The data on this video is UNCONFIRMED.
A Charolottesville PD officer accuses the leftist Mayor of Charlottesville of setting up the violent confrontation between left and right and prevented LE from doing their jobs - he should be investigated and if these accusations prove true charged with aiding and abetting a riot, conspiracy to start a riot, wrongful death of a participant, etc.
"This kind of setup confrontation/crises is right out of Alynsky's Rules for Radicals and will continue if the DOJ doesn't nip this in bud NOW!"
#1
The narrative in this posting is not my own but that of the retired Federal Judge who sent it to me. As stated, the data in the actual video is unconfirmed.
[CaptainsJournal] For those who say the Civil (sic) War was “all about slavery”, I like to point out that slaves in the South were “identified as free” by the Emancipation Proclamation — issued two years after a war that was “all about slavery” started — but weren’t actually free because there were no blue-clad troops to spring them. Slaves in DC were freed by ordinance in 1864. Slaves elsewhere had to wait until the 13th amendment in December 1865, 8 months after a war that was all about slavery ended. It appears the DC politicians didn’t get the memo about the war being all about slavery, and Lincoln, himself, didn’t realize it for two whole years.
The Emancipation Proclamation, America’s first major PR effort, was (much more likely) a ploy to “make the war about slavery” which would operate to bring lots of Northern abolitionists down to the recruiting stations. This, in turn, would beef up the ranks of the Union army which was then getting its clock cleaned.
Had Lincoln been keen to erase slavery, he could have done it far cheaper than ruining the South’s economy and threatening the North’s — at a cost of 620,000 dead — had he done it the way the Brits had 30 years prior; he certainly had to know about that. The Brits outlawed slavery, then bought out all the slaveholders for cash. It was a good deal for anyone who could see the onrushing Industrial Revolution, an event which would, in short order, make human chattel slavery an economic dead-end.
But Lincoln was not keen to empower the South with such a scheme. Lincoln wanted to OWN the South. The tariffs had done that. If the South rendered itself immune to the tariffs, the Northern economy would crash. This could not be allowed to happen. It is related that one reporter asked Lincoln “Why not just let them depart?” and Lincoln’s answer was “Then who would pay for the government?” That was Lincoln’s (and the North’s) motive.
Foreign newspapers of the day, Corriere della Sera, Le Monde, The Times of London, and others, universally saw the conflict as economic and not connected to slavery. As disinterested spectators, their views are telling. Read the whole thing
#1
Oh come-on, slave based economy can't coexist with industrial economy - therefore the war. As to what England did - they could enforce it. Not the situation in USA.
#2
Indeed. As the "industrial revolution" gathered steam (so to speak), it ultimately would have made human labor (slavery, indentured servants, etc.) more expensive, and slavery probably would have died a natural death.
Except for a deadly slave revolt in Haiti (if memory serves me right), there were no "wars to free the slaves" in any of the many countries which engaged in slavery.
Lincoln was a piece of trash and a war criminal and would have hung in Nuremberg had he been on the losing side (along side Sherman).
#3
The cost of buying the slaves was too high to be brought, there were four million slaves worth close to $3 billion plus there would be a huge compensation bill.
#4
On August 25, 2017 at 1:06 pm, Herschel Smith said: It’s easy to onfuse the various manifestations of rejection of centralized control that we may look at as important because of the theatric value of those examples, with what’s really important and what I tried to focus on, i.e., the cultural, theological and philosophical underpinnings of the split.
Agree with Smith or not, ever notice how the conflict postmortems are usually written by the victor with lists of 'righteous causes' provided as the origins of the conflict ?
#5
Personally, I believe that the South operated on the belief of having a monopoly on military prowess. The way things were supposed to go is that - after a few humiliating defeats - Lincoln is impeached, and a new Union - one where South remains dominant for ever - is negotiated. Kinda like the situation today with ideological superiority taking the place of military prowess.
#7
Just pay attention to what the real participants (including the governments of the seceding states) had to say (in writing) about the causes. All of the participants. Tell the whole story and don't cherry-pick to suit your agenda. There are plenty of written records.
