My latest in PJ Media:
The Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) weighed in Saturday on the Confederate flag controversy, calling for the banning of the offending ensign at the Lorain County Fair in Wellington, Ohio. But why would an Islamic advocacy group that doesn’t even consider itself American at all (hence the hyphenated “American-Islamic” in its name, as if they were two distinct entities) care to enter into a conflict over America’s racial divide?
CAIR’s officials claim that it’s because of their concern for civil rights. CAIR-Cincinnati Executive Director Karen Dabdoub explained: “Those who wish to traffic in racist symbols that only serve to marginalize their fellow Americans should not be permitted to do so in a public facility at a community celebration. Instead they should seriously consider putting their time and talents toward positive pursuits that make their community stronger and more inclusive.” How the community could become more inclusive by exclusion, she didn’t say.
Meanwhile, CAIR’s notoriously prickly National Communications Director Ibrahim Hooper was more direct: “Symbols glorifying and honoring white supremacy, slavery and treason should be repudiated by all Americans, not put on display at mainstream venues. Those who reject white supremacy and racism can best demonstrate that rejection by avoiding any enterprise that seeks to profit from hate.”
It is important to remember when reading these statements that CAIR is not actually as high-minded and opposed to “hate” as Dabdoub and Hooper would have you believe.
Read the rest here.
Old Fat Bald Socially Inept Ron says
Every time I see a hijab I am viscerally offended by a symbol glorifying and honoring Islamic supremacy, slavery and violent jihad.
Sun says
So am I.
In addition, it worries me a lot – especially as a woman.
Timothy O says
Dues Vult
Charles Lutz says
Timothy O : Deus vult.
SAFI says
Because it’s HARAAAAM !!!
SAFI says
I mean “offensive”
SAFI says
like pork
fredoniahead says
In other words, more Marxist tactics. The Red-Green Alliance. Mythical White supremacy is the manufactured Kulak boogeyman invented by the Marxists and their Muhammadan allies.
The sad thing is…watch how fast they piss down their legs and ban the flags.
Hell, the US Army War College pissed their pants and capitulated when CAIR yelled “racist” and “White nationalist”
Ever see those little dogs like chihuahuas that shiver and shake and pee because their sensitive and nervous all the time?. That’s the US Army College when CAIR called them names.
PC over common sense. PC over security, PC over life itself. Just call names…that’s all it takes these days to cause cowering, shivering fear in the weak invertebrates.
It is aggravating as hell to watch the weakness and spinelessness over nothing more than some whining and name-calling…It is gutless and f***d up.
I reckon we’ll see if these people ban the Confederate flag or not….I would bet they will. I hope I’m wrong.
CAIR gets another feather in its hat and they didn’t even have to do anything but speak a few words and call a few names. When your enemy is that weak, heck, you don’t even have to fight…they hand it over.
WVinMN says
Nailed it.
Mimi says
Thats exactly how they take over countries ! Believe me. In 10 years we will bow to allah !
gravenimage says
Some of us are working to prevent that, not calling for our surrender.
Mike says
You might bow to “allah” but many of us are descendants of genocide survivors and ex Christian Lebanese militia members who never surrendered and never will
James C. Long says
I agree. It is impossible to change or ” correct?” history by banning anything; it’s also WRONG! ! ! CAIR should be BANNED.
Tony Naim says
There is no bigger engine of hate propagation and discrimination than the Medina verses of the Koran.
These people need to fix themselves before preaching on others.
E T says
President Trump NEEDS to ban CAIR/the Brotherhood hoods.
Michael says
That’s exactly what needs to happen.
Eric Jones says
My great grandmother was a slave in Virgenia. I am no lover of the Confederacy, its symbols or leaders. How can we learn the lessons of history if history is hidden? I oppose tearing down Confederat monuments. We must remember that the Democractric Party was the party of the Confederacy.The Confederat battle flag belongs in a museum. The Confederacy was treason againt the USA. It was backed by the British Crown and by certain German dukedoms. There is nothing patriotic at all about the Confederacy. The average Connfederate soldeir was a brave man fighting for a bad cause.
Displaying something is not the same thing as glorifying it. The Confederat battle flag shoud not be glorified, nor should Nazi banners be glorified. I do not want to see the Green flag of Islam at all.
Eric
gravenimage says
+1
Anjuli Pandavar says
This is a blatant direct attempt to ignite another American civil war. I’m amazed these people are still not deported.
They’re American citizens? Then revoke their citizenship!! Or would you rather lose your country?
James Lincoln says
Anjuli Pandavar,
According to the law website NOLO.com, US citizenship can be lost if one is convicted of treason or participating in any attempt to overthrow the US government.
The Muslim Brotherhood, and all of its front groups like CAIR, want to replace US law with sharia law.
I’m not an attorney but it seems like that those actions would qualify as an attempt to overthrow the US government.
WILLIAM S VARNEY says
We have a right of place and privledge to display the Confederate flag and be unacossted just as much as ANTIFA groups have such rights
The Confederate Battle flag is not about race at all
It is a symbol of protest against governmental tyranny
Which men who the majority of never owned slaves which died with more integrity than all of these worthless people who are unwilling to understand
In ending I DO NOT CAIR !!!
Angemon says
“More inclusive”? You’re the exclusionary one, actively trying to wipe out the existence of a minority of people – people for whom the Confederate flag doesn’t mean what you claim it does. What a bigot!
somehistory says
Some years ago, the Supreme Court ruled that burning the American flag was a form of “speech” and could not be banned or punished. Why have they not decided that flying the Confederate flag is also a form of “speech” and protected by the same Constitutional ‘right’?
The more protests there are against flying or displaying the Confederate flag, the more those who wish to fly or display it will attempt to do so…and they should be accorded that “right.”
The Government is supposed to protect the “rights” guaranteed in the Constitution, even if the ones making use of the “rights” at any particular time are being obnoxious in the eyes of other people, as long as no laws are being broken. Just flying a Confederate flag is not unlawful.
However, cair and its members are a part of the mb…a terror group for islam…and their goal is to overthrow the Constitution of the U.S. They should be investigated and whatever parts of the RICO Act that can be used against them, should be. Un-indicted co-conspiritors….means they are “co-conspiritors” …engaging in a conspiracy with the ones who were “indicted”…and should be indicted and brought to trial.
And since they say they are a “civil-rights org,” they could be, and should be, outlawed and banned as an org of conspiritors. The stated conspiracy…in the notes from the mb found in investigation that led some of them to prison…is to take over the country for islam…which is a crime, whichever way it is turned.
The mb, which includes cair, has the intention of overthrowing the lawful government and replacing the Constitution with their lawless, evil code of islam. This would mean no more Bill of Rights and freedoms and the enforcement of the evil religion of islam on every person in the country.
If a freight train loaded with chlorine gas is running amok…”out of control”… and no brakes are applied, great damage will be done. If cair and the mb are not stopped…how much damage will they do to the people they want to rule and control and from whom they are trying to force submission? Every thing they do and say is in furtherance of that goal.
CRUSADER says
Destroying the USA ?? flag is a hate crime, essentially.
Can hate be a matter of free speech?
CRUSADER says
Destroying the USA ?? flag is a hate crime, essentially.
Can hate be a matter of free speech?
Lu says
“They should be investigated and whatever parts of the RICO Act that can be used against them …”
One can’t avoid thinking about McCarthy and the times this country opposed communism by all means.
Hmm.
WPM says
Will CAIR loudly denounce slavery that goes on in the Islamic world in some Moslem majority countries today as loudly they denounce a symbol of slavery that over 300,000 Americans died fighting a war over 150 years ago? Will CAIR admit that Mohammad was a slave holding racist who words they still follow to the letter of the law as far as slavery and Islamic Sharia law endorses today ? Will CAIR admit that Christians, Jews and others are equal human beings with equal rights to Moslems?” What “positive results” has CAIR put to accepting when they endorse terror groups ,that in word and deed they refused to condemn slavery and terrorism in the Islamic world today? The Islamic slave trade was started before America was founded it is still alive 1400 years later as an institution of Islam,Americas slave trade was only around for about 350 years it ended over 150 years ago ,it was not even accepted in most of America during its time as an institution in most states north of the Mason Dixon line. How many Moslems have died fighting trying to free non-Moslems from the bonds of slavery in any Moslem majority ruled country??
gravenimage says
Fine post.
Kepha says
@WPM: An excellent obervation.
Whenever I see or hear news of slave markets in Libya or Mauretania, I always remember that stupid mantra of the Silly ‘Sixties and SIllier ‘Seventies about “the pride and dignity that Islam brings to the black man…” My own father, who got called a Communist because he stood up for black people when he was a young man in Chicago (he was actually a business-oriented Republican), also used to scoff at the pro-Islam fashion among Civil Rights advocates back then.
The fact that Islam sees all non-Muslim regions as the House of War, potential targets of jihad, and their peoples potentially enslaveable is one reason why I see Islam as pernicious. As for those who love to point out how Christian powers engages in the African slave trade and blame Christianity for it, I cannot help but note that the Christian powers that pioneered the business were Spain and Portugal, two European countries that had just come out from under 7 centuries of Islamic rule and models of how to deal with subjected peoples. Someone once noted the similarity of the regime imposed on Indians and blacks in Spanish and Portuguese colonies (which exempted a few allies, such as the Tlaxcaltecs), which provided a model for the black codes in the southern USA, to Islamic rules on the treatment of Dhimmi
CRUSADER says
Cassius Clay Jr moved to Chicago to be close to the NOI.
Disgraceful!
How the devil has dwelled in the White City !
Capone
Farrakhan
Alinsky
Clinton
MObama
CRUSADER says
Nix.
CAIR couldn’t care less!
CAIR will push for advocating special protections for Muslims and push to have laws silence critics of Islam, even if the critics just point out the obvious which CAIR sidesteps and obfuscates daily!
livingengine says
CAIR and the White Supremacists
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTR7ZTGA1yk
CRUSADER says
Could the X be seen by extreme muzzies as an offensive cross?
Look at this definition for “kike” and notice what it describes….
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kike
The word kike was born on Ellis Island when there were Jewish migrants who were also illiterate (or could not use Latin alphabet letters). When asked to sign the entry-forms with the customary “X”, the Jewish immigrants would refuse, because they associated an X with the cross of Christianity. Instead, they drew a circle as the signature on the entry-forms. The Yiddish word for “circle” is kikel (pronounced KY – kel), and for “little circle”, kikeleh. Before long the immigration inspectors were calling anyone who signed with an ‘O’ instead of an ‘X’ a kikel or kikeleh or kikee or, finally and succinctly, kike.”
Kirsten Dunn says
Unfortunately no one takes the initiative to learn the truth and facts regarding the Confederate or the Union’s stances on what was truly going on during the time period. As a Northerner I am disgusted at the fact we are so pompous and arrogant to think we need to run the entire country. The South had their own beliefs and ways that the north wouldn’t allow themselves to comprehend nor respect. The Civil War was not over slavery (again do your homework) it was the north not having any clue what/how the South operated. The Emancipation Proclamation was only written to screw the British because they were supplying the South with arms in trade for cotton. Which I’d you haven’t figured the slaves picked. It wasn’t to free the slaves, only to f the British. The British had previously ended slavery in their countries and they had also gone after reparations. Interestingly enough the ones to receive payment for reparations were….the slave owners! Oh yes, I said it!! It was a way of life. Does anyone even ask the question as to show sold the slaves in the first place? The first person in the U.S. to own a slave was an African American. There have been slaves of every race in every country on this globe. Are we going to go as far as to destroy the Egyptian Pyrramids because they were built by slaves? There were more Irish slaves than any other…the Chinese slaves built the railroads in this wonderful country we live in. The Native Americans were screwed over the most, but no one is sticking their neck out for them! It is part of our American history. Teach your children the actual history not what society is breeding into you and the wonderful f-ing media is feeding you. Think for yourselves! Please, do us alll a favor, learn your history…and don’t let it repeat itself!
somehistory says
Kirsten Dunn
What you wrote is correct. Many deny it, and repeat the claims of it being all about slavery…tho slavery existed in the North too. The South was prospering and some in the North didn’t like that, so war was the answer for them. Lies were told and repeated.
Just as lies are being told and repeated today. cair is using this issue of the flag to make trouble…two of its supporters…omar and tlaib…are using lies about this country’s treatment of moslims and Israel’s treatment of its moslim citizens in a similar way. They are hoping to incite a civil war in order to affect the changes they want.
People need to recognize the lies for what they are; and realize why so many are being told and repeated endlessly.
Vann Boseman says
In almost every case I support Robert Spencer fully even contributing hundreds of dollars to his efforts over the past few years and plan on continuing to do so in the future. I support him because he reveals radical Islamic terrorism well on a daily basis using obviously well checked sources to comment and monitor Islamic jihad throughout the world. He seems to me to be an inexhaustible genius. Even on this subject I totally agree with his view, though basing his view on the words of Abraham Lincoln was disappointing. In the past I disagreed with Spencer’s interpretation of Northern opposition to his presidency. But this time, totally supported by mainstream historians, he largely distorts history in the complete article on PJ Media that relies on Lincoln. Here he drinks deeper from the “Church of Lincoln” kool-aid than previously.
Whether or not Lincoln was actually religious or Christian is debated ongoing. It was disingenuous of Spencer to point to religiously charged political statements by Lincoln to make his point in that by doing this he is painting a picture of Lincoln as certainly a religious man whose views concerning religion should be considered due to his “integrity.”
Some people believe that Lincoln always believed that slavery in the South should be abolished even though there is tremendous evidence that this is wrong. Most people believe that Lincoln believed Lincoln believed in abolishing the institution of slavery for reasons other than a political strategy around the time of the Emancipation Proclamation, even though there is considerable evidence that his reasoning was precisely a part of a military strategy and was a reflection of nothing else. Certainly after the Emancipation Proclamation, Lincoln made all sorts of public statements like Spencer mentioned causing many to believe that Lincoln had a change of heart somewhere along the way. However, there is evidence that this was political maneuvering showing that Lincoln appreciated that he would have to follow the logical precipitants of the Emancipation Proclamation regardless of what he thought would be the best interest of the United States. Spencer was not representing an open and honest view of history when he merely implies that Lincoln invaded the South to end slavery.
While slavery was the main reason (The issue is actually very complicated involving both Northern and Southern financial interests in slavery.) that the deep South seceded, it was absolutely not the main reason that Southerners fought the Civil War, or the reason that 52% of the Southern population in the states that seceded after Lincoln invaded sovereign states of the South.
Spencer may have been right or partially right in claiming that Lincoln’s “malice towards none” and “charity towards all” statement may have affected the views of some in the US government, Andrew Johnson comes to mind. Overall though, the South was crushed, starved, and disenfranchised after the Civil War. An open minded view of Lincoln’s policies of reconstruction during the war in Louisiana reveals malice towards most and charity for the conquering Northern military. Still, many, including myself, believe that Lincoln would have led at least a less hostile post war rape the vanquished party. Lincoln, after all, was more Southern than Northern in many ways.
The statues grew out of a non-governmental appreciation for the honor and bravery of those who fought on both sides. In 1868 women began to place flowers on the graves of Northern and Southern veterans’ graves in an event known as Decoration Day. Later, this was changed to Memorial Day. Also later, mostly in the early twentieth century, groups of veterans from the Union and Southern armies began meeting in acknowledgement of the same sort of appreciation. It was in this spirit that grass roots support led to the erection of statues to Union and Southern leaders.
CRUSADER says
It likely has to be remembered — in weighing our US $5 bill — that Lincoln could inspiringly quote from Scripture, told many morality and allegorical stories, was a physically ill man, suffered through many tragedies, held to a platform of abolition, and saw so much carnage as well as living through near misses on his life, and so — that for him to be assessed as being any less religious than he is esteemed to be seems rather disingenuous!
Vann Boseman says
@CRUSADER It is true that Lincoln could inspiringly quote from scripture, though he did not do it as often as believed. There is no documentation that Lincoln ever became a Christian. Lincoln was never a member of a church. Lincoln rarely ever went to a church. Neither is there much evidence that Lincoln was a religious man, but just did not attend a church. Much of Lincoln’s spirituality was manufactured after he died as quotes from him began to appear.
“If I have a chance to hit that thing (slavery), I’ll hit it hard.” He never said it.
Some say he became a Christian after viewing the graves at Gettysburg. He is quoted as saying, “I then and there consecrated myself to Christ. I do love Jesus!” He never said it.
“I have never known a worthwhile man who was too big for his boots or his bible.” He never said it.
“God must have loved the common people, he made so many of them.” He never said it.
“Know there is a God and that He hates injustice and slavery.” He never said it.
Lincoln threatened the South with the Emancipation Proclamation months as an ultimatum. He made good his threat. That does not mean that he was a good or religious person. He held a platform of Emancipation as a military strategy. There is no documentation that it was anything more than that for Lincoln.
Many people now and throughout history have seen tremendous carnage, suffered many tragedies, been physically ill, and suffered near misses on their lives. Sometimes people are drawn to a strong religious belief because of these things. Sometimes people are repelled by these circumstances complaining that if there was a God, then how could He allow such things to happen. Some people do not bother to think about religion regardless of events in their lives. If people speak of their beliefs and their reasoning about belief or disbelief, then that is their story to tell. It is not for me to create their story for them.
I do not insult Lincoln or others by making him to be something he was not. If you want to ascribe religious belief to Lincoln, your best bet would be to speak of his religious devotion to preserving the union of the United States. He was willing and able to preside of the slaughter of many thousands of people ruining the lives of many more to pursue this goal while turning his back on his oath of office to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution. He was a traitor to the Constitution and the American people of the highest magnitude. If he propped up his unionism with belief in a religion, then that would not change my view of him. The truth as I see it is that he was not a very religious person even if on occasion he would politically posture to impress those who do not examine the actions he took and did not take in his life.
gravenimage says
Kirsten Dunn wrote:
Unfortunately no one takes the initiative to learn the truth and facts regarding the Confederate or the Union’s stances on what was truly going on during the time period.
……………………….
Actually, slavery–the Mason-Dixon Line, the Missouri Comprise, and what states and territories, including Kansas and California would be slave or free consumed the country in the 1850s. The claim sometimes heard today that the Civil War had nothing to do with slavery is simply revisionist history.
More:
As a Northerner I am disgusted at the fact we are so pompous and arrogant to think we need to run the entire country.
……………………….
Is opposing slavery “arrogant”? Do you believe that opposing Muslim slavery is “arrogant”?
More:
wouldn’t allow themselves to comprehend nor respect. The Civil War was not over slavery (again do your homework) it was the north not having any clue what/how the South operated. The Emancipation Proclamation was only written to screw the British because they were supplying the South with arms in trade for cotton. Which I’d you haven’t figured the slaves picked. It wasn’t to free the slaves, only to f the British.
……………………….
There was a huge abolitionist movement in the United States, that had worked for decades to get slaves to freedom. The idea that this was all about “f the British” is simply absurd.
More:
The British had previously ended slavery in their countries
……………………….
Do you believe that the British ended slavery to “f the British”, as well?
More:
and they had also gone after reparations. Interestingly enough the ones to receive payment for reparations were….the slave owners! Oh yes, I said it!! It was a way of life.
……………………….
Running a whore house is a way of life. Gun running to Jihadists is a way of life.
The idea that if something is a way of life–including enslaving your fellow human beings–it is ergo a good thing is just grotesque. What are you even doing here at Jihad Watch if you have no moral sense?
More:
Does anyone even ask the question as to show sold the slaves in the first place? The first person in the U.S. to own a slave was an African American. There have been slaves of every race in every country on this globe. Are we going to go as far as to destroy the Egyptian Pyrramids because they were built by slaves? There were more Irish slaves than any other…the Chinese slaves built the railroads in this wonderful country we live in. The Native Americans were screwed over the most, but no one is sticking their neck out for them! It is part of our American history. Teach your children the actual history not what society is breeding into you and the wonderful f-ing media is feeding you. Think for yourselves! Please, do us alll a favor, learn your history…and don’t let it repeat itself!
……………………….
The United States wrestled with the moral implications of slavery from the beginning–many of the founding fathers realized that slavery was incompatible with the liberty we so cherished. The idea that we should be just as bad as previous societies was *not* something the United States wanted to passively accept.
It seems that you are the one who is quite ignorant of history.
ntesdorf says
Let us remember that Mohammed is described as a “white man”:
From the Hadith:
“While we were sitting with the Prophet in the mosque, a man came riding on a camel. He made his camel kneel down in the mosque, tied its foreleg and then said: “Who amongst you is Muhammad?” At that time the Prophet was sitting amongst us (his companions) leaning on his arm. We replied, “This white man reclining on his arm.” The man then addressed him, “O Son of ‘Abdul Muttalib.”
Volume 1, Book 3, Number 63. Narrated Anas bin Malik:
Muhammad also owned black slaves:
From the Hadith:
“I came and behold, Allah’s Apostle was staying on a Mashroba (attic room) and a black slave of Allah’s Apostle was at the top if its stairs. I said to him, “(Tell the Prophet) that here is ‘Umar bin Al-Khattab (asking for permission to enter).” Then he admitted me.
Volume 9, Book 91, Number 368. Narrated ‘Umar:
Muhammad also referred to Ethiopians as ‘raisin heads’:
Narrated Anas bin Malik:
Allah’s Apostle said, “You should listen to and obey, your ruler even if he was an Ethiopian (black) slave whose head looks like a raisin.” (Sahih Bukhari Volume 9, Book 89, Number 256)
It sounds as if Muhammad would have fitted in nicely in the old KKK.
Raven says
Preach!
CRUSADER says
Veritas.
gravenimage says
Why Does CAIR Want to Ban Sale of the Confederate Flag?
…………….
CAIR cares *nothing* for civil rights.
Travis Bradley says
Sounds like a racist loser
Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY) says
For a National Communications Director, Ibrahim Hooper is remarkably uncommunicative about the size of CAIR. Just ask him politely for evidence that CAIR is, as it claims, “the nation’s largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization”. You will see how prickly he can get. It seems that he is being shunted aside in the CAIR hierarchy; he hasn’t been allows to publish one of his Action Alerts on the CAIR website’s front page since July 19 of last year. Is the strain driving him to apostasy? He proclaims, “Symbols glorifying and honoring white supremacy, slavery and treason should be repudiated by all Americans.” He’s anti-slavery? Does he really disagree with Allah’s opinion about the propriety of possession by the right hand?
Pray for Honest Ibe.
SamB says
The Confederate Flag is non of my business, but when a bigoted group calls another group racists and bigoted we ought to wonder why in their dichotomous thinking is one group more racists\bigoted than the other? Truthfully, CAIR is super bigoted as it is concerned with Muslim affairs and its Americaness is a by-product of living in America.Moreover, CAIR’s raison d’etre is purposefully centered around an Islamic agenda. The American liberties extended to all citizens is only a means to an end. One wonders which Islam is America going to support when it is there- Shi’a or Sunni?
CRUSADER says
CAIRful strategy to divide and rule over minds….
If they can make an accusation stick, they’ll do so…
If it helps further their cause to spread their dread, they will do so…
Following playbook of the Muslim Brotherhood project for North America….
Jamāʿat al-Ikhwān al-Muslimīn = Society of Muslim Brothers
CRUSADER says
Shia Islam in the Americas…
The Islamic Center of America, the largest mosque in the United States, located in Dearborn, Michigan.
Around the world are living over 200 million Shia Muslims, who make up 10% of all Muslims.
Nearly 786,000 Shia Muslims situated in United States.
American Shia Muslim community has many activities and founded several organization such as Islamic Center of America and North American Shia Ithna-Asheri Muslim Communities Organization (NASIMCO).
gravenimage says
Overall, the Shia are as savage as are the Sunni, and have the same vicious goals as their more orthodox coreligionists.
Kerry Wade says
I must remember to purchase a Confederate flag, perhaps Amazon sell them! And anyway Lincoln stated he would have invaded the South even if there were no slaves, what a monumental hypocrite. No wonder he knew he would die in office for all the deaths he was responsible for.
gravenimage says
Wait–so you are *in favor* of assassinating those who abolish slavery? Good lord.
Kerry Wade says
They didn’t abolish slavery, it was ongoing in the north of America while the south was forced into the Union. And no I don’t favour slavery, but I do detest hypocrites.
gravenimage says
The Emancipation Proclamation did indeed end slavery in the United States, Your belief that this only ended it in the South and that slavery somehow continued in the free North makes no sense.
George Valdez says
Seems as if who ever gets
granted the privilege to move to the greatest country in the world………
WANTS TO CHANGE IT !!!!!!!!!
TRUMP AND PENCE
MAKE. SENCE
Leave it alone
People need to learn there history
Confederate flag.
Was about tariff
Quit craying about poor meeeee
Battle says
CAIR is traitors. CAIR is racists.
Islam man holding Koran thumped, “Show me in this book where it says to invade the United States?”
Lt Col West told thumper, “I have been on the battlefield.” “I have been on the battlefield.”
“Don’t stand there and blow sunshine up my ass then tell me its raining.”
csamagdalen says
I have dealt with CAIR now twice with regard to Confederate displays. They understand that people who are pro-Confederate tend to be Christian and conservative. Most of us have family who served the Confederacy, and often we have Revolutionary ancestors as well. The South has always sent more than its share of warriors to fight in American wars. We are the most likely to invest the term “sacred honor” as one with meaning and worth dying for. That’s why they want us out. Further, the campaign against Southern culture is but an opening salvo for what is intended against America at large – so those who are being organized to help them now would presumably help them later. And finally, there are deep ties between CAIR’s interests and Democrat Party interests, who profit from this race-baiting and lies concerning American history. It’s maddening, this hypocrisy which condemns one group for alleged racial and slave-owning sins by another group whose racial and slave-owning sins continue to this day and dwarf anything done in North America.
gravenimage says
I also know some anti-tax Libertarian-leaning folks from far northern California who use the Confederate flag as a symbol.
gravenimage says
Here is a good
gravenimage says
Not sure why this posted prematurely–here is a good article on how slavery was *not* good for the United States, or anywhere else:
“America Was Made Poorer Because Of Slavery”
https://www.capitalismmagazine.com/2019/08/america-was-made-poorer-because-of-slavery/
Slavery was not “the building block of the American economy” as the anti-capitalists behind the so-called “New History” of Capitalism allege. America was made poorer because of slavery.
Vann Boseman says
gravenimage Overall this was an excellent article building a decisive utilitarian/economics based argument against the notion that slavery made the American economy richer. Making such a case is so important that I sought to make a case against that slavery was a net loss for America in my chapter of the book I am associated with against Islamic jihad.
On reflection, I perhaps threw the baby out with the bath water in condemning Time Upon the Cross. Parts of Time Upon the Cross were every bit as horrible as I and most established economists of the time believed it to be however.
The article would have been better if it engaged more than the utilitarian approach to me. There is considerable religious reason to claim that slavery made America poorer for religious and specifically Christian reasons. There is considerable reason to claim that slavery made America poorer considering natural law and natural rights regardless of and acknowledgement of those laws and rights being endowed by a creator. A mention of the slow rise of laws prohibiting manumission until the 1850s would have helped the paper in its one sided utilitiarian view, but begged a religious and natural rights argument as well. However, I was really glad that the author pointed out the existence of conscripted slave patrols. (Slavery is always a bad thing, whether instituted against whites or blacks.)
The article was wrong in portraying non-slave holding white Southerners as mostly landless, poor, and illiterate. Mass literacy was a thing. The ability to read was greatly valued in the antebellum South and learning to read was pursued in spite of the near universal lack of public education. Antebellum Southern society was complex and weird (The weirdness grew out of the honor codes of all classes of Southern society which were all extremely complex in comparison to Northern honor codes.). You could be rich and of a lower class. You could be rich, lose everything, and still be a member of the aristocracy, get invites to the parties, and get handouts from more fortunate members of the aristocracy.
A fluid economic structure allowed for a non-slave holding white man to become a slave holding plantation owner with many slaves and then through poor decisions lose it all. This is a part of how the sleazy left wing historians try to make the argument that way over 5% of Southerners owned slaves, sometimes inflating the percentage to from 20% to as high as 40%. For these historians, if a Southerner ever owned slaves, then he was a slave owner. If you were in a family that owned slaves, then these historians included you as a slave holder for life. Such generalizations are wrong and never mentioned. (google Grimke sisters). Also, many non-slave holding Southerners owned farms and were able to live out respectable financially modest lives.
Generalizations, if generally correct, are useful in discussing the antebellum South in that it would be hard to discuss the South without using generalizations. This works as long as you remember that the South was complex and that there were always exceptions. Consider that an act of a Southern state legislature once declared that a racially black person to be a white person. Consider Uncle Ben of Uncle Ben’s rice fame who owned a plantation in the sovereign state of Texas with many slaves and was a black man. Most people today, if they found themselves in the antebellum South and assumed that black slavery in the South constituted the only main difference between the antebellum South and modern society would soon experience being shot, assaulted, or imprisoned. Honor, class, and financial standing came together in a way that would be totally alien to any modern American. It is difficult to understand, but it is easy make generalizations and lie counting on moderns to adopt presentism.
The aristocracy tended to have control over their legislatures which did tend to seek to improve the lot of the Southern plantation owners at the expense of everyone else. Still, the antebellum South retained a complex social and financial structure.
Angemon says
“Not sure why this posted prematurely”
I suspect that, when you went to press the “a” key, you might have inadvertently hit the tab key, changing the focus from the “reply” text box into the “Post comment” button. Thus, when you pressed the spacebar, it was as if you clicked the “post comment” button.