Wednesday, March 13, 2019

16 Rare Images of 1900s Vietnam as Part of French Indochina

In a mishmash of sketches and grainy photographs, Vietnam’s landscapes in the 1900s feels almost surreal.

The 1900s was the height of Indochina's rule by the French and their presence lurks in some of these shots, taken by French traveler Gaston Donnet. However, for the most part, this black-and-white collection is dedicated to the daily life and craft of the Vietnamese.

Across southern Vietnam, from the Mekong Delta to Saigon, Chinese immigrants set up shop to sell ceramics, textiles, even delicious street snacks. During their time in the country, French colonists also constructed a slew of infrastructure projects, including a railway network, glimpses of which are captured in the photos.

Experience life in Vietnam in the 1900s through the photo archive.

 More @ Saigoneer

To Lift the Minds of Those Who Come After Us

Image result for (A Guide to Confederate Monuments in South Carolina: “Passing the Silent Cup,” Robert S. Seigler,

The many monuments to Americans across the South represent a lasting tribute to the patriots who fought in 1861 for the very same reasons patriots of 1776 fought: independence, political liberty, and in self-defense. They were symbols of bereavement for those lost in battle, as well as symbols to guide future generations toward emulating their patriotic example.
Bernhard Thuersam,   The Great American Political Divide

To Lift the Minds of Those Who Come After Us

“In April 1878, former President Jefferson Davis prepared a letter to be read at the laying of the cornerstone of the Confederate monument at Macon, Georgia: “Should it be asked why, then, build this monument? The answer is, they [the veterans] do not need it, but posterity may. It is not their reward, but our debt . . . Let the monument, rising from earth toward heaven, lift the minds of those who come after us to a higher standard than the common test of success.

Let it teach than man is born for duty, not for expediency; that when an attack in made on the community to which he belongs, by which he is protected, and to which his allegiance is due, his first obligation is to defend that community; and that under such conditions it is better to have “fought and lost than never to have fought at all”. . . Let this monument teach that heroism derives its lustre from the justice of the cause in which it was displayed, and let it mark the difference between a war waged for the robber-like purpose of conquest and one to repel invasions – to defend a people’s hearth’s and altars, and to maintain their laws and liberties.”

The next year, an editorial in the Southern Historical Society Papers perpetuated the concept of memorializing the Southern soldier by stating: “But let us see to it that we build them a monument more enduring than marble, “more lasting than bronze,” as we put on record the true story of their heroic deeds, and enshrine them forever in the hearts of generations yet unborn.”

(A Guide to Confederate Monuments in South Carolina: “Passing the Silent Cup,” Robert S. Seigler, South Carolina Department of Archives and History, 1997, excerpts pg. 14)

Republicans Determined for War

Stephen A. Douglas opposed the “war wing” of the Republican party in early 1861, which was led by the Blair family and determined to engulf the country in war. On the 19th of March 1861, Senator Thomas Clingman of North Carolina stated that Lincoln would not assemble Congress to present his case for war as “I do not believe they would agree to do it.”

He prophesied that “The Republicans intend . . . as soon as they collect the force to have war, to begin; and then call Congress suddenly together and say, “the honor of the country is concerned; the flag is insulted. You must come up and vote men and money.” As a minority party that won the presidency with only 39% of the vote, Republicans avoided Congress until after the war was launched, and all feared arrest and imprisonment for opposing Lincoln’s will. The book quoted below is available from
Bernhard Thuersam,  The Great American Political Divide

Republicans Determined for War

“15 March [1861]: Lincoln asked his cabinet members to each give him a written opinion on invading Charleston harbor, what he called, in his usual dissenting way, “to provision Fort Sumter.” Seward, Chase, Welles, Bates, and Cameron opposed it. They considered war in a way Lincoln never did, that war of itself is worse than the alternative. Even if for policy rather than moral, it is to their credit that their first instinct was to oppose the horror of war.

Montgomery Blair was the only cabinet member who urged war. His father, Francis, or Frank, heatedly told Lincoln he would be a coward if he did not invade. The Blairs asserted that going into Charleston port would cause no war.

