Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Southern Heritage News & Views

Expand Messages
  • ~mary~
    Charles Demastus wrote: SOUTHERN HERITAGE NEWS & VIEWS is dedicated to the preservation of Southern Heritage and to defend the honour of our Confederate
    Message 1 of 331 , May 26, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Charles Demastus wrote:
      SOUTHERN HERITAGE NEWS & VIEWS is dedicated 
      to the preservation of Southern Heritage and 
      to defend the honour of our Confederate ancestors. 
      It is FREE and sent to you via E-mail.
      To subscribe send blank e-mail to:
      Southern Heritage News & Views
      Keeping You Informed
      Post your Southern events, fundraisers, 
      meetings, etc. FREE
      You can help SHNV by buying chances to 
      win this 1851 Navy Colt Replica.
      Your free subscription is supported by today's sponsor:
      Need a new washer and dryer set? You could get one free!
      New protest permit rules cause furor
      Flaggers, ACLU say state policy flawed. 
      Brian Basinger
      Savannah Morning News
      ATLANTA - Confederate heritage enthusiasts reacted angrily Wednesday after the Georgia Department of Natural Resources Board unanimously agreed to overhaul the rules on permits for protests at state parks.
      Board members insisted the new policy gives protesters easier access to state parks by requiring that officials have no more than five days to decide whether to issue a permit to a person or group. The old rules did not specify how quickly officials must respond to a permit application.
      "We were not trying to limit or restrain protesters," said Sara Clark, an Alpharetta resident who serves as chairwoman of the board's Parks, Recreation and Historic Sites Committee. "We were actually trying to make it easier to get a permit."
      However, members of the Sons of Confederate Veterans said the state can now run out the clock on demonstrators who apply for a permit fewer than five days before an event.
      "What advantage is it for someone who wants to express dissent to have to wait five days?" said Daniel Coleman, spokesman for SCV's Georgia Division. "This is just a loss for all the citizens of Georgia."
      Becky Kelley, who oversees the department's parks and historic sites, said her staff would never attempt to hold up a permit until after a scheduled event.
      State parks have served as the site of various protests and other First Amendment activities for multiple Confederate heritage groups, including many who refer to themselves as "flaggers."
      Some flaggers have held protests at state parks in recent years to protest appearances by Georgia's two most recent governors: Democrat Roy Barnes, who led efforts to remove the Confederate battle emblem from the Georgia state flag in 2001, and Republican Sonny Perdue, who flaggers say failed to keep a promise to let voters decide whether to restore the Confederate emblem to the state flag.
      Park officials have said the new rules weren't motivated by the flaggers, but recommended years ago after similar changes were made to the rules governing protests in federal parks.
      The permit debate has also gained the attention of the American Civil Liberties Union of Georgia, which says the department's rules violate free speech rights under the U.S. and Georgia constitutions.
      ACLU Legal Director Gerry Weber wrote DNR Commissioner Noel Holcomb on Tuesday, saying that passage of the new permit rules "may lead to unnecessary and preventable litigation in this matter."
      Weber did not attend the board's meeting Wednesday, instead sending an intern.
      Board members decided to vote on the permit rule changes, while agreeing to meet with the ACLU as early as next week to discuss Weber's objections.


      In response to: Whistle 'Dixie' if you like, but don't expect all to join in.

      Mr. Roy Hindel is a perfect example of a reconstructed Southerner. He is quoted in this article.. "Thank God Lincoln did what he did to protect the Union". How absolutely vulgar a statement, especially from a man who named his business Dixie Graphics. What type of Southerner do you visualize Mr. Hindel as being? Would he be the type to take a stand against the empire?  As a neighbor, would he help the alphabet soup agencies investigate your activities because you are an active member in the League of the South?
      I guarantee you that this type man will do what ever it takes to keep himself in good graces before the empire. Not only will he sell out his neighbor, but he will sell out anyone, even his own family to those who claim authority.
      Mr. Hindel even denounces his Southern heritage for a Midwestern alliance. Does the word "Scalawag" come into anyone's mind here?
      These type of men not only are a disgrace to Dixie, they are a plague on our Southland! I for one would never do business with Dixie Graphics. They ain't whislin Dixie, but they sure are dancing to the empire's tunes. They probably fly the stars and stripes over their business...just like a good lap dog would.
      For a Free Florida,
      Dan Gonzales
      Vice Chairman Florida League of the South


      Bill Ward

      Dear Chuck and Readers,
      Bill Ward has twice corresponded with me privately about a posting I had made reguarding Nathan Bedford Forrest.
      Twice he has stated that:

      "Mr. Lacy,
      The commentary you posted about Forrest on SHNV is littered with historical inaccuracy. I regret that you chose to post this misinformation at other locations on the Internet without more carefully checking your facts. The most correct statement you made, albeit incomplete was, "Many people ignorant of history say that Bedford was the founder of the KKK." That statement would be more complete had you added, "which is not true."
      You also wrote:
      "The KKK of the late 1860's bears no resemblance to the thugs and racists of the new Klan formed at the turn of the century. [A true statement.]"

