American Gulag


where trust and truth

have gone extinct





Prisoners of principle get tortured



By John Kaminski

You can read this directly at



You don’t hear anybody talking seriously about peace anymore. Back in the 1960s all the lefties talked about was peace. Now all the lefties talk about is killing the president. Something really bad has happened to them between then and now. Now, there is no one on the political left who dares to defend the disappearing rights of the ordinary citizen against that ubiquitous foreign power that controls every aspect of our existence.


More people are beginning to notice that America has crossed the line into insanity. U.S. leaders openly murder foreign leaders of much higher moral character than themselves and blithely bomb women and children as a favor to the oil companies. Trust and truth have gone extinct as the fibers that hold civilization together begin to fray and unravel, sure signs of our imminent demise.


By now deprived of its own volition by the Jews who own it, the USA is now the darkest force for evil in the world, obliterating all opposition (including its own citizens) as it attempts to rearrange the assembly of nations into a plantation it controls utterly and ruthlessly.


American exceptionalism is a Jewish production used to bludgeon the world into submission.


Jewish billionaires hire unemployed proles to violently protest people who are at least trying to act on principle. And even the victims are victimized, having been betrayed by their leaders who are secretly working for the opposition.


What a mess! There is no trustworthy higher authority to appeal to, no competent referee who can wedge the two sides apart and explain what’s happening. There are only partisan voices — corrupt mainstream media which have merged with an occupying government always preaching for war. Disorganized peaceniks and other people of principle have no chance against the information drenching of the white noise machine.


We have devolved into a world of secret agents and unsuspecting victims. The freedoms we thought we had, it turns out, were just advertising slogans designed to get you to give up your most cherished information. Just like Facebook.


It is only in a totalitarian tyranny that people get tortured. The saddest part of the Guantanamo prison tragedy is that the movers and shakers in the war against Islam knew all of those prisoners were innocent since the U.S. braintrust created the original Al Qaeda terror corps by recruiting them in the same way that the Antifa thugs in Charlottesville were hired by George Soros to continue and accelerate the social destabilization of the USA.


Nobody can ever lead America again without telling the truth about 9/11. And that will be the end of Jewish dominance.


8th Amendment bites dust


We watched two disturbing demonstrations of our rancid legal system in recent weeks. These were events that in all their maddening betrayal proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the U.S. government can absolutely no longer be trusted by sincere American citizens.


Event No. 1 was the Charlottesville, Virginia city government, which granted access to paid protesters whose aim was to disrupt the gathering for which another permit had been given to the Unite the Right rally. A Craigslist ad appeared to indicate that these protesters had been paid, although some protesters complained they weren’t paid but we’re supposed to have been.


Event No. 2 was a jury verdict ridiculing the prosecution of Western ranchers who have been held in solitary confinement for a year and a half for defending their own Constitutional rights. 


If the government has proved one thing in its needlessly vindictive harassment (the word “torture” would not be too strong) of innocent people who only sought relief from an overaggressive and corrupt federal land grab, it is that it will break every law it can to convict innocent people who interfere with the big business deals of powerful politicians.


Nevertheless, even a jury almost handpicked by a corrupt judge could not overlook the preponderance of government slander and absence of government evidence, so it found those charged innocent in the second round of many trials to follow. There is always hope with a jury.


Government-approved crime


Our own government continues to violate its own laws. 


And I’m not just talking wars without Congressional approval, I’m talking about the sadistic abuse of its own citizens. It is one of the cruel ironies of history that those American patriots who are most sincere are the ones most likely to be crushed beneath the wheel of a corrupt government, especially one covertly run by a foreign power. God rest Lavoy Finicum’s soul.


The 8th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution basically prohibits the use of cruel and unusual punishment. All of the so-called defendants in the two confrontations in the West over government encroachment over rangelands have been victims of prisoner abuse and government malfeasance way beneath the line of minimal judicial standards.


Just one recent example . . .

---Ammon Bundy live from Solitary confinement---

call: CALL 775 482 8110....option 8 for directory of all police. Option 1 for Sheriff.

...after being handcuffed in a 3x3 foot shower for 13 hours, stripped naked and then thrown in the hole. All for refusing to let a guard take his shirt that was hanging off his bed which is against the rules to have anything hanging over the side. Had he let them take his only shirt he would not have been able to come to the morning meal.

So he ended up being tortured, beaten, had both shoulders dislocated HE was forced to put them back in place on his own! He was isolated over night with bloody ankles from the shackles. 

America, This is not our beloved nation any longer. It's been hijacked by tyrants. 

--Kelli Stewart


The original judge (Hogan) in the first trial in Oregon who originally sentenced the Hammonds stated that he thought a full term of 5 years was “cruel and unusual punishment”. But the government appealed and found a friendlier judge who gave them the mandatory minimum for terrorism so the family would be forced to sell their uranium laden farm to the government.


(I’m assuming you know all about the Bundys and the Hammonds by now, because I don’t have time to tell you how they are, now that Ernst Zündel has passed, the new canaries in the coal mine, the new harbingers of how all Americans who exhibit their moral principles will be treated in the future, crushed beneath the wheel of Jew-created political correctness . . . now and forevermore.)


No trust left in America


• You can’t trust your government. It constantly breaks its own laws that it pretends to enforce.


Otherwise we could arrest Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama for the premeditated murder of Muammar Qaddafi, perhaps the most decent leader the world has ever known, who created a country in which basically all his citizens lived for free with the cushion of oil revenue shared by everyone. Not only that, the Libyan colonel tried to raise up those around him by creating a pan-African currency that would have freed the whole continent from the financial slavery imposed upon it by its Western slavemasters.


And most recently we have learned Qaddafi was holding back the tide of African hordes now raging through Libya, across the Mediterranean and all over Europe, fulfilling the Jewish grand strategy of reducing the Western world to the level of Africa in order to more efficiently harvest members of the herd of cattle it regards the rest of the human race to be. 


The premeditated annihilation of Syria has had a similar effect. So Obama got his $400 million in an offshore account for helping Israel demolish Europe demographically. The ex-President has remained on the scene to vandalize all future presidencies on behalf of the kosher Deep State he has served so well.


The people who run the government don’t work for you; they work for the people who hired them and put them in office to do their dirty work. In the halls of justice, the only justice is in the halls.


• You can’t trust your doctor. They keep saying vaccines are safe and children keep dying. Little girls get messed up for life after being forced to take a shot to prevent a disease they most likely would never get. And doctors keep pushing the improperly tested drugs that the pharmaceutical companies supposedly create to combat the diseases they have also invented.


• You can’t trust your local cop! In fact the profusion of cops killing pets, gunning down innocent people at the wrong address, robbing drivers at gunpoint on I-40 in Tennessee, refusing to investigate the crimes of the rich, and significantly failing to either challenge crimes committed by our government or correct the abuses of people injured unjustly by our government, offer absolutely no avenue of redress except to pay somebody off. If he were a real person, Trump should have pardoned the Bundys and the Hammonds by now.


• You can’t trust your neighborhood holy man. All religions exist only to perpetuate themselves and control their adherents. Their survival is always more important than the message they attempt to preach, which delegitimizes their message. It’s all about blackmail and control, and with the terrifying power of the emissaries of the Almighty use to threaten people to support a criminal government.


Muslim holy men urge their followers to kill strangers, Jewish holy men conspire in a worldwide plot to rob and kill everyone else, and Christian holy men tell us to turn the other cheek while our country is destroyed.


There’s no real leader in the world — with the possible exceptions of Vladimir Putin and Bashar al-Assad — saying things that are philosophically sound. The vast majority of American politicians want to make war with these two sane men. The American government and these spineless traitors prefer to continue to receive the covert payoffs from worldwide Jewry than act on the principles our Constitution, which at one time guaranteed our individual freedom and independence.


These guarantees are of no concern to our current leaders. Human need and enlightened compassion are not among their considerations.


So who do you turn to for help?


You can’t even trust your children anymore, once they have been poisoned by toxic vaccinations and brainwashed by homosexual educators eager to recruit flesh for their masters.


No avenue of redress 

means you are in prison.


Society has been fragmented, atomized, emulsified into an amorphous pond of toxic jelly in which we thrash around in pursuit of goals implanted in our brains by people and agencies who do not have our best interests at heart.


We are free-floating electrons bobbing around our neighborhood nucleus engaging in occupations practiced by humans. The family structure that gave such comfort to the world is largely gone now, replaced by a cold, gray, humorless praxis that keeps people at each others’ throats rather than in their hearts.


The reason things are so screwed up is because Jews control everything, which means honesty and fairness are out the window and exploitation and abuse are everywhere in all segments of the employment spectrum.


Nobody is safe anywhere.


Is this extraordinary?


Ponder the words of Theognis, writing more than 2500 years ago (c. 540 B.C.):


For human nature Hope remains alone

of all the gods — the rest have flown.

Faith is departed; Truth and Honor dead;

And all the Graces too, my friends, have fled.


Could it be that, in all this time, nothing has changed regarding human nature?


When sacrifices are made and altars burn,

After all the gods are adored in turn,

Let Hope be present — and with hope my friend

Let every act of life begin and end.


Yet in this new American Gulag, the bleak assessment remains. You don’t hear anybody talking about peace anymore. And life becomes nothing but a boring preamble to our deaths, as our government debates who it should bomb next.




John Kaminski is a writer who lives on the Gulf Coast of Florida, constantly trying to figure out why we are destroying ourselves, and pinpointing a corrupt belief system as the engine of our demise. Solely dependent on contributions from readers, please support his work by mail: 6871 Willow Creek Circle #103, North Port FL 34287 USA.

How We Know The So-Called “Civil War” Was Not Over Slavery

By Paul Craig Roberts

When I read Professor Thomas DiLorenzo’s article the question that lept to mind was, “How come the South is said to have fought for slavery when the North wasn’t fighting against slavery?”

Two days before Lincoln’s inauguration as the 16th President, Congress, consisting only of the Northern states, passed overwhelmingly on March 2, 1861, the Corwin Amendment that gave constitutional protection to slavery. Lincoln endorsed the amendment in his inaugural address, saying “I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable.”

Quite clearly, the North was not prepared to go to war in order to end slavery when on the very eve of war the US Congress and incoming president were in the process of making it unconstitutional to abolish slavery.

Here we have absolute total proof that the North wanted the South kept in the Union far more than the North wanted to abolish slavery.

If the South’s real concern was maintaining slavery, the South would not have turned down the constitutional protection of slavery offered them on a silver platter by Congress and the President. Clearly, for the South also the issue was not slavery.

The real issue between North and South could not be reconciled on the basis of accommodating slavery. The real issue was economic as DiLorenzo, Charles Beard and other historians have documented. The North offered to preserve slavery irrevocably, but the North did not offer to give up the high tariffs and economic policies that the South saw as inimical to its interests.

Blaming the war on slavery was the way the northern court historians used morality to cover up Lincoln’s naked aggression and the war crimes of his generals. Demonizing the enemy with moral language works for the victor. And it is still ongoing. We see in the destruction of statues the determination to shove remaining symbols of the Confederacy down the Memory Hole.

Today the ignorant morons, thoroughly brainwashed by Identity Politics, are demanding removal of memorials to Robert E. Lee, an alleged racist toward whom they express violent hatred. This presents a massive paradox. Robert E. Lee was the first person offered command of the Union armies. How can it be that a “Southern racist” was offered command of the Union Army if the Union was going to war to free black slaves?

Virginia did not secede until April 17, 1861, two days after Lincoln called up troops for the invasion of the South.

Surely there must be some hook somewhere that the dishonest court historians can use on which to hang an explanation that the war was about slavery. It is not an easy task. Only a small minority of southerners owned slaves. Slaves were brought to the New World by Europeans as a labor force long prior to the existence of the US and the Southern states in order that the abundant land could be exploited. For the South slavery was an inherited institution that pre-dated the South. Diaries and letters of soldiers fighting for the Confederacy and those fighting for the Union provide no evidence that the soldiers were fighting for or against slavery. Princeton historian, Pulitzer Prize winner, Lincoln Prize winner, president of the American Historical Association, and member of the editorial board of Encyclopedia Britannica, James M. McPherson, in his book based on the correspondence of one thousand soldiers from both sides, What They Fought For, 1861-1865, reports that they fought for two different understandings of the Constitution.

As for the Emancipation Proclamation, on the Union side, military officers were concerned that the Union troops would desert if the Emancipation Proclamation gave them the impression that they were being killed and maimed for the sake of blacks. That is why Lincoln stressed that the proclamation was a “war measure” to provoke an internal slave rebellion that would draw Southern troops off the front lines.

