|
President
Abraham Lincoln, Entering Richmond Virginia, April 4, 1865 |
 |
|
"'As Mr. Lincoln and his son walked the streets
of Richmond, one group of newly freed slaves cried out, 'Glory
Hallelujah!', and fell to their knees before Mr. Lincoln. It was
here the President paused, and motioned for them to rise. 'Don't
kneel to me,' he told them, 'You must kneel only to God, and thank
him for your freedom. Liberty is your birthright. God gave it to
you as he gave it to others, and it is a sin that you have been
deprived of it for so many years.'" |
 |
|
Field slaves, circa US Civil War |
|
|
A Reality Check:
Blacks May Not Have Loved Slavery
The South has many things to be proud of.
The Confederate flag is not one of them.
The South gave us
Virginian George Washington, the "father" of our
country. Thomas Jefferson, who drafted our Declaration
of Independence, was also from Virginia. They gave many
key figures in the Revolutionary War. So it is a pity
that so many in the South wish to honor those who, in
defending slavery, fought to destroy the house their
greatest leaders had built.
If you must rally
'round a flag, why not celebrate the
flag of our nation's founding fathers- fellow Southerners for whom they
should rightfully be proud? In the following weeks, Warner Brothers will
release a major motion picture that will celebrate the
flag of the Confederacy by featuring it prominently in almost every scene in the
movie. This leads us to ask what was the Confederacy? and what did it stand for?
If it is fair to say the flag stood for
states rights, state sovereignty, or perhaps even a golden age of prosperity,
let us then turn to eyewitness history, to life on a Mississippi plantation in
1854, and have....
A Glimpse of the South before the
Civil War
"The plows at work, both with single and double mule teams, were generally
held by women, and very well held, too. I watched with some interest for any
indication that their sex unfitted them for the occupation. Twenty of them
were plowing together, with double teams and heavy plows. They were
superintended by a Negro man who carried a whip, which he frequently cracked
at them, permitting no dawdling or delay at the turning; and they twitched
their plows around on the head-land, jerking their reins, and yelling to
their mules, with apparent ease, energy, and rapidity.
Throughout the Southwest the Negroes,
as a rule, appeared to be worked much harder than in the Eastern and
Northern Slave States... They are constantly and steadily driven up to their
work, and the stupid, plodding, machine-like manner in which they labor, is
painful to witness. This was especially the case with the hoe-gangs. One of
them numbered nearly two hundred hands (for the force of two plantations was
working together), moving across the field in parallel lines, with a
considerable degree of precision. I repeatedly rode through the lines at a
canter, without producing the smallest change or interruption in the dogged
action of the laborers, or causing one of them, so far as I could see, to
lift an eye from the ground... I think it told a more painful story than any
I had ever heard, of the cruelty of slavery. It was emphasized by a tall and
powerful Negro who walked to and fro in the rear of the line, frequently
cracking his whip, and calling out in the surliest manner, to one and
another, 'Shove your hoe, there! Shove your hoe!' But I never saw him strike
anyone with the whip.
I happened to see the severest corporeal punishment of a Negro that I
witnessed at the South while visiting this estate... The manner of the
overseer, who inflicted the punishment, and his subsequent conversation with
me about it, indicated that it was by no means unusual in severity.
I had accidentally encountered him, and he was showing me his plantation. In
going from one side of it to the other, we had twice crossed a deep gully,
at the bottom of which was a thick covert of brushwood. We were crossing it
a third time, and had nearly passed through the brush, when the overseer
suddenly stopped his horse exclaiming, 'What's that? Hallo! Who are you,
there?'
It was a girl lying at full length on the ground at the bottom of the gully,
evidently intending to hide herself from us in the bushes.
'Who are you, there?'
'Sam's Sall, sir.'
'What are you skulking there for?'
The girl half rose, but gave no answer.
'Have you been here all day?'
'No, sir.'
'How did you get here?'
The girl made no reply.
'Where have you been all day?'
The answer was unintelligible.
After some further questioning, she
said her father accidentally locked her in, when he went out in the morning.
'How did you manage to get out?'
'Pushed a plank off, sir, and crawled out.'
| 'That won't
do,' said he; 'get down.' The girl knelt on the ground;
he got off his horse, and holding him with his left
hand, struck her thirty or forty blows across the
shoulder with his tough, flexible, 'raw-hide' whip....
At every stroke the girl winced and exclaimed, ''Yes,
sir!' or 'Ah, sir!' or 'Please, sir!' not groaning or
screaming. At length he stopped and said, 'Now tell me
the truth.' The girl repeated the same story. ''You have
not got enough yet,' said he; 'pull up your clothes- lie
down.' |
|
The overseer was silent for a moment, looking at the girl, and then said,
'That won't do; come out here.' The girl arose at once, and walked towards
him. She was about eighteen years of age. A bunch of keys hung at her waist,
which the overseer espied, and he said, 'Your father locked you in; but you
have got the keys.' After a little hesitation, she replied that these were
the keys of some other locks; her father had the door-key.