      Twice I have responded telling him that those were not my words. I was quoting an article written by: Dr. Gene Ladnier. Which can be found by clicking the link below:
      Dr. Ladnier has very impressive credentials:
      "Dr. Gene Ladnier is the author of the recently published "Fame's Eternal Camping Ground," which is a historical fiction account of General Forrest's victory at Brice's Crossroads. Dr. Ladnier lives in the Northeast Mississippi area, is a Disabled American Veteran, Member of the Military Order of the Purple Heart, Son���s of Confederate Veterans. He is retired from the US Army, Airborne, Ranger, Special Forces, 3/22 Infantry ���Deeds not Words��� and now works as an award winning Editor of the Southern Advocate in Ashland, MS. He has written several books on the topics in the history of the American Civil War"
      After giving Bill Ward this very same info not once but twice, he decided to try and discredit me on the SHNV mailing list. I was courteous and respectful to Mr. Ward, and now must wonder what his REAL agenda is.
      For Freedom and Missouri,
      Clint E. Lacy
      Chairman, Missouri League of Southern Voters
      Editor: Show Me South


      Re: Lincoln What?

      Mr. Forkner,
      I would bet you fine gentlemen thought I forgot about you.
      Please note I have listed two other responders in this mailing because they, too, did not agree with me and I think it is safe to assume that they do agree with you once they read your comments below.  Also, I have Mr. Demastus included in this mailing as well since he is a disseminator of information.
      There are a few things I would like for you to know about me before getting into the meat of this 160 year old argument.
      First, I was born in yankee territory, so it stands to reason that all of you may think my stand on the "civil war" argument will be biased to yankee yodel.  I assure you there is nothing further from the truth.  Being born here does not make me a yankee.  Also, I married a southern gal (this is my only marriage and June 10th is our 25th anniversary) and her late father and I has had some very interesting conversations over the years about the civil war.  Nevertheless, I have been taught by the best in southern hospitality and hold my brothers and sisters to the south in high esteem in OUR fight to move government back within it's limits as prescribed in the US Constitution and restoring the security for our unalienable rights, as that is why "governments are instituted among Men."
      Second, I am not a democrat, a republican, a libertarian, a socialite, or any other of the political classifications stigmatized upon people with regards to their political world view.  The only category from which I acknowledge is that of Christian and the only position I defend is that which is right.
      Third, I am no newby to this dialogue.  I have written extensive position papers based upon years of research.  Now, let me explain my approach to research.  Most researchers, especially authors, have a tendency to develop preconceived ideas about things based upon their world view (world view being a total sum of all their experiences and learning at THAT given time).  There is a tendency to seek out research which confirms their preconceived ideas.  That research is, as a general rule, based upon circumstantial evidence and mostly enough for him to draw certain conclusions.  Indeed, some of those conclusions may be accurate.  And many may not be.
      A good author asserts circumstantial conclusions in forms of questions and allows the reader to draw his own conclusions.  With that said, we must accept the fact, no matter how good any author's research that, further from the time loses it's prime.  One must also admit that no man can determine the position of a man's heart when placed in complex and sometimes, static situations.  More so in this vein, no man knows the conscience of man when being beaten and pounded from various special interests.  Such was the presidency of Abraham Lincoln.
      So, I want to say right off the bat that I believe my opinion of the Civil War question is as true as it can be and refined as any man who has spent years studying it.  I have read books from both sides of the fence.  And oddly enough, there are few authors who can remain totally objective in this subject because this subject forces a man to do two things:
      1.  It forces a man to determine how honest he is with self.
      2.  It forces a man to face his prejudices and exposes whether "...all men are created equal" and whether that truth has become "self evident" to him or not.
      With that said, I am not going to spend my time trying to convince you fine gentlemen that I am right and you are wrong.  I sent one quote from Lincoln; he, identifying his enemies of the time:  Banks & Corporations and the southern army.  The southern army, notwithstanding, Lincoln had as much disdain for the money cartel as he had with any other special interests he did not like.  As much lobbying as I do gentlemen, I can tell you without a single shred of doubt that lobbying now is no different than lobbying then.  And I can assure that those who get what they want are the ones who are in the face of the politician; especially those corporate schist's who are determine to make a return for their donated campaign dollars.  This has been core practice in any system of government for thousands of years.  I believe your positions in this matter wrestle's with history which will find no progress and instead, wasted time, energy, and money-the kind of time, energy, and money we need to ultimately save what remnant of rights we have left.
      Also, to state the Civil War was not about slavery when given the other reasons (taxes, property, states rights, and secession)-as I did mention in the mailing-without any acknowledgment, tells me that honesty with self is in question here from my point of view.  A fact still remains that there is a strong contingent from the south who keep saying the Civil War had nothing to do with slavery when this is nothing more than a tactic to avoid the embarrassing fact they were wrong on the issue.  Therefore, to argue these points would be ineffectual.  Besides, I am sick of arguing this point.  And from my readings of the Civil War, the slave question weighed upon Lincoln more than you know regardless of what he personally felt, said, or declared.
      But hey, that issue has been resolved, for the most part.  However, taxes and property theft by government is at crisis proportions, where there are no North and South lines anymore.
      Secession is still very controversial, however. There are a myriad of theories which determine where sovereignty lies in terms of separating, expatriating, and revolution; whether it is constitutional individually or collectively for the former two, and how revolution is justified from an offensive act of aggression for the latter.  Books have been written on these as well and the opinions are as numerous as that of the Civil War itself.
      For instance:  There are two schools of thought as to WHO can secede from the "Union:��� States or Individuals.
      One side of the argument asserts that when the Constitution was formed, that it essentially established two forms sovereignty:  States and a National Union.  They are "separate entities whose social compacts are separately binding on its citizens."  Hence, the Constitution acknowledges two jurisdictions of law over its citizens.   However, since ultimate sovereignty falls upon "we the people," then, to secede from the "union" can only be from the individual.  One can secede from the US government and still be a citizen within his state.  It defends the notion that the federal "government derives its existence and powers from the people, not from the state, yet each state government derives it's power from the people of that particular state."
      Whether you agree with this or not, the Constitution can be interpreted to support it.
      The other side of the argument asserts that States represent a delegation of the people and therefore, contain virtually the same sovereignty as the individual since, in a republic, the people choose representatives to occupy the space and time for which the people cannot do.  This side argues that states are as much as the election process to Federal power, viz the Electoral College, as the individual citizen.
      So, where to go, what to do?
      First Americans must resolve to understand the self-evident principles in the security of Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.  They must embrace the fact that these Rights are endowed upon them from their Creator, no matter what name you wish to call Him.  And finally, Americans must resolve the distinction of what constitutes the free exercise thereof, and clear violations of the same.  That line MUST be so wide encroachment from unjust powers will be obvious.  And more importantly, Americans must resolve what they will do when such encroachment is executed.
      Most of the questions can be answered in the Declaration of Independence.  While many patriots put their stock in the Constitution, the Constitution is meaningless unless one understands the premise from which it was derive.  That premise is the Declaration of Independence.
      Now, if any of you gentlemen feel the need to debate this, the Declaration of Independence and how these truths put the Constitution into perspective, I am all for it.  Henry David Thoreau said, "There are thousands hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root."  Are you a root striker or will you continue to hack at the branches of who is right or wrong on the Civil War?  That debate leads to nothing than more division; more symptomatic worthless action; more obscurity to see what proper courses of action are needed to preserve what little we have left.
      Jeffery J. Cole



