11th NC PATCON May 31st - June 5th...
AAR & Pictures X NC PATCON +
10th NC PATCON September 28 - October 3rd 2016
Pictures: 9th NC PATCON
9th NC PATCON June 1 - June 6th 2016
PICTURES: NC PATCON VIII
8th NC PATCON September 30 - October 5th 2015
7th NC PATCON May 6th - 11th 2015
Pictures: 6th NC PATCON October 1st - 6th 2014
AAR - 6th NC PATCON October 1st - 6th 2014
Thursday, December 22, 2011
Some of the comments were centered on murder vs. killing, and maintaining the highly subjective and vulnerable-to-indirect-fire (metaphoric and real) “moral high ground”. It sparked some thoughts on my part, and I am posting them here for consideration. I don't want to address the act of ending a life (in war or peace) as much as I want to look at the interpretation of action(s).
If a person or nation is in a fight worth fighting, which is in most cases, a fight for survival or for the conditions that will allow it, that person or nation must win. There is no choice in such a case. Undertaking a “moral” (if you will allow me to use the term here) fight implies that the outcome of not fighting is unacceptable, immoral, unlivable. Losing means death, slavery, or severe suffering. A win is the only acceptable outcome in a fight worth fighting. The only “moral” outcome, one might say. It follows logically then that any means that contributes directly to a win is acceptable, while means that do not contribute to, or hinder, a moral outcome are unacceptable, or “immoral”. My purpose is not to start an ends / means debate, but to illustrate that in this case, losing means it does not matter anymore.
Obviously my criteria for “fights worth fighting” would exclude petty social violence, “small wars” of intervention, “peacekeeping” police-type conflicts, etc. Morality becomes more difficult in these situations, and for a reason. This is because they are, almost without exception, not worth fighting.
But let us consider history, the past as seen through the lens of the present. History, being the past, in the context of present power, culture, and society. Perspective.
"The Official Website of the North Carolina WBTS Sesquicentennial Commission"
North Carolina Patriots of ’61: J. P. Little:
“J.P. Little enlisted in Company C [28th Regiment], at Newton on August 13, 1861. He was at this time only sixteen years of age, and the examining officer, thinking the boy too young to enlist, refused to accept him at first but through persistent pleadings of the youth to fight for a cause that he thought was just, he was at length accepted. Even at this early age he was cultivated to no small degree. His manners were frank and candid, and the more intimately he was known, the better he was beloved. Never was he known to shrink from any toil, however painful, nor quail before any danger.
He had a high regard for his superior officers, and more still for the commission which he filled, as exemplified in an anecdote told be one of his comrades. At the Battle of the Wilderness when the soldiers had become somewhat routed, in order to rally them again the brave Captain Lovell reached up to shake the flag that Little was carrying, but the fearless ensign, reaching for his pistol, gave the Captain to understand that he was man enough to carry that flag and for him to let it alone.
He was in many of the principal battles of the war, namely, Hanover Court House, Seven Days…around Richmond, Cedar Run, Second Manassas…Oz Hill, Harper’s Ferry, Sharpsburg…Shepardstown, Fredericksburg, Chancellorsville, Wilderness, and Spottsylvania Court House. At the Battle of Frazier’s Farm he received a wound in the thigh, and was also wounded at Chancellorsville, and Spottsylvania Court House. At the latter place he was in the famous Bloody Angle and was taken a prisoner here. Later he was sent to Elmira, New York, where he was held during the remainder of the war.
He returned home in the summer of 1865, and then completed his education. He is now a merchant in Hickory.”
(The Catawba Soldier of the Civil War, George W. Hahn, Clay Printing Company, 1911, pp. 174-175)
North Carolina Patriots of ’61: J. P. Little
"All I wanted was a Snickers bar," pleaded the battered and bloody man before he was gagged by his assailant.
On November 4, Karl Thompson, the man convicted of killing Zehm, was taken to jail. Several dozen members of Thompson’s gang were gathered outside the courtroom – most of them proudly wearing the colors – to “show their honor” by offering the murderer a public salute. Thompson – whose hands weren’t cuffed, in violation of long-established rules – smiled and returned the gesture. Zehm’s still-grieving mother and several other relatives stood just a few feet away.
