← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · confederate_commando
Thread ID: 19628 | Posts: 9 | Started: 2005-08-13
2005-08-13 23:46 | User Profile
Ethnic Cleansing of Dixie Commentary by Billy Bearden
This past Sunday, we witnessed yet another brutal assassination in the war against everything Southern, what we below the Mason-Dixon line traditionally call our cultural Heritage. It was the last ever running of the NASCAR Southern 500.
NASCAR, of course, was born in the back woods and hills of Georgia, but since NASCAR has teamed up with the shakedown artist, Je$$e Jack$on, NASCAR must now deny their roots and forget their Southern fans. Everyone has heard about NASCAR's efforts to ban Confederate flags from viewing stands and the infields, bogus stunts such as "flag trade-ins" and efforts to appease Je$$e Jack$on by "diversifying" the drivers and race teams.
The University of Mississippi "Ole Miss" Rebels have had their 'Colonel' mascot removed. There are talks at the State University of West Georgia to change the Braves mascot to appease NCAA thought-police. The NCAA Div. III Dixie Conference of southeast Virginia and northeast North Carolina had to alter its 40-year-old name last year thanks to "P.C." The University of the South in Sewanee, Tennessee, is under PC pressure to change its 130+ year-old name to something more yankee friendly. Vanderbilt University changed the name of "Confederate Hall," built with money from the United Daughters of the Confederacy, to appease P.C. forces. Litigation continues on that one. The NCAA continues its extortion against States with Confederate symbols in their state flags or on their capitol grounds and against universities with mascots or team names they find potentially "offensive."
Ashby Street in Atlanta was changed to Lowery Blvd. in 2001. The road was previously named to honor Brigadier General Turner Ashby, who while leading a charge into battle, including Georgians, said "Forward my brave men!" and was then shot dead. Atlanta city council changed the name in violation of Georgia Law (O.C.G.A 50-3-1 ) which is supposed to prevent the altering of memorials to any military service. Also in violation of the same law, one of three Confederate flags were removed from a memorial in Augusta Georgia by Augusta Mullah-Mayor Bob Young in September 2004 thanks to the demands from the South Carolina NAACP.
The statue of Jefferson Davis in New Orleans was vandalized in 2003. Some of the statues on Monument Avenue in Richmond Virgina were vandalized just before Confederate Memorial Day this year. The UDC offered a reward. An Obliesk in White Point Gardens in Charleston, S.C., was defaced immediately following the burial of the eight Confederate Sailors of the Submarine Hunley in April. This past week, monuments in Chickamauga were defaced and vandalized just prior to Veterans Day.
Coca-Cola no longer uses southern imagery in its advertisements, like a 1940's Life magazine ad during World War II showing General Stonewall Jackson resting his troops for "The Pause that Refreshes" nor do they even credit Coke's inventor, Dr John Pemberton, with being a Colonel in the Confederate Cavalry, he is just mentioned as a 'civil war veteran.' BellSouth refuses to allow advertisements with images of Southern flags or icons. And numerous Georgia-based businesses like Coke and Home Depot gave thousands of dollars to the legislators who voted for the state flag change in 2001 (from the '56 flag specifically designed to honor Georgia's veterans to the flag known as "the ugliest flag in North America.")
The 1956 Georgia flag was stolen by radical zealots in 2001, led by King Rat Roy Barnes, all predicated on a mountain of lies about the '56 flag and its adoption. These same radicals, minus a rat or two, mad that the ugly blue Barnes' Legacy flag only lasted about 110 weeks, attempted to pass HB 899 in 2003, which would have meant the removal of the Memorial Carving on Stone Mountain. The radical Georgia Democrats, with their anti-Southern fanaticism are just as evil as Afghanistan's Taliban. Why? Remember the Taliban didn't want the centuries old statues of Buddahs, so they blasted them down in 2001.
Former Presidential candidate Dick Gephardt demanded the removal of Confederate flags in the only two Confederate graveyards in Missouri. A federal judge banned the flying of a Confederate flag over Confederate graves in the Union run Confederate Prisoner of War camp in Maryland - Point Lookout. Numerous school systems illegally forbid students from wearing anything Confederate to class (school banning) in violation of the Constitution's First Amendment, Supreme Court 1969 ruling in Tinker, 6th Circuit 2001 ruling in Castorina, and 4th Circuit 2003 ruling in Newsom.
This list doesn't begin to be all-inclusive but rather is a short list from the top of my head. These attacks are epidemic. Beginning in 1991 with the NAACP issuing their demand that the Confederate Flag be removed from the South Carolina Statehouse Dome with a press release calling the flag "...An odious blight on the universe" and, after accomplishing that, they complained bitterly when it was moved to a memorial elsewhere on the capitol grounds. The NAACP reneged on their promise to end the economic boycott if the flag were removed from the Capitol dome. Since tourism dollars are up in South Carolina, I'm sure the S.C. Chamber types hope the NAACP boycott goes on indefinitely.