      Mr. Cole,
      This response is similar to the one I sent you on April 21 covering the same subject, except that I have added some commentary regarding your remarks, and a couple of book titles.
      In your sixth paragraph, you engaged in philosophical ramblings that were, in large part, preaching to the choir. You mentioned your vast study of history (the Internet is full of those types), and I will, in turn, mention to you that I have probably been a student of history as long as you are old. Having retired at age 60, history is now very much my avocation. I have written and lectured on the War Between the States (WBTS: erroneously called a civil war) for years.
      Many years ago, I coined two terms, (1) presumptive history -- similar to what you expounded on except that one tends to lose some of your intent in pseudo-intellectual ramblings -- and (2) selective history, which those who would destroy true Southern and WBTS history are adept at using.
      You made statements concerning questions of Lincoln's political leanings, and his allies in the northern financial and industrial world that cannot be substantiated by authors whose writings and carefully researched knowledge on the subject far outweigh yours or mine. Therefore, I will not debate you on the subject, and particularly not by e-mail.
      I encourage you to find copies of the following books that I have listed. If you will carefully digest the information contained in these books, there will be no need for a debate between us on the subject of Abraham Lincoln. They are listed in a suggested reading order, although reading them in a particular order is of minor importance:
      ���The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War,��� by Dr. Thomas J. DiLorenzo. Note that DiLorenzo teaches and specializes in the history of economics and political economy.
      ���When in the Course of Human Events: Arguing the Case for Southern Secession,��� by Charles Adams. This author is considered an expert on the history of taxation.
      "Forced into Glory: Abraham Lincoln's White Dream," by Lerone Bennett, Jr. (Mr. Bennett is the black executive editor of Ebony Magazine -- hardly a biased observer on subjects such as the Emancipation Proclamation.)
      "Lincoln The Man," by Edgar Lee Masters (orig. pub. 1931), currently available in reprint. This is one of the most complete and brutally honest biographies of Lincoln possibly ever written.
      "The Real Lincoln," (a different book), by Charles L. C. Minor (orig. pub. 1904), and available from Crown Rights Publishing (you can find on the Internet).
      As I told you previously, I believe these books will give you a completely different outlook on Abraham Lincoln. Nothing has changed in that belief within the past month.
      Bill Ward
      Salisbury, NC 