The fact that Romney is not getting his questionnaire back is understandable, since he has been all over the map on gun ownership. Recently he's sounding pro-gun, but his history is anything but that.
Rick Perry, however, has a solid record on the Second Amendment as Governor of Texas, so why isn’t he getting his questionnaire back to GOA? I have to believe this is a campaign staff decision, which is a bad decision at best. Perry already has a good record, so why not fill it out so we can know where he stands on issues specific to the presidency?
Newt Gingrich was far from perfect on the Second Amendment when he was Speaker of the House, and he still falters on background checks, but at least he gave GOA his answers and signed our questionnaire. You have to respect him for that.
I have personally had contact four times with Perry staff who all said they would get it done and back to GOA right away, but so far it's been lip service and no questionnaire.
Bottom line -- come on Rick, send GOA a completed and signed questionnaire so gun owners across the country can get a more complete picture of your views.
Please encourage Rick Perry to return the GOA questionnaire by calling 1-855-887-5627.
Some say he could also walk away with a win in New Hampshire, and possibly even win the Republican (GOP) nomination.
For the Republican National Committee (RNC), this must be uncomfortable − the idea that they would be forced to nominate a principled, Constitutionalist just because WE THE PEOPLE demanded it.
But here's what really terrifies them: Ron Paul is in a position to hand the election of 2012 over to Barack Obama and the Democrats because he would be a "spoiler." But even more terrifying is the fact that Dr. Paul is in a position to be much more than a "spoiler" − he's in a position to be a "winner."
Etymology of the term SPOILER:
I’ve been trying to understand why smart people I know support Ron Paul and I just can’t get my head around it. I get the sense that maybe the Ron Paul People I know just don’t realize what Ron Paul’s all about. That or they just don’t care.I sent her the following email:
The Ron Paul People I know are almost all straight, single, relatively young, non-religious, white men. Available demographics suggest that this is an accurate picture; there are others in Ron Paul’s camp, but it’s basically youngish white men.
They do not consider themselves to be Democrats or Republicans. Some of them hate the idea of rules, many of them hate the idea of having their money taken away in taxes, but none of them are stupid or without the resources to learn more about their candidate. And none seem to care about any of Ron Paul’s policies outside of cutting spending, regulations, and taxes.
Every Ron Paul Person I know comes out of the woodwork any time anything negative is said about the guy, no matter how true the statement and no matter how much that individual disagrees with Ron Paul’s position or behavior. I get the sense that libertarians are so excited to have someone on the national stage that they don’t want to see anything problematic with the guy, but he’s transparently a bad deal.
So, why are these people supporting a crazy, racist Christian fundamentalist?
Dear Ms Miller,
I'm not going to waste any time correcting your attempt to criticize Ron Paul. Instead, let us simply posit that you are absolutely correct concerning every single complaint you listed about the man. Here is why you, and everyone else, should not only vote for him, but pray to the God in whom you do not believe that he wins the 2012 election anyhow.
He is the only national politician who gives the United States any chance of surviving the collapse of the global economy.
You may not like him. You may think he is crazy and hypocritical and wrong on a panoply of issues. But the fact of the matter that he has been warning everyone about the eventual consequences of the credit boom that the Federal Reserve and the federal government created over the last fifty years, and the subsequent bust they have been desperately staving off since 2008. In doing so, they have made things worse, so much so that the USA may not survive as a nation when their efforts finally fail.
This is not a Democrat vs Republican thing. It is an economic sanity vs insanity thing. Obama has been disastrous, as he has increased federal debt 92% since 2008. McCain would have done the same or worse. Romney and Gingrich would actually be worse than Obama in this regard. The economic Fimbulwinter is coming and there is only one national politician who even understands the core issues involved.
You probably won't believe anything I say here. That's fine. But the central banks are presently dancing on the very edge of the precipice, as the recent actions of the Fed and the ECB serve to demonstrate. And if it all collapses before November, I hope you will remember that there was one man who understands why it happened, who tried to prevent it happening, and has been preparing to rebuild from the ashes for a very long time.
