# Slavery, The Confederate Flag and the Uninformed American Public.. The Final Word!



## Urinal Cake (Oct 19, 2013)

Share this with your under-educated friends....And WHY every Patriot should Raise this Flag (The New Gadsen Flag)

Megyn Kelly | The Confederate Flag Needs To Be Raised, Not Lowered

The Confederate Flag Needs To Be Raised, Not Lowered
The Confederate Flag Needs To Be Raised, Not Lowered first appeared here

Ladies and gentlemen, I submit that what we see happening in the United States today is an apt illustration of why the Confederate flag was raised in the first place. What we see materializing before our very eyes is tyranny: tyranny over the freedom of expression, tyranny over the freedom of association, tyranny over the freedom of speech, and tyranny over the freedom of conscience.


----------



## Chipper (Dec 22, 2012)

Great read. Thanks for posting.


----------



## Piratesailor (Nov 9, 2012)

Yes. Great article. Lessons in history that have been forgotten and twisted. What's that saying about learning from history or repeating it.....


----------



## DELTA 3 (Jul 8, 2014)

For some reason it says the server can't be found. Maybe it's just on my end.


----------



## slewfoot (Nov 6, 2013)

DELTA 3 said:


> For some reason it says the server can't be found. Maybe it's just on my end.


Same here Delta 3

When I see this kind of things going on in this country I have to stop and ask. Are the people of this country really this stupid or is it they need to jump on some band wagon to get their 15 minutes of fame.
This flag was not their national flag it was a battle flag nothing more nothing less.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Won't open for me, either.


----------



## Urinal Cake (Oct 19, 2013)

The Confederate Flag Needs To Be Raised, Not Lowered

Ladies and gentlemen, I submit that what we see happening in the United States today is an apt illustration of why the Confederate flag was raised in the first place. What we see materializing before our very eyes is tyranny: tyranny over the freedom of expression, tyranny over the freedom of association, tyranny over the freedom of speech, and tyranny over the freedom of conscience.


In 1864, Confederate General Patrick Cleburne warned his fellow southerners of the historical consequences should the South lose their war for independence. He was truly a prophet. He said if the South lost, “It means that the history of this heroic struggle will be written by the enemy. That our youth will be trained by Northern school teachers; will learn from Northern school books their version of the war; will be impressed by all of the influences of History and Education to regard our gallant debt as traitors and our maimed veterans as fit subjects for derision.” No truer words were ever spoken.


History revisionists flooded America’s public schools with Northern propaganda about the people who attempted to secede from the United States, characterizing them as racists, extremists, radicals, hatemongers, traitors, etc. You know, the same way that people in our federal government and news media attempt to characterize Christians, patriots, war veterans, constitutionalists, et al. today.


Folks, please understand that the only people in 1861 who believed that states did NOT have the right to secede were Abraham Lincoln and his radical Republicans. To say that southern states did not have the right to secede from the United States is to say that the thirteen colonies did not have the right to secede from Great Britain. One cannot be right and the other wrong. If one is right, both are right. How can we celebrate our Declaration of Independence in 1776 and then turn around and condemn the Declaration of Independence of the Confederacy in 1861? Talk about hypocrisy!

In fact, southern states were not the only states that talked about secession. After the southern states seceded, the State of Maryland fully intended to join them. In September of 1861, Lincoln sent federal troops to the State capital and seized the legislature by force in order to prevent them from voting. Federal provost marshals stood guard at the polls and arrested Democrats and anyone else who believed in secession. A special furlough was granted to Maryland troops so they could go home and vote against secession. Judges who tried to inquire into the phony elections were arrested and thrown into military prisons. There is your great “emancipator,” folks.

And before the South seceded, several northern states had also threatened secession. Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island had threatened secession as far back as James Madison’s administration. In addition, the states of New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Delaware were threatening secession during the first half of the nineteenth century–long before the southern states even considered such a thing.

People say constantly that Lincoln “saved” the Union. Lincoln didn’t save the Union; he subjugated the Union. There is a huge difference. A union that is not voluntary is not a union. Does a man have a right to force a woman to marry him or to force a woman to stay married to him? In the eyes of God, a union of husband and wife is far superior to a union of states. If God recognizes the right of husbands and wives to separate (and He does), to try and suggest that states do not have the right to lawfully (under Natural and divine right) separate is the most preposterous proposition imaginable.

People say that Lincoln freed the slaves. Lincoln did NOT free a single slave. But what he did do was enslave free men. His so-called Emancipation Proclamation had NO AUTHORITY in the southern states, as they had separated into another country. Imagine a President today signing a proclamation to free folks in, say, China or Saudi Arabia. He would be laughed out of Washington. Lincoln had no authority over the Confederate States of America, and he knew it.