      Re: The South is not entirely to blame for slavery
      Regarding some comments I posted under the title, "The South is not entirely to blame for slavery", I received a request from a gentleman named Donald Simmons requesting verification/references for a quote I used which was attributed to the despicable Union General Sherman.  I apologize for not providing the references when I wrote my comments.  For that reason I now wish to provide that reference so anyone can verify it and possibly use that quote in the future as it clearly illustrates to criminality of both Lincoln and the butchers who operated under his tyrannical authority.
      That particular quote came from an article entitled, Ethic Cleansing, by James Bovard in October 1999.  You may read the entire article at: http://www.fff.org/freedom/1099d.asp
      Additional information on this subject you may find educational and informative is:
      "On April 24, 1863, Lincoln issued General Order No. 100, known as the Lieber Code, which reiterated the accepted conventions of international law that existed at the time and which prohibited the intentional targeting of civilians in wartime. Those who did so were considered to be war criminals and should be prosecuted as such.
      But from the very beginning, the Lincoln administration ignored its own Code as its armies pillaged, plundered, raped, and burned their way through the Southern states. In 1862 the entire town of Randolph, Tennessee, was burned to the ground by General Sherman even though there were no enemy combatants there.  In 1863 Sherman burned Jackson and Meridian, Mississippi to the ground, again after the Confederate army had left.  In a letter to General Grant, Sherman boasted that "for five days, ten thousand of our men worked hard and with a will, in that work of destruction, with axes, sledges, crowbars, clawbars, and with fire, and I have no hesitation in pronouncing the work well done. Meridian . . . no longer exists.""   SOURCE: an article entitled, "Lincoln's Second American Revolution" by Thomas J. DiLorenzo which appeared at:
      Additionally,  Sheridan's character was revealed in the below commentary:
      "General Sherman declared on January 31, 1864 that "To the petulant and persistent secessionists, why, death is mercy."  In a July 31, 1862 letter to his wife he said his goal was "extermination, not of soldiers alone, that is the least part of the trouble, but the people."  And so he burned the towns of Randolph, Tennessee, Jackson and Meridian, Mississippi, and Atlanta to the ground after the Confederate army had left; bombarded cities occupied only by civilians in violation of the Geneva Convention of 1863; and boasted in his memoirs of destroying $100 million in private property and stealing another $20 million worth. All of this destroyed food stuffs and left women, children, and the elderly in the cold of winter without shelter or food.
      General Philip Sheridan did much of the same in the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia, burning hundreds of houses to the ground and killing or stealing all livestock and destroying crops long after the Confederate Army had left the valley, just as winter was approaching.
      "A new kind of soldier was needed" for this kind of work, writes Roberts. Here he is referring to my quotation of pro-Sherman biographer Lee Kennett, who in his biography of Sherman wrote that "the New York regiments [in Sherman���s army] were . . . filled with big city criminals and foreigners fresh from the jails of the Old World." Lincoln recruited the worst of the worst to serve as pillagers and plunderers in Sherman���s army."
      SOURCE:  Article by Thomas J. DiLorenzo entitled, "Fighting Facts With Slander" http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo14.html
      Hope this is helpful.
      Jim Welch


      Contrary to what is often contended...

      Not all Confederates were convinced that the Confederacy was or should be a nation governed by religion or that public education was evil:
      Jabez Lamar Monroe Curry was elected to the Alabama legislature in 1847 and served several terms.  During that time, he authored a bill for the geological survey of the state and promoted public education.  In 1857, Curry was elected to the United States Congress and reelected in 1859.  Along with other Southern congressmen, he resigned from Congress in 1861 due to the conflict between the states.  Curry served in the Confederate Congress, 1861-1863, and in the Confederate army as lieutenant colonel of the Alabama 5th Cavalry Regiment. 
      Following the Civil War, Curry was elected president of the Alabama Baptist State Convention in 1865.  A month later, he became president of Howard College (now Samford University) serving until 1868.  He went on to hold numerous high posts in the Southern Baptist Convention and became an ardent advocate of the separation of church and state.
      Because of his work in behalf of free schooling for every child, he was selected to supervise the George Peabody Fund for public education in the South and to serve as agent of the Slater Fund for Negro Schools.  Booker T. Washington said of him, "There was no man in the country more deeply interested in the higher welfare of the Negro than Dr. Curry."  Through countless speeches and publications to the public and governmental sectors, he tirelessly promoted the cause of free public education for all. 
      The 5th Alabama Cavalry Regiment was organized at Tuscumbia in December,
      1862, and was sent into middle Tennessee, where it began a brilliant career by skirmishes at Chapel Hill.  The 5th Alabama later accompanied General Forrest on his Pulaski raid.

      Col. Kelley


      Re: Three-Year-Old Expelled for Spelling 'GOD'

      I hope you read far enough into this "story" to find out that it was a hoax, a complete fabrication by The Swift Report.  They wrote it to point out how picky our public schools are getting.


      Passing of Maj Gen George S. Patton - SCV

      Forwarded Message:
      From: SteveCSA2@...