Also on March 15 in the Senate, Douglas attacked the Blairs. He told the truth:

“What they really want is a civil war. They are determined, first, on seeing slavery abolished by force, and then on expelling the entire Negro race from the continent. This was old Blair’s doctrine. Sir, long ago, and it is Montgomery’s doctrine, Sir.

If they can get their grip on Lincoln, this country will never see peace or prosperity again. Sir, in your time or mine, or in our children’s time. We all know the irrepressible conflict is going on in [Lincoln’s] camp, even debating whether Fort Sumter shall be surrendered when it is impossible to hold it . . . for fear that somebody in the Republican party might say you had backed down.

What man in all America, who knows the facts connected with Fort Sumter, can hesitate in saying that duty, honor, patriotism and humanity require that Anderson and his gallant band should be instantly withdrawn? Sir, I am not afraid to say so. Peace is the only policy that can save the country and save your [Republican] party.”

(Southern Independence. Why War? The War to Prevent Southern Independence, Charles T. Pace, Shotwell Publishing, 2015, excerpts pp. 152-153)

Why do people in South Vietnam call Northern Vietnamese 'Cho bac ky'? & Pre-75 Saigonese pronunciation.

Chó Bắc Kỳ = ''Northern [Vietnamese] dog''. Vietnamese south of the Ben Hai River 17th parallel use that term to pejoratively refer to North Vietnamese people (namely people in North and Bắc '75 (post-1975 North Vietnamese migrants to the South)). The term is usually used by Central, South Vietnamese when discussing:

*the Communist dictatorship (which is dominated and led by mostly Northern hardliners) and it's many injustices, crimes, amorality, incompetence, Chinese puppetry and other problems. 

More @ QUORA

*The article insinuates that it was only used after '75 which is incorrect as it was used at the time I first went to Vietnam in '67 though I only heard Bắc Kỳ which was derogatory none the less. I found this piece as I searched for  'Pre-75 Saigonese pronunciation' which I read in Saigoneeer and I assume that the Saigoneese accent has changed because of the influx of the northerners.......?

Former NYPD Commissioner Calls for Obstruction Investigation into Clinton Email Probe

(INSET: Hillary Clinton) WASHINGTON, DC - MARCH 24: FBI Director James Comey (2nd L) speaks as U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch (L), and U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara (R) of the Southern District of New York listen during a news conference for announcing a law enforcement action March 24, 2016 in … 

Former NYPD Commissioner Benard Kerik warned Wednesday that Americans will “never have faith” in the U.S. government until the FBI’s handling of the Hillary Clinton email probe is investigated for obstruction of justice.

Kerik’s remarks came in response to transcripts showing former FBI legal counsel Lisa Page testified to Congress that the Department of Justice ordered the FBI not to charge Clinton with “gross negligence” for mishandling classified information.

More @ Breitbart

From Zero to Castro. What AOC Doesn't Want You to Know.

Via Papa

Comment on Everything You Know About the Civil War (sic) is Wrong

Via David

To secede from the Union over Tariffs, when Congress had the constitutional right to collect Tariffs, would in fact be unconstitutional and an act of rebellion. So. To be smart and legal about it they simply followed the lead of Northern states. Slavery along with the tariff was also constitutional… and so was the federal Fugitive Slave Law. However, under the 10th Amendment and States Rights, Northern states were nullifying the Federal Fugitive Slave Law and refusing to return runaway slaves. So. If the Northern States could claim States Rights and disobey the US Constitution… so could the Southern States for this very same reason. That’s why they listed States Rights and slavery as their reason for seceding. Then. At this point, Lincoln offered the South the Corwin Amendment that would forever make slavery constitutional and legal to where no amendment could ever abolish it. (Yeah. The Great Emancipator). All the South had to do was rejoin the Union and pay the high Tariff being placed on them. The South refused and Lincoln had them invaded. While this was going on. Lincoln and his Union Yankee army was murdering the Indian out West, enslaving them and taking their land. Neither the invasion on his brothers in the South, or the invasion of the Indian in the West was over slavery. It was over money, banking, and power. Period. Because of Lincoln. We ended up with another Centralized banking system.. the Federal Reserve and IRS… taxes on our income. Now everyone in the entire damn country are debt slaves. Study the economy issue. Follow the money and you will see the true cause of the invasions in both the South and the West.. It wasn’t slavery.