If we look carefully we can find a phony hook in the South Carolina Declaration of Causes of Secession (December 20, 1860) as long as we ignore the reasoning of the document. Lincoln’s election caused South Carolina to secede. During his campaign for president Lincoln used rhetoric aimed at the abolitionist vote. (Abolitionists did want slavery abolished for moral reasons, though it is sometimes hard to see their morality through their hate, but they never controlled the government.)

South Carolina saw in Lincoln’s election rhetoric intent to violate the US Constitution, which was a voluntary agreement, and which recognized each state as a free and independent state. After providing a history that supported South Carolina’s position, the document says that to remove all doubt about the sovereignty of states “an amendment was added, which declared that the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States, respectively, or to the people.”

South Carolina saw slavery as the issue being used by the North to violate the sovereignty of states and to further centralize power in Washington. The secession document makes the case that the North, which controlled the US government, had broken the compact on which the Union rested and, therefore, had made the Union null and void. For example, South Carolina pointed to Article 4 of the US Constitution, which reads: “No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up, on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due.” Northern states had passed laws that nullified federal laws that upheld this article of the compact. Thus, the northern states had deliberately broken the compact on which the union was formed.

The obvious implication was that every aspect of states’ rights protected by the 10th Amendment could now be violated. And as time passed they were, so South Carolina’s reading of the situation was correct.

The secession document reads as a defense of the powers of states and not as a defense of slavery. Here is the document.

Read it and see what you decide.

A court historian, who is determined to focus attention away from the North’s destruction of the US Constitution and the war crimes that accompanied the Constitution’s destruction, will seize on South Carolina’s use of slavery as the example of the issue the North used to subvert the Constitution. The court historian’s reasoning is that as South Carolina makes a to-do about slavery, slavery must have been the cause of the war.

As South Carolina was the first to secede, its secession document probably was the model for other states. If so, this is the avenue by which court historians, that is, those who replace real history with fake history, turn the war into a war over slavery.

Once people become brainwashed, especially if it is by propaganda that serves power, they are more or less lost forever. It is extremely difficult to bring them to truth. Just look at the pain and suffering inflicted on historian David Irving for documenting the truth about the war crimes committed by the allies against the Germans. There is no doubt that he is correct, but the truth is unacceptable.

The same is the case with the War of Northern Aggression. Lies masquerading as history have been institutionalized for 150 years. An institutionalized lie is highly resistant to truth.

Education has so deteriorated in the US that many people can no longer tell the difference between an explanation and an excuse or justification. In the US denunciation of an orchestrated hate object is a safer path for a writer than explanation. Truth is the casualty.

That truth is so rare everywhere in the Western World is why the West is doomed. The United States, for example, has an entire population that is completely ignorant of its own history.

As George Orwell said, the best way to destroy a people is to destroy their history.

Apparently Even Asians Can Be White Supremacists If They Are Named Robert Lee

ESPN has pulled an Asian-American named Robert Lee (Lee is a common name among Asians, for example, Bruce Lee) from announcing the University of Virginia/Wiliam & Mary footbal game in Charlottesville this Saturday because of his name.

What We Learned From Charlottesville

By Paul Craig Roberts

We learned, although we already knew it, that the US media has no integrity.

We learned that the liberal/progressive/left holds fast to myths that justify hate.

We learned that misrepresentation is the hallmark of American history.

We learned that some websites that we thought were brave are not.

We learned that Identity Politics has a firm hold and that the demonization of white people is now an ideology that rivals in strength the neoconservative ideology that Americans are the exceptional and indispensable people. Obviously, we cannot simultaneously be both deplorables and the best people on earth.

We learned that the liberal/progressive/left will cooperate with the military/security complex to bring down a president whose intent was to normalize relations with Russia and reduce the dangerously high tensions between the two major nuclear powers.

In brief, we learned that the US is on a firm course of both internal and external conflict.


Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many university appointments. His internet columns have attracted a worldwide following. Roberts' latest books are The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism and Economic Dissolution of the West, How America Was Lost, and The Neoconservative Threat to World Order.

Freedom for the Speech We Hate: The Legal Ins and Outs of the Right to Protest

By John W. Whitehead

“If there is any principle of the Constitution that more imperatively calls for attachment than any other, it is the principle of free thought — not free thought for those who agree with us but freedom for the thought that we hate.”— Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes

August 24, 2017 - There was a time in this country, back when the British were running things, that if you spoke your mind and it ticked off the wrong people, you’d soon find yourself in jail for offending the king.

Reacting to this injustice, when it was time to write the Constitution, America’s founders argued for a Bill of Rights, of which the First Amendment protects the right to free speech. James Madison, the father of the Constitution, was very clear about the fact that he wrote the First Amendment to protect the minority against the majority.

What Madison meant by minority is “offensive speech.”

Unfortunately, we don’t honor that principle as much as we should today. In fact, we seem to be witnessing a politically correct philosophy at play, one shared by both the extreme left and the extreme right, which aims to stifle all expression that doesn’t fit within their parameters of what they consider to be “acceptable” speech.

There are all kinds of labels put on such speech—it’s been called politically incorrect speech, hate speech, offensive speech, and so on—but really, the message being conveyed is that you don’t have a right to express yourself if certain people or groups don’t like or agree with what you are saying.

Hence, we have seen the caging of free speech in recent years, through the use of so-called “free speech zones” on college campuses and at political events, the requirement of speech permits in parks and community gatherings, and the policing of online forums.

Clearly, this elitist, monolithic mindset is at odds with everything America is supposed to stand for.

Indeed, we should be encouraging people to debate issues and air their views. Instead, by muzzling free speech, we are contributing to a growing underclass of Americans—many of whom have been labeled racists, rednecks and religious bigots—who are being told that they can’t take part in American public life unless they “fit in.”

Remember, the First Amendment acts as a steam valve. It allows people to speak their minds, air their grievances and contribute to a larger dialogue that hopefully results in a more just world. When there is no steam valve to release the pressure, frustration builds, anger grows and people become more volatile and desperate to force a conversation.

The attempt to stifle certain forms of speech is where we go wrong.

In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court has held that it is “a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment...that the government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea offensive or disagreeable.” For example, it is not a question of whether the Confederate flag represents racism but whether banning it leads to even greater problems, namely, the loss of freedom in general.

Along with the constitutional right to peacefully (and that means non-violently) assemble, the right to free speech allows us to challenge the government through protests and demonstrations and to attempt to change the world around us—for the better or the worse—through protests and counterprotests.










This monument offends me - it is too white, I demand it be torn down









Oliver Stone on Charlottesville: "Deep State" Is "Bigger Problem" Than Trump


The display of the Confederate flag on this website is for Educational & Historical purposes which history shows it is the United States (CORPORATE) Shadow Government which is engaged in the Slave Industry even today.

The Confederate Flag is a reminder of Hate and Division perpetrated by Government bodies for their benefit of Human Slave Trafficking and Taxation which is ongoing current day.

To Americans it is not a symbol of intolerance but part of American History as a battle flag. It will serve you well to get educated by researching and reading the facts.

The embarrassment is strictly on the head of Government Officials attempting to sweep their crimes under the rug for what they did and continue to perpetrate. Keep the flag flying, the only shame is on the real promoters of Hate & Intolerance.

Today The (CORPORATE) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA INC., is waging World War against many nations to change "their" government because the US  is INTOLERANT & HATES anyone who does not bow down to serve them. That same HUBRIS demonstrates the GOVERNMENT HYPOCRISY which still exists in America today, against peoples of all color.






THE RECENT TRAGEDY IN CHARLOTTESVILLE and the subsequent demonstrations and remonstrations that have been going on ad nauseum are the latest examples of the harm that can be done by the falsification of history in service to political agendas (and the ill effect of excising history as a subject of study from the typical government school curriculum). Were the history of the War Between the States taught, and taught accurately, the wind would be drained from the sails of both sides in the clash.

Were that history accurately known, the War Between the States would be understood by all as having been fought over taxes (the imbalanced tariff structure of the time, in which 87% of the tax's burden fell on the South), not slavery (which Lincoln was willing to see permanently-embedded in the Constitution). Were that history accurately known, statues of Robert E. Lee would neither serve any symbolic interest of racists, nor offend anyone, and we could be spared dangerous inclinations to "sanitize" our catalog of national and regional monuments.




by Andrew Colesanti


> Begin Colesanti Document      > Begin Colesanti Document

The US government collected a $5 Tax for every slave transaction in America (human sold as “property”).

Slavery in America did not end after the civil war it just changed its modus operandi (MO) to “Debt Slavery” of mostly blacks who were alleged to have committed some offense or another then a hefty fine was levied that the victim could never possibly ever pay so they were forced to sign contracts to work their debts off, however in most cases the debt is never paid off, many were worked to death and the slaves' labor was traded, rented out, leased or sold to other slavers across America all under the Flag of the United States

Post-civil war "debt slavery" was now big business in America bigger than all previous slave endeavors undertaken in the past with all the large plantations, farms, the railroads, mines, freight carriers, industry, and large corporations like US Steel and municipal governments all reaping the profits of the debt slavery industry all under the Flag of the United States.

Debt was usually created out of thin air while other methods were through company stores/towns and even the court system was used to recruit debt slaves who were then handled by slavers all under the Flag of the United States. 

[This is in full effect even today in 2015 under Debtor Prisons : see The U.S. Is Locking People Up For Being Poor, ]

Most notably Teddy Roosevelt had created the predecessor to the FBI who investigated the slavers and even charged, tried and jailed some of the most notorious slavers of the day. Teddy gave in to demands and pressure from the plutocrats to pardon the slavers so they could provide cheap labor to all industries, the railroads, shipping, mines, plantations etc.

So Teddy did the right thing for his plutocrat friends, he pardoned the slavers so they could ply their trade and slavery continued in America under the Flag of the United States.

> End Colesanti Document.   > End Colesanti Document.



Those unfortunate souls caught up in the debt slavery industry were mostly blacks, Irish, Italian, German, Chinese etc. The debt slavery continued through WW2 and into the 1960’s in the form of chain gangs and the like. Today chain gangs are making a comeback for rebuilding roadways and within the prison industries all under the Flag of the United States. 

[see: ]  

Lest we forget it was the US government that abused blacks in countless illegal human experiments (see: Boyd Graves Research on  THE US SPECIAL VIRUS CANCER PROGRAM) and held them as second class citizens’ right through WW2 under the Flag of the United States.

President Wilson created segregation again under the Flag of the United States.

Iraqi Dinar devalued by the US

THE DINAR: The dinar was introduced into circulation in 1932, by replacing the Indian rupee, which had been the official currency since the British occupation of the country in World War I, at a rate of 1 dinar = 11 rupees. The dinar was pegged at par with the British pound until 1959 when, without changing its value, the peg was switched to the United States dollar at the rate of 1 dinar = 2.8 dollars. By not following the devaluations of the U.S. currency in 1971 and 1973, the dinar rose to a value of US $3.3778. IN OTHER WORDS - A DINAR was worth 3X MORE THAN THE US DOLLAR BILL

After the Gulf War in 1991, due to UN sanctions, the previously used Swiss printing was no longer available. Due to sanctions placed on Iraq by the United States and the international community, the dinar devalued quickly, and in late 1995, US$1 was valued at 3,000 dinars.

There is considerable confusion around the role of the International Monetary Fund in Iraq. 
How do  you say theft by "conversion" ?

You create a war with a country whose money is stronger and more reliable than yours. You bomb them into submission, destroy their infrastructure, and as conqueror you (the oppressor) devalue their money THREE THOUSAND TIMES - then Loan the new puppet government you put in power there Billions so they can pay YOUR CONTRACTORS to rebuild their country but they can never pay off that debt because you devalued their money and they have to buy US dollars to repay you (in dollars) the billions your contractors charged them to put back what you Bombed.  Criminally Slick as Shit isn't it?

WORLD SLAVERY IS ALIVE AND WELL - and Caesar is fiddling away.

Charlottesville and Its Aftermath: What if It Was a Setup?

The ridiculous campaign by virtually every media outlet, every Democrat and far too many squishy Republicans to label Trump some kind of  racist and Nazi sympathizer is beginning to have the stink of an orchestrated smear.   The conflagration in Charlottesville is beginning to feel like a set-up, perhaps weeks or months in the planning.  Planned by whom?  Time may tell.  We know that Michael Signer, the mayor of Charlottesville, declared his city to be the "capital of the resistance" just after Trump's inauguration.  We know that Gov. Terry McAuliffe is a corruptocrat, joined at the hip to the Clintons.  He pardoned sixty-thousand felons in order to ensure he delivered his state to the presidential election of Hillary Clinton.  We know he would like to run for president himself.