      Dear Compatriots,
      I have some sad news to pass along. One of our camp members had crossed over the river, under the shade of the trees.....
      I have learned from our SCV HQ today that....Compatriot, Major General retired George Smith Patton had passed away last month, on April 4th.
      I have not gotten all the details as of yet, but I will be contacting his family this week.
      As you my remember, General Patton had joined our camp last year, when our Buffalo Guards Camp 1975, had paid for his Life, SCV membership - after he has been inactive for many years. Our Buffalo Guards Camp 1975, did not want him to be forgotten or left behind
      We were honored to pay for his Life membership for the service he did for his country, and for his proud family name and for the many years he served in our SCV ranks.
      He was the son of General George S Patton of WW2 - and the Great great grandson of Colonel George Smith Patton, who commander the 22nd VA Infantry of the Kanawha Valley, in the western counties of Virginia.
      Also though he passed away, he was a life member in the SCV. Compatriot Patton was in poor depleting health for some time. He would have been very proud to know that so many of his comrades that served under him during his military service (and the Vietnam era) respected him, as well as his fellow compatriots in the SCV.
      His wife was very honored that our Buffalo Guards Camp was interested in having him as an honored life member, and was very thankful, and gave us praise.
      I only wish that I would have had the opportunity to meet the general personally, or was able to talk to him when he was in better health.
      I will be putting in a special dedication in our Picket Post, newsletter in honor to Compatriot Patton, as well as submitting a story to the CV magazine about his ancestors, whom my very ancestor, who served in the 36th VA Infantry had served with Colonel Patton of the 22nd VA Infantry (Since these two units were brigaded together for nearly the whole conflict).
      Please keep Compatriot George Smith Patton VI (MG Retired), in your prayers, as well as his widow and surviving family.
      I will try to contact them, to offer our condolences and to offer any help. It is the leased we can do after hearing about this news several weeks after his passing.
      More news when I get it.
      I will have it posted on our message board, and in the Picket Post, for more details.
      and our website: www.DixieResearch.com
      Any questions contact me any time....
      Your Obedient Servant
      Steve Teeft, Commander
      Buffalo Guards Camp 1975
      Buffalo, NY


      I wrote Rick Badie to tell him about the origins of the term Dixie from the bank in New Orleans, its Dix bill and the Natchez Trace spreading the Dixies to the north.  Apparently I was not the only and he and he might work up a column on that.
      Ernest E. Blevins, MFA
      Blevins Historical Research
      110 Evergreen Way
      Villa Rica, Georgia 30180
      Historic Preservation Consultant -- Historical and Architectural Research -- Genealogical (Family) Research -- Preservation Planning and Documentation -- House History
      Member: Association of Professional Genealogists, Georgia Association of Professional Genealogists, and numerous lineage and heritage societies.


      The history and the TRUTH of "DIXIE" is fabulous ... such a shame that others do not see the beauty in it.....
      I learned fast ... how to have fun, and how to piss off these young "Bucks" who can't handle reality ... mess with this old man, and you mess with your life!  I might be ... 60 ... but I still love my Bluegrass music!
      I have a CD by the singer Sandy Posey, a country-pop singer of the 60's and 70's, and I might add, a hometown girl from Jasper Alabama.  Those not familiar with her ... she's the gal who set "Women's Lib" back a generation ... with her 1966 heartbreaker hit "Born A Woman". 
      On her CD of Bluegrass greats (issued in 1982), is a true BLUEGRASS version of "Dixie", which is loaded in my convertible's CD player.   With the top down ... and the all six speakers at full tilt.... whoa....
      Some yokel (of any color or race) pulls up to a light, with his/her (or its) Rap, Hiphop or other garbage rattling local windows, and I responded, by turning up the sweet voice of Sandy Posey, full blast ... singing DIXIE. 
      Ooooooo.... the reactions are.... PRICELESS!
      BTW ... had a local hick cop in Montgomery, praise me for my audacity ... and he was Black ... even he loved the music!   Maybe it was the message....
      Steve Mungie
      Dothan Alabama


      CSA E-Mail Rapid Response Force Alert Service For the Robert E. Lee 1st. Communications Division
      Dixie Daily News Internet Polls for Donnie Kennedy & GOP Presidential Nomination
      Re: Another 2008 Presidential Election Poll from Dixie Daily News
      Dear Readers:
      There is a 2008 Presidential Poll at http://2008politicalperspective.blogspot.com/2005/05/2008-presidential-poll-update.html Please log on and ask that they also list Donnie Kennedy's name as a potential GOP presidential candidate. Also send them the link to Dixie Daily News and mention our GOP poll.
      In Ronnie Kennedy's new book, "Reclaiming Liberty", he makes the case
      for his Brother, Donnie Kennedy to consider running in the GOP Primaries across Dixie for the 2008 GOP Presidential Nomination.
      Our online survey poll is simply, would you consider supporting Southern activists and author, Donnie Kennedy For President in 2008?
      Log on to Dixie Daily News at http://www.southerncaucus.org and vote
      today in our online poll.
      Thank you,
      Dixie Daily News