--Jim Hays

No More Surrender

Via Bob

Well, the day of my uncle's funeral, six months after my double bypass, we were feeding the pigs that night, which we had done every night for a year or two. The male pig decided he wanted to get a little aggressive. His weight was around 250 pounds, fully grown. I felt a nudge on the back of my leg, then I felt a nudge again, a hard nudge, which is not really uncommon, our pigs just did that. But on the third nudge, I realized he was biting me about knee high. I hollered at him and he started to circle me.

Being the prepared person I am, I pulled out my pistol and fired a shot into the ground in front of him. This did not deter him, he continued to circle. It was still daylight at this time and I knew what was coming, so I shot him right behind the head, which ended the circling.

More @ Frank & Fern

$outhern Poverty Center Surpasses Half Billion in Assets; $121 Million Now Offshore - Top money-maker in the outrage industry

Image result for $plc splc

Reports $518 million in total assets despite $21 million fall in donations

The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), a far-left nonprofit known for its "hate group" designations, has surpassed a half billion dollars in total assets and now has $121 million parked offshore, according to the group's most recent financial statements.

The SPLC, which is based in Montgomery, Ala., has not publicly posted its most recent financial statements on its website. However, the organization applied for renewal in the state of California days ago and submitted a number of documents pertaining to its financial standing including its most recent audited statement and tax forms for calendar year 2018, which covers Nov. 1, 2017 to Oct. 31, 2018.

Environmentalist rips Ocasio-Cortez, Green New Deal“: Pompous Little Twit” "End of Civilization"

In our hearts, unconquered still

I recited the poem many time as a boy, heartfelt and loved. 
The Conquered Banner

Federalism was suffocated at Appomattox and we live with the results today. Yes, history can be re-written, and it's spawn is ignorance as fed by the public school system on this and any other subject we care to uncover- sincere apologies to the many dedicated teachers but the results speak for themselves and the issue is out of your hands entirely. The statues mean very different things to us today than when they were dedicated, partly because we did not live through the events and partly because as a public we are unschooled on the precedents and aftermath. So yes, the statues are not appropriate in today's social beehive so pluck them out as you might your offending eye.

To correct the record, the Confederates did not commit treason - they did not seek to overthrow or defeat the US initially but rather organized a new sovereignty, all the while seeking a resolution to the differences between the CSA and the USA. The birth of that movement was rooted in the very evil that supported the economy of both factions, a problem that was boiling since the early 1800s and saw no simple solution on the horizon.

Without the slave-produced raw materials (King Cotton) the mills of the north would go wanting. The material costs would skyrocket ruining the market for their products; the New England and New York mill owners were as much at fault as anyone. This is a flawed and too simplistic explanation but serves to reveal that the South's production was not for it's own use as is popularly believed (the plantations did not grow peas and carrots as cash crops), but sent as raw material to Britain and New England, heavily tarriffed if I remember correctly, and it was those tariffs that Lincoln sought to protect by opposing the Confederate secession, not protection of the enslaved Africans.

I have not included all the elements of error in this quick post, so forgive my incomplete assessment. The blindness of current society to history is appalling and will contribute to the coming social disaster; the rush to blame today's ills on an inanimate and mute talisman is not only juvenile and misdirected, but siphons the energy from other fruitful efforts. I can see how a stunted mind could focus on convenient targets to create an enemy for their ire (think of the Salem witch hunts and the Monty Python send-up to illustrate that point), but an adult with a fully formed mind should be willing and able to search for the truth rather than cling to myth and superstition, but recent trends defy that theory.

