Saturday, May 21, 2016

Publish the Truth in a Thousand Forms

Wilmington Mayor Alfred Moore Waddell welcomed the United Daughters of the Confederacy annual convention to his city in 1901 and lauded that organization for its efforts to preserve an accurate record of the war. A prewar Whig opposed to secession, he honorably served as a lieutenant-colonel of the Third North Carolina cavalry.
Bernhard Thuersam,  The Great American Political Divide

Publish the Truth in a Thousand Forms

“In November, 1901 the annual convention of the United Daughters of the Confederacy was held in Wilmington, North Carolina and Mayor Alfred Moore Waddell, welcomed them to this historic city. In his address, he said that “As one who bore a humble part in the service of the Confederacy I reverently salute you the wives, sisters, and daughters of my comrades, the noblest army of heroines and patriots that ever trod the earth.” He went on to say that:

“Your organization is unique in human annals, as was the struggle whose memories you seek to preserve. The dreamer and sentimentalist may fold his hands, and with a sigh exclaim that history will do justice between the parties to that struggle; but experience has shown that history, like Providence, helps those only who help themselves, and will honor only those who help her to record the truth.

You will readily admit that if the Southern people had remained silent, and had used no printer’s ink after the war, they would have been pilloried in history as Rebels and traitors who had, causelessly and without a shadow of excuse, drenched the land with the blood of unoffending patriots.

But the Southern people did not remain silent; they published in a thousand forms the truth, both as to the causes which impelled them to assert their rights and as to the battles in which they maintained them, and have thus made a partial, unjust and one-sided history impossible.

In this work the Memorial Association first, and after them the United Daughters of the Confederacy, have been the most heroic and devoted, and they may justly claim a large share of the credit for successfully vindicating before the world the causes which their Southern countrymen engaged, and in which thousands of them sacrificed their lives.”

(Confederate Veteran Magazine, November 1901, page 485-486)

White Slavery Denial

Via David

The currently approved conceptual framework for American race relations dictates that whites—all of them, simply by dint of being white—are oppressors. Any deviation from this rigid script, no matter how deeply rooted in fact, must be immediately annihilated like a blood-engorged tick.

We are taught that black academic and financial underperformance—as well as black over-performance in crime—are the direct result of slavery’s horrid legacy. There are to be no other possible explanations. To note the hugely embarrassing fact that American blacks live far longer and under vastly superior economic conditions in America than they do in any majority-black nation on Earth may be factual, but it is RACIST because it undermines the ironclad Guilt Narrative that must never be questioned.

Here are some facts that The Script demands you ignore:

More @ TAKI'S

Clinton hits Trump on Muslim ban; Trump: “Ask Hillary who blew up the plane last night”

Via David


“The fact that Hillary thinks the temporary Muslim ban, which she calls the ‘Muslim ban’, promotes terrorism, proves Bernie Sanders was correct when he said she is not qualified to be President,” the presumptive Republican presidential nominee’s campaign said in a statement on Thursday.

Clinton was critical of Trump’s call to ban Muslims from entering the country in an interview with CNN.

“When you run for president of the United States, the entire world is listening and watching,” she told CNN’s Chris Cuomo. “So when you say you’re going to bar all Muslims, you’re sending evidence to the Muslim world, and you’re also sending a message to terrorists. … Donald Trump is essentially being used as a recruiter for more people to join the cause of terrorism.”

Trump seized on the moment to fire off an attack that Sanders used against the Democratic front-runner in early April, saying she is unqualified to be president and linked the critique to the disappearance of a jet headed from Paris to Cairo.

More @ Jihad Watch

Vote for Abraham Lincoln!

Assistant Secretary of War Charles A. Dana, testified after the war that the whole power of the war department was used to secure Lincoln’s reelection in 1864. It was essential to obtain the soldier vote and politically-connected Northern officers helped distribute Republican ballots to their commands while Democrat ballots were lost. In cities Republican newspapers spread fear among voters should Democrat George B. McClellan be elected.
Bernhard Thuersam,   The Great American Political Divide

Vote for Abraham Lincoln!

[Diary entry] Chicago, November 5, 1864:

“It was one of those amazing [newspaper] appeals to the voters that is half circus poster and half sermon . . . the sort of thing that shows how the Americans excel in catering to the lowest levels of public taste.

It carried this portentous title in large black type: “THE TRUTH!” There followed a long list of the dire consequences that will be sure to follow the election of [George B.] McClellan.