We know that Obama and his inner circle have set up a war room in his D.C. home to plan and execute resistance to the Trump administration and his legislative agenda.  None of these people care about the American people, or the fact that Trump won the election because millions of people voted for him.  They suggest those deranged persons who gathered in Charlottesville as members of one of several fringe groups, Unite The Right, neo-Nazi or KKK, are Trump's base -- as if there are more than a few hundred or thousand of them throughout the country.  There are not enough of them to affect anything or elect anyone.  Those who are actual members of these small groups are most likely mentally ill to one degree or another. Trump has disavowed them all, over and over and over again.  Liz Crokin, an entertainment reporter and no fan of Trump, wrote in 2016 that she had covered Trump for over a decade and  in all that time, no one had ever suggested he was racist, homophobic, or sympathetic to white supremacists.  That all began after he announced his campaign.  It is as fake a narrative as the "Russia collusion" meme.  The left set out to defame Trump from moment one.  When he won the election, their shock, dismay and intolerance for every opinion that differs from their own shifted into hysterical overdrive.   They mounted their crusade to destroy his presidency on Nov. 9, 2016. 

What if Signer and McAuliffe, in conjunction with Antifa and other Soros-funded groups like Black Lives Matter, planned and orchestrated what happened in Charlottesville and meant for events to unfold roughly as they did?  If they did,  it was icing on their sick, immoral cake.  If this was all part of a plan, one would hope those behind it suffer for their part in and responsibility for the tragic death of a young woman, Heather Heyer.  The "founder" of Unite The Right, Jason Kessler,  was an activist with Occupy Wall Street and Obama supporter. 

Jason Kessler at Charlottesville City Hall, August 13, 2017

He sees himself as a professional provocateur. What if he was a ringer, a phony who revels in riling up some crazy people for some political purpose?  We know the left is skilled in all manner of dirty tricks.  That sort of thing was Robert Creamer's job for the Hillary campaign, hiring thugs to incite violence that could then be blamed on Trump supporters.  Think of Ferguson, Baltimore, Berkeley, etc.  Antifa and BLM are every bit as fascist as any of the supremacist groups; they are more violent and there are more of them.  Why is the left so afraid to admit this fact?  Even Peter Beinart did in the Atlantic, written before last Saturday.

Since that day, the call to remove the statues on display that honor any members of the Confederacy has become shrill and  frenzied.  Erasing American history benefits no one and only condemns us to repeat past mistakes.  The supremacist groups had a permit; they had applied months earlier.  The Antifa and Black Lives Matter groups did not have a permit.  The local police at some point, on whose order we do not know, turned the pro-statue groups toward the Antifa and BLM groups, many of whom were armed with lethal weapons - soda cans filled with cement, bottles filled with urine, baseball bats and boards with screws protruding to do maximum harm, and improvised flamethrowers.  These are the people who initiated the violence.  How was this not a planned melee?  Pit groups of demented racists  -- all of them on both sides are certainly that -- against each other and violence is sure to occur.  (Certainly, there were decent people among the protestors and counter-protesters who had no affiliation with the supremacist groups or Antifa or BLM. Heather Heyer was among them.)

Trump spoke out on Saturday and his statement was perfectly fine given the known facts at the time.  But the media reacted as though he had defended the supremacist groups.  He did not; not even close.  It was as though no matter what Trump said, they were going to attack his remarks as being insufficient.  When he reiterated his horror of the brawl the next day and named the groups present,  they again reacted as if he had defended the supremacist groups because he said there was mayhem committed by both sides.  He correctly stated that there was violence perpetrated by members of all the groups present.  The media was apoplectic even though they surely knew what he said was true.  Reporters on the scene saw the police stand down.  Only one of them reported that truth.  One has to wonder if talking points were distributed before the event took place and before Trump said a word about it.

The Democratic Party is no longer liberal, it is leftist.  It is not progressive, it is regressive and repressive.  It seeks to overturn the First Amendment.  It means to indoctrinate, and has, successive generations via public and private education.  It is becoming ever more fascist by the day.  Along with groups like Antifa, BLM, and the host of anti-democratic groups George Soros funds to protest all around the nation, the media and the Democrats in Congress seek to overthrow an elected president in order to impose their vision of some sort of socialist utopia which of course will never exist.  What will result if they get their way is a Venezuela-style two-tiered class system, the ultra rich and the very poor who are kept in their place by economic and social control.  The millions of people who see the left for what it has become see this.  It is why they voted for Trump. 

It is disheartening to see so many American elites, privileged in wealth and position within the media and/or government be so completely of one, unthinking mind.  They all have braces on their brains (Auntie Mame).  So afraid to buck the rigid mindset of their peers, they have become mouthpieces for their own group identity.  Do they believe the nonsense they spew?  Who knows?  Those in Congress, all the Democrats and the anti-Trump Republicans essentially care about one thing and one thing only: getting re-elected.  They cannot afford to offend their donors or the lobbyists whose largesse fills their coffers.  So they trip over each other getting to the nearest camera to align themselves with whatever opinion they think will put them on the right side of the money people.  They are wrong so often.

Finally, Trump's press conference on Tuesday made the left's heads explode.  Why?  Because everything he said was absolutely true.  He does not play by their tyrannical PC rules.  He said what was true and that room full of puerile reporters shouting insults at him could not handle the truth.  They want what they want to be true but it just is not.   This entire episode, the behavior of all those protesters in Charlottesville and the bizarre behavior of the media will likely drive future voters to Trump, not away from him.  Millions more than those who voted for him are as likely to be sick to death of the self-righteous preening of the talking heads:  Chuck Todd, Jake Tapper, Don Lemon, Shep Smith, etc.  There must be a contest to see who can appear to be the most egregiously triggered by what Trump did or did not say. 

So were the events of Saturday the result of a despicable plan to further undermine Trump? There was plenty of time and Charlottesville is the "capital of resistance."   If it was, it was evil and deadly and the people involved need to be prosecuted.  Or is this a wild conspiracy theory?  Perhaps. But the pieces fit.  Will the DOJ and the FBI actually investigate the many mysteries that surround the events of that day?  Not likely.  The left in this country has long been and seems to remain above the law.  But someday, maybe someone will come forward and tell the truth.  What is certain is that the violence could easily have been prevented with the common sense strategies civilized cities put in place.  America deserves much better from its media and its elected officials.  The only person remembering why he is there is Donald Trump. 

Editor's note: An error on the purpose of McAuliffe's pardoning of 60,000 felons that ran in an earlier version of the piece has been corrected.




It's just that whites haven't figured out
they are slaves in an open air prison
Toiling by the sweat of their brow
Just to survive and pay
never ending bills


All Florida prisons on indefinite lockdown after ‘credible intelligence’ of planned uprisings

Officials said they planned on “resuming normal visitation as soon as possible.” However, the Miami Herald reported Thursday that the entire Florida prison system would be on lockdown for an indefinite period of time.

A group of prisoner advocates plans to march on the White House Saturday, demanding“the 13th amendment enslavement clause of the United States Constitution be amended to abolish legalized slavery in America.”

On Wednesday, the organizers of the march tweeted a link to an article from the Herald about the FDC cancelling visitation for the weekend.

“Prisons around the nation will probably be shutting down, and punish any prisoner that mention human rights,” the organizers tweeted.

As A Nation Grapples With White Supremacy, The Millions For Prisoners March Comes At The Perfect Time

People all over the US have responded to the violence of Charlottesville and the President’s defense of the white nationalist groups as morally equivalent to their anti-fascist opponents by taking direct action against confederate statues, most prominently with members of the World Worker’s Party including Takiyah Thompson tearing down a confederate monument in Durham, North Carolina this past week.

Their demand is the end of slavery in America — the elimination of the “exception clause” in the 13th Amendment which fatally caveats the abolition of slavery with the phrase “except as punishment for a crime.”

“The 13th Amendment did not abolish slavery; it nationalized it,” Bennu Hannibal Ra-Sun explains in a recent article in the SF Bay View. As one of the members of the Free Alabama Movement, Bennu has faced intense repression from the Alabama Department of Corrections due to his involvement in the call and promotion of last year’s national prison labor strike against the practice of prison slavery.

In 1970 Black Panther Afeni Shakur, one of New York’s Panther 21— who would later become mother to rap artist Tupac Shakur — penned a passionate essay from prison entitled “We Will Win,” she stated poignantly within it, “We know that the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments did not liberate us — that they only legalized slavery and expanded the Dred Scott decision to include the Indians, Spanish speaking and poor whites.”

More notably within mainstream America, Ava DuVernay released her Oscar nominated documentary 13th during the prison strike, bringing the voices of prominent scholars and political pundits to the topic of the “exception clause,” lending it more mainstream credibility. There have been large class action lawsuits under anti-slavery laws against two private prison companies that gave large donations to — and have received massive contracts from — the Trump administration.

The issue also became a topic of mainstream discourse when a passage from a Hillary Clinton memoir was revealed online, showing that she endorsed and benefitted from prison slavery during her time as First Lady in the Arkansas Governor’s mansion.

‘Treating them like animals’: Florida inmates denied toilet paper, toothbrushes


It’s become a near-weekly occurrence. Somewhere in some state, the FBI will announce that they’ve foiled yet another terrorist plot and saved lives. However, as the data shows, the majority of these cases involve psychologically diminished patsies who’ve been entirely groomed, armed, and entrapped by FBI agents. Simply put, the FBI manufactures terror threats and then takes credit for stopping them.

We the People are getting mighty educated these days. We tracked down the original 13th Amendment to the Constitution - you know, the one you started the War of 1812 over so you could burn the copies - and it says you Esquires are not allowed to have a title of nobility AND hold public office in America. Up until now, you have been getting away with it.

We learned that the BAR originates in the Crown Temple in London, England. Therefore, your oath to the BAR means you are not Americans anymore but agents for a foreign power. You have no citizenship. You claim to have licenses to practice law. As a matter of fact there is no such thing as a license to practice law. We searched in the statutes, codes, rules and regulations for every state and also their respective secretaries of state and supreme courts. No authorization for the "license to practice law" exists anywhere. That means every one of you is unauthorized and illegal in the Republic. JOHN HENRY DOE, ESQUIRE is a fiction that exists only on paper.

What you do have is a BAR card that simply authorizes you to use the statutes, codes, rules and regulations, which are all copyrighted. We can't help but notice that all of the law you use is copyrighted, so the People can't use it without using you. People, how well are you doing with these laws? It wasn't easy since you have us hanging upside down looking in the mirror trying to read the newspaper, but we figured out that statutes, codes, rules and regulations are not law but abrogations of the law. Abrogate means "to abolish by authoritative action: ANNUL". Applying the force of deadly violence, you annulled the real Law and replaced it with color of law. Color of law is a false flag, a pirate flag. You're all a bunch of actors. No license and no law, either.

We counted the number of statutes, codes, rules and regulations that you created, with the intelligence endowed by your Creator, to use against us. There are many more than 60 million statutes, codes, rules and regulations, certainly more than all of you BAR attorneys put together can keep track of without plenty of software, quarterly updates, and teams of legal researchers - and, voila! You have billing!

You write statutes, codes, rules and regulations at the behest of the putrefying corrupt Chosen Masters, the ancient hate-driven cult within a hate-driven racist sect that are the tiresome take-over-the-world crowd and the blueprint for criminality. The beasts of this world have more honor than you. You herd the People you have defrauded into the system of the Matrix like so many cattle, to be processed, robbed of their freedom, families and property, experimented upon with drug sorcery, and all too often killed.

You do this because the BAR Association is a hate-driven money cult. Your masters reward you with obscene hourly rates for the building of your personal empires. You are so far gone from the sight of God that you think you have the authority to write rules to justify torturing your fellow beings. You have much blood on your hands.

And your "noble cause" is what? Why, the U.S. bankruptcy is your noble cause, your reason for destroying millions of lives minute by minute. The U.S. bankruptcy is George W. Bush's noble cause, Cindy. Claiming the authority to enact and enforce new "bankruptcy laws" (statutes) that create debtor's prisons for the People, who since 1933 have had no money to pay a debt with, the U.S. corporation is itself bankrupt and has made us into the surety for the debt. 

In fact all so-called governing bodies in the U.S. are bankrupt corporations telescoping from one to the other, back and forth between federal-state-county-municipal, due to the Federal Project of Credit. The SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA is a bankrupt corporation and does not exist. Your law firm is bankrupt. There is no money. We have no law because we have no money.