Do you not find it interesting that Lincoln’s proclamation did NOT free a single slave in the United States, the country in which he DID have authority? That’s right. The Emancipation Proclamation deliberately ignored slavery in the North. Do you not realize that when Lincoln signed his proclamation, there were over 300,000 slaveholders who were fighting in the Union army? Check it out.

One of those northern slaveholders was General (and later U.S. President) Ulysses S. Grant. In fact, he maintained possession of his slaves even after the War Between the States concluded. Recall that his counterpart, Confederate General Robert E. Lee, freed his slaves BEFORE hostilities between North and South ever broke out. When asked why he refused to free his slaves, Grant said: “Good help is hard to find these days.”

The institution of slavery did not end until the 13th Amendment was ratified on December 6, 1865.

Speaking of the 13th Amendment, did you know that Lincoln authored his own 13th Amendment? It is the only amendment to the Constitution ever proposed by a sitting U.S. President. Here is Lincoln’s proposed amendment: “No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give Congress the power to abolish or interfere within any state with the domestic institutions thereof, including that a person’s held to labor or service by laws of said State.”

You read it right. Lincoln proposed an amendment to the U.S. Constitution PRESERVING the institution of slavery. This proposed amendment was written in March of 1861, a month BEFORE the shots were fired at Fort Sumter, South Carolina.

The State of South Carolina was particularly incensed at the tariffs enacted in 1828 and 1832. The Tariff of 1828 was disdainfully called “The Tariff of Abominations” by the State of South Carolina. Accordingly, the South Carolina legislature declared that the tariffs of 1828 and 1832 were “unauthorized by the constitution of the United States.”

Think, folks: why would the southern states secede from the Union over slavery when President Abraham Lincoln had offered an amendment to the Constitution guaranteeing the PRESERVATION of slavery? That makes no sense. If the issue was predominantly slavery, all the South needed to do was to go along with Lincoln; and his proposed 13th Amendment would have permanently preserved slavery among the southern (and northern) states. Does that sound like a body of people who were willing to lose hundreds of thousands of men on the battlefield over saving slavery? What nonsense!

The problem was Lincoln wanted the southern states to pay the Union a 40% tariff on their exports. The South considered this outrageous and refused to pay. By the time hostilities broke out in 1861, the South was paying up to, and perhaps exceeding, 70% of the nation’s taxes. Before the war, the South was very prosperous and productive. And Washington, D.C., kept raising the taxes and tariffs on them. You know, the way Washington, D.C., keeps raising the taxes on prosperous American citizens today.

This is much the same story of the way the colonies refused to pay the demanded tariffs of the British Crown–albeit the tariffs of the Crown were MUCH lower than those demanded by Lincoln. Lincoln’s proposed 13th Amendment was an attempt to entice the South into paying the tariffs by being willing to permanently ensconce the institution of slavery into the Constitution. AND THE SOUTH SAID NO!

In addition, the Congressional Record of the United States forever obliterates the notion that the North fought the War Between the States over slavery. Read it for yourself. This resolution was passed unanimously in the U.S. Congress on July 23, 1861: “The War is waged by the government of the United States not in the spirit of conquest or subjugation, nor for the purpose of overthrowing or interfering with the rights or institutions of the states, but to defend and protect the Union.”

What could be clearer? The U.S. Congress declared that the war against the South was NOT an attempt to overthrow or interfere with the “institutions” of the states, but to keep the Union intact (by force). The “institutions” implied most certainly included the institution of slavery.

Hear it loudly and clearly: Lincoln’s war against the South had NOTHING to do with ending slavery–so said the U.S. Congress by unanimous resolution in 1861.

Abraham Lincoln, himself, said it was NEVER his intention to end the institution of slavery. In a letter to Alexander Stevens, who later became the Vice President of the Confederacy, Lincoln wrote this: “Do the people of the South really entertain fears that a Republican administration would directly, or indirectly, interfere with their slaves, or with them, about their slaves? If they do, I wish to assure you, as once a friend, and still, I hope, not an enemy, that there is no cause for such fears. The South would be in no more danger in this respect than it was in the days of Washington.”

Again, what could be clearer? Lincoln, himself, said the southern states had nothing to fear from him in regard to abolishing slavery.

Hear Lincoln again: “If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it.” He also said: “I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the states where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so and I have no inclination to do so.”

The idea that the Confederate flag (actually, there were five of them) stood for racism, bigotry, hatred, and slavery is just so much hogwash. In fact, if one truly wants to discover who the racist was in 1861, just read the words of Mr. Lincoln.

