Wednesday, July 28, 2010

Nullify Bolton's Decision Or Secede

28 July 2010

League of the South News Service

Re: Feds strike down central provisions of Arizona immigration law

Imagine that! A federal judge ruling in favor of the federal government in a case against a State! But that’s what you can expect when there is no impartial arbiter to determine matters of constitutionality.

The League of the South, the premier Southern nationalist organization, encourages the sovereign State of Arizona to either 1) nullify the decision of U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton that removed the teeth from Arizona’s immigration law, or 2) begin immediately to prepare the State for secession from a union in which the compact has been broken by the general (federal) government. Anything less will not be sufficient to protect the lives, liberty, and property of the citizens of Arizona.

The League also encourages Southern Patriots (and those elsewhere of goodwill) to give aid and comfort to the beleaguered citizens of Arizona and their elected representatives and conversely to oppose the federal government and its minions by refusing the same.

For too long the federal government has shown itself to be an organized, criminal enterprise that defines the extent of it own power and rules for the benefit of the elite. This is but the latest example. Such criminal behavior must be stopped by the citizens of the sovereign States acting in concert with each other. We have the legal and moral authority to do so; but do we have the will?

While it might seem meet and right for supporters of Arizona to make the trek to that State to provide aid and comfort, we in the League suggest you focus your efforts against the feds at home. It is more difficult to extinguish a thousand brushfires than one larger conflagration. Be bold and creative in your dissent.


Statement issued by Dr. Michael Hill of Killen, Alabama. He can be reached for further comment at (256) 757-6789 or by email

Thinking Southern & The (new) American Patriot's Bible

(Kindness of Jack. BT)


Dear Friends of the South,

The following subject is a difficult one for the radical nationalist to come to terms with. There are aspects of radical nationalism that are desperately needed today in order to restore U.S. Constitutional principles. I often discuss these, but the subject of this note is also part of the picture.

There is a great and largely unconscious void and blurred confusion in the United States about . . .

1. the nature of patriotism and nationalism (what we often call “patriotism” is actually “nationalism”),

2. legitimate nationalism vs supranationalism,

3. the difference between a “citizen” and a “subject” of government,

4. the relationship of a responsible citizen to his representative government,

5. the relationship of a State government to that of the central federal government and

6. the relationship of churches, Christianity and Christians to both the State and federal governments.

These authorities, institutions and ideas have become dangerously joined and co-mingled. The result brings us to a position that has divinised (given the highest level of authority to) the government, particularly the federal level of government, and to a continuous flow of self-justification concerning nearly every turn of events about the authority, powers, actions and decisions of the U.S. central government. Government "of" the people and "by" the people has devolved to government "over" the people.

The United States is now nearly the only country in the world in which its subjects or citizens "want" to pledge their personal allegiance to their central government. While it has become a fairly common practice, even some Christians place their hands over their hearts to perform their pledge of faithfulness to their central government. This is a very recent historical phenomena. To question anything about this practice is nearly to commit immediate public political suicide.

Churches have actually excommunicated longstanding and faithful members of their congregations over their refusal to repeat the U.S. Pledge of Allegiance in their church services on dedicated July the 4th or on Memorial Day services. These are people who love their country, served in the U.S. military and would again offer their lives to keep the U.S. secure from any foreign enemy. Echoing through the halls of time it is not difficult to picture the early apostles reactions had some overly enthusiastic Roman tried to flag the Roman Eagle in a first century synagogue or church. A sense of the "Holy" is becoming increasingly secularised and obscured in western Christian churches and in their doctrines.

Until the late 19th century most people in their speech and in their writings used the term “country” when referring to their native State. The word “foreigner” was used to refer to a person from another State, and the word “stranger” was used to refer to a person from outside of the United States. And, government wasn't about “jobs”, an “education”, the “economy” or “making the world safe for democracy.” It was about establishing and preserving freedom, liberty and independence.

Most States now fly the national U.S. flag "over" their State flags flying over their capital buildings which indicates that the States are no longer free, sovereign and independent, but rather a vassal state to a higher ruling government. The States also fly the U.S. national flag in the “superior position” to their State flag in the halls of State government and in their court rooms where State laws are being administered. This also is a very recent historical phenomena, and it is a practice that no one questions.

The States since 1865 have become to the U.S. federal government more like counties are to their State governments. The States are now the underling servants of their central government rather than having their central government as their servant exercising only powers delegated to them by the sovereign States. This is important because now there is no longer a check on federal power and authority. It was the original practice and intention of the united States Founders that the governments of the States would maintain a check and control that would limit and contain the federal government from overreaching the boundaries of its delegated authority and responsibilities. This is also a relatively new practice that the Founders of the united States would have found an offense to the reasonable constitutional practices of independence, freedom and liberty.

It has also become a common practice for non-orthodox churches to fly the United States flag inside of their houses and sanctuaries of worship, and all of these churches fly it in the "superior" position with the Christian flag being flown in the "inferior" position meaning that the highest authority of that church is not God but rather the newly divinised government of the United States of America. It indicates that the church is under the authority of the central state rather than the state coming under the authority of God. Such a practice in both the near and remote past would have been seen by Christians as blasphemy against their God. They would not have had a national flag in their churches at all much less have flown it in a superior position to the symbol of the atoning sacrifice of Christ on the Cross of Calvary. Many now believe that such church denominations and pastors are no longer morally or spiritually qualified to offer a legitimate opinion on the relationship of church and state much less on how the government should operate. These churches are quiescently compliant to the authority of the centralised state.