Whether or whether not you BAR attorneys swore a secret oath to administer the U.S. bankruptcy, the bankruptcy is in each and every letter you send, every form you submit, every court pleading you file, every plea bargain you negotiate. It is a fact of your every professional thought, besides billing. "Law" has nothing to do with it. 

Just when we thought your deeds could not possibly get more hideous, we discovered that you create commercial paper for each inmate in prison and put a price on him and hypothecate that price many times. Correctional Corporation of America (Nashville, Tennessee) creates the bonds, and Lehman Brothers underwrites those bonds for being bought and sold on the world financial markets. The Chosen Masters cut you in on the deals and you all take profits from this. We are enraged to know that U.S. corporations are being funded by our brothers and sisters who were busted for pot or for not having a current driver’s license. You BAR attorneys created crimes out of nothing and wrote the rules for this heinous and sickening theft of the People's energy, all for administering the U.S. bankruptcy and your own unjust enrichment.


A. Colesanti, Aug. 2017



All I see is a well-funded and violent 5th column movement in America operating unchecked chanting all sorts of slogans along with hate speech as distractions from the truth however; most alarming are the chants to kill whitey, kill Christians, and kill Trump supporters from modern slaves who have no idea whatsoever that they are slaves as they call for revolution against what they have coined as the FASCIST USA.

Truth be told those who co-opted the duly constituted republic to their own ends have made a mockery of the constitution and the USA so in reality any intelligent American would be hard pressed these days to support such a nefarious entity as the NEO AMERICAN MILITARY POLICE STATE JUNTA that has latterly enacted law to make democide exacted by US & foreign (UN/NATO) military and paramilitaries against American civilians legal all without due process of law (ref: NDAA) in other words “extrajudicial executions will escalate to horrific level’s, so the question you need to ask yourself is will you be a victim or resist?” (Emphasis added).

This 5th Column movement is a divide and conquer tact to destabilize America from within by operates financed and supported by the DEEP STATE,  US tax dollars, established globalist elites; NGO’s while being propagandized as a good thing by main stream news as it parrots the hate speech that blaming white privilege; white racist Christians of European ancestry for the violence that took place in Charlottesville Virginia all of which is the result of the deep states mission to destroy Southern history, heritage and culture “which will not end there simply because everything USA to include the civilian populations have become expendable under the global dominance agenda of the NEW WORLD ORDER” (emphasis added).

Fact is these 5th Column operatives; with their deranged and perverse prospective of American history are too ignorant to understand they are actually an expendable tool of the DEEP STATE deployed to incite, provoke and start all the violence while government paramilitaries stand down then “as the violence escalated those same government paramilitary enforcers declared a state of emergency stating that the permitted activity was now an illegal gathering” when in fact the only illegal gathering according to the government’s own rules was the 5th Column operatives who converged upon the area to exact their hatred with violence which was responded to with more violence.

“The inaction; of those who allowed the violence to escalate evidences DEEP STATE control of the dialog (emphasis mine).”

This ongoing destruction of Southern Culture, Heritage and Confederate History will not end there for soon you and yours will be targeted only for being white.

IT IS WELL DOCUMENTED; that the ANTIFA flag, RED COMMUNIST HAMMER & SICKLE flag, the COMMUNIST BLACK POWER/PANTHER flag, BLACK LIVES MATTER (BLM), AFRICAN NATIONAL CONGRESS (ANC), ISLAMIC STATE (ISIS/ISIL) along with other well-known banners and flags symbolizing a violent and deep hatred of America its white race and Christians* alike. Those flags and banners were flown and displayed by these violent 5th Column operatives all without meeting the governments permit requirement that is forced upon their enemies (emphasis added).

CHRISTIANS*: Mainstream news more than once has parroted the 5th COLUMN battle cry against white Christians of European decent…which evidences IMO an obvious Wahhabi/Khazar influence of the destabilizing of America from within.

WHITE PRIVLAGE is another hate phrase used by the 5th COLUMN and directed at whitey in general when in fact “the only privilege that has ever existed in America is exclusively exercised by the rich multi-cultural predator class of ruling elites” (emphasis mine).

ONLY WHITES OWNED SLAVES; nothing could be further from the truth; “the only individuals/entities who could afford to own and support slaves in America were and are the RICH of all races and nationalities along with corporate interest and not the common man white or otherwise.” (Emphasis added)

DO NOT GIVE SILENT CONSENT; you need not struggle to hear or see who the targets are of this multi-cultural communist 5th COLUMN movement in America “they are the entire white race, Christians, constitutionalist, anti-established elite, anti-NWO, anti-police state, anti-IRS, anti-established elite, pro 2nd Amendment, pro-freedom, survivalist, preppers, veterans as well as others who believe in traditional American ideals and values and the first 10 Amendments of the constitution.”

BE AWARE; as white Christians of European origin you and your loved ones are high up on the list of enemies the DEEP STATE maintains and face a clear and present danger and now openly targeted by the violent multi-cultural communist 5th COLUMN movement which on many, many occasions have declared war upon you and yours with the bogus claim you’re a WHITE NAZI FACIST RACIST or some other thing they have been taught or paid to hate.

SUFFICE TO SAY; the current form of government at all levels is controlled by the DEEP STATE thereby will not protect any of you simply because you have become expendable in the furtherance of their NEW WORLD ORDER (emphasis mine).

IN CONCLUSION; redundant but necessary, the current form of government at all levels in America will not protect you and yours. If perhaps, you are not prepared by now “arms & ammunition have come down in price so there is no excuse not to be well armed at all times,” from here gather and store any items of logistical, trading or survival value. If perhaps you can’t afford the aforementioned then plan to take it by primitive means from your enemies when the time comes and that time my fellow Americans, quickly approaches (emphasis added).


Support American Sheriff Wayne Ivey


GUN CON-TROL = Hitting The Target


COMMENT: some short excerpts below are from research during several years living in North Carolina and travelling several states as KY, VA, all the way west to FRESNO, actually meeting and living with (some) "The Informer", others like Eustace Mullins, Nord Davis Jr., Northpoint Teams and numerous other GREAT men. I spent months in small towns, old federal buildings, hunting for original "books" which none of you will ever have the privilege to touch or read, sadly.

The good news is - somewhere in Appalachia, in old building(s), caves, mining shafts, and other locations, hundreds to thousands of books, parchment are in safe keeping, for the day America Awakens.  I am told there in another location lies the original Freemen Documents   

A Military Flag

And to further confirm and understand the significance of what I have told you, you need to understand the fringe on the United States flag. Read the following.

First the appearance of our flag is defined in Title 4 sec. 1. U.S.C.. "The flag of the United States shall be thirteen horizontal stripes, alternate red and white; and the union of the flag shall be forty-eight stars, white in a blue field." (my note - of course when new states are admitted, new stars are added.)

A foot note was added on page 1113 of the same section which says: "Placing of fringe on the national flag, the dimensions of the flag, and arrangement of the stars are matters of detail not controlled by statute, but within the discretion of the President as commander-in-chief of the Army and Navy." 1925, 34 Op.Atty.Gen. 483.

The president, as military commander, can add a yellow fringe to our flag. When would this be done? During time of war. Why? A flag with a fringe is an ensign, a military flag. Read the following.

"Pursuant to U.S.C. Chapter 1, 2, and 3; Executive Order No. 10834, August 21, 1959, 24 F.R. 6865, a military flag is a flag that resembles the regular flag of the United States, except that it has a YELLOW FRINGE, bordered on three sides. The President of the United states designates this deviation from the regular flag, by executive order, and in his capacity as COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF of the Armed forces."

From the National Encyclopedia, Volume 4:
"Flag, an emblem of a nation; usually made of cloth and flown from a staff. From a military standpoint flags are of two general classes, those flown from stationary masts over army posts, and those carried by troops in formation. The former are referred to by the general name flags. The latter are called colors when carried by dismounted troops. Colors and Standards are more nearly square than flags and are made of silk with a knotted Fringe of Yellow on three sides...use of the flag. The most general and appropriate use of the flag is as a symbol of authority and power."

"...The agency of the master is devolved upon him by the law of the flag. The same law that confers his authority ascertains its limits, and the flag at the mast-head is notice to all the world of the extent of such power to bind the owners or freighters by his act. The foreigner who deals with this agent has notice of that law, and, if he be bound by it, there is not injustice. His notice is the national flag which is hoisted on every sea and under which the master sails into every port, and every circumstance that connects him with the vessel isolates that vessel in the eyes of the world, and demonstrates his relation to the owners and freighters as their agent for a specific purpose and with power well defined under the national maritime law." Bouvier's Law Dictionary, 1914.

Don't be thrown by the fact they are talking about the sea, and that it doesn't apply to land. Admiralty law came on land in 1845 with the Act of 1845 by Congress. Next a court case:

"Pursuant to the "Law of the Flag", a military flag does result in jurisdictional implication when flown. The Plaintiff cites the following: "Under what is called international law, the law of the flag, a shipowner who sends his vessel into a foreign port gives notice by his flag to all who enter into contracts with the shipmaster that he intends the law of the flag to regulate those contracts with the shipmaster that he either submit to its operation or not contract with him or his agent at all." Ruhstrat v. People, 57 N.E. 41, 45, 185 ILL. 133, 49 LRA 181, 76 AM.

I have had debates with folks that take great issue with what I have said, they dogmatically say the constitution is the law and the government is outside the law. I wish they were right, but they fail to see or understand that the American people have been conquered, unknowingly, but conquered all the same. That is why a judge will tell you not to bring the Constitution into his court, or a law dictionary, because he is the law, not the Constitution. You have only to read the previous Senates report on National Emergency, to understand the Constitution and our Constitutional form of government no longer exists.

Social Security

I fail to understand how the American people could have been so dumbed down as to not see that the Social Security system is fraudulent and that it is based on socialism, which is the redistribution of wealth, right out of the communist manifesto. The Social Security system first, is fraud, it is insolvent and was never intended to be. It is used for a national identification number, and a requirement to receive benefits from the conquers (king). The Social Security system is made to look and act like insurance, all insurance is governed by admiralty law, which is the kings way of binding those involved with commerce with him.

"The Social Security system may be accurately described as a form of Social Insurance, enacted pursuant to Congress' power to "spend money in aid of the 'general welfare'," Helvering vs. Davis [301 U.S., at 640]

"My judgment accordingly is, that policies of insurance are within... the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of the United States." Federal Judge Story, in DELOVIO VS. BOIT, 7 Federal Cases, #3776, at page 444 (1815)

You need to know and understand what contribution means in F.I C. A., Federal Insurance Contribution Act. Read the following definition.

Contribution. Right of one who has discharged a common liability to recover of another also liable, the aliquot portion which he ought to pay or bear. Under principle of "contribution," a tort-feasor against whom a judgement is rendered is entitled to recover proportional shares of judgement from other joint tort- feasor whose negligence contributed to the injury and who were also liable to the plaintiff. (cite omitted) The share of a loss payable by an insure when contracts with two or more insurers cover the same loss. The insurer's share of a loss under a coinsurance or similar provision. The sharing of a loss or payment among several. The act of any one or several of a number of co-debtors, co-sureties, etc., in reimbursing one of their number who has paid the whole debt or suffered the whole liability, each to the extent of his proportionate share. (Blacks Law Dictionary 6th ed.)

Thereby making you obligated for the national debt. The Social Security system is one of the contractual nexus' between you and the king. Because you are involved in the kings commerce and have asked voluntarily for his protection, you have accomplished the following. You have admitted that you are equally responsible for having caused the national debt and that you are a wrong doer, as defined by the above legal definition. You have admitted to being a Fourteenth Amendment citizen, who only has civil rights granted by the king. By being a Fourteenth Amendment citizen, you have agreed that you do not have standing in court to question the national debt. Keep in mind this is beyond the status of our country and people, which I covered earlier in this paper. We are in this system of law because of the conquest of our country.

Congress has transferred its Constitutional obligation of coining money to the federal reserve, the representatives of the king, this began after the Civil War and the overturning of the U.S. Constitution, as a result of CONGEST. You have used this fiat money without objection, which is a commercial benefit, supplied by the kings bankers. Fiat money has no real value, other than the faith in it, and you CANNOT pay a debt with fiat money, because it is a debt instrument. A federal reserve note is a promise to pay and is only evidence of debt. The benefit you have received is you are allowed to discharge your debt, which means you pass on financial servitude to someone else. The someone else is our children.