Whether her story was true or false, could have been ascertained in two
minutes by riding on to the gang with which her father was at work, but the
overseer had made up his mind.
'That won't do,' said he; 'get down.' The girl knelt on the ground; he got
off his horse, and holding him with his left hand, struck her thirty or
forty blows across the shoulder with his tough, flexible, 'raw-hide' whip (a
terrible instrument for the purpose). They were well laid on, at arm's
length, but with no appearance of angry excitement on the part of the
overseer. At every stroke the girl winced and exclaimed, ''Yes, sir!' or
'Ah, sir!' or 'Please, sir!' not groaning or screaming. At length he stopped
and said, 'Now tell me the truth.' The girl repeated the same story. ''You
have not got enough yet,' said he; 'pull up your clothes-lie down.'
The girl without any hesitation, without a word or look of remonstrance or
entreaty, drew closely all her garments under her shoulders, and lay down
upon the ground with her face toward the overseer, who continued to flog her
with the raw-hide, across her naked loins and thighs, with as much strength
as before. She now shrunk away from him, not rising, but writhing,
groveling, and screaming, 'Oh, don't, sir! Oh, please stop, master! Please,
sir! Please, sir! Oh, that's enough, master! Oh, Lord! Oh, master, master!
Oh, God, master, do stop! Oh, God, master! Oh, God, master!'
A young gentleman of fifteen was with us; he had ridden in front, and now
turning on his horse, looked back with an expression only of impatience at
the delay. It was the first time I had ever seen a woman flogged. I had seen
a man cudgeled and beaten, in the heat of passion, before, but never flogged
with a hundredth part of the severity used in this case.
I glanced again at the perfectly passionless but rather grim business-like
face of the overseer, and again at the young gentleman, who had turned away;
if not indifferent he had evidently not the faintest sympathy with my
emotion. Only my horse chafed. I gave him rein and spur and we plunged into
the bushes and scrambled fiercely up the steep acclivity. The screaming
yells and the whip strokes had ceased when I reached the top of the bank.
Choking, sobbing, spasmodic groans only were heard. I rode on to where the
road, coming diagonally up the ravine, ran out upon the cotton-field. My
young companion met me there, and immediately afterward the overseer. He
laughed as he joined us, and said: 'She meant to cheat me out of a day's
work, and she has done it, too.' "
References:
Olmsted's account appears in: Olmsted, Frederick, Law, (Arthur M.
Schlesinger ed.), The Cotton Kingdom (1953); Nevins, Allan, Ordeal of
the Union (1947);
"Life on a Southern Plantation, 1854", EyeWitness to History,
www.eyewitnesstohistory.com
(2005).
also see...
|
 Mark Ebner
on Hollywood, Interrupted
"Bestseller status does not guarantee riches.
Consider the breakdown: Modest book advance split two ways with my
co-author, a year to research and write the thing, and the better part of
another year to get the hardcover out and promote the fucker. The math is
depressing."
An interview with
Mark Ebner, New York Times best seller and co-author of
Hollywood Interrupted.
|
|
|
Soviets Planned First Strike
Russia Planned Nuclear First Strike to Preempt West, Documents Show
Warsaw Pact Allies Resented Soviet Dominance and "Nuclear Romanticism"
Bloc Saw Military Balance in West's Favor
from 1970s On, Especially in Technology.
Plans were in order
to initiate the use of nuclear weapons, ostensibly to
preempt Western first-use, as Soviet expectations were
that conventional conflicts would go nuclear, and as
such they planned to fight and win such conflicts.
The "nuclear
romanticism," primarily of Soviet planners, concerning
the viability of unconventional warfare, including a
memorable retort by the Polish leader that "no one
should have the idea that in a nuclear war one could
enjoy a cup of coffee in Paris in five or six days."
Source
site:
|
|
|
 Jolie's Son
Maddox: Paternity Questioned
Internet icon
Maddox, author of
The Best
Page in the Universe, suspected of
fathering Jolie's "adopted" son
Maddox
Why the
"miscarriage and adoption" cover story?
Theories abound from worries of the child's
safety to threats from Brad Pitt's legal team;
since Pitt, it is alleged, has never forgiven
Maddox for stretching out his new squeeze to
the point kegels are a study in
futility. Maddox
refuses to change his story, however, and goes
on to suggest that if there was any adoption,
it was he who should have been
adopted:
"I can
only hope to one day suck the teat of Ms.
Jolie. I'm not worthy of such a thought. I
can only hope to imagine Elizabeth Hurley
sucking the teat of Ms. Jolie, at which time
the universe would explode (and by universe,
I'm referring to my penis)."
Related:
|
|
A Prophetic
Blueprint for Fascism
"Upon
that much-vexed subject the
authenticity of ... The Protocols of
Zion we shall not enter, except to
say that if the document is a forgery,
as alleged, then it is one of the most
remarkable in the history of
literature."