The Good Boy Mayor stated the removal was "...for public safety" among other tripe. What? Isn't that why we have the police department and sheriff's office? No? Well, Good Boy Mayor what the hell else is for public safety? My firearms, bumper stickers, refrigerator magnets?

We are living under mob rule. Don't believe it? Try going against the prevailing group-think in a public place.

Someone, maybe on this site, said "We are an embarrassment to our ancestors" and they are correct.

--Dan Patterson

Wolf dog dumped at Kill Shelter

Via Daughter Christine

Image may contain: 1 person, smiling, outdoor and text
Beaten by a professional breeder and dumped at a kill shelter when he got too big and too much to handle. Luckily a sanctuary took him instead and saved his life! His DNA testing came back as 87.5 % Gray Wolf, 8.6 % Siberian Husky, and 3.9 % German Shepherd 

More @ Thalmaray

Many Thousands Gone & The Slave Trade

A review of Many Thousands Gone: The First Two Centuries of Slavery in North America (Harvard, 1998) by Ira Berlin

For an understanding of the Atlantic-African slave trades and the origins of the peculiar institution in North America, Prof. Berlin’s Many Thousands Gone is a must read (along with Hugh Thomas’ The Slave Trade: The Story of the Atlantic Slave Trade, 1440-1870 [1997] ). An expert in African-American history at the U. of Maryland and long-time editor of Freedom: A Documentary History of Emancipation, 1861-1867 ( 4 vols., 1982-1993), Berlin brings to the task of explaining what today seems impossible to imagine his own considerable talents as a(n)historian and a welcome objectivity.

The answers he provides are thus more nuanced and perhaps not as satisfying as some would like to hear. “New World slavery,” he notes, “did not have its origins in a conspiracy to dishonor, shame, brutalize, or reduce slaves on some perverse scale of humanity-although it did all of these at one time or another….” At bottom, and the root of it all, was greed on the part of all involved (African, European, and Muslim) who sought wealth for personal and for imperial reasons.


Image result for The Slave Trade, Capt. S.A. Ashe, Confederate Veteran

The lack of historical perspective today supports the mistaken belief that the American South somehow introduced and perpetuated African slavery in North America, and that the Confederate Battle Flag somehow represents this gross inhumanity.

The truth is not difficult to find, and it is that a Portuguese ship brought the first African to North America, and well after the Spanish had brought them, already enslaved by their African brethren, to the islands of the Caribbean – the latter done after it was found that the local Indians they had enslaved for work died off too quickly.

The British fostered the rise and perpetuation of African slavery in America as a colonial labor system – and African chieftains supplied their needs with captured men, women and children.

The New Englanders quickly followed the British example and became preeminent slavers in their own right, with the economic base of that region founded on slave trade profits, and the later mills of Massachusetts dependent upon slave-produced cotton for profitability.

The American South fought no more fought to preserve slavery than did the American Colonies after Lord Dunmore’s infamous emancipation proclamation of 1775; nor was the United States fighting for the preservation of slavery after Vice Admiral Sir Alexander Cochrane issued his own emancipation proclamation in 1814.

The American South fought for political independence from a North which had lost its moorings to the Constitution of 1789 which held the States together. The South had remained faithful to that document, and departed that federation to maintain its political liberty. The North prosecuted a devastating war to prevent that political liberty, “freed” the slaves which they themselves had helped securely fasten upon the South, and converted them into a dependable voting bloc with which to maintain political hegemony over formerly free States.
Bernhard Thuersam,  The Great American Political Divide

The Slave Trade

“In the library of the State College at Raleigh, N.C., there is a notable book of some three hundred and fifty pages and forty-nine illustrations – the fifteenth publication of the Marine Research Society, of Salem, Mass., and published in Vermont – the title being: “Slave Ships and Slaving.”  The introduction is written by a British navy officer, and the text is by George F. Dow.

