Lee Statue in Richmond Vandalized

Richmond's Robert E. Lee Statue Vandalized

Posted: Nov 12, 2012 5:29 AM CST

RICHMOND, VA—Police are searching for the person who vandalized the Robert E. Lee monument in Richmond this Sunday.
Capital Police found the worlds "beef cake" spray painted on three separate sides of the statue early Sunday morning.
The monument has been tagged a few times this year.
Capital Police are reviewing surveillance video and talking to people in the area who may have seen the person responsible.
Stay with 8News for updates.

http://www.wric.com/story/20070110/richmonds-robert-e-lee-statue-vandalized

Flags Placed at Monument in Mississippi

Confederate ‘Flaggers’ exploit loophole in Haywood monument law; Become Mississippians-for-a-day December 9, 2012
By Roger McCredie

WAYNESVILLE – With some passive help from the sovereign state of Mississippi and active involvement by the Southern Legal Resource Center, devotees of the Confederate flag outflanked the Haywood County Council last weekend.
On Friday, November 30, flag supporters placed two miniature Mississippi state flags in front of the Confederate monument on the grounds of the Haywood County Courthouse. The Mississippi flag prominently features the Confederate battle flag in its upper left corner, but although the county recently enacted a temporary ban on displays of the battle flag on public property and is considering an ordinance that would ban it entirely, the battle flag’s appearance as part of the Mississippi flag in no way violated the very ordinance designed to prevent its display.
The county enacted the flag ban in June after Robert Clark, an attorney now practicing in Waynesville, objected to the practice of placing tiny Confederate flags at the memorial, which was donated to the county in 1940 by the United Daughters of the Confederacy. The ordinance currently before the county’s board of commissioners specifically prohibits the battle flag’s display on county property at any time. It does allow for placement of the Confederate First National flag (the “Stars and Bars”) at the monument, but only on Confederate Memorial Day (May 10).
The Southern Legal Resource Center, a Black Mountain-based nonprofit law firm which specializes in Southern heritage cases, noticed that the interim flag ban does not apply to “official government flags,” including “the flag of any state or territory of the United States.” Lyons drafted a letter to Haywood County attorney “Chip” Killian, informing him that members of the North Carolina Sons of Confederate Veterans and the Western North Carolina Flaggers intended to place the Mississippi flags at the monument on Friday. “The display of the Mississippi state flag comports in every way with the interim ‘Display Policy’ … and therefore it should not be removed or molested in any way,” Lyons’ letter stated, adding, “premature removal of these flags from county monuments by private persons or state actors constitue[s] theft and monument desecration.”
County atty. Killian was in Waynesville on Friday – his office is in Raleigh – and Lyons delivered the letter to him by hand.
“The County’s interim policy and the proposed policy is still unconstitutional & illegal. But should it be adopted, we have an allowable Confederate Battle flag variant, the Mississippi state flag, that is an “official Government Flag” that can be displayed on County property while the illegal ban on the Confederate Battle flag, for both the interim & proposed policy is fought out,” SLRC Executive Director Thomas Willis said.
Approximately 20 “flaggers” carrying full-sized battle flags and other flags of the Confederacy were present for the placing of the small Mississippi flags. They were joined by several passers-by.he county council is expected to vote on the proposed flag ban at its December 17 meeting.

http://www.thetribunepapers.com/2012/12/09/confederate-flaggers-exploit-loophole-in-haywood-monument-law-become-mississippians-for-a-day/

ALabama Dsplays Heritage - Hate Monger Holmes Objects

State Weighs in on Confederate Flag Flap


Louisville Metro Police say Fabian Valentine, 35, is responsible for at least eight robberies in the Metro and two in southern Indiana.More >> Another flag flap for Alabama. This time the repercussions over a huge Confederate flag flying along Interstate 65 could have a ripple effect on the state.

Opponents question the legality of putting up the giant battle flag and vow to take drastic measures to bring it down. Others view it as their given heritage.
The Sons of Confederate Veterans dedicated the banner Sunday. As they raised the flag, a protestor raised a question about it's legality.
Protestor Frank Matthews says, "that racist flag is a violation of state statutes." He says the banner is too tall and too close to the interstate.
So WSFA 12 News checked with the state department of transportation.
Tony Harris, the department's spokesman says, "When it comes to outdoor signs, billboards, and things of that nature, there's nothing that we have in the law or in regulations that effect flying a flag on private property."
DOT lawyers even examined the height and proximity of the flag and found nothing illegal.