#8
2 cents worth. Most wars are about bankers and banking if you dig deep enough. Slavery had been on its way out when the Civil War began. Abolitionists had been pushing for some time for the abolishment of slavery. Some slave owners actually treated their slaves quite well while others did not.
I find it interesting and curious that some free blacks were both slave owners and slave traders. For them slavery must have been, to an extent, about making a buck and less about ideology.
Slavery is prevalent in the world today but it seems as if there is far more concern for the slavery some 150 years ago than there is today.
#10
How and why did the civil war start?
The background is as follows:
The large slaveholders, many the descendants of the supporters of King Charles in the English civil war back in the 1600s, were the elite in the south who held political power.
Slaves were extremely valuable, with sales prices on the order of a thousand dollars each which corresponds to hundreds of thousand dollars each in today's money. One of the major sources of income on plantations was raising slaves, and selling or renting them out.
However, they were so successful at this, by the 1850s they started worrying about there being an oversupply of slaves. This would lower their value. In consequence they made an strong effort to extend slavery to new territories, such as Kansas. They were also concerned that immigrants tended to settle in the north, in part because they did not want to have to compete with slave labor in the South. The southern economic system was like a closed union shop, in which the union members were slaves, and that was not so appealing to immigrants who wanted to succeed by their own efforts in an open society. As a result the northern and western populations grew much more rapidly than the southern population did.
The Democratic party was controlled by the southern elite leadership and it controlled the national government until March of 1861.
The southern leaders looked to the future and saw doom for their way of life, with too many slaves and too small a population to maintain control of the national government. They instigated Secession, which most of their citizens opposed, but most were won over by later events. By the end of the pro-south Buchanan adminstration most southern states had seceded from the union. The north was divided between democrats who had been allies of the southern democrats, and the new republican party. There was confusion and no consensus in the north about what to do about secession.
However, the southern leaders decided to attack the government occupied fort sumpter in Charleston harbor SC. This action enraged most northerners, who flocked to the colors to oppose this aggression.
This in turn caused states like Virginia, which had not even voted for the Southern Democrats in 1860 to join the Confederacy.
Having controlled the national government until March 1861 the Southerners were much better prepared for war than the northerners were. They won some battles, particularly in the East, but, in the Fall of 1862 were defeated in an attempt to invade the north at the battle of Antietam, the bloodiest single days battle of the war. After that battle, General MacClellan, who won it, suggested to Lincoln that the victory gave L the opportunity to make a public statement,about war aims.
Lincoln , perhaps in response, issued the Emancipation Proclamation. Before then, while some generals had attempted to free slaves, official union policy was to do nothing to interfere with slavery, (in part to discourage secession by Missouri and Kentucky.)
Thus the war was indirectly about slavery. But the average supporter of secession in the south was not a slave owner, and many were not even admirers of slavery. Their support came from loyalty to their states. There were also people throughout the south who supported the union, particularly in east tennessee west virginia and among the german immigrants to texas.
Thus while the future of slavery was probably the major motivation for secession, the war was about succession and physical attacks on US government facilitiesm and conflicting loyalties to states and to the union.
Posted by: Daniel ||
08/27/2017 13:59 Comments ||
Top||
[TheZMan] “When you strike at a king, you must kill him” is a famous expression by Ralph Waldo Emerson. We’re all familiar with it and its meaning. When you challenge authority, you better win, as authority cannot tolerate challenges. It’s why the people in charge are so ruthless in dealing with challenges to their power. They instinctively know that to do otherwise means being displaced. In all probability, they got to where they are by subverting or knocking off their predecessor.
That’s what we see going on with the Trump administration. The rules of the game, as designed by the political class, were supposed to prevent a guy like Trump from winning the Presidency. Instead, both parties would hire approved actors to put on a show, pretending to be bitter rivals. The voters would re-enact these mock battles among themselves, getting into arguments on-line and with friends. Then one candidate would “win”, pick a staff from the political class, and the party would keep going.