“Twenty million people under the heel of 300,000 slave-owners!” – “A Confederacy of the Northwest!” – “A Democratic insurrection (see the threats in the World and the Chicago Times)!” – “McClellan leading the revolt (see the speeches at the Chicago Convention)!” –“The theatre of war shifted from Atlanta and Richmond to New York, Cincinnati, Philadelphia and Chicago (see the Richmond papers supporting the Copperheads)!” – “Barricades; civil war” — “Our streets drenched with blood – our countryside laid waste – Our country’s credit ruined – Gold at 2,000 and the price of necessities in proportion (see the history of the French Revolution and the Reign of Terror in Paris)!”

Do you doubt any of this? Here is a table comparing “Republican Prices,” Democratic Prices,” McClellan Prices (those that would result from his compromise with Jefferson Davis – that is, guaranteeing the Rebel debt and paying the Southern States for their war costs,” – and finally, “Rebel Prices” such as will be seen “if [August] Belmont succeeds in raising a Democratic insurrection.”

But if, on the contrary, you want the Union’s flag to “float gloriously from the Great Lakes to the Gulf, from the Atlantic to the Pacific, over a hundred free States without a single despot, over fifty million — soon to be a hundred million — people without a single slave, then sweep the country clean, once and for all, of the party that is so greedy . . . this gang of slave-merchants and perpetrators of rebellion, debts and taxes that calls itself the Democratic party! . . . Vote for Abraham Lincoln!”

One must distrust all such accounts of triumphal demonstrations, of “gigantic mass-meetings,” that fill the newspapers of the two parties at this time. People lie as shamelessly in America as in Europe, with the sole difference that since here everyone has the right to lie, no one has the privilege of being believed.”

(A Frenchman in Lincoln’s America, Ernest Duvergier de Huaranne, Donnelly & Sons, 1975, pp. 3-7)

NC: Reconstruction, the Most Shameful Period of Our History

The following is an excerpt from an 1892 address by Lt. Col. Alfred Moore Waddell to the Alumni Association of the University of North Carolina. He served as a United States Congress 1871-1879. Bernhard Thuersam,   The Great American Political Divide

Reconstruction, the Most Shameful Period of Our History

“[Reconstruction] constitutes the one indelible and appalling disgrace of the American people — the one chapter of their history which contains no redeeming feature to relieve it from the endless execration of the civilized world.

A distinguished orator from a Northern State declared in Congress in 1872 that one-third of the boundaries of this Republic had been filled “with all the curses and calamities ever recorded in the annals of the worst governments known on the pages of history,” and attacking the [radical Republican] authors of these calamities, he exclaimed,

“From turret to foundation you tore down the governments of eleven States. You left not one stone upon another. You rent all their local laws and machinery into fragments, and trampled upon their ruins. Not a vestige of their former construction remained.”

And again he said:

“A more sweeping and universal exclusion from all the benefits, rights, trusts, honors, enjoyments, liberties, and control of government was never enacted against a whole people, without respect to age or sex, in the annals of the human race. The disgraceful disabilities imposed against the Jews for nearly eighteen hundred years by the blind and bigoted nations of the earth were never more complete or appalling.”

Those old enough to remember that most shameful period of our history will readily recall the degradation, the crimes against civilization, and the terrorism which then prevailed, and how, amidst the general dismay, the faint-hearted stood helpless and silent before the arbitrary and reckless power exercised over them.”

(The Life and Character of William L. Saunders, address to the Alumni Association of the University of North Carolina, Tuesday, May 31, 1892, Col. Alfred Moore Waddell of Wilmington)

Trump Lashes Out At Clinton's Hypocrisy: "No More Guns To Protect Hillary!"

Via comment by Central Alabamaian on "Trump’s NRA nod may secure female votes"


As the Clinton campaign continues to stumble along trying to figure out just how to attack Trump, The Donald is wasting no time showing Hillary how that's done.

Trump has already put together the narrative he plans to use in order to defeat Clinton this fall, and the plan is very simple: Paint Hillary as a crooked, untrustworthy candidate who wants to confiscate everyone's guns.

Fresh off of receiving the NRA's endorsement, Trump fired up his twitter account this morning and immediately got to work on just that. The Donald called out Hillary's gun control hypocrisy by saying that if Clinton wants to get rid of guns, then that mandate should include the bodyguards that travel with Clinton as protection.
As The Hill reports,

Trump’s NRA nod may secure female votes


The NRA’s endorsement of Donald Trump and his vow to be the sheriff of the Second Amendment could secure him coveted votes with a group he’s struggling to win over — women.

“There’s quite a few women who own guns ... and they will take a hard look at who is supporting their right to protect themselves and their families,” said Jim Wallace of the Gun Owners Action League of Massachusetts.

He said Trump’s promise yesterday at the National Rifle Association convention in Louisville, Ky., to protect gun owners’ rights hits home.