The NAACP and their attack dogs now routinely equate Honorable men like General Robert E. Lee with German dictator Adolf Hitler. Atlanta Mayor Maynard Jackson is credited with first coining the phrase "Confederate swastika" and hate-filled racists like Julian Bond and Al Sharpton have been parroting the phrase ever since to refer to Confederate Battle flags. The most recent presidential campaign brought forth more vitriol against Southern symbols from the likes of Howard Dean, John Edwards and Al Sharpton.
Relentlessly they continue, and what began as an outcry against one flag in one place has turned into the ethnic cleansing of Dixie
[url]http://spofga.org/flag/2005/aug/ethnic_cleansing_of_dixie.php[/url]
2005-08-16 01:46 | User Profile
The problem is that there are still negros in large numbers among us. That is what it boils down to. Oil and water do not mix. One race must dominate, the other must submit. Which side will it be ? Nascar is only a tiny piece of the picture of a much larger question.
2005-08-16 12:33 | User Profile
[QUOTE=JoseyWales]The problem is that there are still negros in large numbers among us. That is what it boils down to. Oil and water do not mix. One race must dominate, the other must submit. Which side will it be ? Nascar is only a tiny piece of the picture of a much larger question.[/QUOTE] Josey, I think the blacks are simply used as the foot soldiers in these kind of cultural wars. They are useful as tools, but they are not the ones pulling the strings.
2005-08-16 14:05 | User Profile
Yes and no. Yes they are used as tools, and like I said - they are part of a much larger problem. Im sure your familiar with what Dabney and Jefferson said regarding the ability of the white man and the negro to live under the same government, as equals. It just wont work. We have 140+ years of proof.
The world doesnt seem to tolerate an aprtheid type system any longer, but its either that or white seperation. The only other choice is surrender and that is not really an option...
2005-08-16 15:38 | User Profile
Josey,
I think Q is correct on this. The blacks and guilt ridden White "liberals" are the ones we see on tv and hear on the radio, but if it wasn't for the "economic men"/women represented by the slugs of the "Chamber of Commerce" and other gutless and greedy "business" groups this would be just your usual "civil rights" whores trying to get attention. It is the "business community" that serves as enablers with financing/bribes. In the case of Georgia and the real state flag we had loud pressure from below provided by the professional protesters (and talkradio loudmouths like Neal Boortz) and quiet pressure provided from above by the "business community".
2005-08-16 15:43 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Sertorius]... (and talkradio loudmouths like Neal Boortz)[/QUOTE] You just can't resist mentioning him on any thread you know I'll read, can you? :taz:
2005-08-16 16:01 | User Profile
Sorry, Q, I couldn't help myself.
Seriously, he was one of the biggest cheerleaders on this, referring to flag supporters as "flaggots" and putting out the lie that the only reason the flag was changed in 1956 was because of Brown v. Topeka Board of Ed. If you wanted to know what the "business community" thought, here's your Ivy Lee.
2005-08-16 16:48 | User Profile
More revisionist history, extremely dangerous revisions at that. Denying the economic and states rights issues that really started the war between the states is just another ploy to force the PC agenda down every Americans throat, it's all a racist thing by the evil white man. Just as the "were a nation of immigrants" lie deny's the cultural and socio-economic dominance of european migration in shaping this country. How can any thinking person not recognize the lie?
2005-08-18 10:38 | User Profile
Economic issues? Marxist history?? Economic issues like 'bleeding Kansas' or john brown's raid???
:wallbash:
[QUOTE]From The Confederate States of America, E. Merton Coulter, Ph.D.;(LSU Presss, 1950), pages 9-10:
"Slavery was undoubtedly a potent cause; but more powerful than slavery was the Negro himself. It was the fear of what would ultimately happen to the South if the Negro should be freed by the North, as the abolitionists seemed so intent on doing--and Southerners considered Republicans and abolitionists the same. This fear had worried Calhoun when he wrote in 1849 'The Address of Southern Delegates in Congress to their Constituents.' It was not the loss of property in slaves that the South feared so much as the danger of the South becoming another San Domingo, should a Republican regime free the slaves. And it is no argument to say that Lincoln would never have tried to do this. The South believed that his party would force him to it if he did not do so of his own volition. If he were not himself an abolitionist, he had got his position by abolition votes. What Southerners believed to be the fact impelled them to action--not what the fact might have been. A friend of Salmon P. Chase, Secretary of the Treasury, had told him that the South's knowledge of what happened in San Domingo and 'Self preservation had compelled secession.'"[/QUOTE]
No secession, no war--at least not in the States Rights form it took...