      An American Barbecue Pilgrimage

      SCV Camp 2007 Meeting
      Long Beach, California
      June 18, 2005 2PM
      Post your Southern events, fundraisers, meetings, etc. FREE

      related to Christian persecution, government and media
      abuse of Christians, and general Christianphobia.
      It is FREE and sent to you via E-mail.
      To subscribe send an e-mail to: 
    • ~mary~
      SOUTHERN HERITAGE NEWS & VIEWS is dedicated to the preservation of Southern Heritage and to defend the honour of our Confederate ancestors. It is FREE
      Message 331 of 331 , Sep 7, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        SOUTHERN HERITAGE NEWS & VIEWS is dedicated   to the preservation of Southern Heritage and   to defend the honour of our Confederate ancestors.   It is FREE and sent to you via E-mail.  To subscribe send blank e-mail to:  SouthernHeritage-subscribe@...      STAY ON THE CUTTING EDGE OF THE HERITAGE   BATTLE WITH OUR NEWS, OPINIONS AND UPDATES      Dixie Outfitters is working every day to   preserve our Southern heritage. When you   buy Dixie Outfitters apparel you are helping   in the effort to honor our ancestors and safeguard   our Southern way of life.   Buy the original and the best, Dixie Outfitters.  CALL TOLL FREE: 866-916-5866 for your free   color catalog or to place an order.  Visit our web site at: http://www.dixieoutfitters.com      REBEL YELL ON
         LINE   Your Source for Standard and Unique Rebel Merchandise  such as Redneck Gift Baskets and Dixie Birdhouses.  http://www.rebelyellonline.com/      
        Op-ed submission ref. Gettysburg 09/02/06
        Per our telephone conversation, the following is submitted:

        In "The battle over flag's meaning" (York Daily Record, Sunday, 09/03/06) following the protests by the 37th Texas Cavalry and others against the Klan’s appearance at the Gettysburg battlefield the York Daily Record wrote, "The Klan's counter-protesters were organizations that honor the heritage of fighting a war to protect slavery."

        With that statement a newspaper that was otherwise objective attempted to discredit honorable individuals and organizations by repeating flawed folklore rather than history.

        There was never a war fought in America to protect slavery just as there was never a war fought to end slavery.

        Northerners like to get the warm fuzzy feeling from the legend that they fought a noble war to end slavery while Southerners reminisce wistfully about states’ rights.

        Both are wrong.

        There was a war fought to resist ruinous taxation.  By 1860 the revenues from export tariffs on Southern raw goods and import duties on European finished goods had the South providing nearly 70% of the Federal budget.  Almost 90% of that budget was then spent to aid growing Northern industrialization.

        Southern agrarian states lacked the number of  Senators and Congressmen to resist wave after wave of targeted tariffs, taxes and duties which saw most great planatations either bankrupt or teetering on the verge of bankruptcy by 1860.

        In 1861 President-Elect Lincoln lobbied and pushed through a proposed Consitutional amendment to protect slavery forever (Corwin Amendment - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corwin_amendment).  Two State legislatures ratified it:  Ohio on May 13, 1861; followed by Maryland on January 10, 1862. Illinois bungled its ratification by holding a convention.  

        The South could have returned to the Union, helped ratify this Amendment and been victorious in fact and in principle IF the protection of slavery had been their cause for secession.  They did not.

        In his December, 1862, State of the Union Address Lincoln offered the South gradual compensated emancipation with slavery lasting until 1900.  Again the South refused this offer to protect slavery and Lincoln issued his hypocrtical “Emancipation Proclamation” only after this offer failed.

        Neither of these offers to protect slavery brought the South back into the Union - inexplicable if the South was “fighting a war to protect slavery.”

        The “Emancipaton Proclamation” did not free a single slave nor was it intended to do so.  Union slave states remained unaffected as did areas of the South controlled by Union forces and even the entire Confederate state of Tennessee.  Because of the language in the proclamation approximately 800,000 slaves remained in bondage in the North and South until December, 1865, almost eight months after Lee surrendered - meaning that the United States was the last slave nation in North America.

        European nations saw clearly what was happening.

        "...So Englishmen saw it. Lincoln's insincerity was regarded as proven by two things: his earlier denial of any lawful right or wish to free the slaves; and, especially, his not freeing the slaves in 'loyal' Kentucky and other United States areas or even in Confederate areas occupied by United States troops, such as New Orleans."  - The Glittering Illusion: English Sympathy for the Southern Confederacy, Sheldon Vanauken, 1989, Washington, DC: Regnery/Gateway

        The unsegregated Confederate Army included 13,000 Indians (one a Brigadier General), 6500 Hispanics (nine Colonels), 3500 Jews (including the Secretary of State), tens of thousands of foreign-born, Filipinos from Lousiana, Amerasians and many Black Southerners (Free and slave) who were documented fighting for the South.