Trump was supposed to have his vanity run, then bow out in the primary, before he became too much of a distraction. The political class was so sure this would be the case, they never bothered to address Trump until it was too late. They thought they had it gamed out in the general election, but then those idiot voters did the wrong thing and voted for the wrong candidate. This challenge cannot stand, which is why they have been going berserk. The threat must be addressed, by any means necessary.
Continued on Page 49
[Robert Lewis' blog] My last post expressed concern about the possibility our intelligence services might seek to unduly influence British elections, and since then it has transpired that a former SIS officer, and a few of his former SIS colleagues, sought to do precisely that to the last US Presidential election. Months before the vote, Christopher Steele was privately touting a now notorious dossier of entirely fictional Trump allegations supplied to him (so Steele claimed) by impeccable sources in Russian intelligence. The finer details of this episode are unclear to me, but what I find particularly interesting is the light it casts on an aspect of the Hutton Inquiry, which was held (14 years ago now) to examine "the circumstances surrounding the death of David Kelly".
I have no idea if Christopher Steele and David Kelly ever met, although considering Steele was working under diplomatic cover in Moscow while Kelly toured the country as part of a secret biowarfare inspection team, I think it’s safe to say they may well have done. Although they both relied on obviously unreliable humint to draft dodgy dossiers, no working relationship suggests itself. What I am more interested in is Christopher Steele’s current whereabouts.
After Steele was named as the originator of this dossier the press were at his family home within hours. The exact process by which he was identified, and his home tracked down, is also unclear, but by the time the journalists arrived, he had gone. According to reports, Steele and his family had left the night before. They had dropped their three cats off with a neighbour for safekeeping, and without saying where they were going, they disappeared in such a hurry that they left all their lights on. Where they are now, nobody knows. Every single mainstream media outlet has it that Steele’s family are in a safe house some where, and "security sources" (whoever they might be) are briefing journos to this effect.
#1
>Every single mainstream media outlet has it that Steele’s family are in a safe house some where, and "security sources" (whoever they might be) are briefing journos to this effect.
i.e. the spook wasn't as ex as claimed. The 5eyes has turned into an illegal establishment protection run by deep state sinecurists.
#5
I know Steele is a Brit but the last comment was intended. Moreover, if our intelligence agencies were doing their jobs, they might have the time to address our enemies foreign and domestic instead of colluding with them.
[American Thinker] When North Korea’s military publicly announced plans for a mid-August launch of four intermediate ballistic missiles near the U.S. Pacific territory of Guam, President Donald Trump quickly responded. He famously told reporters that "fire and fury" would be the likely response to any North Korean provocation. A follow-up Presidential tweet on August 11th proclaimed that the U.S. military was "locked and loaded should North Korea act unwisely." Western media again then immediately focused attention on the unpredictability of the "paranoid guy" Kim Jong-un.
#1
How many meaningless Chinese political overtures and Russian Bear bombers approaching South Korean air space are required before someone acknowledges the proxy nature of this situation.
[Newsweek] Donald Trump is being undermined by White House insiders who would rather have worked for Hillary Clinton, according to former deputy assistant to the president Sebastian Gorka.
Gorka, who disputed reports he was asked to leave his role and insisted he resigned shortly after the departure of Steve Bannon, slammed West Wing insiders in an interview with Radio 4 on Sunday.
"Hopefully everybody who followed the campaign of Donald J Trump understood that he won against immense odds. Our victory was an insurgency that took over the behemoth that is the swamp that is the Washington administrative state. It was a hostile takeover. Right now the forces that are un-Trumpian are in ascendance. I put that in my letter to the president, but that will change," Gorka told presenter Paddy O’Connell.
A nibble:
[Spectator] There she goes again, reporting for duty. And here we thought she was safely squirreled away at a nunnery. No such luck. But even she should admit she makes her own luck, and in certain matters her luck was her own doing, or undoing, as history will have it. So the real question is: Who leaked those lascivious 2005 NBC Apprentice tapes last October? Who signed off on their release at a key moment in the presidential campaign, their purpose being to apply the coup de grace to the staggering Trump campaign?
