Saturday, August 19, 2017

Antifa Declares: ‘F**k Your F***ing Constitution, We’re Here to Punch Nazis’

Via Billy

An unmasked Antifa member was caught on video in Seattle, Washington, going off on a group of leftists because they refused to engage in violence.

According to Blue Lives Matter, a right-wing group known as Patriot Prayer rallied in Seattle which attracted large groups of counter-protesters. And with large leftist gatherings of the sort, Antifa showed up carrying sticks and shields. But when they couldn’t get their numbers up to overwhelm the police and set about destroying the city, they were left to scream their little hearts out like the woman in the above video.

“I didn’t create a debate, because that’s not why we’re here,” the black-clad member said with an uncovered face. “I’m from Charlottesville, Virginia. I walk the street that mowed down that woman every single day for thirteen years. I’ve worked in Charlottesville, I had all my friends in Charlottesville, I booked shows in Charlottesville, I know the woman who was hit and killed by Nazis.”

She went on to lecture her fellow progressives that non-violent protests aren’t going to cut it.

More @ Truth Revolt

Do you believe historical statues and monuments honoring the soldiers who fought for the Confederate States should be removed?

Via Jason

Poll @ AMAC

Is Google down ranking "anti-establishment" news/criticism sites on the left+right?

Via comment by Weaver on NC: Duke University Removes Robert E. Lee Statue ...

Bannon: 'The Trump Presidency That We Fought For, and Won, Is Over.'

Via Billy

“I feel jacked up,” he says. “Now I’m free. I’ve got my hands back on my weapons. Someone said, Bannon the Barbarian.’ I am definitely going to crush the opposition. There’s no doubt. 
With the departure from the White House of strategist Stephen K. Bannon, who helped shape the so-called nationalist-populist program embraced by Donald Trump in his unlikely path to election, a new phase of the Trump presidency begins. Given Trump’s nature, what comes next will hardly be conventional, but it may well be less willfully disruptive—which, to Bannon, had been the point of winning the White House.

“The Trump presidency that we fought for, and won, is over,” Bannon said Friday, shortly after confirming his departure. “We still have a huge movement, and we will make something of this Trump presidency. But that presidency is over. It’ll be something else. And there’ll be all kinds of fights, and there’ll be good days and bad days, but that presidency is over.”

NC: Duke University Removes Robert E. Lee Statue After It Was Vandalized by Associated Press

Via Billy

Duke University removed a statue of Gen. Robert E. Lee early Saturday, days after it was vandalized amid a national debate about monuments to the Confederacy.

The university said it removed the carved limestone likeness early Saturday from Duke Chapel where it stood among 10 historical figures depicted in the entryway. Another statue of Lee was at the heart of a violent protest in Charlottesville, Virginia, that turned deadly a week ago.

More @ NBC

America’s Second Civil War

“They had found a leader, Robert E. Lee — and what a leader! … No military leader since Napoleon has aroused such enthusiastic devotion among troops as did Lee when he reviewed them on his horse Traveller.”

So wrote Samuel Eliot Morison in his magisterial “The Oxford History of the American People” in 1965.

First in his class at West Point, hero of the Mexican War, Lee was the man to whom President Lincoln turned to lead his army. But when Virginia seceded, Lee would not lift up his sword against his own people, and chose to defend his home state rather than wage war upon her.

This veneration of Lee, wrote Richard Weaver, “appears in the saying attributed to a Confederate soldier, ‘The rest of us may have … descended from monkeys, but it took a God to make Marse Robert.'”

Growing up after World War II, this was accepted history.

Wonder How Much Jason Kessler is getting paid? He suddenly changed sides when Trump was Elected.

Via comment by Weaver on Charlottesville: what the mainstream media isn't t...


I will no longer associate w/ Jason Kessler; no one should. Heyer's death was deeply saddening. "Payback" is a morally reprehensible idea.

Viral photo shows peace in Lynchburg

Via Billy

 This photo was captured at the end of the day at the Jubal Early monument at Fort Early.

Tensions throughout our country are high right now, after a rally turned deadly in Charlottesville last weekend.

And after last weekend, a post made the rounds on social media claiming that the hacker group, "Anonymous" put out a hit on 11 cities threatening to take down Confederate monuments, and Lynchburg was named in that list.