Within ten years after the discovery of America the Spaniards began to transport Africans to work in their possessions, and all the maritime nations of Europe followed their example; and during the next two hundred and fifty years the English transported twice as many as all other countries put together. They began in Queen Elizabeth’s time, kept it up in the next reign, and, in 1662, the Duke of York undertook to transport to the British Colonies three thousand slaves every year. Ten years later the King himself became interested and, under contract, England got from Spain the exclusive right to supply the Spanish colonies [with African slaves]; and the King of England and the King of Spain each received one-fourth of the profits.

Between 1680 and 1688 England had two hundred and forty-nine slave ships; from 1713, for twenty years, 15,000 slaves were annually brought to America. In 1786, England brought over 97,000 slaves. During eleven years, 1783-1793, Liverpool owned eight hundred and seventy eight vessels in this trade, and imported many thousands of slaves in the West Indies. They were worth some 15,000,000 pounds of that period; equal to about $150,000,000 now [1930].

While Liverpool was the chief port for this trade, Bristol was a close second. Then, over here, New England was not slow. Massachusetts started in 1638. However, Rhode Island became the rival of Liverpool. Ten pages on this volume are devoted to the operations in Rhode Island. There nearly everyone was interested.

In 1750, “Rum was the chief manufacture of New England. About 15,000 hogsheads of molasses were annually converted into rum in Massachusetts alone. The number of stills in operation was almost beyond belief. In Newport there were no less than twenty-two.” With rum they purchased Negroes in Africa; these were exchanged for molasses in the Caribbean Islands and South America, and the molasses was brought to the New England stills; and so the profitable business was carried on in a circle to an extent beyond ordinary imagination!

It was the very basis of New England’s prosperity. At Newport, Bristol and Providence [Rhode Island], some of the most respectable and wealthy merchants were engaged in the trade. Even preachers and philanthropists were advocates. “One elder, whose ventures in slaving had usually turned out well, always returned thanks on the Sunday following the arrival of a slaver that the Africans could enjoy the blessing of a Gospel dispensation.”

The Southern colonies had no ships, nor any molasses. They were not in the trade. However, the British Slaving Company, in which the King of England was a partner was in duty-bound to supply the needs of the colonies as particularly required by Good Queen Anne. The Colonies were forbidden to manufacture, and their products were required to be shipped to England, where they were exchanged for British goods. So the more slaves making products, the more goods the Colonies bought in England.

At length Virginia forbade any more importation [of Africans] but the King annulled that Virginia law. In Jefferson’s draught of the Declaration of Independence he denounced the King most severely for annulling these prohibitions. However, in 1774, importations were forbidden by the people of North and South Carolina, and there were no importations until 1803, when South Carolina opened her ports for four years.

Great Britain abolished the [slave] trade in 1807, just as the Congress of the United States did. After a few years, other countries followed our example: Spain in 1820, Portugal in 1830; but the trade between Portuguese Africa and Brazil did not cease until Brazil, in 1888, put a stop to it. That this volume has been prepared by the Marine Research Society, of Salem, Mass., speaks well for New England, and it should be in every library of the South.”

(The Slave Trade, Capt. S.A. Ashe, Confederate Veteran, December 1930, pg. 457)

More than half of all illegal immigrants arrested at the US-Canada border are Mexican

Related image

More than half of the illegal immigrants arrested last year as they traveled from Canada to the U.S. were Mexican citizens, according to newly released government data.

A total of 4,316 noncitizens were arrested at the northern U.S. border in fiscal 2018, and 2,245 of those were Mexican citizens. Mexican nationals are able to fly to Canada without a visa.

Leaked Lisa Page Testimony Reveals FBI Was Considering Charging Crooked Hillary under Espionage Act Until DOJ Told Them “No”

Image result for Lisa Page revealed FBI was going to charge Hillary under Espionage Act & DOJ said no

On Friday Republican Doug Collins (R-GA) released the Bruce Ohr testimony transcript online.

Rep Collins said his patience with the DOJ had grown thin so he released the testimony.
Collins plans on releasing more testimony.

The Ohr testimony disclosed the Bruce Ohr gave his wife’s opposition research on Trump to the FBI in a flash drive.

On Tuesday Doug Collins released the Lisa Page testimony online.