On August 14, 1862, Abraham Lincoln invited a group of black people to the White House. In his address to them, he told them of his plans to colonize them all back to Africa. Listen to what he told these folks: “Why should the people of your race be colonized and where? Why should they leave this country? This is, perhaps, the first question for proper consideration. You and we are different races. We have between us a broader difference than exists between almost any other two races. Whether it is right or wrong I need not discuss; but this physical difference is a great disadvantage to us both, as I think. Your race suffers very greatly, many of them, by living among us, while ours suffers from your presence. In a word, we suffer on each side. If this is admitted, it affords a reason, at least, why we should be separated. You here are freemen, I suppose? Perhaps you have been long free, or all your lives. Your race is suffering, in my judgment, the greatest wrong inflicted on any people. But even when you cease to be slaves, you are yet far removed from being placed on an equality with the white race. The aspiration of men is to enjoy equality with the best when free, but on this broad continent not a single man of your race is made the equal of a single man of our race.”

Did you hear what Lincoln said? He said that black people would NEVER be equal with white people–even if they all obtained their freedom from slavery. If that isn’t a racist statement, I’ve never heard one.

Lincoln’s statement above is not isolated. In Charleston, Illinois, in 1858, Lincoln said in a speech: “I am not, nor have ever been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races. I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of *******, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races from living together on social or political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white.”

Ladies and gentlemen, in his own words, Abraham Lincoln declared himself to be a white supremacist. Why don’t our history books and news media tell the American people the truth about Lincoln and about the War Between the States?

It’s simple: if people would study the meanings and history of the flag, symbols, and statues of the Confederacy and Confederate leaders, they might begin to awaken to the tyrannical policies of Washington, D.C., that precluded southern independence–policies that have only escalated since the defeat of the Confederacy–and they might have a notion to again resist.

By the time Lincoln penned his Emancipation Proclamation, the war had been going on for two years without resolution. In fact, the North was losing the war. Even though the South was outmanned and out-equipped, the genius of the southern generals and fighting acumen of the southern men had put the northern armies on their heels. Many people in the North never saw the legitimacy of Lincoln’s war in the first place, and many of them actively campaigned against it. These people were affectionately called “Copperheads” by people in the South.

I urge you to watch Ron Maxwell’s accurate depiction of those people in the North who favored the southern cause as depicted in his motion picture, “Copperhead.” For that matter, I consider his movie “Gods And Generals” to be the greatest “Civil War” movie ever made. It is the most accurate and fairest depiction of Confederate General Thomas Jonathan “Stonewall” Jackson ever produced. In my opinion, actor Stephen Lang should have received an Oscar for his performance as General Jackson. But, can you imagine?

That’s another thing: the war fought from 1861 to 1865 was NOT a “civil war.” Civil war suggests two sides fighting for control of the same capital and country. The South didn’t want to take over Washington, D.C., no more than their forebears wanted to take over London. They wanted to separate from Washington, D.C., just as America’s Founding Fathers wanted to separate from Great Britain. The proper names for that war are either, “The War Between the States” or, “The War of Southern Independence,” or, more fittingly, “The War of Northern Aggression.”

Had the South wanted to take over Washington, D.C., they could have done so with the very first battle of the “Civil War.” When Lincoln ordered federal troops to invade Virginia in the First Battle of Manassas (called the “First Battle …


----------



## Slippy (Nov 14, 2013)

I don't give a shat if you fly the flag or not. I also don't give a shat if someone is offended by a flag. Matter of fact, if someone is "offended" by a flag or any other inanimate object, well I guess that someone has earned a special kind of pussy status that I'll never understand.

I cannot believe (but I can) the inability of We, The People to think for ourselves.

Regarding The Flag and how it relates to The Dukes of Hazzard...The damn tv show has been on for 36 years and now because the liberals and liberal media tell you to be offended by it, people are? Good gracious...

Why Modern Liberalism Is A Disease | The Federalist Papers


----------



## Salt-N-Pepper (Aug 18, 2014)

The Civil War was about which set of oligarchs got to control the southern states... the Federalist oligarchy or the Southern Federalist oligarchy.

Make no mistake, it was nothing more than choosing which set of leaders got to rule the roost. 

The Stars and Stripes flew over a nation of slaveholders for 90 years, and the confederate flags flew over a nation of slaveholders for only four.

The tragic horror of that war is that so many, many good men had to die for what amounted to no more than a pissing contest between oligarchs. They all should have just gotten together, unbuttoned their pants (the zipper as we know it was invented in 1913 even though there were similar but not widely used devices dating back to 1893), pulled out their johns, measured and gotten it over with before a lot of people died.