“Hillary Clinton has come out aggressively against gun owners,” Wallace said. “Gun owners look for somebody who protects their rights and Donald Trump is heading in that direction.”

Trump targeted Clinton as he accepted the NRA’s backing.

“Hillary Clinton wants to abolish the Second Amendment,” Trump said in his televised speech. “We’re not going to let that happen.”

Six-Figure Fines for Gender Pronouns?


The left used to congratulate itself on being the “Free Speech Movement.” It used to celebrate the rebellious anarchists who used obscene words and forced sexually graphic images and conversations into the public sphere. Conservatives were the ones who insisted on decency in the public discourse and demanded regulation, both within the private sector and from the federal government, to protect the public from that obscenity.

But now, as the world turns upside down on sexuality and gender, leftists are becoming the ones who censor and fine. Instead of a Hays Code for decency, there’s a Gays Code. Breaking the new language rules of the LGBT lobby can be very dear. Literally. 

Washington Post blogger Eugene Volokh revealed that the New York City Commission on Human Rights has issued guidance that employers, landlords, professionals and businesses can now be fined up to $250,000 for not using an individual’s preferred name, pronoun or title, under the New York City Human Rights Law, “regardless of the individual’s sex assigned at birth, anatomy, gender, medical history, appearance, or the sex indicated on the individual’s identification.”


Slaves and such

Every opportunity that arises, I put out writings, such as this:

White slaves were common in Southern Appalachia, there was a preference for
Scots and Irish in the hills of Georgia and Alabama.  The climate and topography
there was not conducive to vast cotton plantations and so, Celts were the prime
subjects from earliest colonial days.

New England had no objection to Irish Catholic slaves, of which they had many.
No integration and damn sure no interbreeding.

The Slave ships were virtually all New Englanders, as were their crews.  In those
days many Captains also owned their ships, and were 'independent businessmen'.
However, there were Cartels that invested in the enterprise, and became the sources
of so many New England fortunes . . . and New York and Philadelphia, for that matter.

Generally, the ships' captains bought the merchandise from the native traders, on
'speculation' and hoped to derive a profit on arrival in America.  One has to do some
research to properly evaluate the circumstances of the Middle Passage horror stories.

Slaves were allotted a space 18" - 24" wide, the exact same allowance the Royal Navy
allowed its 'free' seamen aboard their ships of war.  Headroom was restricted but the
slave could sit up on his bench, turn over, and had some wiggle room.  Sanitary facilities
were not of the best, but given decent weather, the slaves were allowed on deck during
the day, to exercise and socialize, while the crew cleaned out the quarters.

As independent small businessmen, and 'sharp Yankee traders' the Captains and crews
of those 'horrid' slave ships DEPENDED upon selling at a profit, their stock in trade.
It borders on fantasy that they would deliberately damage their merchandise, or casually
toss their cargo overboard.  It happened, on occasion, when a Naval vessel overtook
a ship, to seize the ship, cargo and crew as a 'Prize' to be sold for profit.  Rarely did the
Navy bring a slaver into port and release the poor slaves into the wild.

The reasons for that are: profit, they stood to make money from selling their 'Prize'
and the fact that releasing ignorant people in a strange country, meant that those
same innocents would shortly be clapped in irons again and sold once more.

If the menu for slaves seems unsavory, consider the menu for sailors of the Royal Navy
and soldiers of anybody's army at the time.  Gruel, beans, stal water were standard fare
for everybody on a long sea voyage . . . except officers who bought their own provisions
and stocked the manger with poultry and animals.  Rarely did Jack Tar enjoy a Rabbit
stew, I say rarely to the point of vanishingly small chance.

Slavery was a legally recognized institution, biblically acceptable, routinely practiced by every
nation and a profitable business responsible for innumerable fortunes in London, Boston,
Newport, Providence, and so forth.  As with anything else, there were excesses and criminal

It is not widely known that ALL the Southern States of the united States had Laws on the
books prohibiting cruel and unusual treatment of slaves, and PROSECUTED those guilty.
Those same States allowed suits brought by slaves against masters, and encouraged
owners to provide training and education to their servants, sufficient to prevent them
becoming a charge on the County or Parish.  It was against the law, to 'turn out' any
aged or disabled slave, without means of support or sustenance.

At that time the South was a seriously Christian society, and believed and practiced their
faith sincerely.  Master felt a serious obligation to 'Christianize' his people, and provided
time and facilities for that purpose.  The famous General Stonewall Jackson conducted
Sunday School for all and any Blacks who cared to come.  He taught Bible and Religion
to those within his range, wherever he might be.  He was not a wild eyed bible thumper,
but an honest and sincere believer, as were most of his peers.