According to all the Russian hackers we know, there was only one person in the entire universe who could have given the nod. We know her as Hillary. The hackers call her Gillary, there being no "h" in the Russian language. Yet one more thing to cause her skin to crawl and to blame it all on Putin once she finds some safe space of her own in which to do so. Trump luckily doesn’t drink. If it had been Putin literally breathing down her neck, we’d be hearing insights into the stench of vodka breath. Poor Hill, always victimized by her own incompetence.
#3
"Gal" not "Gallery." I got this new Samsung Tab E and it has some AI built-in that anticipates what you mean and then types it. Just leave me alone to get drunk by myself without the AI making things worse.
Re Hillary, if "making your own luck," means you are universally disliked, then I'll go along with that. There is no "making-over" this womyn's image--it'simpossible.
#6
Skin is crawling when with DJT at the debate? Her body has become a host vessel for alien parasites who would take control of the Earth. When they emerge they crawl for awhile until they find a new host.
[ENGLISH.ALARABIYA.NET] Last week marked India’s 70th independence and "division" anniversary. India celebrated amid tensions on the borders between it and China. India protested on Bhutan’s behalf but China defied it and Bhutan kept silent. India’s economic boom did not hide the tensions in Kashmire as the situation there is dangerous now that people’s struggle shifted from calling for freedom to calling for "an Islamic caliphate." This has worsened divisions between holy warrior Kashmiri groups and violence may escalate in the future between "the brothers in terrorism."
It seems the situation there may lead to the return of al-Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent which is looking forward to have a foothold in Kashmire and in India later as there are close interests between al-Qaeda and Kashmiri local groups that support an Islamic caliphate in Kashmire.
In June, al-Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent issued a "code of conduct" for its followers and called on other jihadist groups to vow loyalty to the Islamic State
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Fred ||
08/27/2017 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under: al-Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent
#1
I'll bet the holy warriors turn on paks once India gets it's Trump style wall up (already got one with Bangladesh).
#3
When I read articles with words "tensions" and "divisions" my mind goes dull. All I want to hear is who is occupying what territory or moving to do so and in what strength and order of battle. And most importantly: led by whom?
[DAWN] WALKING a tightrope is not for the fainthearted: sooner or later, a gust of wind can threaten your balance.
Ever since the Americans attacked and occupied Afghanistan in 2001, Pakistain has teetered on the edge of Washington’s tolerance for what it sees as our double-faced policy of running with the hares and hunting with the hounds. Time and again, policymakers in Islamabad and GHQ have been exhorted publicly and privately to stop supporting and sheltering the Afghan Taliban ...the Pashtun equivalent of men... and the Haqqani network.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Fred ||
08/27/2017 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
[American Thinker] What on earth has happened to the moral and political sensibilities of Paul Ryan, John McCain, Jeff Flake, Jeb Bush, etc.? All of those RINOs who are attacking President Trump for pardoning Joe Arpaio are simpering, whining traitors to the party they allegedly represent. They should declare themselves Democrats and be done with the masquerade.
Perhaps they should remind themselves of all the criminals and thugs that President Obama pardoned, or that President Clinton pardoned. Trump made it clear at his rally in Phoenix that he was going to pardon the beleaguered sheriff. The audience there was thrilled, as were the millions of people watching on television, the citizens who want our immigration laws enforced. If there was ever anyone who deserved a pardon, along with Scooter Libby, it is Joe Arapio. This was a no-brainer! The man has enforced both federal and state laws for his entire career. Arpaio was found in contempt of court after a Clinton-appointed judge, Susan Bolton, ordered him to stop enforcing the law, detaining people he suspected (or knew) to be illegal immigrants. It was the judge who broke the law as so many of our activist judges have over the last decade. They do not want laws that protect our borders enforced. Such judges are traitors to the nation as well.