A new book titled The U.S. Pledge of Allegiance: A Sacred Prayer to a Secular Power considers “what is a reasonable assessment” of the above commonly accepted practices in the United States of America. The book also contains a large “Appendix” that presents U.S. laws and regulations regarding the proper display and handling of a State or national flag and how ceremonies should be conducted where flags are utilised and honoured. Flag protocols have also been obscured and the handling of the flags has become less respectful during the last 50-100 years. You can order this paperback flag resource and history of the U.S. Pledge of Allegiance online and save time at our website TSPR OnlineBookstore at or you can order it for $19.95 plus $3.99 for shipping by sending a check payable to "Tim Manning" to: TSPR, c/o Tim Manning, 160 Longbridge Drive, Kernersville, North Carolina 27284. Visit our website at

This weeks attached essay (Available HERE. BT) is a thought provoking assessment of the new American Patriot's Bible: The Word of God and the Shaping of America by Lawrence M. Vance. Vance is best known for his works on the conduct of warfare and its consequences.

May God bless you as you read.

Deo Vindice.

CSA Scout Dewitt Jobe Died A Horrible Death

“They put out Jobe's eyes. Perhaps then it was that Jobe heaped epithets upon them. How much courage did it take to do what they did then? They cut out Jobe's tongue.” More HERE.

Torture, Coleman's Scouts, Revenge, Butcher Knife, Raving Maniac

"And The War Came"

The Center for Civil War Research


Dear Dr. Neff,

I cannot help but remember a speaker at a symposium pointing out that Lincoln’s statement - “...and the war came...” was, in fact, a deliberate lie. Lincoln used that phrase to obfuscate the actual causes of the war and which side began it! The war didn’t “come”; the war was the direct result of Lincoln and the Republican’s refusal to permit certain states in the Union exercising their constitutional right of secession and the actions they took to prevent that from happening.

On the other hand, the states of the South were driven to secession for economic, political, religious and even cultural reasons (yes, even but not mainly, slavery) and in at least two cases by an illegitimate demand from the federal government for troops with which to wage an unconstitutional war on sovereign states in the South.

Therefore, to use the phrase “and the war came” as the title of your conference is to validate the claim that the war was inevitable (it wasn’t) or, in the alternative, that the war was a result of unprovoked Southern actions which culminated in a justifiable Northern response in an effort to “save the Union”. In other words, the phrase is a lie which conceals and/or excuses a lie. For the actions taken by South Carolina and her sister States in the South were definitely provoked - and over a long period of time - while the response to those actions was not only legally “unprovoked” but were, in fact, illegal, immoral, inhumane and unconstitutional.

Certainly, a study of the issues leading to the war is a noble effort, but if you begin that study with a false premise by virtue of your “motto”, it will be very hard to do anything other than further validate that premise. The book North Over South is an excellent study of the efforts of many outside of Dixie to prevent the South from having any influence in the developing “American” character as the nation moved west. As well, there abound many studies regarding the vilification of the South by the North long before Sumter. The technique of demonizing your enemy or potential enemy so as to be free to make war upon him is as old as war itself.

I would hope that you reconsider your “theme”. The war didn’t “come” as some sort of natural catastrophe. It came because the adherents of the philosophy of Adams and Hamilton wanted to supplant the adherents of the philosophy of Jefferson and Madison; they succeeded and the Republic with its limited government and power residing in the states and the people gave way to an Empire with a strong central government, impotent states and an almost direct democracy (see Amendment 17 of the Constitution). A northern historian, Jay Hoar acknowledged what was wrought by the War of Secession (it wasn’t a “civil war”) when he told authors Walter Kennedy and Al Benson, “The worst fears of those Boys in Gray are now a fact of American life – a Federal government completely out of control.”

Unless you want this conference to be just another rubber stamp of what passes for “history” these days, I strongly suggest that you find another motto.

Valerie Protopapas

Huntington Station, New York

American Revolution & The Secession Of Southern States

(13,000 words and more than 1,600 hits when first posted which is an unheard of amount for my small, Pentagon banned site!;) This article is the best I've ever seen and should be read by all when they have the time. BT)
American Revolution & The Secession Of Southern States
having neither been completed nor garrisoned according to the contract, either within the three years specified time, or, for that matter, by 1861, Major Anderson occupied a piece of property that the United States had not the vestige of a right to occupy, and which was under the ownership, jurisdiction, and sovereignty of the State of South Carolina exclusively."


"......many have come from the North (and not just New England) who don't want to live in the South except geographically. Worse, they then spend a lot of time criticizing the local culture (and people) and using their increasing numbers to create changes contrary to the wishes of the "indigenous" folks. That is bad manners to say the least. It is also arrogant and inexcusable. If one wants New York or Massachusetts big government and all that that implies, one should stay in New York or Massachusetts! I am always amazed by those who move to the Carolinas or Georgia for the lower taxes and then do their damnedest to demand government "services" that caused the high taxes in the states they left! Of course, when they get their wish, the taxes go up and they move on (complaining all the way) leaving the locals stuck in a situation not of their own making. These people are a sort of economic locusts, a red tide of cultural destruction. They remind me nothing so much as the aliens in Independence Day, destroying everything in one place and then moving on to destroy some other pristine environment!

Lady Val
New York