He was out driving, when he saw a car similar to his wife’s, driven by a blond white girl. The other car flashed its lights so Tommy pulled over.
A group of Pakistani youths wearing knuckle dusters poured out. Tommy was knocked out pretty quickly, and they gave him a good kicking.
He looks pretty beaten up, but no bones were broken, and no eyes or teeth are missing. He had a brain scan this morning. We don’t know the results yet.
He has spoken to The Sun, who asked whether he had called the police. Tommy said there was no point, as a racial attack on a white guy was of no interest to them.
That’s all the information I have at the moment. If anything further comes in, I’ll post it.
Update 3:50pm EST:
The EDL is urging its supporters to remain calm.
We all want Tommy to go to the police. We need to learn whether the police will act against the perpetrators of this heinous act. If not, it is yet more evidence that there is a two-tier system of justice in England.
Update 3:26pm EST:
Message from Tommy: "They were shouting ‘allahu akhbar’ and ‘Merry Christmas, Tommy’”.
Also: He had a C.T. scan, and apparently has “bruising of the brain”. He got out of hospital this afternoon.
Update 3:11pm EST: Here is a photo of Tommy’s face after the attack.
The revelation may well affect congressional redistricting, because of the key role Voting Section staff play in approving state legislative plans, including the staffer in question.
For example, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott might use these allegations of perjury involving Texas redistricting to fight the ongoing redistricting litigation. Impeachment of a different sort–that of a testifying witness–is his for the taking.
The wide ranging DOJ Inspector General investigation is examining the harassment of conservative leaning DOJ employees who were willing to enforce civil rights laws equally against all wrongdoers, such as the New Black Panther party. You read that right–the harassment of employees who were willing to enforce the law against the New Black Panther Party.
The particulars of the DOJ perjury, as reported by Has von Spakovsky at PJ Media, are even more troubling. They involve the leaking of internal memos about Congressional redistricting to the Washington Post by leftist DOJ staff who hoped to hurt the Bush administration. The current Texas redistricting plans are being litigated in both San Antonio and Washington D.C. courtrooms.
Von Spakovsky reports:
It's Wednesday morning around 10:30 when the Oak Hill finally comes into view, its steel-gray bow peeking out from behind a grove of green trees at Joint Expeditionary Base Little Creek.
It's been three months since the dock landing ship left home for Central America, and all of the usual fanfare is waiting to greet its crew: crowds of cheering families, toddlers dressed in sailor suits, and the lucky, excited woman who's been chosen to take part in a time-honored Navy tradition - the first homecoming kiss.
In this case, that woman is 22-year-old Citlalic Snell. She's a sailor herself, assigned to the destroyer Bainbridge, but today she's in civilian clothes - jeans, boots and a stylish leather jacket. Watching pierside as the Oak Hill pulls into port, she absentmindedly twists the small diamond ring on her left hand.
A uniformed liaison who is with her explains how it's going to work: Snell's sailor will be among the first off the ship, and when it's time, Snell will be escorted onto the pier for the kiss.
The liaison asks whether she's nervous.
"Sort of," Snell admits.
As it starts to drizzle, the brow is finally lowered. A handful of top officers are first off the ship, and then comes a young woman in dress blues, Petty Officer 2nd Class Marissa Gaeta.
Snell cracks a wide smile.
"That's her," she says.
When Gaeta spots her, she smiles, too. They embrace. With all eyes watching, they keep the kiss short, and the crowd cheers.
Following the brouhaha over Ron Paul's old newsletters, I want to clarify my position on some points and make some tentative suggestions for improving racial disparities in America.
1. Races do vary in many ways. Some of us are better at higher math, some of us are better at sinking three-pointers outside the line. There is no harm or foul in acknowledging these differences, as long as we understand these are tendencies, not universal laws. Everyone is an individual and should be judged by his own abilities and attitudes. Everyone should be allowed to pursue his goals and achieve as much as his talents and ambition will allow. On the other hand, no one should be given a free pass or supplied with a standing excuse for destructive behavior.