State representative Alvin Holmes of Montgomery says, "You know sometimes the lawyers for the highway department, their interpretation is wrong and backwards."
Holmes says he will have attorneys for the state's black caucus review the law, including whether the flag is a distraction to drivers.
If it is determined that the flag is flying legally, then he will ask white leaders to call for it's removal. And if that doesn't work, Holmes says, "We are going to consider calling for a nationwide economic boycott against the state of Alabama."
Governor Bob Riley says, "That's as much a part of our culture, a part of Alabama history as a million other things."
During Sunday's dedication ceremony, protesters posted signs on the bank below the flag calling for the governor to bring it down.

http://www.wsfa.com/Global/story.asp?S=3527616&nav=0RdEbVrN

Special Offer From 2014 Reunion Host Committee

Compatriots,

At the recent national convention, the SC Division 10th Brigade, host camp of the 2014 National Reunion, offered a package for early registration called the Palmetto Package. Many compatriots have already claimed the limited packages.

Palmetto Package includes:

Registration ($45.00)

Reunion Program

1 Numbered Medal ($75.00)

1 Awards Banquet ticket ($35.00)

1 Ancestor Memorial ($10.00)

1 Second National Confederate Flag flown over Ft. Sumter National Monument

Palmetto Package Cost: $125.00
The Palmetto Package is valued at over $170.00 and is limited to the first 250 registrants. The Palmetto Package offer will close on January 1, 2013 or until a combined total of 250 registrations have been sold. Whichever comes first! Other incentive packages may be put together at a later date. We only have 2nd National remaining – First registered; first served – The flags are 3 x 5 poly flags with a certificate of authenticity signed by the Superintendent of Ft. Sumter National Monument.
Visit our reunion site to claim one of the remaining packages available.
www.scv2014.org
In January 2013, the package will be replaced with general registration information. Don’t miss out on this last opportunity to save! Compatriots who purchase the early registration package will receive information pertaining to the tours and other events prior to announcing on the reunion website.

David Rentz 2014 National Reunion Chairman

Intollerance and Ignorance Causes Removal of Statue

Confederate statue removed at DSC Officials feared artwork might be damaged
Wednesday, Dec. 6, 2012

 Confederate statue removed: A statue on Dixie State College’s campus depicting two Confederate soldiers carrying a Confederate flag was removed Thursday afternoon. Emotions varied from excitement to shock Thursday afternoon when Dixie State College removed a Confederate soldier statue that stood in front of the Avenna Center.

The statue, created by local artist Jerry Anderson, depicted a Confederate soldier on a horse reaching his hand out to a wounded soldier, with a Confederate flag in the background. Former alumni president Connor Shakespeare said he was “sad” the statue was taken off the campus. “I didn’t look at it with two Confederate soldiers; I saw the greatest act of service one could render to another human being, and it was a pure form of self-sacrifice having one fellow soldier risking his life for another,” Shakespeare said. “It’s too bad that there are individuals that felt otherwise. The only thing they saw was the Confederate flag instead of reading the poem or looking at it as a piece of art.”

For others, the Confederate statue was a sign of racism and discrimination. “I think if we’re going to be a university, we need to cater to everyone’s feelings and not just to the community,” DSC student Ryan Mayfield said. “I think it’s really cool to be here and see it leave; I think it’s a big day in Dixie’s history.”

Mayor Dan McArthur said it is “too bad it came down.” “To see that is kind of like ripping the heart out of us,” McArthur said. “I still think the piece of artwork was well-done.”

DSC student Kourtni Mietchen also was “glad” to see the statue moved. “I think it’s the good direction that Dixie needs to go in,” Mietchen said. “It just offended a lot of people.” DSC public relations director Steve Johnson said the decision to remove the statue was made Wednesday by DSC president Stephen Nadauld, who has been discussing the removal of the statue with administrators. In the wake of a protest at the statue last week, school officials expressed concern that the piece might be damaged. “It’s a valuable piece of art, even though we understand it has been a focal point of contention as part of this university naming process over the last couple of weeks,”

Johnson said. The discussion to remove the statue began once administrators became aware that “people had issues with it being on our campus,” Johnson said. The discussion has surfaced in connection with Dixie State College preparing to be elevated to university status, which is expected to happen early next year. School officials are also exploring a possible name change. The fate of the statue is still in question, as the statue was originally donated in the late 1980s when the current DSC Avenna Center was the Dixie Convention Center. “The statue was donated to the city and county when that area was the Dixie Convention Center,” Johnson said. “When the Dixie Convention Center south of town was built, everybody moved from (the Avenna Center), and the state then acquired that property. (The state) made it into the Smith Computer Center, the Avenna Center and the Cox auditorium, but the statue remained.”

Johnson said it is unclear who owns the statue, but the college has been in contact with the St. George city attorney’s office to determine who owns the piece. “Until we find out who owns it, we decided to take it down to protect it because it’s worth tens of thousands of dollars,” Johnson said. “We don’t want anything to happen to the statue or the integrity of the statue because the college doesn’t want to be monetarily responsible.”