Friday night, rumor started to spread of 'gatherings' going on around in Lynchburg and messages indicated the people gathering were members of a 'hate group.'

But, in actuality, that wasn't the case.

More @ WSET

Friday, August 18, 2017

Ha! SDU College Republicans Demand Muslim Student Association Condemn Latest Islamist Attack in Barcelona

Via Billy


The San Diego State University College Republicans demanded the Muslim Student Association condemn the latest Islamist terrorist attack in Barcelona, Spain.


Fourteen people were killed in the van attack and over 90 others were injured.One American was killed in the attack.
The ISIS ringleader, Moussa Oukabir, was shot dead by Spanish police during an attack on the coastal resort of Cambrils late Thursday night. Four other terrorists were killed by police in Cambrils late last night.

On Friday the San Diego College Republicans demanded the Muslim Student Association condemn the latest attack in the name of Islam.

Robert E. Lee is the uniter America has been looking for

A historic human habit of which most are occasionally guilty is that of getting tied in knots over philosophical questions as hard to understand in origin as to disentangle in practice. Assuming they ever get successfully disentangled.

The growing brawl over the Robert E. Lee statue in Lee Park comes to mind.

Hardly a passer-by had complained or even taken much notice of the Lee statue or its fitness to go on commanding, as it has since 1936, a verdant slope leading down to Turtle Creek Boulevard. Now in recent days, everybody has an opinion of the statue: monument to heroism and bravery, or hideous moral pollutant.

History, in Whittaker Chambers' phrase, hit many of us like a freight train. It was vital, we suddenly learned, to pronounce sentence on the late commander of the Army of Northern Virginia, Confederate States of America. Should we cart away the statue of a traitor and pro-slavery agitator? Or could we leave the dead to bury the dead? No strategy of an in-between nature would do, apparently. The mayor of Dallas said a civic task force would address the issue. Cities elsewhere in the South wrestled with related questions. In Charlottesville, Va., as we know to our sorrow, the quarrel has cost three lives.

The nub of the question, as I say, is the role we as a community assign Robert Edward Lee, 140 years after his death — not on the battlefield but as occupant of the presidency of Washington College in Lexington, Va. — today's Washington and Lee University (for shorthand, W&L). Lee's primary fame rests, obviously, upon his leadership — much praised by military strategists — of the Army of Northern Virginia, in which role he either, depending on your perspective, helped thwart the extinction of slavery or with personal dignity and humanity defended the rights of his native state, Virginia.

I am not in a mood to argue here for or against either of those positions. I am in a mood, rather, to suggest something novel about Gen. Lee. To wit, he was a model, in life and action, for resolution of the anxieties that presently beset both sides in a brouhaha Marse Robert (as his soldiers called him) would have loathed with all his gentlemanly, and intensely Christian, being. He would have wished us, I think, to train our gaze on matters higher than revenge or vindication. He would have asked — I infer — what is all this about? Have we nothing better to do? What about our identity as Americans? Would that not be a more fruitful matter for consideration?

He was an American. That is a point today's disputants tend to neglect. He loved America. He served her in uniform — long before the secession crisis, our great national tragedy, unsurpassed for the suffering it caused, brought about the parting of friends and the sundering of ideals. At war's end he wished nothing more and nothing less than to bind up the terrible wounds caused by four years of bloody conflict. He knew what had gone wrong. He wished that things might be right again for a united American people.

"Lee the warrior," writes his preeminent biographer, Douglas Southall Freeman, "became Lee the conciliator. With less than five months from the time he had said he would rather die a thousand deaths than go to General Grant [at Appomattox Court House, to surrender] he was telling Southern men to abandon all opposition, to regard the United States as their country, and to labor for peace and harmony and better understanding. Seldom had a famous man so completely reversed himself in so brief a time, and never more sincerely."

Said Lee himself: The disputed questions of past years "having been decided against us, it is the part of wisdom to acquiesce in the result, and of candor to recognize the fact." To a veteran of Mosby's Rangers, one Channing Smith, he said: Channing, go home, all you boys who fought with me and help build up the shattered fortunes of our state."

None of which has the choking odor of bitter-end opposition to reality. Lee had lost; the South had lost. The moral and philosophical considerations that had precipitated his resignation from the U.S. Army, so as to follow Virginia into exile, had lost. There was nothing to be done about it, save to rebuild.