When you go to the grocery store and hand the clerk a fifty dollar federal reserve note you have stolen the groceries and passed fifty dollars of debt to the seller. Americans try to acquire as much of this fiat money as they can. If Americans were aware of this; it wouldn't matter to them, because they don't care if the merchandise is stolen as long as it is legal. But what happens if the system fails? Those with the most fiat money or real property, which was obtained with fiat money will be forfeited to the king, everything that was obtained with this fiat money reverts back to the king temporary, I will explain in the conclusion of this paper. Because use of his fiat money is a benefit, supplied by the king's bankers; it all transfers back to the king. The king's claim to the increase in this country comes from the original Charter of 1606. But, it is all hidden, black is white and white is black, wealth is actually debt and financial slavery.

For those that do not have a Social Security number or think they have rescinded it, you are no better off. As far as the king is concerned you are subject to him also. Why? Well, just to list a couple of reasons other than conquest. You use his money and as I said before, this is discharging debt, without prosecution. You use the goods and services that were obtained by this fiat money, to enrich your life style and sustain yourself. You drive or travel, which ever definition you want to use, on the king's highways and roads for pleasure and to earn a living; meaning you are involved in the king's commerce. On top of these reasons which are based on received benefits, this country HAS BEEN CONQUERED!

I know a lot of patriots won't like this. Your (our) argument has been that the government has and is operating outside of the law (United States Constitution). Believe me I don't like sounding like the devils advocate, but as far as international law goes; and the laws that govern War between countries, the king/queen of England rule this country, first by financial servitude and then by actual Conquest and Military Occupation. The Civil War was the beginning of the Conquest, as evidenced by the Fourteenth Amendment. This Amendment did several things, as already mentioned. It created the only citizenship available to the conquered and declared that these citizens had no standing in any court to challenge the monetary policies of the new government. Why? So the king would always receive his gain from his Commercial venture. The Amendment also eliminated your use of natural rights and gave the Conquered civil rights. The Conquered are governed by public policy, instead of Republic of self-government under God Almighty. Your argument that this can't be, is frivolous and without merit, the evidence is conclusive.

Nothing has changed since before the Revolutionary War.

All persons whose activities in King's Commerce are such that they fall under this marine-like environment, are into an invisible Admiralty Jurisdiction Contract. Admiralty Jurisdiction is the KING'S COMMERCE of the High Seas, and if the King is a party to the sea-based Commerce (such as by the King having financed your ship, or the ship is carrying the King's guns), then that Commerce is properly governed by the special rules applicable to Admiralty Jurisdiction. But as for that slice of Commerce going on out on the High Seas without the King as a party, that Commerce is called Maritime Jurisdiction, and so Maritime is the private Commerce that transpires in a marine environment. At least, that distinction between Admiralty and Maritime is the way things once were, but no more. George Mercier, Invisible Contracts, 1984.

What Lincoln and Jefferson said about the true American danger was very prophetic.

"All the armies of Europe, Asia and Africa combined could not, by force, take a drink from the Ohio, or make a track on the Blue Ridge in a trial of a thousand years. At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer, if it ever reach us it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we ourselves must be its author and finisher. Abraham Lincoln

"Our rulers will become corrupt, our people careless... the time for fixing every essential right on a legal basis is [now] while our rulers are honest, and ourselves united. From the conclusion of this war we shall be going downhill. It will not then be necessary to resort every moment to the people for support. They will be forgotten, therefore, and their rights disregarded. They will forget themselves, but in the sole faculty of making money, and will never think of uniting to effect a due respect for their rights. The shackles, therefore, which shall not be knocked off at the conclusion of this war, will remain on us long, will be made heavier and heavier, till our rights shall revive or expire in a convulsion. Thomas Jefferson

Below are the political platforms of the Democrats and the Republicans, as you can see there is no difference between the two, plain socialism. They are both leading America to a World government, just as Cornwallis said, and that government will be the British empire or promoted by the British.

"We have built foundations for the security of those who are faced with the hazards of unemployment and old age; for the orphaned, the crippled, and the blind. On the foundation of the Social Security Act we are determined to erect a structure of economic security for all our people, making sure that this benefit shall keep step with the ever increasing capacity of America to provide a high standard of living for all its citizens." DEMOCRATIC PARTY PLATFORM OF 1936, at page 360, infra.

"Real security will be possible only when our productive capacity is sufficient to furnish a decent standard of living for all American families and to provide a surplus for future needs and contingencies. For the attainment of that ultimate objective, we look to the energy, self-reliance and character of our people, and to our system of free enterprise. "Society has an obligation to promote the security of the people, by affording some measure of protection against involuntary unemployment and dependency in old age. The NEW DEAL policies, while purporting to provide social security, have, in fact, endangered it. "We propose a system of old age security, based upon the following principles:

1. We approve a PAY AS YOU GO policy, which requires of each generation the support of the aged and the determination of what is just and adequate.

2. Every American citizen over 65 should receive a supplemental payment necessary to provide a minimum income sufficient to protect him or her from want.

3. Each state and territory, upon complying with simple and general minimum standards, should receive from the Federal Government a graduated contribution in proportion to its own, up to a fixed maximum.

4. To make this program consistent with sound fiscal policy the Federal revenues for this purpose must be provided from the proceeds of a direct tax widely distributed. All will be benefitted and all should contribute. "We propose to encourage adoption by the states and territories of honest and practical measures for meeting the problems of employment insurance. "The unemployment insurance and old age annuity of the present Social Security Act are unworkable and deny benefits to about two-thirds of our adult population, including professional men and women and all engaged in agriculture and domestic service, and the self-employed, while imposing heavy tax burdens upon all."



compiled by Ronald Miller [University of Illinois Press, Urbana, Illinois (1973)





     What Mr. Montgomery is trying to convey in this, his final

writing on this subject, is that laying of the foundation for how

this country operates today.  Not that you can go into a court

and present these arguments today,  you can't..  If you don't

know the power structures beginnings then you are doomed forever

to repeat the same mistakes as those that preceded you in their

quest to seek justice.  To truly win in the situation there must

be a concerted effort of at least 70 percent of the people to

overturn the present state of affairs.  That will not happen

because of the ignorance of the masses that are so easily led by

those in power.  The people have truly forsaken the true

Sovereign, namely the Lord Almighty.  Without going into the so

called "religion" aspect, let me just pose some questions.  Did

not the Lord Almighty create the land?  Yes.   Did the Pope

create the land?  No!   Did the King create the land?  No!  Did

any other man create the land?  No!  Did any group of men called

State create the land?  No!  Now that I have answered the

questions for you then here are some that you are to answer.

Then who is the real owner of the land?  Did not the creator of

the land bestow it upon all men and their heirs to be stewards of

the land, granting to no one man or group of men, absolute

dominion over any land?  When man dies who does the land escheat

to?  For those not familiar with that term escheat, it means who

does the land go back to when all men die?   Your answers can

only show that no Pope, King, Man himself, or group of men called

State can ever claim they own the land and charge another man a

fee to live on that land.  Mr. Montgomery is showing you the

progression from a certain period of time that certain mere

mortal men have decided that they were granted certain rights

above all other men in claiming dominion over all land.

The pecking Order starting from the top in controlling land are;

1. The Pope

2. The Kings of all lands, but we are talking specifically England here.

3. Knights

4. Lord Proprietors of the King in America

5. Royal Governors of the King, in America

6. Administrative officers of the corporate colonies of America

7. Freeholders/Freemen of granted property in America.

8. The officers of the newly constituted States of America which, gave way to the;

9. Officers of the United States which now reverses 8 and 9 due to the States joining Union.

10. The County officers which are the corporate instrumentalities of the State.

11. Simple man, meaning you, reading this.


     You, number 11, are so far removed from the land that the

Lord Almighty gave to all men, that essentially you have no claim

but as a squatter on someone else's land and have no control

whatsoever in saying you have the right to not pay taxes for the

use of the Pope's land.  But the Pope is the figure head of a

corporation called the Vatican consisting of  men forming a


claiming complete dominion over all land in the world.  When the

Pope dies another of these men are chosen as the new Pope. There

is one little quirk that needs to be mentioned.  That is, a group

of men exist that has control of even the Vatican, therefore

every chain holder on down to number 11 on the list is

controlled.  That group of men are called Bankers.  The Pope and

the King, in 1213, on to a period just past 1218, lost a lot of

money fighting each other and drew on a group of men, one in

particular, that loaned to each side money.  When neither could

pay the loans back and defaulted, the money lender foreclosed.

He foreclosed in agreement by not taking all the property, except

for England, as is done today on foreclosures, but an arrangement

was made that satisfied the so called "holy trinity" that is

espoused by Mr. Montgomery below.  That "Holy Trinity" is

mentioned in the Treaty of 1783.  Who do you think the Holy

Trinity consists?   So the list above from 1 to 11 needs another

entity.  I did not put him in so I could make it clear who is in

order of claim to the land you live on as a tenant.  Now number

one has been replaced by the Banker and everyone has shifted down

a notch.  Hello number twelve, how do you like your position on

the list?  Well, if people reject allegiance to the True Lord and

cling to another and pledge allegiance to another then you

deserve to pay those that allow you, through privilege, to live

on their land.  You gave up that RIGHT to live on land of the

True Land Owner without even a fee, except to abide by His Laws

and not that of mere mortal man such as yourself.  Until you

understand this and what Mr. Montgomery has tried telling you in

his previous articles and I have in my books and articles on the

net, you will, continue to be nothing but a slave to the system

that perpetrated a fraud on you and your family tree for

centuries.  No, you cannot attack unless the numbers are

sufficient.  Yes, the below is true despite what any one says to

degrade Mr. Montgomery's research of many years.  These people

that degrade have either an ignorance level so high that no

amount of education will correct it or they are in league with a

higher number on the pecking order that wants to keep the status

quo.  These men are the only ones that the Lord Almighty wished

woe upon in the Bible for "hiding the key of knowledge,"

in Luke and Matthew.  You can look at it this way as relates to

present day.  The Banker remains in complete control.  I don't

mean your local banker, but those that control all banks in

America and the world.  They operate with straw men many deep so

as to keep the people ignorant as to what is going on. 


Look at the list above to see how many straw men exist.   Mr Montgomery

mentions the pope once below.  He is trying to keep it a little

simpler because the straw man of the Vatican/Pope, The Crown, is

easier to understand for most people.  This is the same operation

that many people get into by creating so many corporations that

you never know just who is the controlling man.  You may see this

on government stories where the detective says he traced back

through a tree of corporations and got lost in the many branches

and could not find who really owns the contraband.  I will vouch

that Mr. Montgomery is a very thorough researcher and has nothing

to gain from the dissemination of the information below, with the

exception to get people to wake up to the truth instead of

constantly, for decades, chasing the elusive wizard of OZ with

all his smoke and mirrors.  I have read Mr. Montgomery's article

below and it confirms what I have also found.  As I said, the

power brokers control every lawyer and judge, who are also

lawyers, in this if not all other judges in the world because

without them the fraud could not be carried out.  Have you ever

heard of an honest trial where justice is dispensed the American

man or woman who runs afoul of "the System," even when he is

innocent?  Where do you think all the money the private IRS

collects goes?  Maybe to the credit of the Straw man # 9 above?

Credit to whom?  Just follow the ladder back up to the top, and

remember the original numbers have all dropped one notch down to

make room for whom?




Settled between his Excellency General Washington, Commander-in-Chief of the combined Forces of America and France; his Excellency the Count de Rochambeau, Lieutenant-General of the Armies of the King of France, Great Cross of the royal and military Order of St. Louis, commanding the auxiliary troops of his Most Christian Majesty in America; and his Excellency the Count de Grasse, Lieutenant-General of the Naval Armies of his Most Christian Majesty, Commander of the Order of St. Louis, Commander-in-Chief of the Naval Army of France in the Chesapeake, on the one Part; and the Right Honorable Earl Cornwallis, Lieutenant-General of his Britannic Majesty's Forces, commanding the Garrisons of York and Gloucester; and Thomas Symonds, Esquire, commanding his Britannic Majesty's Naval Forces in York River in Virginia, on the other Part.

Article I. The garrisons of York and Gloucester, including the officers and seamen of his Britannic Majesty's ships, as well as other mariners, to surrender themselves prisoners of war to the combined forces of America and France. The land troops to remain prisoners to the United States, the navy to the naval army of his Most Christian Majesty.

Article II. The artillery, arms, accoutrements, military chest, and public stores of every denomination, shall be delivered unimpaired to the heads of departments appointed to receive them.