The
Spectator, London, October 16th,
1920
Since
the protocols have definitely been followed or
emulated, most notably by Nazis and
Communists; it's time to understand and study
what that plan is. A century after their
publication in 1905, history offers an answer
as to the price of not knowing the most
concise and frank blueprint for fascism. From
control of the press to economic wars,
knowing the plan's details helps you
identify who is using it, because the
methodology remains the same.
"The
class of people who
most willingly enter into secret societies
are those who live by their wits,
careerists, and in general people, mostly
light-minded, with whom we shall have no
difficulty in dealing and in using to wind
up the mechanism of the machine devised by
us. The goyim enter the lodges
out of curiosity or in the hope by their
means to get a nibble at the public pie, and
some of them in order to obtain a hearing
before the public for their impracticable
and groundless fantasies: they thirst for
the emotion of success and applause, of
which we are remarkably generous. And the
reason why we give them this success is to
make use of the high conceit of themselves
to which it gives birth, for that insensibly
disposes them to assimilate our suggestions
without being on their guard against
them...
The Impious Digest takes no position
on the authorship of the
disputed
papers, other than the obvious: they were written by
high-level Masons. They are herein reviewed to
ascertain which political entities
appeal to the protocols today.
 |
| Nazi Germany, May 10, 1933
Berlin book burning. Like web filters,
they had the desired effect of enabling
the most criminal elements of fascism by
censoring opponents. Expect to
find filters in web pages with political
content. (Political content is a
blockable criteria for
Websense.) |
Let's say the word "n
word" is flagged. Among the sites
conceivably blocked are those
containing eyewitness accounts of
Klan
serial killings,
bombings, and
historical references to civil
rights documents.... A speech by
late
Sen. Strom
Thurmond, Sen.
Trent Lott or
Sen. Robert
Byrd regarding
de-segregation, for example...
could easily be blocked by school
filters if any student should try
and pull up the text of their
earlier speeches or writings,
which then used the offensive term
quite openly... |
|
THIS WEB SITE BANNED BY
WEBSENSE
How
Politically Entrenched Bigots Gain from Web
Filters
So
you're all grown up and you still need a Net
Nanny, even if you didn't ask for
one?
This
site, which features anti-Klan articles
EXCLUSIVELY, is now listed as harboring hate
speech precisely because of that. Now think:
who does this software company favor: the
violent racist hungry to eliminate dissent, or
their opponents; whom rely on the extremists'
own words to counter and expose their agendas
and crimes? How is this filtering any
different than the Nazi
book
burningyou see pictured here in Berlin,
1933? Hitler controlled the press, but it was
not enough. He also wanted to censor
literature beyond his immediate control:
books. Our parallel, since our press and book
publishers are now pretty much controlled by a
handful of corporations, is the net, where
people can still hope for a free exchange of
ideas and information. (For the time being.)
The Nazis sought to filter their opponents
through book burnings. Books that were flagged
were immediately banned and owning them was a
criminal offense.
In
particular, Adolf Hitler targeted contemporary
writers who took apart his arguments and
exposed them for what what they were:
arguments designed to manipulate the masses
against their own interests and bypass common
sense, this by appealing to their basest
instincts- hate and fear. To counter this,
Hitler's political opponents used his own
words against him. In fact, they could not
attack him without quoting him. They could not
examine his character without repeating his
Hitler's own words. They could not expose the
fallacy and pointless hatred without using
Hitler's most powerful and mortal
enemy...HIMSELF. Now...
How do
web filters work? They use key words and
concepts that are defined as obscene,
tasteless, offensive, etc. For example, let's
say the word "n word" is flagged. Among the
sites conceivably blocked are those containing
eyewitness accounts of
Klan
serial murders,
bombings, historical references
to civil rights documents or even government
documents. A speech by late
Sen. Strom
Thurmond, Sen. Trent Lott or
Sen. Robert
Byrd,regarding desegregation, for example,
would easily be blocked by school filters if
any student should try and pull up the text of
their earlier speeches or writings, which then
used the offensive term quite
openly...
So if
Hitler were alive today and held the reins of
the controlling political party, any of his
opponents who used his speeches to illustrate
his fallacy or position would be banned, but
Hitler would not, because he could strong-arm
and shut down web filtering companies through
legislature. Incidentally, it should also be
noted that Websense filters now include
political content, and they even advertise the
fact. Consider which party most vehemently
advocates web filters today, and you know who
Websense works for. It doesn't help that
several powerful
Senators and Congressman,
in both parties, were members of the Klan and
that in actuality and practice, a web site's
repeating their historical record verbatim
could cause the site to be blacklisted by web
filters. This, of course, serves no one more
than the very racists Websense, and other web
filters, claim to be fighting
against.
As for
the Impious Digest, the controversial article
in question, which earned us a ban,
is
here.
Knowledge may be dangerous, but ignorance
kills. This is why libraries hate web
filters. If you need a web filter to
surf the web, ignorance now becomes a
conscious choice. And you will deserve
the government you vote for.
Related:
|
