believed government (especially the federal government) could not be trusted with too much power and worked to ensure the separation of powers within the federal government. He also was a major proponent of states’ rights and sovereignty. Madison broke with Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton over Hamilton’s promotion of the State Bank and (together with Thomas Jefferson) formed what became known as the Democratic-Republican Party. Madison also co-authored with Jefferson two of the most prominent documents of liberty: the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions.


I trust and pray that each of us will reacquaint ourselves with the principles upon which the Declaration of Independence was written and upon which the United States of America was founded. And while we are doing that, let’s be sure we are passing these principles on to our children and grandchildren.


Were Confederate Generals Traitors?


Syndicated Column by Dr. Walter Williams
Walter E. Williams is a professor of economics at George Mason University.


June 29, 2017


My “Rewriting American History” column of a fortnight ago, about the dismantling of Confederate monuments, generated considerable mail.


Some argued there should not be statues honoring traitors such as Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson, and Jefferson Davis, who fought against the Union. Victors of wars get to write the history, and the history they write often does not reflect the facts.


Let’s look at some of the facts and ask: Did the South have a right to secede from the Union? If it did, we can’t label Confederate generals as traitors.


Article 1 of the Treaty of Paris (1783), which ended the war between the Colonies and Great Britain, held “New Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, to be free sovereign and Independent States.”


Representatives of these states came together in Philadelphia in 1787 to write a constitution and form a union.


During the ratification debates, Virginia’s delegates said, “The powers granted under the Constitution being derived from the people of the United States may be resumed by them whensoever the same shall be perverted to their injury or oppression.”


The ratification documents of New York and Rhode Island expressed similar sentiments.


At the Constitutional Convention, a proposal was made to allow the federal government to suppress a seceding state. James Madison, the “Father of the Constitution,” rejected it.


The minutes from the debate paraphrased his opinion:


A union of the states containing such an ingredient [would] provide for its own destruction. The use of force against a state would look more like a declaration of war than an infliction of punishment and would probably be considered by the party attacked as a dissolution of all previous compacts by which it might be bound.


America’s first secessionist movement started in New England after the Louisiana Purchase in 1803. Many were infuriated by what they saw as an unconstitutional act by President Thomas Jefferson.


The movement was led by Timothy Pickering of Massachusetts, George Washington’s secretary of war and secretary of state. He later became a congressman and senator.


“The principles of our revolution point to the remedy-a separation,” Pickering wrote to George Cabot in 1803, for “the people of the East cannot reconcile their habits, views, and interests with those of the South and West.”


His Senate colleague James Hillhouse of Connecticut agreed, saying, “The eastern states must and will dissolve the union and form a separate government.”


This call for secession was shared by other prominent Americans, such as John Quincy Adams, Elbridge Gerry, Fisher Ames, Josiah Quincy III, and Joseph Story. The call failed to garner support at the 1814-15 Hartford Convention.


The U.S. Constitution would have never been ratified-and a union never created-if the people of those 13 “free sovereign and Independent States” did not believe that they had the right to secede.


Even on the eve of the War of 1861, Unionist politicians saw secession as a right that states had. Rep. Jacob M. Kunkel of Maryland said, “Any attempt to preserve the union between the states of this Confederacy by force would be impractical and destructive of republican liberty.”


The Northern Democratic and Republican parties favored allowing the South to secede in peace.


Northern newspapers editorialized in favor of the South’s right to secede. New-York Tribune (Feb. 5, 1860): “If tyranny and despotism justified the revolution of 1776, then we do not see why it would not justify the secession of five millions of southrons from the federal union in 1861.”


The Detroit Free Press (Feb. 19, 1861): “An attempt to subjugate the seceded states, even if successful, could produce nothing but evil-evil unmitigated in character and appalling in extent.”


The New-York Times (March 21, 1861): “There is a growing sentiment throughout the North in favor of letting the Gulf States go.”


Confederate generals were fighting for independence from the Union just as Washington and other generals fought for independence from Great Britain. Those who’d label Lee as a traitor might also label Washington as a traitor.


I’m sure Great Britain’s King George III would have agreed.


Descendants of WBTS soldiers, battlefield re-enactors, and local officials gathered in Westminster, Maryland last weekend as they do every year to commemorate Corbit’s Charge of June 29, 1863. The two-day series of activities has long featured a ceremony at the grave of Confederate Lt. John William Murray, who was killed in the battle and buried in the cemetery of the Church of the Ascension.


This year, for the first time, a member of the Sons of Union Veterans had been invited to speak about a soldier, whose grave was recently discovered in a local church cemetery – near that of a Confederate lieutenant who is always honored.


The organizers invited Tim McCoy, Commander of the Sons of Union Veterans of the Civil War to add a marker to the gravestone of Butler, who fought for the North.


When McCoy decided to abuse the platform to wax eloquent on what he perceived to be the “war fought over slavery,” members of a Confederate color guard turned their backs on him.


Ray Rooks, color guard sergeant of the Maryland Sons of Confederate Veterans, ordered his 11 men holding flags to about-face. As they did, they were joined by three women and a bagpiper and a drummer.


Rooks said McCoy was being “derogatory” to Southern soldiers, and that “a political type of speech” was inappropriate to a graveside ceremony. “He was speaking facts that were not correct, and degrading to the soldiers of the South,” Rooks said. “It was his tone,” he said. “He was very negative toward the soldiers of the South.”


Commander McCoy declined to comment on the incident.


The event is sponsored by the City. Its organizer, Steven Carney, said he was surprised by the Confederate descendants’ display. But he also noted that the group turned back around when it came time to honor the Union soldier. “They did not disrespect Butler,” he said.


Carney said he has not begun to plan next year’s event, but that it will honor soldiers of both sides. “We will absolutely have people speak about Corporal Butler and John William Murray as well,” he said.


Corbit’s Charge was a brief and lopsided clash, in which about 100 Union soldiers were overwhelmed by about 6,000 Confederate troops.


To the extent that it’s remembered, it’s because it delayed the advance of Gen. J.E.B. Stuart to the pivotal battle of Gettysburg. Some believe Stuart’s late arrival, after the fighting already started, contributed to the Confederacy’s defeat there and thus in the war.


Dixie Heritage would like to commend Sgt. Ray Rooks, his color guard, and those who joined them in maing a non-verbal statement of opposition to one who would so publicly defame the good names of our ancestors.


Dixie Heritage
P.O. Box 618
Lowell, FL 32663