        "Almost fifty years before the (Civil) War, the South was already enlisting and utilizing Black manpower, including Black commissioned officers, for the defense of their respective states.  Therefore, the fact that Free and slave Black Southerners served and fought for their states in the Confederacy cannot be considered an unusual instance, rather continuation of an established practice with verifiable historical precedence."  - "The African-American Soldier: From Crispus Attucks to Colin Powell" by Lt. Col [Ret.] Michael Lee Lanning

        Were these Black Southerners - many of them among the quarter-million Free People of Color in the South by 1860 - “fighting to protect slavery?”  They were regularly enlisted in the Confederate Army from the first days of the War because they saw the War as did Southerners and European observers:

        "For this war is essentially a war of conquest. If ever a nation did wage such a war, the North is now engaged, with a determination worthy of a more hopeful cause, in endeavoring to conquer the South..." - Col. James Arthur Lyon Fremantle, Coldstream Guards, British Army - "Three Months in the Southern States: April, June, 1863"

        Last Sunday’s editorial attempting to discredit wholesale those who stand against hate proves before one writes one should at least be minimally educated in the topic.  In this case the writer and the York Daily Record failed miserably.

        We simply ask that all act upon the facts of history.

        Michael Kelley
        Commanding, 37th Texas Cavalry (Terrell's)


        Letters to the editor
        Roanoke Times, VA

        Pride and hate aren't related
        In his Aug. 29 letter to the editor, "One nation, indivisible," I couldn't help but laugh at Ryan McCarren calling people "Confederates."
        So, should I call him a "Yankee" or "Federal" for his Union heritage?
        I do have a problem with McCarren's comment, "'heritage, not hate' is a bunch of nonsense."
        Is he saying that people who fly the Confederate flag or take pride in their ancestors are filled with hate?
        True, there are better symbols to represent Southern heritage, and unfortunately the Confederate flag has been tainted by its use by certain organizations.
        McCarren's comment, "it was slavery, plain and simple" -- c'mon.
        Yes, slavery was a big issue, but it was also something that was dying when the Civil War began.
        Maybe he should consider the thought that only 20 percent of Southerners owned slaves, with an even smaller percentage possessing numerous slaves.
        Does that justify slavery? No, it was wrong, but here's something to think about:
        Why did so many Southern men fight if they didn't own slaves? What was the motivation for the average working man to fight for his home, state and rights?
        We need to be cautious of blanket statements.

        Respecting heritage
        I read with great interest Ryan McCarren's Aug. 29 letter to the editor, "One nation, indivisible," and two points really stood out.
        n He felt the need to "honor his Union heritage (who wouldn't have guessed) and the brave men who fought to preserve the Union," but would deny the same privilege to Southerners.
        n He was absolutely sure he knew why the war was fought.
        For his information, "heritage, not hate" is not a bunch of nonsense but a sense of pride in our heritage.
        Also, for his information, at least 80 percent of the Confederate army was comprised of men who didn't even own one slave and never expected to do so.
        My opinion is that McCarren's lack of knowledge is only exceeded by his arrogance.
        S.M. DURRANT



