AWRM
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
CNN Article Equates Confederate Soldiers to Terrorists #151201
04/11/2010 03:29 PM
04/11/2010 03:29 PM
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 19,714
A 059 Btn 16 FF MSC
ConSigCor Offline OP
Senior Member
ConSigCor  Offline OP
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 19,714
A 059 Btn 16 FF MSC
CNN Article Equates Confederate Soldiers to Terrorists

Kurt Nimmo
Prison Planet.com
Sunday, April 11, 2010

In a remarkably addlepated story about the Confederacy, Roland Martin of CNN tells us Confederate soldiers defending their homes against invasion by the North were no different than Osama bin Laden and the supposed 9/11 hijackers.


According to CNN, Confederate soldiers were domestic terrorists and no different than Osama bin Laden.


“Even if you’re a relative of one of the 9/11 hijackers, that man was an out-and-out terrorist, and nothing you can say will change that. And if your great-great-great-granddaddy was a Confederate who stood up for Southern ideals, he too was a terrorist,” writes Martin. “They are the same” as Muslim terrorists.

Martin also feeds into the ongoing corporate media effort to demonize a large number of Americans as “extremists.” He does not mention the Hutaree or other exaggerated scapegoats, but his historical revisionist argument hints that opposition to federal power over the states is domestic terrorism.

Martin made his comments after Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell decided to honor Confederates for their involvement in the so-called Civil War, actually a war against Northern aggression.

Since McDonnell issued his proclamation — and modified it to include a reference to slavery in response to intense pressure by the race-baiting crowd — the corporate media has gone into overdrive to characterize the North’s invasion as a heroic effort to end slavery.

As Infowars.com noted last week, the so-called Civil War was not about ending slavery. It was about the North imposing economic policies on the South. The South seceded from the Union because the North had imposed punitive tariffs upon it. In 1828 the North began imposing agricultural tariffs on the Southern states to subsidize its industrial policies and this ultimately led to secession.

In 1860, Lincoln promised not to interfere with slavery, although he did pledge to “collect the duties and imposts” the government claimed.

Lincoln admitted to Treasury Secretary Salmon P. Chase that his Emancipation Proclamation was not designed to free the slaves but was a brazen piece of war propaganda.

McDonnell’s effort to honor Confederate soldiers arrives at precisely the right time for advocates of state power over the individual. Millions of Americans stand in opposition to Obama and the federal government in response to Obamacare, cap and tax, and additional authoritarian power vested in the Federal Reserve and the IRS at the expense of the states and in direct violation of the Constitution.

It is also a response to a number of states talking about secession and nullifiction.

“I believe we are nearing a point where there are enough irreconcilable differences between those Americans who want to control other Americans and those Americans who want to be left alone that separation is the only peaceable alternative,” writes Walter E. Williams. “Just as in a marriage, where vows are broken, our human rights protections guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution have been grossly violated by a government instituted to protect them.”

Mr. Martin’s article is yet another example of the the Mockingbird corporate media in league with the federal government pulling out the stops to characterize patriotic Americans as extremists, racists, and domestic terrorists.


"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: CNN Article Equates Confederate Soldiers to Terrorists #151202
04/11/2010 05:08 PM
04/11/2010 05:08 PM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 729
High Desert
D308cat Offline
Senior Member
D308cat  Offline
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 729
High Desert
Does his birth certificate have an EXP.date?


PSALM 144:01 Blessed be the LORD my Rock, Who trains my hands for war, And my fingers for battle---
Re: CNN Article Equates Confederate Soldiers to Terrorists #151203
04/11/2010 05:56 PM
04/11/2010 05:56 PM
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,763
43/18
McMedic Offline
Senior Member
McMedic  Offline
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,763
43/18
Quote
Originally posted by ConSigCor:
[b]if your great-great-great-granddaddy was a Confederate who stood up for Southern ideals, he too was a terrorist,” writes Martin. [/b]
I guess that makes me a proud decendant of a terrorist, according to that dirtbag.

"Roland Martin of CNN" isn't worthy to carry my great, great grandfathers shoes.

Re: CNN Article Equates Confederate Soldiers to Terrorists #151204
04/11/2010 06:42 PM
04/11/2010 06:42 PM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 291
OR
sinistral Offline
NCO Contributor
sinistral  Offline
NCO Contributor
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 291
OR
What a dirtbag. I guess he just accepted the revised history taught in our fine public school system.


“If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace”
-Thomas Paine
Re: CNN Article Equates Confederate Soldiers to Terrorists #151205
04/12/2010 02:25 AM
04/12/2010 02:25 AM
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 100
New York/Vermont
A
APatientMan Offline
Member
APatientMan  Offline
Member
A
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 100
New York/Vermont
It's time for another Civil War. We need to free the entitlement slaves from the reigns of dependency. We need to release the bonds of intrusive, omnipotent government.


Freedom is that instant between when someone tells you to do something and when you decide how to respond
Re: CNN Article Equates Confederate Soldiers to Terrorists #151206
04/12/2010 02:28 AM
04/12/2010 02:28 AM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 291
OR
sinistral Offline
NCO Contributor
sinistral  Offline
NCO Contributor
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 291
OR
That will be where the real fight lies. Those entitlement slaves aren't going to want to give up all that government candy. That will be the difference. The slaves this time around don't want to be free.