The statue will be removed from DSC’s campus and put into storage until it is decided who owns it.“You can understand our sensitivity for wanting to protect the statue because a local Washington County resident created it,” Johnson said. “You can understand our sensitivity for wanting to protect the statue because a local Washington County resident created it,” Johnson said.

 http://www.thespectrum.com/article/20121206/NEWS01/312060002/Confederate-statue-removed-from-Dixie-campus?odyssey=nav%7Chead

Budget and Finance Deadlines for Funding Requests Announced

Compatriots,


The Budget and Finance Committee will review funding requests prior to the GEC (General Executive Council) Spring meeting. To be considered requests must be received no later than January 19, 2013.
It is preferred that requests and supporting documentation be sent as attachments to an email message directed to Adjutant-in-Chief Ritchie (aic@scv.org) and Executive Director Sewell (exedir@scv.org).

If you send the request and supporting documents in hard-copy format, they should be sent to AIC Ritchie, Executive Director Sewell and Army Commanders Earnest, Strain and Owens, who also serve on the Budget and Finance Committee. Mailing addresses can be found on the National Committee page at:

http://www.scv.org/committeeView.php?cid=BFf.

Those requesting funds should read the Funding Proposal Guidelines found on the Forms and Documents page of scv.org at:

http://www.scv.org/pdf/FundingProposalGuidelines.pdf

The form to be used to make a Funding Request is also on the Forms and Documents page at: http://www.scv.org/pdf/SCVFundRequests.pdf

The information requested on the form is the minimum that is needed to consider a request. Those making requests are encouraged to submit additional supporting information if it helps clarify the purpose and other particulars of the project.

If you have any questions regarding the guidelines, form or process, please contact me.


Stephen Lee Ritchie
Adjutant-in-Chief
aic@scv.org
(765) 759-8038

Lincoln Film Is Propaganda

Lincoln the Racist


(Or: Steven Spielberg, Call Your Office)
by Thomas J. DiLorenzo

"Who freed the slaves? To the extent that they were ever ‘freed,’ they were freed by the Thirteenth Amendment, which was authored and pressured into existence not by Lincoln but by the great emancipators nobody knows, the abolitionists and congressional leaders who created the climate and generated the pressure that goaded, prodded, drove, forced Lincoln into glory by associating him with a policy that he adamantly opposed for at least fifty-four of his fifty-six years of his life."

Lerone Bennett, Jr., Forced into Glory: Abraham Lincoln’ s White Dream, p. 19

Let me introduce you to Lerone Bennett, Jr. who was the executive editor of Ebony magazine for several decades (beginning in 1958) and the author of many books, including a biography of Martin Luther King, Jr. (What Manner of Man: A Biography of Martin Luther King) and Forced into Glory: Abraham Lincoln’s White Dream. Bennett is a graduate of Morehouse College in Atlanta and authored hundreds of articles on African-American history and culture during his career at Ebony. He spent more than twenty years researching and writing Forced into Glory, a scathing critique of Abraham Lincoln based on mountains of truths.

Forced into Glory, published in 2000, was mostly ignored by the Lincoln cult, although there were a few timid "reviews" by reviewers that have never done one-thousandth of the research that Lerone Bennett did on the subject. As a black man, he was spared the mantra of being "linked to extremist hate groups" by the lily-white leftists at the Southern Poverty Law Center, the preeminent hate group of the hardcore Left. He was also spared that hate group’s normally automatic insinuation that any critic of Lincoln must secretly wish that slavery had never ended. They mostly sat back and hoped that he would go away.

Lerone Bennett, Jr. contends that it is almost impossible for the average citizen to know much of anything about Lincoln despite the fact that literally thousands of books have been written about him. "A century of lies" is how he describes Lincoln "scholarship." He provides thousands of documented facts to make his case.

On the subject of Steven Spielberg’s new movie on Lincoln, which is entirely about Lincoln’s supposed role in lobbying for the Thirteenth Amendment that ended slavery, Bennett points out: "There is a pleasant fiction that Lincoln . . . became a flaming advocate of the amendment and used the power of his office to buy votes to ensure its passage. There is no evidence, as David H. Donald has noted, to support that fiction . . ." To the extent that Lincoln did finally and hesitatingly support the amendment, Bennett argues that it was he who was literally forced into it by other politicians, not the other way around as portrayed in the Spielberg film. (David Donald, by the way, is the preeminent Lincoln scholar of our day and Pulitzer prize-winning Lincoln biographer).

On the issue of the Emancipation Proclamation, Bennett correctly points out that "J.G. Randall, who has been called ‘the greatest Lincoln scholar of all time,’ said the Proclamation itself did not free a single slave" since it only applied to rebel territory and specifically exempted areas of the U.S. such as the entire state of West Virginia where the U.S. Army was in control at the time. (James G. Randall was indeed the most prolific Lincoln scholar of all time and the academic mentor of David Donald at the University of Illinois).

Lerone Bennett is understandably outraged at how the Lincoln cult has covered up Lincoln’s racism for over a century, pretending that he was not a man of his time. He quotes Lincoln as saying in the first Lincoln-Douglas debate in Ottawa, Illinois, for example, that he denied "to set the niggers and white people to marrying together" (Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, vol. 3, p. 20). In Forced into Glory Bennett shows that Lincoln rather compulsively used the N-word; was a huge fan of "black face" minstrel shows; was famous for his racist jokes; and that many of his White House appointees were shocked at his racist language.

Lincoln did not hesitate to broadcast his racist views publicly, either. Bennett quotes his speech during a debate with Douglas in Charleston, Illinois on September 18, 1858 (Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, vol. 3, pp. 145-146):

"I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races, that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will for ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race."

Bennett documents that Lincoln stated publicly that "America was made for the White people and not for the Negroes" (p. 211), and "at least twenty-one times, he said publicly that he was opposed to equal rights for Blacks." "What I would most desire would be the separation of the white and black races," said Lincoln (Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, vol. 2, p. 521).

Reading through Forced into Glory, one gets the clear impression that Bennett got angrier and angrier at the non-stop excuse-making, lying, cover-ups, and fabrications of the "Lincoln scholars." He never takes his eye of the ball, however, and is relentless in throwing facts in the faces of the Lincoln cultists.

As a member of the Illinois legislature Lincoln urged the legislature "to appropriate money for colonization in order to remove Negroes from the state and prevent miscegenation" (p. 228). As president, Lincoln toiled endlessly with plans to "colonize" (i.e., deport) all of the black people out of America. This is what Bennett calls Lincoln’s "White Dream," and more recent research of the very best caliber supports him. I refer to the book Colonization after Emancipation by Phillip Magness of American University and Sebastian Page of Oxford University that, using records from the American and British national archives, proves that until his dying day Lincoln was negotiating with Great Britain and other foreign governments to deport all of the soon-to-be-freed slaves out of the U.S.

The Lincoln cult, which has fabricated excuses for everything, argued for years that Lincoln mysteriously abandoned his obsession with "colonization" sometime around 1863. Magness and Page prove this to be the nonsense that it is.

In Illinois, the state constitution was amended in 1848 to prohibit free black people from residing in the state. Lincoln supported it. He also supported the Illinois Black Codes, under which "Illinois Blacks had no legal rights. White people were bound to respect." "None of this disturbed Lincoln," writes Bennett.

Bennett also points out the clear historical fact that Lincoln strongly supported the Fugitive Slave Act which forced Northerners to hunt down runaway slaves and return them to their owners. He admittedly never said a word about slavery in public until he was in his fifties, while everyone else in the nation was screaming about the issue. When he did oppose slavery, Bennett points out, it was always in the abstract, accompanied by some statement to the effect that he didn’t know what could be done about it. And as a presidential candidate he never opposed Southern slavery, only the extension of slavery into the territories, explaining that "we" wanted to preserve the Territories "for free White people" (Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, vol. 3, p. 311). In Bennett’s own words: "One must never forget that Lincoln always spoke in tongues or in a private code when he was talking about slavery or Negroes. And although he said or seemed to say that slavery was wrong, he always qualified the assertion in the same speech or in a succeeding speech, saying either that slavery was wrong in an abstract sense or that it was wrong in so far as it sought to spread itself." He was a master politician, after all, which as Murray Rothbard once said, means that he was a masterful liar, conniver, and manipulator.

All of these truths, and many more, have been ignored, swept under the rug, or buried under thousands of pages of excuses by the Lincoln cult over the past century and more in books and in films like the new Lincoln film by Steven Spielberg. After spending a quarter of a century researching and writing on the subject, Lerone Bennett, Jr. concluded that "Lincoln is theology, not historiology. He is a faith, he is a church, he is a religion, and he has his own priests and acolytes, most of whom have a vested interest in ‘the great emancipator’ and who are passionately opposed to anybody telling the truth about him" (p. 114). And "with rare exceptions, you can’t believe what any major Lincoln scholar tells you about Abraham Lincoln and race." Amen, Brother Lerone.

November 10, 2012

Thomas J. DiLorenzo [send him mail] is professor of economics at Loyola College in Maryland and the author of The Real Lincoln; Lincoln Unmasked: What You’re Not Supposed To Know about Dishonest Abe and How Capitalism Saved America. His latest book is Hamilton’s Curse: How Jefferson’s Archenemy Betrayed the American Revolution – And What It Means for America Today. His latest book is Organized Crime: The Unvarnished Truth About Government.

http://lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo241.html