        Part 1. Treatment of prisoners IN THE CONFEDERACY
        Issue 1. FROM THE GRAY BOOK
        By Matthew Page Andrews
        Author of the History of The United States, Dixie Book of Days, &C, &C.
        Only a generation ago, Raphael Semmes, commander of the Confederate warship Alabama, was widely advertised as a"pirate"and Robert E. Lee was stigmatized as a "traitor." Thousands of young Americans were taught so to regard these Southern leaders. Now, however , these terms are nearly obsolete; while many Northern historians, such as Charles Francis Adams, who fought on the Federal side in the War of Secession, and Gamaliel Bradford, who grew up after the war, have delighted in honoring Lee and other Southern leaders as Americans whose character and achievements are the ennobling heritage of a united Nation.
        It was more or less natural that Americans should have been led astray of the truth in the heat of sectional strife and partisan
        expression. Misconceptions have arisen out of every war. In fifty years, however, Americans have made progress in overcoming war prejudices than the people of other lands in the twice or thrice that period.
        This is encouraging, yet the fact that the greater number of our textbooks, and consequently our schools, teach that "the cause for which the South fought was unworthy:" that the Southern leaders "were laboring under some of the most curious hallucinations which a student of history meets in the whole course of his researches ;" and that "the South was the champion of the detested institution of slavery," indicates a lamentable state of historical ignorance on the part of those who should know better. The characters of the Southern leaders are longer aspersed but their motives are besmirched or clouded and their cause unjustly condemned because it is still widely misunderstood*(1).
        Furthermore, since the beginning of the World War of 1914, the conduct of the Prussians, together with the character of their cause, has been compared with the character of the Confederate conduct of the War of Secession, together with the cause and character of Southern statesman. Reputable magazines of wide circulation and writers of prominence have compared the Confederate treatment of prisoners with Prussian outrages in Belgium and France. American newspapers also have printed literally thousands of such comparative references. Fortunately, nine-tenths of these comparisons have been made through ignorance of the facts and not through any malicious desire of the authors to defame the fair name of a single fellow-American on the Confederate side or the "lost cause" which he represented with unsurpassed devotion and valor.
        Side by side with these accusations, in some cases, generous praise is bestowed upon the former "pirate" Semmes as having furnished a model for warfare on the high seas; and it is freely stated that his observance of all requirements of international custom and of the dictates of humanity in civilized warfare held not only to the letter, but also the full spirit of the law. It is not denied, also, that Lee, the Confederate chieftain and quondam "traitor" has offered the noblest example of orders of conduct for an army in the enemy’s country that all history can show, and that these orders were also carried out "even to the protection of a farmer’s fence rails!" The Boston Transcript, for example, took occasion, in 1917, to publish these orders in full.
        Nevertheless, in regard to the treatment of prisoners, the sweeping condemnation of James G. Blaine, delivered in an outburst of war-inspired and partisan condemnation of the South is still, in a general way, believed by Americans who have, of late, been echoing them, although in milder terms and in limitation of the number of those held to have been guilty. Mr Blaine declared some ten years after the war: "Mr Davis [President of the Confederate States] was the author, knowingly, deliberately, guiltily, and willfully, of the gigantic murder and crime at Andersonville. And I here, before God measuring my words, knowing their full extent and import declare that neither the deeds of the Duke of Alva in the low countries, nor the massacre of Saint Bartholomew, nor the thumb screws and engines of torture of the Spanish Inquisition, begin to compare in atrocity with the hideous crimes of Andersonville."
        Historians do not now accept this statement as true, solemnly made as it was by a man who, a few years later, barely missed election to the highest office in the gift of the people of the United States. Furthermore, American historians, even if inclined to bias, do not now go into any detail in the matter of these charges. They refer the reader, however, to a mass of matter(,) the major part of which is as false today as when James G. Blaine based upon it his colossal libel of Jefferson Davis and the military and civil authorities of the Southern Confederacy. As above stated, the so-called "general" historian has dropped this matter in detail, though Mr. Blaine exclaimed dramatically that it would remain as the "blackest page" in the annals of all time.*(2)
        On the other hand, innumerable monographs have been written upon this subject, four-fifths of which are either false per se, or based on false evidence such as that which has misled so many Americans from the time of James G. Blaine and contemporary historians, to editors of and writers in magazines and newspapers of the second decade in the twentieth century. With this one notable exception, American history is rapidly freeing its narrative of misconception in all its phases. It is here that we now find the last great stronghold of sectional misconception.
        If four-fifths of the monographs on prison life in the South are false per se, are based on false evidence, it follows that one-fifth are true or approximately so. The writer has had the privilege of knowing personally a distinguished Union Veteran who suffered privations at Libby Prison. Published in 1912, his story, as it affects his personal experiences, is doubtless true in every respect; yet this same good American helped to publish simultaneously another volume by one of his comrades that is a tissue of falsehood and slander from beginning to end. The voracious author seemed to take his mendacious comrade at his face value, and he advertised as worthy history a gross historical libel.*(3)
        The charges preferred against the authorities of the Confederacy were, for several years, made the most important subject under consideration by the people and even the government of the United States. During that period, the magnitude and violence of the accusations obscured much more weighty and serious problems and placed the South on the defensive, because it was not better element in the North but the radical and partisan minority that had, for the moment, the ear of the country and the world.
        Again with reference to a portion of the truthful fifth part of the testimony in monographs or special articles, it should be said that a concerted attempt has apparently been made by certain interested individuals and groups to cry down, suppress, or defame the authors.


        "All the South has ever desired was that the union, as established by our forefathers, should be preserved; and that the government, as originally organized, should be administered in purity and truth."
        ~~ Gen. Robert E. Lee 1866


        You might be a Yankee if... 
        You take the Wall Street Journal so your neighbors will see it in your driveway.


        Rally sparks debate over flag
        "The Klan's counter-protesters were organizations that honor the heritage of fighting a war to protect slavery."
        Southern Poverty Law Center

        Google opens up 200 years of news 
        The news archive search is one of several new Google services
        Web giant Google is further expanding its online empire with the launch of the Google News Archive Search.
        BBC NEWS

        Museum, donor settle differences
        Lacombe man to take back his flag, other items
        Times Picayune, LA

        Books by Clint Johnson

        SCV Camp 813's
        Battle at Zachary Hill
        Saturday September 9, 2006

        Civil War Days
        Glen Allen, VA.
        Sept 9-10 2006

        Rail Excursion To Chickamauga War Between The States Days Festival Sept. 16
        The Chattanoogan
        POW Day, CSA
        Petersburg, VA
        4:00 pm to 5:00 pm
        September 16, 2006


        Southern Heritage News & Views  Keeping You Informed  http://www.thesouthernamerican.org/SHNV.html      SOUTHERN EVENTS CALENDAR  Post your Southern events, fundraisers,   meetings, etc. FREE  http://pub19.bravenet.com/calendar/show.php?usernum=1560065017      Southern Heritage News & Views Hot Spot  Check here often for breaking news between newsletters.  http://shnv.blogspot.com/      SHNV ARCHIVES  YahooGroups   8-12-1999 thru 1-14-2001  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SouthernHeritage/  Topica  3-27-2001 thru today  http://lists.topica.com/lists/southernheritage/read      Link Partners of SHNV  http://www.thesouthernamerican.org/SHNV.html       *******    

        Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive & well-preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, Champagne in one hand, strawberries in the other, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming "What a Ride!" ~mary~
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.