“If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace”
-Thomas Paine
Re: CNN Article Equates Confederate Soldiers to Terrorists #151207
04/12/2010 02:43 AM
04/12/2010 02:43 AM
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 19,714
A 059 Btn 16 FF MSC
ConSigCor Offline OP
Senior Member
ConSigCor  Offline OP
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 19,714
A 059 Btn 16 FF MSC
Southron response to the latest hate speach by the yankee media.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wdHR-M5mko&feature=player_embedded

After the battle of First Mannasas, General Jackson asked President Davis if he could pursue the federal army back to Washington. He told Davis that we must utterly destroy the federals and burn their capital to the ground or we would never be rid of them. Jackson was right.


"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: CNN Article Equates Confederate Soldiers to Terrorists #151208
04/12/2010 05:21 AM
04/12/2010 05:21 AM
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 19,714
A 059 Btn 16 FF MSC
ConSigCor Offline OP
Senior Member
ConSigCor  Offline OP
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 19,714
A 059 Btn 16 FF MSC
Chris Matthews Race Baits Pat Buchanan Over Confederate History

Kurt Nimmo
Prison Planet.com
Friday, April 9, 2010

Liberals love to fudge history. For instance, they are enamored with the establishment version of the so-called Civil War and vociferously claim the war was about slavery and evil slaveocrats in the Deep South. In the process, they discard historical facts.

So when Pat Buchanan said on Chris Matthews’ Hardball the other day that Virginia did not secede from the Union over slavery but because the North insisted the state mobilize its militias and attack the Deep South, the libs went ballistic.

It was a classic case of race baiting of the sort Chris Matthews engages in continually in his ongoing effort to support authoritarian government – or rather the effort of his establishment handlers.

Buchanan made the comments during a discussion of Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell’s proclamation reinstating Confederate History Month. Libs are outraged that slavery was not mentioned in the proclamation that pays tribute to the sacrifices of Confederate soldiers.

The exchange between MSNBC’s bully Matthews and Buchanan occurred after Matthews asked why Virginia seceded.

“They wanted to be free of the Union,” Buchanan responded.

“They wanted to keep slaves,” Matthews insisted.

“Who was right in the Civil War?” Matthews then asked.

“I think in a way both sides were right,” Buchanan responded. “Lincoln had a right to save the Union. I think they [the South] had a right to go free.”

“Let’s not defend the right to slavery,” MSNBC political analyst Karen Finney said.

“Has Buchanan, who is certainly no stranger to racial controversy, finally stepped over the line?” asks Alan Colmes’ blog, Liberaland. “Should MSNBC disallow further commentary from this man?”

Should we disallow all political commentary that differs from that of Alan Colmes and is quite frankly at odds with history? Far too many libs – who consider constitutionalists rightwing domestic terrorists – think so and their demands to limit the discussion are becoming a deafening crescendo.

However, if Buchanan had read up on his history, he would not have had to endure such ignorance.

The South seceded from the Union because the North had imposed punitive tariffs upon it. In 1828 the North began imposing agricultural tariffs on the Southern states to subsidize its industrial policies. “Thirty year later, with the South paying 87 percent of federal tariff revenue while having their livelihoods threatened by protectionist legislation, it became impossible for the two regions to be governed under the same regime. The South as a region was being reduced to a slave status, with the federal government as its master,” writes Lew Rockwell.

In 1860, Lincoln promised not to interfere with slavery, although he did pledge to “collect the duties and imposts” the government claimed.

Rockwell writes:

Before the war, Lincoln himself had pledged to leave slavery intact, to enforce the fugitive slaves laws, and to support an amendment that would forever guarantee slavery where it then existed. Neither did he lift a finger to repeal the anti-Negro laws that besotted all Northern states, Illinois in particular. Recall that the underground railroad ended, not in New York or Boston-since dropping off blacks in those states would have been restricted-but in Canada! The Confederate Constitution did, however, make possible the gradual elimination of slavery, a process that would have been made easier had the North not so severely restricted the movements of former slaves.

In fact, as Thomas J. Di Lorenzo notes, not only did Lincoln support the slavery forever amendment, but the amendment was his idea. He worked tirelessly on federal legislation that would outlaw the various personal liberty laws that existed in several Northern states.

Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation was little more than a political trick. He admitted as much in a letter to Treasury Secretary Salmon P. Chase: “The original proclamation has no… legal justification, except as a military measure.” In other words, the Emancipation Proclamation was little more than war propaganda.


“No one mourns the passing of the slave system,” writes Thomas E. Woods, Jr.. “But those who can see nothing more than slavery at stake in this contest miss the insight of men like Lord Acton, who saw in this victory for centralization a defeat for the values of civilized life in the West. With the destruction of state sovereignty went both the main institutional restraint on the power of the federal government as well as the important moral example of a polity organized along different lines from those of the centralized states that would come to dominate the political landscape in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.”

Chris Matthews and Alan Colmes are apologists for authoritarian federal power over the states and they are race baiting the opposition in order to circumvent the discussion. Unfortunately, Colmes’ assertion that Buchanan is a racist and should be barred from the network is indicative of those who support Obama and the Democrats and their unprecedented effort to eradicate the Constitution and its unambiguous limitations on the federal government, in particular the Tenth Amendment that restates the Constitution’s overriding principle of federalism by providing that powers not granted to the federal government are reserved to the states or the people.

Finally, Pat Buchanan is not doing any of us a favor by allowing the shill Matthews and his federal government worshiping guests (including the reprehensible Alan Colmes) to pillory him – and us – as racists and rightwing extremists who need their First Amendment checked at the door.


"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861

.
©>
©All information posted on this site is the private property of the individual author and AWRM.net and may not be reproduced without permission. © 2001-2020 AWRM.net All Rights Reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.1.1