2. IQ is an important factor in higher SAT scores and academic achievement. Research shows that blacks, as a group, have the lowest average IQ of all racial groups: 85, compared to 95 for hispanics, 100 for whites and 105 for Asians. This, more than any other factor, explains the failure of blacks to achieve SAT scores as high as whites or Asians. It explains the lack of blacks in higher math, physics and other demanding disciplines. It is no one's fault, it just is. However, some pertinent observations:
- By acknowledging this reality, I take no joy or pleasure in it, nor do I wish to use it as an excuse to bring back segregation or to assign an inferior citizenship status to blacks or anyone else, or to engender hostility towards blacks or anyone else.
- I WISH this IQ business weren't true.
Being a journalist I’m not going to argue with a collegue for persistence. I just wish Gloria Borger was just as persistent in finding out whether there were WMD’s in Iraq as she was asking whether Ron Paul wrote his little fan newsletters or not. The latter is just politics. Actual lives were at stake when it came to Iraq. Apparently to Borger, one was more important than the other. It’s too late to play “journalist” now and ask the “really tough questions.”
To their credit, people like Connor Friesdorf and Andrew Sullivan and Reason magazine (which went the the opposite way four years ago) realize the bigger picture at stake. Others will take their pot-shots to stop a man whom they view as a mortal threat. But what the whole newsletters issue really comes down to, whether these words which even a scumbag like Eric Dondero said Paul never wrote are as important as what’s going on right now in the world where brown children in Afghanistan and Pakistan are being blown away from Obama’s killer drones as collateral damage or whether Iranian children might have the same done to them if Iran is attacked by the U.S. and or Israel.
If being the PC police, pleasing the SPLC and being clear of conscious of the taint of “racism” is more important than what’s being done in their name and their tax money in southwest Asia which Ron Paul wishes to stop. We’ll find out what’s more important to people, trivialities or human life.
Bernhard Thuersam, Chairman
North Carolina War Between the States Sesquicentennial Commission
"The Official Website of the North Carolina WBTS Sesquicentennial"
"It was a grim hour for all of the South when William Tecumseh Sherman [was] marching relentlessly through Georgia..... A young mother has caught much of the pathos of the hour in several brief entries in her diary. Dolly Sumner Lunt, from Maine, married a planter who lived near Covington, Georgia. Three years before the start of the war her husband died, and as Mrs. Thomas Burge, Dolly continued on the estate with her daughter "Sadai" Sarah. The Burges were still there when Sherman's men passed, and many of the plantation Negroes, afraid of the soldiers, slipped into the house to be with their mistress.
On Christmas Eve, Mrs. Burge described her preparations for a bleak meal, her attempts to provide the plainest of presents for her remaining servants. "Now how changed!" she wrote, "No confectionery, cakes or pies can I have. We are all sad...Christmas Eve, which has ever been gaily celebrated here, which has witnessed the popping of firecrackers and the hanging up of stockings, is an occasion now of sadness and gloom." Worse, she had nothing to put in her Sadai's stocking, "which hangs so inviting for Santa Claus."
On Christmas night Mrs. Burge penned a sorrowful afternote: "Sadai jumped out of bed very early this morning to feel in her stocking. She could not believe but that there would be something in it. Finding nothing, she crept back into bed, pulled the cover over her face, and I soon heard her sobbing." A moment later the young Negroes had run in: "Christmas gift, Mist'ess! Christmas gift, Mist'ess!" Mrs. Burge drew the cover over her own face and wept beside her daughter.
The next year, Christmas came more happily to the Burge plantation. On December 24  the mother gave thanks to God for His goodness "in preserving my life and so much of my property." And on Christmas Day she added:
"Sadai woke very early and crept out of bed to her stocking. Seeing it well-filled, she soon had a light and eight little Negroes around her, gazing upon the treasures. Everything opened that could be divided was shared with them. "Tis the last Christmas, probably, that we shall be together, freedmen! Now you will, I trust, have your own homes and be joyful under your own vine and fig tree."