Article III. At twelve o'clock this day the two redoubts on the left flank of York to be delivered, the one to a detachment of American infantry, the other to a detachment of French grenadiers. The garrison of York will march out to a place to be appointed in front of the posts, at two o'clock precisely, with shouldered arms, colors cased, and drums beating a British or German march. They are then to ground their arms, and return to their encampments, where they will remain until they are despatched to the places of their destination. Two works on the Gloucester side will be delivered at one o'clock to a detachment of French and American troops appointed to possess them. The garrison will march out at three o'clock in the afternoon; the cavalry with their swords drawn, trumpets sounding, and the infantry in the manner prescribed for the garrison of York. They are likewise to return to their encampments until they can be finally marched off.

Article IV. Officers are to retain their side-arms. Both officers and soldiers to keep their private property of every kind; and no part of their baggage or papers to be at any time subject to search or inspection. The baggage and papers of officers and soldiers taken during the siege to be likewise preserved for them. It is understood that any property obviously belonging to the inhabitants of these States, in the possession of the garrison, shall be subject to be reclaimed.

Article V. The soldiers to be kept in Virginia, Maryland, or Pennsylvania, and as much by regiments as possible, and supplied with the same rations of provisions as are allowed to soldiers in the service of America. A field-officer from each nation, to wit, British, Anspach, and Hessian, and other officers on parole, in the proportion of one to fifty men to be allowed to reside near their respective regiments, to visit them frequently, and be witnesses of their treatment; and that their officers may receive and deliver clothing and other necessaries for them, for which passports are to be granted when applied for.

Article VI. The general, staff, and other officers not employed as mentioned in the above articles, and who choose it, to be permitted to go on parole to Europe, to New York, or to any other American maritime posts at present in the possession of the British forces, at their own option; and proper vessels to be granted by the Count de Grasse to carry them under flags of truce to New York within ten days from this date, if possible, and they to reside in a district to be agreed upon hereafter, until they embark. The officers of the civil department of the army and navy to be included in this article. Passports to go by land to be granted to those to whom vessels cannot be furnished.

Article VII. Officers to be allowed to keep soldiers as servants, according to the common practice of the service. Servants not soldiers are not to be considered as prisoners, and are to be allowed to attend their masters.

Article VIII. The Bonetta sloop-of-war to be equipped, and navigated by its present captain and crew, and left entirely at the disposal of Lord Cornwallis from the hour that the capitulation is signed, to receive an aid-de-camp to carry despatches to Sir Henry Clinton; and such soldiers as he may think proper to send to New York, to be permitted to sail without examination. When his despatches are ready, his Lordship engages on his part, that the ship shall be delivered to the order of the Count de Grasse, if she escapes the dangers of the sea. That she shall not carry off any public stores. Any part of the crew that may be deficient on her return, and the soldiers passengers, to be accounted for on her delivery.

Article X. The traders are to preserve their property, and to be allowed three months to dispose of or remove them; and those traders are not to be considered as prisoners of war. The traders will be allowed to dispose of their effects, the allied army having the right of preemption. The traders to be considered as prisoners of war upon parole.

Article X. Natives or inhabitants of different parts of this country, at present in York or Gloucester, are not to be punished on account of having joined the British army. This article cannot be assented to, being altogether of civil resort.

Article XI. Proper hospitals to be furnished for the sick and wounded. They are to be attended by their own surgeons on parole; and they are to be furnished with medicines and stores from the American hospitals. The hospital stores now at York and Gloucester shall be delivered for the use of the British sick and wounded. Passports will be granted for procuring them further supplies from New York, as occasion may require; and proper hospitals will be furnished for the reception of the sick and wounded of the two garrisons.

Article XII. Wagons to be furnished to carry the baggage of the officers attending the soldiers, and to surgeons when travelling on account of the sick, attending the hospitals at public expense. They are to be furnished if possible.

Article XIII. The shipping and boats in the two harbours, with all their stores, guns, tackling, and apparel, shall be delivered up in their present state to an officer of the navy appointed to take possession of them, previously unloading the private property, part of which had been on board for security during the siege.

Article XIV. No article of capitulation to be infringed on pretence of reprisals; and if there be any doubtful expressions in it, they are to be interpreted according to the common meaning and acceptation of the words.

Done at Yorktown, in Virginia, October 19th, 178l.

Cornwallis, Thomas Symonds.

Done in the Trenches before Yorktown, in Virginia, October 19th, 1781.

George Washington, Le Comte de Rochambeau,

Le Comte de Barras, En mon nom & celui du Comte de Grasse.

< The above are short excerpts only>

U.S. Has Always Been A Dangerous Nation

America Is Now a Dangerous Nation

By Gideon Rachman


The claim that America is a “threat to world peace” has been a staple of Russian and Iranian propaganda for many years. For believers in the western alliance, it is painful to acknowledge that there is now some truth to this idea. Under Donald Trump, America looks like a dangerous nation.

Over the past week, Mr Trump has indulged in nuclear brinkmanship in North Korea, issued vague threats of military action in Venezuela and flirted with white supremacists at home. He is offering the very opposite of the steady, predictable and calm leadership that American allies seek from Washington.

Mr Trump’s swiftly notorious threats that North Korea risks “fire and fury” from a “locked and loaded” America were particularly irresponsible. Even if the threat is a bluff, it puts American credibility on the line and risks triggering escalation from the Kim Jong Un regime, which is threatening to fire missiles near the US territory of Guam. Even more alarming, the Trump administration is openly flirting with the idea of a pre-emptive strike on North Korea — arguing that a nuclear-armed Mr Kim cannot be deterred. But if America could rely on deterrence to contain the nuclear threat from Stalin’s Russia and Mao’s China — it can certainly do the same with Mr Kim’s North Korea. All previous presidents have rejected the idea of pre-emptive attacks on nuclear-armed states — for obvious reasons.

The international crisis that Mr Trump is stoking is increasingly inseparable from the domestic problems besieging his administration. The investigation by former Federal Bureau of Investigation director Robert Mueller into Russian intervention in the US election is getting ever closer to the president’s inner circle. Congress is deadlocked and the White House is a merry-go-round of sackings and scheming. And now there is political violence on the streets, as white supremacists and neo-Nazis attack, and even kill, protesters in Charlottesville — while the president issues evasive and equivocal statements from a golf course.

The danger is that these multiple crises will merge, tempting an embattled president to try to exploit an international conflict to break out of his domestic difficulties. Just this week, Sebastian Gorka, a controversial White House aide, used the North Korean crisis to pressure Mr Trump’s domestic critics to back down, telling Fox News: “During the Cuba missile crisis we stood behind JFK. This is analogous to the Cuba missile crisis. We need to come together.”

Mr Gorka’s flirtation with the idea that the threat of war could lead Americans to rally around the president should sound alarm bells for anyone with a sense of history. Governments facing a domestic crisis are often more inclined to adventurism abroad. For example, the German government that led Europe into the first world war felt under acute threat from domestic political enemies. But on the day war broke out, an exultant Kaiser told a crowd: “I no longer recognise any parties or affiliations; today we are all German brothers.” Or as Mr Gorka put it last week: “These are the moments when we have to come together as a nation.”

Leaders under severe domestic political pressure are also more likely to behave irrationally. During the Watergate crisis, members of Richard Nixon’s cabinet told the military to double check with them before obeying a presidential order to stage a nuclear strike. Unfortunately, it is not clear that any US official — now or then — has the right to countermand the president if he decides to go nuclear.

At least in public, the pushback against Trump’s threats of war has been remarkably weak, both in Congress and within the administration

Outside observers are left hoping that the “adults” in the Trump administration will somehow manage the president. But, at least in public, the pushback against Mr Trump’s threats of war has been remarkably weak, both in Congress and within the administration.

HR McMaster, the president’s national security adviser, has defended Mr Trump’s warmongering on national television. Meanwhile, General McMaster himself is under attack from the white nationalist wing of the president’s supporters, who blame him for sacking some of their allies on the National Security Council. Last week, as the North Korean crisis built, the hashtag “Sack McMaster” was trending on Twitter, as the nationalists sought to purge their newfound enemy from the White House. This is the very opposite of the atmosphere that should prevail in the White House as a potential nuclear confrontation looms in the Pacific.

Those who are hoping that America’s “Deep State” will contain Mr Trump — or even force his resignation — are probably guilty of wishful thinking. Forcing him from office remains a massively difficult task and risks provoking a further radicalisation both in domestic politics and the conduct of US foreign policy.

A final disturbing thought is that Mr Trump’s emergence increasingly looks like a symptom of a wider crisis in American society, that will not disappear, even when Mr Trump has vacated the Oval Office. Declining living standards for many ordinary Americans and the demographic shifts that threaten the majority status of white Americans helped to create the pool of angry voters that elected Mr Trump. Combine that social and economic backdrop with fears of international decline and a political culture that venerates guns and the military, and you have a formula for a country whose response to international crises may, increasingly, be to “lock and load”.


In America Propaganda Has Vanquished Truth

By Paul Craig Roberts

In Durham, North Carolina, the seat of Duke University, a gang of largely white males destroyed public property by pulling down a statue of a Confederate soldier. Perhaps they took their cue from the neo-Nazis installed in Ukraine by Obama and Hillary following the US-engineered coup that overthrew the elected democratic government. The first thing the new Obama-installed neo-Nazi regime did was to pull down all the Soviet war memorials of the liberation of Ukraine from Nazi Germany. The neo-Nazis who pulled down the war memorials were the descendants of the Ukrainians who fought for Nazi Germany. These neo-Nazis comprise the government of the “democracy” that Obama and Hillary brought to the Ukraine and is the government that the US government and its European vassals support.

What did the destruction of public property in Durham achieve, and where were the police?

What the films of the event reveal is a collection of crazed white people, mainly white men, kicking and spitting at a bronze statue and jumping back as if the statue were going to strike back. It was a display of ignorant psychopathic hatred.

Where did this hatred come from and why was it directed at a statue? To the ignorant gangsters, most likely Duke University students, the destroyed statue is a symbol of slavery.

This ignorant association between a Confederale soldier and slavery contradicts all known history. Slavery in the Southern states was confined to large argicultural tracts known as plantations. Slaves were the agricultural workforce. This institution long predated the Confederacy and the United States itself. It was an inherited institution from the time that the New World was colonized by European economic interests. Slaves were not a Southern invention. They were brought in long prior to the Declaration of Independence, because there were resources to be exploited but no work force.

The first slaves were white slaves, but they died like flies from malaria and yellow fevor. Next indigenious Americans (“Indians”) were used as slaves, but they would not work. Then it was discovered that some Africans had immunity to malaria and resistance to yellow fever, and finally a work force was located. The slaves were purchased from the African tribes that annually conducted warfare between themselves, the booty of which was slaves. Socialist historians, such as Karl Polanyi, the Jewish brother of my Jewish Oxford professor, the distinguished physical chemist and philosopher Michael Polanyi, to whom my first book is dedicated, wrote detailed and exacting histories of the African slave trade conducted by black Africans.

Confederate soldiers did not own slaves, and as every honest historian knows, they were not fighting for slavery. They were fighting, because their country had been invaded.

The Confederacy was not their country any more than the United States had been. Their country was their state. In those days people’s loyalty was to their state. They thought of their state as their country. To their minds, the United States was something like the EU is to the French, Italians, Dutch, British, etc. The French still think of themselves as French, not as EU.

Remember, when Robert E. Lee was offered command of the Union Army, he declined on the grounds that he could not bring war to his own country, by which he meant Virginia.

Lee’s army was the Army of Northern Virginia.

As President Lincoln said over and over, the war is not about slavery. It is about “preserving the union,” that is, the empire. If the South were permitted to separate, it would mean that there would be two countries competing for the vast lands to the west of the Mississippi River. The budding empire in Washington did not want any such competition.

If the South were permitted to seperate, the North would lose its market for its relatively high priced manufactured goods that it hoped to sell to the South by placing a tariff against the cheaper British goods.

The South figured, correctly, that it would be doubly hit. Higher prices from the North and retaliatory tariffs from the British on its cotton exports.

This economic conflict between the North and South went on for a long time before it provoked secession. The left-wing American Historian, Charles Beard, explains the so-called “Civil War” in the economic terms that provoked it. It had nothing whatsoever to do with slavery.

The very designation, “Civil War,” is a lie. A civil war is when two sides fight for control of the government. The South was not fighting for control of the US government. It was fighting, because the North had invaded.

Lincoln did not free the slaves. Moreover, had Lincoln not been assassinated, his plan was to send the blacks, whom he regarded as inferior to whites, back to Africa. This is not a “conspiracy theory.” It is the documented fact. It is totally impossible to refute this documented fact.