The question hangs over discussions of Lee's merits like a funeral pall. Why, as a colonel in the U.S. Army, and former commandant of West Point, did he elect for service in the army of a country newly come into existence? Why, indeed? A century and a half later, the habit of regarding the Confederacy as an essentially stupid, and possibly hateful, enterprise feeds our perceptions of Lee's decision. The America of our early decades was not a business corporation, run from the top downward, but a coalition of supposedly sovereign states that had entered the union under their own steam and, save in the largest matters, stood out from each other.

Lee had opposed secession, but Virginia, his native state, had decided against him. The slogans and shibboleths of the 20th and 21st centuries are of no application in exegesis of his non-21st century motives. "He held that in her secession," Freeman writes, "Virginia carried him with her."

Yet once back inside the Union he busied himself at the urgent business of healing. Offered the presidency of tiny, war-ravaged Washington College, he devised and carried out a program aimed at the intellectual and moral revival of Southern youth, the class hit hardest and laid lowest by the war.
He deemed it "the duty of every citizen, in the present condition of the Country, to do all in his power to aid in the restoration of peace and harmony." Here was his chance, tellingly, to put theory into practice. And so he did.

The temper of the times, our times, elevates the slavery/civil rights issue to supremacy as a public consideration, hence as an impeachment of Robert E. Lee —  notwithstanding that the government of the Union moved against slavery only after two years of horrifying combat. I think moral one-upmanship — in this case, we got there before you did! — a questionable mode of argument, not least concerning events of a century and a half ago.

Lee himself, Virginia aristocrat as he was, was no slave taskmaster; he was a soldier of the United States. Just before the war, he received in trust from his late father-in-law's estate 196 slaves designated, under terms of the will, for emancipation. Which objective, despite the distractions of command, Lee faithfully achieved at the end of 1862. A New York newspaper report from the same time period accusing Lee of stripping and personally beating a woman runaway slave deserves the same credence as might a tale of Barack Obama's endowing the Richard B. Spencer Chair of Confederate History at Yale. Fake news.
Concerning the sin of slavery we have Lee's own words. "So far from engaging in a war to perpetuate slavery," he wrote in 1869, "I am rejoiced that slavery is abolished. I believe it will be greatly for the interests of the South."

Four years prior to Fort Sumter he had called slavery "a moral and political evil in any country," according to Charles Bracelen Flood's book Lee: The Last Years.

Anti-Lee bloggers delight in denying Lee the moral credit a white Southerner in his time and place might be owed for such forceful sentiments.

 They would prefer, perhaps, he had made his home a stop on the Underground Railroad. But then he would have been someone other than Robert E. Lee. The gift of applying contemporary moral insights to long-ago problems and vexations seems to be widely, painfully distributed in our time.
So, to the Lee Park statue and its prospects, in a day very different from the one that saw the bronze statue rise over Lee Park, more different still from the day Robert E. Lee sought with every fiber of personal force and intellect to advance the reconciliation of South and North.

He was never one for theory alone. The general himself said he never "saw the day" when he failed to pray for "the people of the North." In 1865, amid the strange new silence of the guns, he knelt at church near a black man who presented himself for Communion.

Douglas Southall Freeman tells the story of how, "When neighborhood youths set upon a juvenile 'Yankee' whom they caught alone in the street in front of Lee's home, the general told off the assailants and whisked the frightened lad into his own home. On another level of witness, a mob in Lexington attempting to lynch an accused horse thief suddenly recognized in its midst the figure of Gen. Robert E. Lee, going from one knot of men to the next, urging the law be allowed to take its course. Off, in the end, went the thief for an 18-year prison term.

How deeply does the American community of 2017 desire reconciliation? As much as the bloodied veterans of the war themselves did — back when, in Shelby Foote's words, "the victors acknowledged that the Confederates fought bravely for a cause they thought was just and the losers agreed it was probably best for all concerned that the Union had been preserved." That much? That deep the instinct for renewed peace and affection?

Present signs afford scant comfort. Marches, banners, threats. And those deaths. To what end? That we might be again as we were in the moral destitution of 1865 —  divided, self-alienated, angry at shadows?

The bronze man who rides at Lee Park —- for now at least — knew the horror of fraternal war, and still he reached out his hand to the former enemy. Why remove an image of reconciliation in our unreconciled time?