(The Southern Christmas Book, Harnett T. Kane, David McKay Company, 1958, pp. 205-206)
Tis the last Christmas
Or, "There is no precedent in history to indicate that mass immigration is a path that leads to something good in the end."
Nicolai Sennels’ take on psychological issues has a seminal importance that deserves recognition. I’m speaking not just of his most recent article, but also his other work in which he approaches analysis of group psychological patterns in Islamic culture and the characteristic group psychology of Western societies that receive Muslim immigrants and other groups — and his attempts to articulate these interactions using these same terms of group psychology. For his efforts, I wish to communicate my support and admiration for his continuing intellectual fortitude.
You may want to take an Advil now in advance. I have a penchant for run-on sentences that is truly terminal, and beyond any mortal man’s ability to correct (myself included).
There may be something worth exploring and articulating further in the concept of “coping mechanisms” in relation to Western societies and their apparent “vaginal” response to Islamic immigration. Perhaps in comparison to what we would see manifested psychologically in a rape victim. The denial, the disassociation, etc.
I also see wisdom in working the term “cultural genocide” into GoV vernacular.
The phrase “cultural genocide” provides an important conceptual handle for people who are struggling to articulate and relate to what’s happening now in Western societies concerning conflicts caused by the policy of mass immigration. Trends such as the “war on Christmas”, for example, may be used to introduce, with some dark humor, the of the notion of “cultural genocide” into public discourse as a kind of faux satire. Broach the notion in a diffuse manner initially, and then proceed from there under the assumption that there is currently observed at GoV a sensitivity to the counterproductive nature of alarmism, and how most people would react to the term “cultural genocide” when presented in this context — a context I believe is the most appropriate and correct one.
The Left is selective to the point of rank denial in their application of the term “cultural genocide”, as they apparently refuse to apply it reciprocally and equally to Western societies. There seems to be some deliberation on their collective part, whether conscious or not, in denying that the term does reciprocally apply. The same reluctance can also be seen in their typical responses bordering on hysteria that are asserted in defense of their own denial, in which they commence to shame and attempt to illegitimately discredit those who assert the term’s more appropriate application to Western societies and not only to their immigrants. This should be characterized as an intellectually inferior practice — a highly suspect and questionable type of alternate, secondary, even artistic approach, rather than scientific application of the term.
Not only does the term “cultural genocide” apply to the current situation in the West, but the inertia of current social trends suggests its applicability will increase at an exponential rate.
“Cultural genocide” is a term that more appropriately applies to Western societies because they are to date in a perpetual state of cultural “receivership” that has no corollary in non-Western societies. There is no precedent in history to indicate that mass immigration is a path that leads to something good in the end.
In the Left’s view, “cultural genocide” is only in operation when Western societies commit it against immigrant enclaves. In their often warped estimations — fueled by anti-intellectual emotionalism — the situation is never the other way around. There is then a staunch cultural resistance in the population of the host country that places a taboo on exploring the idea in public discourse. The term “cultural genocide” can and should be applied in a reciprocal, equal, culturally unbiased manner that allows for open examination of its application to the antithetical reactions of immigrant groups against the Western societies that act as their receivers. Especially where there is evidence that steps are being taken from within or without Western host societies to empower these immigrant groups in making such hostile assertions.
The selective manner in which the Left applies the term “cultural genocide” is analogous to the proverbial shaming of the rape victim — that is, the Western “receiver” society. Poignantly, in this analogy the Left actively shames itself as well as others, because obviously they are also part of this “receiver” society.
An aspect of this shaming is to project onto the victims the notion that they are not to view themselves as the victims. To ignore legitimacy of the concept of “cultural genocide” as applied conversely to Western “receiver” societies seems similar to the denial and disassociation that is sometimes manifested in a rape victim who rationalizes that the rape was somehow her fault. Since she caused it, she must allow it to continue happening to atone for herself.
How one would say all this in psychological terms, I’d have to leave to adepts like Nicolai Sennels. I’m not trained or certified in psychology.
Thank you for everything you do. Your intellectual resilience has been an inspiration to me as well.
— Run-on Ranter