The Emancipation Proclamation was propaganda. It had two purposes: one was to shut up the abolitionists. The other was to promote a slave rebellion in the Southern states that would draw Confederate troops out of the front lines to protect the women and children at home. As Lincoln’s own Secretary of State, William H. Seward, said, we have freed the slaves where we have no jurisdiction and left them in slavery where we have jusistiction. Seward’s exact words: “We show our sympathy with slavery by emancipating slaves where we cannot reach them and holding them in bondage where we can set them free.”

The left-wing historian Richard Hofstadter ridiculed Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation for freeing only the slaves over which Lincoln had no power.

Lincoln’s purpose was not to free slaves but to provoke the slave rape of Southern women and murder of Southern children that would pull the Southern troops his generals could not defeat off the front lines and impel them home to protect their families from Lincoln’s slave revolt.

But the slaves did not revolt even though there was no one there to conrol them but women and children. So what kind of oppression was this?

Lincoln issued the proclamation intended to produce a slave rebellion because he had run through countless generals, and although the Union army in its engagements with Robert E. Lee always outnumbered the Southerns by two or three to one, and sometimes more, the Army of Northern Virginia did not lose a battle for the first two years of the War. If the South had had more people, a number of Southern battle victories would have ended in the capture of Washington and the end of the war. But the South never had the number of soldiers sufficient to have a reserve to capitalize on its military victories. In contrast, the North had an endless supply of immigrants from Ireland, most of whom died for the American Empire.

Oppositon to the war in the North was high. Lincoln had to arrest and imprison 300 northern newspaper owners and editors and exile a US Congressman.

Slavery was an inherited institution, not a Southern construct. Slavery would have gradually disappeared as immigrants into the South begin forming a work force and the over-cultivated plantation lands begin losing their fertility. Slavery existed as long as it did because new immigrants, instead of becoming a local work force, moved west, occupied Indian land and became independent farmers.

Of course, the abolitionist created all the hatred of the South that they possibly could. Indeed, during my entire life, lived almost exclusively outside the South, I have observed the liberals foment racial hatred of blacks toward whites, and I have watched feminists foment gender hatred of women toward men. Hatred is the great cause of the liberals. It is what defines them.

The stupid liberals have sowed social enmity between races and genders. The destruction of America will be the result.

Perhaps we will fall apart, occupied in racial and gender warfare, before the Russians and Chinese have to blow us off the face of the earth.



Is Removing Confederate Monuments Like Erasing History?

It Is History That Teaches Us To Hope.

Robert E Lee

The South Was Right

Alabama State Senator Charles Davison's Entire Speech for deliverance on the Senate Floor in support of the amendment to return the confederate battle flag to the top of the Alabama State Capitol. From the Confederate Heritage Fund, P.O. Box 771, Andalusia, Alabama, 36420. Received by E. Burnthorn on February 28, 1997.

My fellow members of the Alabama Senate, our south, our Confederate history and by extension, our ConfederateConfederate Flag battle flag have suffered for many years from the relentless hatchet job of false propaganda heaped upon them by the news media, the education system and of course, Hollywood and television. It appears that they wish to drive a wedge between southern blacks and whites, much as the carpetbaggers did after the War for Southern Independence and much as the northern news media drove a wedge between the North and South before the war.

It is important to remember that movies such as Roots and North & South are make believe fiction; in other words they are not true, just like Uncle Tom's Cabin written before the war was not true. One must wonder if the only reason such false propaganda is produced and promoted by the movie and television industry is to make blacks hate whites, especially southern whites.

For example, the confederate battle flag has no more to do with the Ku Klux Klan than the Christian cross which the Klan carries and burns or the flag of the United States that the Klan says the Pledge of Allegiance to, yet the news media and Hollywood constantly tries to connect our Confederate flag to the Ku Klux Klan and their propaganda. However, the news media never asks preachers if they are Klan members because they wear a cross around their neck or link the American Legion to the Klan because they carry the U.S. Flag. It is time to put an end to this anti-confederate bigotry. It is past time that the truth was told. Hitler's tactic of tell a big enough lie often enough and people will believe it has been utilized to the fullest extent, and to smear the Confederate States of America and her symbols such as the battle flag.

Fortunately, most people have not been deceived by such hate mongering tactics as is evidenced in a recent Lewis Harris Poll which shows that 92% of the Southern people, of all races are not offended by our Confederate battle flag and that national wise 68% of blacks are not offended. Unfortunately, a few too many have believed the lies about our Confederate battle flag, which has resulted in unjustified and horrible intolerance, bigotry, hatred, violence and even murder.

Today, I come before you to set the record straight – to repudiated the myths and false propaganda and to remind you of the truth concerning our Confederate ancestors and history. It is my hope and fervent prayer that truth will replace fiction; that tolerance will replace intolerance; that peace will replace violence; that love will replace hate; and that unity will replace division. In John 8, verse 32 our Lord Jesus said, "And you shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free"; in this case free from hate and intolerance of our Confederate symbols. So, I beg of you to listen with an open mind and a Christian heart.

The first lie concerns slavery and its link to racism. The lie is; that only blacks were slaves and thus have some special right to a "slavery pity party" because their ancestors were slaves and therefore, anyone who owned slaves were racists. This is not true.

The word slave is Greek for the word Slav and rightly applies only to white European slaves or Slavs from the countries of Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, Slavonia, Russia, Poland, Hungary and others. The Slavonic tribes are the root of all European white people. So for a thousand years, so many millions of these white European slaves were captured and sold as servants, that the word "Slavs" or "slaves" became universally used for the word "servant". It was only later applied to black servants. Every white person in America has ancestors who were slaves at some time or other, including the Scotch, British, French, Spanish and Germans. In the early colonies of America whites were regularly sold as permanent slaves. If it were justifiable, whites would be more justified in having "a chip on their shoulders" or "a pity party" over slavery than blacks because more of their white ancestors were slaves and for a longer period of time than blacks. Almost all blacks - 95% in the United States – were under slavery for less than a hundred years and only 5% of all black slaves shipped by black masters ever came to the United States, because almost all black slaves were shipped to south America or the West Indies.

The white European Slavs - or slaves - were sold to Romans, Arabs, Germans, and yes, even to "black American masters" in northern Africa such as Egypt, Libya and Ethiopia. Are these black masters in Africa racist because they owned white European Slaves? The Bible tells us that the blacks of Egypt owned the Oriental Jews as slaves for 400 years. Does that make Africans in Egypt racists because they owned the Jews as slaves for 400 years? The Bible also tells us that Abraham, who is the father of the Jews, the Christians and the Muslims owned hundreds of slaves; God also required Abraham to circumcise those slaves that he bought with money, as well as those slaves that were home born. Moreover, Abraham's slaves fought for Abraham in a war with the King Chedorlaomer to rescue Lot. In addition, Isaac, Jacob, Daniel, Job, Joseph, and David all owned slaves and even the Apostle Paul returned a white runaway slave to his Christian master in the Book of Ghilemom.

My question is this: Is the anti-Southern news media, educational system, and Hollywood calling these great men of God like Abraham, a racist or evil or wicked because he owned hundreds of slaves? If not, then neither can they call Southerns like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Jefferson Davis racists because they owned slaves. What hypocrisy and bigotry to criticize only white Southerners or the Confederate States for owning slaves. Almost every nation in the world owned slaves, especially the black masters in Nigeria, where most American blacks had their roots. Accordingly, if flags of nations that owned slaves and to be labeled racist, then almost all the flags in the world are racist, especially the African flag of Nigeria which dealt so overwhelmingly in slave trading.

Our ancestors in the old South were fundamentally Christians which means they believe that the Bible, Old and New Testament, were the opinions of Almighty God, Who does not change and not the opinions of man. On the other hand, the abolitionists from up North were Humanists. They believed that God changed with the times and that the Bible was merely the opinions of man and not necessarily the opinions of God. I shall read to you a little of what God says in the Bible concerning slavery and thus what our ancestors in the Old South believed.

In the Old Testament, Leviticus, 25; 44-46, God says, "As for your male and female slaves whom you have acquired – you may acquire male and female slaves from the Pagan nations that are around you. Then, too, it is out of the sons of the sojourners who live as aliens among you that you may gain acquisition, and out of their families who are with you, whom they will have begotten in your land; they also may become your possessions. You may even bequeath them to your sons after you, to receive as a possession; you can use them as permanent slaves."

In the New Testament, I Timothy, 6:1-5, God says; "Let all who are under the yoke as slaves regard their own masters as worthy of all honor so that the name of God and our doctrine may not be spoken against. And let those who have believers as their masters be not disrespectful to them because they are brethren, but let them serve them all the more because those who partake of the benefits are believers are beloved. Teach and preach these principles".

People who are bitter and hateful about slavery are obviously hatful and bitter against God and His Word, because they reject what God says and embrace what mere humans say about slavery. This humanistic thinking is what the abolitionists embraced while Southerners and most Northerners embrace what God said in the Bible. These humanists' argument is not with me or the South or the United States but rather their argument is with God. They had made themselves out to be greater than God for they add to God's Word when they call something evil that God obviously allows. Is this what the abolitionists did? Teaching the doctrines of man as if they were the doctrines of God. The second lie is; that slaves were mistreated in the Old South. Again, this is not true. Colossians 4;1, Jesus said; "Masters, grant to your servants justice and fairness, knowing that you too have a Master in heaven." To say that slaves were mistreated in the Old South is to say that the most Christian group of people in the entire world, the Bible Belt, mistreated their servants and violated the commandments of Jesus their Lord. Anyone who says this is an accuser of the brethren of Jesus Christ, not a very good position to take. We in the South are offended by such accusations.

Just the opposite is true. In a U.S. Government PWA survey of former slaves, taken years after the war, 70% of former slaves had only good experiences to report about life as a slave and about the Old South. In the Old South there were numerous laws that protected slaves from abuse just like there are laws to protect wives and children from abuse, today. But just because a few men abuse their wives or children does not make marriage or having children a cruel, hateful endeavor. The same is true for slavery. Modern studies of slavery in the Old South proved that in food, shelter, clothing and medical care, Southern slaves were significantly better off than the free white factory workers in the North. The instance of abuse, rape, broken homes and murder are a hundred times greater, today, in the housing projects than they ever were on the slave plantations in the Old South. The truth is, that nowhere on the face of the earth, in all of time, were servants better treated or better loved than those were in the old South by white, black, Hispanic and Indian slave owners.

That's right, even blacks and Indians owned slaves in the Old South. While 7% of whites owned slaves, 2% of blacks in the South owned slaves. For example, in 1860, the United States census reported that around 10,000 free blacks owned some 60,000 black slaves.

It was a black slave master named Anthony Johnson who sued and won his case in a Virginia court in 1853 that changed temporary servitude to lifetime servitude. Thus, this black slave owner established permanent slavery in Virginia. Moreover, when the Cherokee Indians were moved by the United States Government along the Trail of Tears out West, more than 25% of the people who were moved were black slaves of the Cherokees.

Just as white European slaves were primitive, barbaric Pagans who practiced human sacrifice, incest, witchcraft and idolatry; yet were converted to Christianity, learned trades and skills and became a civilized people under black, Oriental and white masters; so also did black African barbaric Pagans become civilized Christians with skills and trades under slavery in the Old South.

Slavery was a family institution in the Old South, just like it says in the Bible in Galations 4;1 "As long as the son is a child he does not differ at all from a slave although he is the heir of everything". A typical family plantation had one family of whites living next door to one family of blacks. They had the same last name, worked in the fields and on the farms side by side, played together, prayed together, raised each others children, took care of each other in sickness and all in all, loved one another, just like family. It was on these small family farms that Southern blacks were taught about and converted to Christianity by the millions; I am sure that those converted black Southerners are grateful today, too, just like our white European ancestors are grateful for their conversion to Christianity while slaves of black masters in North Africa, such as the black Coptic Christians in Egypt, one of the oldest Christian groups in the world. Remember, it was not from Yankees that Southern black learned about Jesus Christ. For the most part it was from Southern slave owners.

It was here on the family plantations that blacks learned trades and skills from farming to saw-milling, to ranching to carpentry to bricklaying to producing textiles and iron, as well, driving railroad trains. Even the abolitionist Yankee government's Department of Education admitted in 1892, at the total failure of the so-called "reconstruction experiment" that the best technical education that the world has ever seen, was the education that was given by their masters to the slaves before emancipation.