Sitting around arguing about which abusive government was better, to me, seems quite silly. Then again, I am not a statist, I believe in the rights of individuals and in freedom (and that includes ALL individuals, not just the old white guys that ordered others to fight that bloody useless pointless war).


----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

slippy went away for a while and came back angry lol
hard time changes a man


----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)




----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

I wonder how many would know what it was if I hoisted the first confederate flag


----------



## Prepared One (Nov 5, 2014)

Excellent read. The link opened right up for me. Salty, your are pretty spot on and Slippy, I agree. All this talk about the flag and it's meaning don't mean doodle y squat. That flag coming down has changed neither the history or the present


----------



## Slippy (Nov 14, 2013)

Slippy, you be racis...

View attachment 12002


----------



## Salt-N-Pepper (Aug 18, 2014)

Jakthesoldier said:


> I wonder how many would know what it was if I hoisted the first confederate flag


The Bonnie Blue?


----------



## Slippy (Nov 14, 2013)

Salt-N-Pepper said:


> The Bonnie Blue?


Just like the mama in Good Times...Florida! Dy-No-Mite!


----------



## sideKahr (Oct 15, 2014)

The more I learn about the War Between the States, the more I realize the wrong side won.


----------



## Salt-N-Pepper (Aug 18, 2014)

sideKahr said:


> The more I learn about the War Between the States, the more I realize the wrong side won.


There was no "right side" just a whole lot of wrong sides. It's a hard sell to say "Yay, the South won, slavery lives on and we have the same political masters, they are just located in Richmond instead of Washington!!" but it's also hard to say "Yay, the North won and the Federal government brutally crushed the nation!"


----------



## Slippy (Nov 14, 2013)

Salt-N-Pepper said:


> There was no "right side" just a whole lot of wrong sides. It's a hard sell to say "Yay, the South won, slavery lives on and we have the same political masters, they are just located in Richmond instead of Washington!!" but it's also hard to say "Yay, the North won and the Federal government brutally crushed the nation!"


Salty my silly friend,

You know slavery lives on and is "prospering" (HA HA) certainly increasing every year. Its called Welfare and it goes by really cool acronyms like EBT, SNAP and other stuff. It is also "managed " (and I hate to even use that word to describe it) by Big Official sounding names Departments and Bureaus...like the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and The Department of Housing and Urban Development, Department of Agriculture etc etc...


----------



## Salt-N-Pepper (Aug 18, 2014)

Slippy said:


> Salty my silly friend,
> 
> You know slavery lives on and is "prospering" (HA HA) certainly increasing every year. Its called Welfare and it goes by really cool acronyms like EBT, SNAP and other stuff. It is also "managed " (and I hate to even use that word to describe it) by Big Official sounding names Departments and Bureaus...like the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and The Department of Housing and Urban Development, Department of Agriculture etc etc...


I guess I honestly just don't have a sense of humor when it comes to slavery.










That crap was just evil. If anybody doesn't think it was evil, then I might suggest some ideas so we can quickly get that person out of the gene pool and help us get to a better tomorrow.


----------



## Slippy (Nov 14, 2013)

A flea market shopper was so offended by Confederate and Nazi stuff that "he was shaking and almost vomited". He also called 911.

Is this really what men have been reduced to?

http://www.theamericanmirror.com/of...opper-calls-911-over-confederate-merchandise/


----------



## oddapple (Dec 9, 2013)

Anywhere in the world, any time, you're not supposed to abuse slaves or allow sadistic handlers to. Every where in the world, if they act like ours do they get dead. This and the other Islamic state supporting white countries are the only ones that carry a bunch of stupid, worthless dead weight and let it rot on the cob. Many people put their self in traps that they wish they didn't have to defend but many people also do not think with the brain.


----------



## topgun (Oct 2, 2013)

Jakthesoldier said:


> slippy went away for a while and came back angry lol
> hard time changes a man


Did you get that info directly from his cell-mate Bruno?


----------



## Prepadoodle (May 28, 2013)

Good read, thanks for posting.

Odd that they didn't mention the Three-fifths Compromise.

At the 1787 United States Constitutional Convention, the Southern states wanted the slaves counted as people when determining the number of representatives each state would send to the House of Representatives. The Northern states didn't think slaves deserved to be recognized as people at all. They did want to count them for taxation purposes, but only as "property."

They eventually reached a compromise and counted each slave as 3/5ths of a person, which gained the Southern states more than a dozen additional seats in the House. Bitterness over this festered, and was another reason for the Civil War.

To say the Northern states fought the Civil War in order to free slaves is just wrong... it's not the way it happened at all.


----------



## Boss Dog (Feb 8, 2013)

CONFEDERATE AMERICAN PRIDE: The Truth About The Confederate Battle Flag


----------