How have we come to the point at which the Republican leadership in Congress is so consistently on the wrong side of their stated principles? They have made common cause with the likes of the odious Sen. Chuck Schumer and the rest of the left. They despise Trump. That is clear to everyone. They intend to continue their sabotage of the president, even if it means they lose their majority, even if it means they contribute to the further takeover of the country by the totalitarian left. They are apparently just fine with the increasing restriction on free speech and the failure to identify Antifa and BLM as the terrorist groups they are. They seem to be fine with the criminal nonsense perpetrated by the Southern Poverty Law Center.
#4
Aside from giving Arpaio a break that he deserved, the pardon is a message to his people, that not cooperating with the inquision doesn't mean jail. Mueller, game on!
Posted by: ed in texas ||
08/27/2017 11:45 Comments ||
Top||
#5
It was the judge who broke the law as so many of our activist judges have over the last decade.
There's no evidence of prosecutorial or judicial misconduct in the Arpaio case.
Such judges are traitors to the nation as well.
The judge is not a "traitor to the nation". This entire piece is hyperbolic rubbish not worthy of the 'burg.
#8
newc, Obama's pardons were based on compassion, All the people he pardoned had done was things like murder, robbery, rape, and, in Bradley Manning's case, betray the United States. On the other hand, what Sheriff Arpaio had done was RACIST, and thus unforgivable. Of course the people had to melt down. /sarcasm
Posted by: Rambler in Virginia ||
08/27/2017 13:50 Comments ||
Top||
#9
What on earth has happened to the moral and political sensibilities of Paul Ryan, John McCain, Jeff Flake, Jeb Bush, etc.?
"American Thinker" hasn't done much thinking about this, has he?
Or is this one of those "Appeal to the better angels of their nature by professing shock at behavior that's been going on for decades" bits that the conservative commentariat like to engage in?
[The Hill] Over the past few months, we have finally entered the fully realized historical revisionism promised in George Orwell’s "1984," in which the motto, "Who controls the present controls the past. Who controls the past controls the future," was central to shaping the book’s dystopian world. In the book, history was continually being rewritten and re-promulgated to meet the political necessities of the moment. There was no history to be remembered, let alone lessons to be learned.
For all the talk of Trumpian bluster or exaggeration, there is only one group that seeks to systematically and violently achieve its goals here in the United States on a broad scale: the so-called "anti-facist" movement, now commonly called "Antifa." And the goal? It’s not "anti-facist" or "anti-racist" as they attempt to portray themselves. It’s the systematic elimination of free speech, free assembly, and free thought via any means necessary, including violent protest, the media and Orwellian revisionism.
It is the imposition of a perverse type of intolerance based on Marxist and Chinese communist values that, it turns out, is far more welcome and pervasive within the Democrat Party of Sens. Bernie Sanders (D-Vt.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) than neo-Nazis, the KKK and white supremacists are in the Republican Party. The gunman, James Hodgkinson, who shot Rep. Steve Scalise and four others in Alexandria was a habitual Antifa website visitor and advocate and Sanders volunteer. Even Democrat vice presidential candidate, Sen. Tim Kaine’s (D-Va.) son has been identified as an Antifa activist.
I came across it during my doctoral studies and after researching it, determined it to be the wellspring of our current problems.
The teaching of critical theory is a paradigm in post graduate studies. It is the birthplace of ethnic and gender studies and the breeding ground of black lives matters, antifa, and others. No coincidence as so many of the 60's radicals went into academia when the Viet Nam war ending and they didn't have an excuse to demonstrate.
I suggest all of my fellow rantburgers do some research on critical theory. Sun Tzu did say "know your enemy"
They'd be simple to deal with if they didn't have the backing of people who can take everything from you and throw you in prison(or shoot you with no fear of prosecution).
#9
re #3: Frank, as I understand it, Virginia law already makes wearing a mask at a demonstration a felony. In a sane world, the Virginia State Police would start by rounding up all the masked Antifa people.
Of course, we no longer live in a sane world. Gov. McAuliffe (spit) ordered the state police to stand down. And the mayor of Charlottsvile ordered the city police to stand down.
Posted by: Rambler in Virginia ||
08/27/2017 15:16 Comments ||
Top||
#10
trump fans should have freedom rallies in cities with conservative mayors and with harsh restrictions on violent protestors (hopefully with 8 year sentences). Antifa will no doubt manage to get themselves arrested and the problem will slowly resolve itself.
[Free Beacon] Two law professors have been condemned by University of Pennsylvania (UPenn) students, alumni, and faculty as bigots engaging in "racist and white supremacist discourse," after they wrote a nostalgic op-ed praising America's 1950s "bourgeois culture."
UPenn Professor Amy Wax and University of San Diego's Lawrence Alexander were slammed by a group of 54 UPenn doctoral students and alumni as "promoting hate and bigotry under the guise of ’intellectual debate'" in their piece titled, "Paying the price for breakdown of the country's bourgeois culture," published earlier this month by the Philadelphia Inquirer.
In it, they argued the "[1950s] culture laid out the script we all were supposed to follow: Get married before you have children and strive to stay married for their sake. Get the education you need for gainful employment, work hard, and avoid idleness. Go the extra mile for your employer or client. Be a patriot, ready to serve the country. Be neighborly, civic-minded, and charitable. Avoid coarse language in public. Be respectful of authority. Eschew substance abuse and crime."
They conceded that there was "racial discrimination, limited sex roles, and pockets of anti-Semitism," but insisted that the modern "loss of bourgeois habits seriously impeded the progress of disadvantaged groups."
"All cultures are not equal," wrote Wax and Alexander. "Or at least they are not equal in preparing people to be productive in an advanced economy. The culture of the Plains Indians was designed for nomadic hunters, but is not suited to a First World, 21st-century environment. Nor are the single-parent, antisocial habits, prevalent among some working-class whites; the anti-’acting white' rap culture of inner-city blacks; the anti-assimilation ideas gaining ground among some Hispanic immigrants."
#2
Gee, the 50s. You mean when drug use and out of wedlock pregnancy weren't running rampant in a certain community? Two of the major causes of mufti-generational poverty in the country.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
[TheZMan] “When you strike at a king, you must kill him” is a famous expression by Ralph Waldo Emerson. We’re all familiar with it and its meaning. When you challenge authority, you better win, as authority cannot tolerate challenges. It’s why the people in charge are so ruthless in dealing with challenges to their power. They instinctively know that to do otherwise means being displaced. In all probability, they got to where they are by subverting or knocking off their predecessor.
[Robert Lewis' blog] My last post expressed concern about the possibility our intelligence services might seek to unduly influence British elections, and since then it has transpired that a former SIS officer, and a few of his former SIS colleagues, sought to do precisely that to the last US Presidential election. Months before the vote, Christopher Steele was privately touting a now notorious dossier of entirely fictional Trump allegations supplied to him (so Steele claimed) by impeccable sources in Russian intelligence. The finer details of this episode are unclear to me, but what I find particularly interesting is the light it casts on an aspect of the Hutton Inquiry, which was held (14 years ago now) to examine "the circumstances surrounding the death of David Kelly".
[ENGLISH.ALARABIYA.NET] Last week marked India’s 70th independence and "division" anniversary. India celebrated amid tensions on the borders between it and China. India protested on Bhutan’s behalf but China defied it and Bhutan kept silent. India’s economic boom did not hide the tensions in 
[The Hill] Over the past few months, we have finally entered the fully realized historical revisionism promised in George Orwell’s "1984," in which the motto, "Who controls the present controls the past. Who controls the past controls the future," was central to shaping the book’s dystopian world. In the book, history was continually being rewritten and re-promulgated to meet the political necessities of the moment. There was no history to be remembered, let alone lessons to be learned.
[Free Beacon] Two law professors have been condemned by University of Pennsylvania (UPenn) students, alumni, and faculty as bigots engaging in "racist and white supremacist discourse," after they wrote a nostalgic op-ed praising America's 1950s "bourgeois culture."