Remember, that black slaves from Nigeria, the most populous region in Africa, were not civilized and not Christians, practicing Voo-Doo, cannibalism, and witchcraft, just like the white European slaves. These blacks were captured in tribal wars by other blacks in Nigeria. White people did not run through the jungles of Africa kidnapping blacks and making them slaves. Black Africans captured and sold other blacks as slaves. They were already slaves of black Africans before they ever set foot in a Spanish, Portuguese, English or New England Yankee slave ship. Such ships stayed anchored offshore for their fear of jungle diseases and these slaves were rowed out in long boats by Africans and put on board. Many of these slaves were already riddled with disease and half starved. All slave ships from the United States sailed from the Northern states of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey and Delaware under the United States flag. Not one southern ship sailed to Africa to bring back slaves and no ship ever sailed under the Confederate flag to bring back slaves. This slave trading was the big business of the rich New England Yankees. They traded rum made in northern factories to black African slave owners for their slaves and then traded most of the slaves to South America or the West Indies for molasses, only 5% of the slaves reached the US, and then manufactured the molasses into rum and made another trip. Then with rare exception, the life of a slave in the United States was ten times better than his life had been in Africa.

The third lie is; that the war for southern independence (or as the United States Congress declared it to be; the War Between the States, it was not a civil war), was fought over slavery with the north fighting to free southern slaves and the south fighting to keep her slaves. This is, of course, not true.

First off, all 13 original states that seceded from England in 1776 and formed the United States, from Maine (a part of Massachusetts at the time) to Georgia, owned slaves. Was the first American Revolution fought over slavery? No, then neither was the second American Revolution fought over slavery, when the southern states withdrew from the United States and formed the Confederate States of America. Is the 4th of July a racist holiday because all 13 original colonies had slaves? No, then neither are our Confederate holidays. Is the United States flag a racist flag because all 13 original states had slaves? No, then neither is the Confederate Battle Flag, or do these intolerant individuals and the news media ever advocate taking down the U.S. flag? If yes, they will need to take down almost all the national flags in the world starting with the flag of Nigeria in Africa who were more involved in selling slaves than any other nation. What blatant bigotry to call the Confederate flag racist!

During the war for southern independence (1861-1865), the south also had slaves, but refused to sell their slaves until after the war. Delaware, Maryland, Kentucky, Missouri and West Virginia all owned slaves. Never seceded, and were under the control of the United States the entire war, however, they were not required to free their slaves by the United States Government, as proved by the fact that the U.S. Congress, from 1861 to 1864 refused to pass a constitutional amendment abolishing slavery, when the only senators and representatives in Congress were from the north. Remember, all southerners had left congress to form their own nation. How could the north be fighting the war to free southern slaves when they would not free their own, like U. S. Grant's personal slaves or Abraham Lincoln's father-in-law's slaves? What hypocrisy!

Northern slaves were even exempt from Lincoln's emancipation proclamation, and therefore, remained slaves throughout the war! Furthermore, captured southern slaves on the Mississippi River were forced to work on the plantations as slaves for the United States Army, growing cotton for northern factories rather than be set free. Also, during the war just as many Union soldiers owned slaves as confederate soldiers and since only 7% of white southerners owned slaves, it is irrational to think that the other 93% were shedding their blood so these few could keep their slaves. Is the United States flag a symbol of slavery because the United States owned slaves during the war? No, then neither is the Confederate Battle flag. How could the war have been fought over slavery when both sides had slaves?

Even worse, in 1861, Lincoln and the U. S. Congress offered and passed a new constitutional amendment for the south guarantying permanent slavery forever in the slave states if only the southern states would return to the Union. Three states ratified the amendment before the war started. The south refused the offer. It is ridiculous to think that the north invaded the south to free slaves when the north had just voted to keep slavery in the south forever.

The war for southern independence was fought for local self government by the south verses centralized government by the north; the centralized government won and local self government lost. The Southern battle flag is the symbol of the right of local people and the states to govern themselves and is flown in memory and honor of all our confederate ancestors and veterans who gave their lives for less government, less taxes and southern independence.

In his inaugural speech of March 4, 1861, U.S. President, Abraham Lincoln, stated that he had "no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery. I believe that I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so" Furthermore, Union General, Ulysses S. Grant, said that if he "thought that this war was to abolish slavery, I would resign my commission, and offer my sword to the other side". A war over slavery? Not hardly! The Confederate States of America even offered to free all southern slaves in return for independence. Lincoln refused the offer.

The term "free" state meant free from blacks. Northerners did not want to live with blacks, slave or free and many northern states and territories actually passed a law prohibiting free blacks from entering into them. Abraham Lincoln, himself, stated the opinion of the northern people at a meeting with a group of black leaders during the war, Lincoln said to them, "there is an unwillingness on the part of our people, ‘northern whites' for you free colored people to remain with us. Whether it is right or wrong, I do not propose to discuss, but to propose it as a fact with which we have to deal. It is better for us both, therefore, to be separated".

Thereupon, Abraham Lincoln and the United States Congress purchased land, passed laws and started shipping free northern black out of the United States down to poverty stricken Haiti. Lincoln put together several such schemes to remove freed blacks from the U.S. to send some back to Africa and some to Central and South America. At the end of the war, a few weeks before Lincoln was killed, Union General Benjamin Butler, asked Abraham Lincoln what he was going to do with all the recently freed southern slaves. United States President Abraham Lincoln replied, "I believe it would be better to export them all".

Meanwhile, down south, Confederate States President, Jefferson Davis and his wife Barina are adopting an 8-year old freed black orphaned boy, named Jim Limber. After his mother died, Jim was placed with a free black family as foster parents but this black family badly treated this 8 year old black youngster to such a degree that the news reached the ears of Mrs. Davis and the President. Thereupon, President Jefferson Davis, in the middle of the war, took the time and effort to intercede and rescue Jim from this child abuse. Jim's wounds were doctored and he was welcomed into the Confederate white house as a member of the Jefferson Davis family. President Davis went to court in Richmond and had free papers registered for Jim so he would always be free. Even when our president was on his way to prison for trying to obtain independence and self government fro the southern people, he made arrangements for Jim Limber's future education and care. In the Old South it was not uncommon for black to take in orphaned whites or for whites to take in orphaned blacks, a relationship between black and whites that northerners, even today, do not understand nor appreciate. The war for southern independence was fought over the right of the local people to govern themselves rather than a centralist government by the few, the rich and the powerful. The south wanted less goverment, less taxes, independence, and decisions made at the local level where the people have control. The north wated more taxes, more government, centralism with a compulsory union a bayonet point and decisions made in Washington rather than by the local people.

The south stood on the principles of the southerner, Jefferson, who in the Declaration of Independence, said, "Governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that, whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new government". In other words the people should control government, not the government controlling people.

The north stood on the principles of the northerner, Alexander Hamilton, who believed that, "governments should be ruled by an intellectual aristocracy, maintained by the enlightened self-interest of the wealthy", rather than by common people governing themselves. Northern abolitionists like, William Lloyd Garrison, publicly burned the U.S. Constitution, calling the Constitution an "agreement with hell". U.S. President Abraham Lincoln brutally violated almost every article and amendment in the U.S. Constitution, throwing over 35,000 northern citizens in prison as political prisoners, including state senators, without cause or trial, as well as violently closing down hundreds of opposition newspapers and suppressing freedom of speech. President Jefferson Davis and the Confederate states never did any such thing. The southern people took the U.S. Constitution with them when they volunteerily withdrew from the voluntary union brought forth on this continent, a new nation, where the right of the local people to govern themselves was protected.

Just like the war for American Independence of 1776, the war for Southern Independence of 1861 was fought over "taxation without representation". The north was constantly trying to increase taxes on southerners through a high sales tax on imported goods, in order to protect the inefficient big business up north who could not compete with manufactured goods from England and France with whom the south traded cotton in exchange for their manufactured products. The south did not have factories, so had to import finished products. The Industrial Revolution allowed England and France to produce and ship across the Atlantic Ocean, products that were cheaper than the products of northern manufacturers, who refused to modernize, could produce with their white child labor; ten year old children working sixteen hours a day in polluted cities for pennies and sleeping in the streets. Slaves in the south were treated much better than white labor in the industrial north.

When the sales tax on imports was raised then the price paid by the southern people for goods from England and France went up and of course the northern manufacturers immediately raised their prices for the products the south bought from the north. But the south did not receive any more money for its cotton to compensate for the increased prices. Therefore, the southern people, poor and rich, black and white, all paid the sales tax on imports or high-priced northern goods, while the north received the windfall profits and tax receipts to stand on their canals, railroads and other internal developments. The south paid much more in taxes than the north and received much less back in tax spending, a very burdensome, unfair situation for southerners. This was in direct violation to the U.S. Constitution, which provided for taxes to be levied equally among the states. However, the south was outvoted in the U.S. Congress by the populous north and became little more than sheep to be fleeced by the north's oppressive taxation without representation. The south's only recourse was to either admit more states to the union that would vote against the oppressive taxes, or keep a low tax president in the white house, whose veto power would protect against higher taxes, or withdraw from the union and form another nation with lower taxes. For example, when the "tariff of abomination" was passed in 1928 and another such high tariff, "sales tax on imported products" in 1832, the state of North Carolina threatened to withdraw from the union, but these abominable taxes were repealed or diluted to a 20% tax on imports before her secession took place. Please note that South Carolina's threatened withdrawal from the union was not over slavery but over taxes.

For a period of years after that the south was able to keep the sales tax on imports "import tax" at a barely tolerable level of 20%, by electing presidents who would veto higher tariffs. Unfortunately, in 1860, in a four-way presidential election, Abraham Lincoln was elected by less than 40% of the vote, all from up north. Lincoln did not receive even one vote in the deep south. The minority elected president Lincoln had promised the rich big businesses in the north that, if elected, he would dramatically raise the import tax. That is why the southern states quickly began to escape from the tax net that Lincoln was spreading. Within Lincoln's first month in office, the United States Congress had passed the Morrill Tariff, which was the highest import taxes in U.S. history, which more than doubled the income tax rate from 20% to 47%, enough to bankrupt many southerners. This oppressive tax is what pushed southern states to legally withdraw from the volunteer union, not slavery. Now since these southerners had escaped the tax by withdrawing from the union, the only way the north could collect this 47% sales tax on imported goods was to invade the Confederate States and force them at gunpoint back into the union where they could be taxed. It was to collect this oppressive 47% import tax to satisfy his northern industrial supporters that Abraham Lincoln invaded our south and not to free any slaves. Lincoln's war cost the lives of 600,000 Americans.

When Lincoln invaded Charleston and then Virginia, all southerners; white, black, Hispanics, Indians, Orientals, Protestants, Catholics, Jews, rich and poor, male and female almost to a person, rose up and volunteered their services in defense of the Confederate States of America, because all were going to suffer from this horrible federal tax. Nowhere in the history of movements of independence and self government, have a people been so united in purpose and dedicated to the cause of independence. No, not even in ‘76 did the thirteen colonies receive such support and sacrifice by the people and that war was fought over a 3% tax on tea.

My fellow Senators, the south was right; the Confederate battle flag represents all southerners and even northern confederates from states like Ohio, Illinois, Indiana and others who supported the south and who even tried to secede from the Union and form their own nation but whose efforts for freedom were crushed by Lincoln's troops. Confederate Indians, Hispanics, blacks and whites all received confederate pensions after the war and attended Confederate reunions together year after year; just as they had suffered and fought together during the war year after year. The Confederate battle flag represents all confederates, regardless of race or religion and is the symbol of less government, less taxes, and the right of a people to govern themselves. It is flown in memory and honor of confederate ancestors and veterans who willingly shed their blood for southern independence. Their Confederate battle flag deserves the highest of honors, by being flown on top of our Alabama State Capitol.

The decision we make today is similar to the decision that was being made in Mississippi on February 11, 1890 regarding a monument to the Confederate dead. John F. Harris, a black Republican delegate from Washington county rose to speak for the bill saying, "When the news came that the south had been invaded, our men went forth to fight for their country and for what they believed, and they made no request for monuments... But they died, and their virtues should be remembered. Mr. Speaker, I went with them. I too, wore the gray, the same color as my master wore. We stayed four long years, and if that war had gone on ‘til now, I would have been there yet. . . I want to honor those brave men who died for their convictions. And sir, I shall vote for it. I want it known to all the world that my vote is given in favor of the bill to erect a monument in the honor of the Confederate dead". When the applause died down, the measure passed overwhelmingly, and every black member voted "Aye". May God grant that the same response occurs here, today. Thank you.

You may write Senator Davison and thank him for standing for the south at: State Senator Charles Davison, Rt1, Box 439-K, Jasper, Alabama, 35501.

The research for this speech was done by Roger K. Broxton, President, Confederate Heritage Fund. All statements herein were verified by (Dr. Hill has a PH in History) Dr. Michael Hill, President, the Southern League, P.O. Box 40911, Tuscaloosa, Alabama, 35404 (205-553-0155)

Originally Posted here: