Is This What All the Ammo Was For?
“warfare is eminent, and in order for Black people to survive the 21st century, we are going to have to kill a lot of whites — more than our christian hearts can possibly count.” ~ DHS Employee (Via MoonBat)
Racism
Racism Accepted if Against White Westerners ~ Won`t Even Serve Whites Coffee
Racism now in Australia is going almost exclusively one-way: Against the native Anglo-Saxon population. White Aussies are being kicked out of neighborhoods in all the major cities. And when they refuse to leave, they’re being blatantly discriminated against.
She lives in Marucca. And she wanted a cup of coffee. And the Sudanese would not serve her… It’s racist I think.
The Sudanese and Somalis are even discriminating against immigrant southeast Asians. And one shopkeeper’s life was threatened for having a picture of Jesus Christ on his wall.
Racist Skin-Head, Wade Michael Page, Hated Tea Party Candidate Herman Cain
Via Libertarian Republican
It’s now finally coming out. National Socialist piece of shit skinhead Wade Michael Page, who murdered 6 Sikhs and wounded dozens of others at a Sikh temple in Wisconsin last week, was also a hater of the Tea Party’s candidate for president Herman Cain.
At [about] the 2:10 mark of this short documentary video, Page comments critically against Cain on an on-line racist forum. A fellow forum member threatens to leave the country if the African American is elected president.
Editor’s comment – No doubt these Nazi skinheads hate libertarian-conservative Reps Allen West and Tim Scott, and other Black Republicans like Mia Love, Michael Steele and Condi Rice, as well.
…read more… (This site unfortunately no longer exists)
OWS Wants to Improve the Economy-But Got 21 People Fired! (Plus Drawing Swastikas On MLK)
The Occupy Wall Street movement, which says its goals include improving the economic lot for 99 percent of Americans, may have some explaining to do to some cafe workers now out of a job.
Mark Epstein, owner of the Milk Street Cafe at 40 Wall Street, just let 21 employees go.
The reason? The barricades police have set up throughout Wall Street as a consequence of the ongoing demonstration.
Erasing Hate ~ WOW ~ Keep The Widner Family in Your Prayers
A Crazy Story of Bad Judgment and Possibly Some Profiling That Needn’t Be
Darfur-Sudan~The Devil Came on Horseback
I have been following this Black African and Christian genocide in the Sudan since about 1994. Many Christian missions groups have been on the forefront of this alarm since before Hollywood and others have been touting and documenting this horrible travesty. A short documentary was done in 1999 entitled Sudan: The Hidden Holocaust; and Unholy War: Christian Genocide in Sudan. This documentary below, however, goes a step beyond. It is a much watch, but be prepared, you will need a box of tissues.
(RoC) I watched this documentary about genocide is Sudan and learning that the slave trade has once again risen up in the world of Islam in Sudan. Even though this documentary is hard to watch, especially when you see the amount of evidence for the mass genocide and learn nothing is being done about it by the US government, the part between 1:00 and 1:35 is very touching for me. Even though most of the aid sent from the US is stolen before it gets to people in need, the only thing these people have comes from America and this man says he is so grateful to the American People and the “free world”. Even though they are Muslims… no help comes from any Islamic countries, and that is because they are black African Muslims which the Arab Muslim controlled Sudanese Government have decided to kill in masses.
Three-year-olds being labelled as bigots
This comes from Sweetness and Light:
Teachers are being forced to report children as young as three to the authorities for using alleged ‘racist’ language, it was claimed last night.
Munira Mirza, a senior advisor to London Mayor Boris Johnson, said schools were being made to spy on nursery age youngsters by the Race Relations Act 2000.
More than a quarter of a million children have been accused of racism since it became law, she said.
Writing in Prospect magazine, she said: ‘The more we seek to measure racism, the more it seems to grow.
For the record, Prospect is described as a left of center magazine. In 2005 its readers selected Noam Chomsky as the world’s foremost intellectual.
‘Teachers are now required to report incidents of racist abuse among children as young as three to local authorities, resulting in a massive increase of cases and reinforcing the perception that we need an army of experts to manage race relations from cradle to grave.
‘Does this heightened awareness of racism help to stamp it out? Quite the opposite. It creates a climate of suspicion and anxiety.’
The Act compelled 43,000 public authorities, including schools and churches, ‘to promote good relations between persons of different racial groups’. Details of the incidents are logged on databases.
Teachers are allowed to report racism even if the alleged ‘victim’ was not offended or if the child does not understand what they were saying.
Freedom of Information replies obtained by civil liberties group the Manifesto Club show that between 2002 and 2009, 280,000 incidents have been reported.
Being three years old is no excuse for committing a hate crime.
LaRouchites In The SCV (from UFOs to KGB death squads-Democratic Nuts)
We have some LaRouchite’s in our valley, and I hope to “stake out” there sites here-and-there as they talk to unsuspecting people. One lady today said she was just fed up with Obama, and I presume just grasping at straws in her political dissatisfaction. When I mentioned that they are technically a political cult she responded that, “she doesn’t judge the way ‘he is’ [Larouche] because she wants the government to run properly.” I can only laugh to myself and wag my head at the thought of how bad government would be (worse than Obama’s made it) if these guys were in charge. She later said “I want what God wants me to do,” somehow equating her giving $25 dollars to a political cult who practices brainwashing techniques, anti-Semitism, large swings in policy, and its members indicted in murder as something God wants her to do. The lack of thinking in today’s culture (religious, non-religious, Democratic or Republican) never ceases to amaze me. Never. (It reminds me of the recent story of Pastor Terry Jones saying God told him to burn the Qur’an and then telling him to not burn it, and then saying God said to postpone it with a possibility of burning [rain]. God is made into a weather forecaster for the person’s current emotional likes or dislikes and the exegetical study of the Bible and the already spoken “plan” for us is rejected in light of these emotional whims.)
So lets deal with a few items of interest for those walking up to their table. Anti-Semitism:
Given such views, it should be no surprise that the LaRouche organization has demonized the U.S. Justice Department unit charged with tracking down and deporting Nazi war criminals; indeed, the LaRouche organization, including such fronts as the Schiller Institute and the Fusion Energy Foundation, went all out in the 1980s to defend (as patriotic Americans and innocent victims of a Zionist vendetta) the likes of John “Ivan the Terrible” Demjanjuk of the Treblinka death camp; Karl Linnas, the butcher of the Tartu camp; Waffen SS mass murderer Tscherim Soobzokov; and Nazi rocket engineer Arthur Rudolph (who ran the an underground factory using slave labor from the Dora-Nordhausen camp—over 5,000 of his slaves died or were killed by the SS). (See “Old Nazis and New Dreams” in Dennis King, Lyndon LaRouche and the New American Fascism, pp. 75-81.)
9/11 Trutherism:
“This Israeli spy network inside the United States was unable to achieve their objective [war with Iraq] until President Bush was entrapped by the events of Sept. 11, 2001….Lyndon LaRouche demands to know: Is this not the motive that explains the who and why of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001?” — “The Pollard Affair Never Ended!” leaflet issued in 2002 by “LaRouche in 2004” (LaRouche’s Democratic primary Presidential campaign committee).
“Under no circumstances, LaRouche assesses, could the attacks of Sept. 11 have been organized and directed by Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda apparatus, based out of Afghanistan. […] LaRouche also emphasizes that the recent years’ massive Israeli espionage against and covert-operations penetration of the United States—including the U.S national security and military institutions—may suggest a more direct Israeli involvement in the military coup activities that facilitated the Sept. 11 attacks on New York and Washington. […] This apparatus is part of the “Mega” network of prominent wealthy North American Zionists led by Edgar Bronfman, Ronald Lauder, Michael Steinhardt, et al., who are the leading promoters of Ariel Sharon’s suicidal war drive, and who wish to draw the United States into that effort to assure a global conflagration on a scale of the First World War or worse.” “Lyndon H. LaRouche Exposes Sept. 11 Coup-Plotters: “Zbigniew Brzezinski and Sept. 11th””, by Jeffrey Steinberg, Press Release, Jan. 2002
Conspiracy Theories:
LaRouche steered the NCLC away from the Marxist left while retaining some of the slogans and attitudes of the left. LaRouche’s critics, particularly Dennis King and Chip Berlet, characterize his new orientation as being a conspiracy theory worldview, or conspiracism. They say the Marxist concept of the ruling class was converted by LaRouche into a conspiracy theory, in which world capitalism was controlled by a cabal including the Rothschilds, the Rockefellers, Henry Kissinger, and the Council on Foreign (Source Watch)
In 2002 the LaRouche campaign issued a press release titled “Israeli Moles Behind 911 and Iraq War,” claiming Israeli government policies had been “foisted on the President by a nest of Israeli agents inside the U.S. government.”3 That this “Israeli spy network inside the United States” 4 was related to the policy formulations of the group of Bush advisers known as the Neoconservatives was made clear later when the LaRouchites began issuing a series of pamphlets with the running title “Children of Satan.” (PublicEye)
AIDS:
The best example is the AIDS issue. By the fall of 1985, LaRouche recognized that it was about to become the scariest issue of the decade. He concocted the slogan “Spread Panic, not AIDS!” The entire human race, he claimed, would face extinction if stern measures weren’t taken immediately against gay people and mosquitoes. Offering himself as the only leader willing to act with the necessary ruthlessness, he picked California as his first battleground. In the summer of 1986 his followers fanned out through most of the state’s fifty-eight counties. Operating through a committee called PANIC, they collected over 700,000 signatures for a ballot initiative calling for quarantine of AIDS victims. The signatures withstood all legal challenges, and the measure was placed on the ballot as Proposition 64. It received nationwide publicity and became a major issue in California politics. Congressman William Dannemeyer (R.-Cal.) championed it and became its respectable front man. Ironically, Dannemeyer had chaired the Republican Study Committee two years earlier when it produced a report warning conservatives not to be taken in by LaRouche propaganda and pointing out that LaRouche’s intent was to “disrupt our democratic system.” Dannemeyer now said, as did some other California conservatives, that he was supporting Proposition 64 solely on its merits. Gay organizations, the health professions, labor unions, and the Democratic Party launched a counter-effort, warning the public that “political extremist Lyndon LaRouche” was behind the measure. (One of the anti-Proposition 64 groups was even called “Stop LaRouche.”) Gay organizations charged that when LaRouche said quarantine he really meant concentration camps.
LaRouche’s cadres were preprogrammed for the quarantine campaign. For years words like “faggot” and “queer” had peppered NCLC publications, along with allegations that child molesters, Satanists, and Communists control the gay rights movement, The articles also suggested that homosexuality is a characteristically Jewish condition and that rich Jews encourage it to undermine Western civilization. When the AIDS crisis erupted, LaRouche blamed the “shylocks” for being too cheap to pay for research crash programs.
His gay-equals-Jewish canard dates back to the 1970s, when New Solidarity raved against the “faggot politics” of “Zionist-supporting” gay activists. New Solidarity published a cartoon series in which prominent New York Jews were shown in Roman togas at a banquet sponsored by the “Emperor of Homohattan,” Mayor Ed Koch. In the early 1980s LaRouchian publications accused prominent Jews and pro-Zionist Gentiles of being part of an international “Homintern.” LaRouche wrote “Kissinger: The Politics of Faggotry,” a crude and defamatory leaflet on his longtime Symbolic Jew. According to LaRouche, Kissinger’s alleged “heathen sexual inclinations are merely an integral part of a larger evil,” and Kissinger is “psychologically” part of a “distinct species.” In the context of LaRouche’s biological-racial theories about the Jewish “species,” the equation of Jewishness and “faggotry” was unmistakable.
LaRouche also taught that the alleged pathology of the Jewish family, especially the mother’s possessiveness, produces psychosexual aberrations in young Jews. A 1986 New Solidarity item, “Jewish Mothers in the Age of Aquarius,” joked that homosexuality is the natural result.
That the Jewish oligarchy deliberately promotes homosexuality is suggested by LaRouche’s references to “sodomic,” “pederastic,” and “lesbian” practices within oligarchy-controlled “cults” such as Freemasonry and the Quakers. In a November 1985 speech, he said AIDS was a “man-made evil” linked to these “cults out of Babylon.” He further developed this theme in “The End of the Age of Aquarius?,” a rambling discourse on AIDS that included attacks on the “Babylonians,” the “British,” “usurers,” and “cabalists.” His conclusion; “Homosexuality was organized in the United States. It wasn’t something that sprang from the weeds. . . .It was organized. . .” (an excerpt from New American fascists, chapter 16)
The Re-Writing of History
True, about a million and a half Jews did die as a result of the Nazi policy of labor-intensive “appropriate technology” for the employment of “inferior races,” a small fraction of the tens of millions of others – especially Slavs – who were murdered in the same way Jewish refugee Felix Rohatyn proposes today.
Even on a relative scale, what the Nazis did to Jewish victims was mild compared with the virtual extermination of gypsies and the butchery of Communists. The point is that Adolf Hitler was put into power largely on the initiative of the Rothschilds, Warburgs and Oppenheimers, among other Jewish and non-Jewish financial interests centered in the City of London. [….] The Jews who did die at the hands of Nazism were the victims of fascism, the victims of the Schactian form of “fiscal austerity.”
The “Holocaust” simply proves that the failure of the Nuremberg tribunal to hang Hjalmar Schacht made the whole proceeding a travesty of justice. The murderers of the million and a half or more Jews who died in the “holocaust” are any group, Jewish or non-Jewish, which supported then or now the policies advocated by Felix Rohatyn or Milton Freidman [sic]. Either you, as a Jew, join with the U.S. Labor Party to stop Rohatyn, Friedman the Mont Pelerin Society now, or you are implicitly just as guilty of the death of millions of Jews as Adolf Hitler. (New Solidarity, 8 Dec.1978, p.4) A scanned version available online
…(read more)…
Brainwashing Techniques:
I AM GOING TO MAKE YOU ORGANIZERS – by taking your bedrooms away from you … What I shall do is expose to you the cruel act of your sexual impotence … I will take away from you all hope that you can flee the terrors of politics to the safety of ‘personal life.’ I shall do this by showing to you that your frightened personal sexual life contains for you such terrors as the outside world could never offer you. I will thus destroy your rabbit-holes, mental as well as physical. I shall destroy your sense of safety in the place to which you ordinarily imagine you can flee…Can we imagine anything much more viciously sadistic than the Black Ghetto mother.” (“Ideological Odyssey: From Old Left to Far Right,” and, “No Joke“)
“Don’t let her leave!” The group leader had thoroughly worked her over, hammering her with guilt about her previous actions, accusing her of being delusional, telling her to confess, until she was no longer recognizable as a woman, but only as a blubbering mess of tearful convulsions. The tearful woman got up to flee the room.
“Don’t let her leave! Keep her in here!” Someone got up and physically blocked her from leaving the room.
“SIT DOWN. Now M—–,” the leader said in a calm voice, “You know you’ve got to stop doing this…” She went on calmly for some time, and then everyone else left the room. I sat across the room and watched her sob hysterically with her face in her hands, and not for the first time wondered what the LaRouche organization was all about.
Throughout the summer I witnessed similar scenes over and over again in different forms; in personal meetings with the leadership, in small group meetings, Sunday “Field Meetings,” at “retreats,” and one-on-one conversations. There was a clear pattern being used in each case; the sowing of guilt (real or imagined), fear, confusion, and the use of “sore spots” (personal shames or shortcomings) to browbeat someone into an extremely worked up emotional state. Once the person has been whipped up she is then questioned until she contradicts herself on some minute point. This contradiction is then used as a stick to beat her with until there is a complete emotional breakdown, then they admit their faults (confess), after which the leadership then redefines the “mission” for them. I recognized it as manipulation. I recently took interest in a book by William Sargant, “The Battle for the Mind,” and he had another name for it: Brainwashing. (Freedom of Mind Center)
I realize I only put two conspiracy quotes, but the LaRouches pretty much believe in most of them. A short bio from an article about Lyndon LaRouche displays a quick synapsis of some hisghlites from Larouche’s political career:
- 1976: Lyndon LaRouche makes first bid for U.S. presidency under the U.S. Labor Party.
- 1982-83: LaRouche engages in exploratory talks with the Soviet Union which lead to the development of President Ronald Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative
- 1984: LaRouche founds the Schiller Institute, a non-profit formed to “defend the rights of all humanity to progress –material, moral and intellectual”
- 1986: LaRouche followers draft California ballot initiative calling for the isolation or quarantining of people infected with AIDS
- 1987: Roy Frankhouser,
formerKlu Klux Klan grand dragon and LaRouche advisor, convicted of obstruction of justice.
- 1988: LaRouche and six associates convicted on federal conspiracy charges. LaRouche spends five years in prison.
- 2004: LaRouche makes his fifth bid for the U.S. presidency, this time running a candidate under the Democratic Party.
This movement, and the young men and women involved in this group, is considered a cult (some say more than a cult). In fact, a site put together by former LaRouchites (LaRouche Planet) defines this topic well in their From a Political Sect to a Political Cult:
It is NOT a political democratic organization that respects individual freedom. It is a cult that uses politics to its own ends, it is a political cult which uses cult method of mind-control.
It is therefore totalitarian by definition (LaRouche would say “authoritarian”). A “cult of personality” reminiscent of the cults of personality which Stalin, Mao or Hitler once enjoyed.
The nearest representation of LaRouche’s world is the world described in George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four novel. Politically, it shares many (not all) features with the so-called “Third Position” of our contemporary political spectrum.
Similarly to the world of Nineteen Eighty-Four, in the LaRouche cult, politics is not just “war-like”, IT IS WAR; a never ending war between “Oceania” and “Eurasia”, or between “Eastasia” and “Oceania” etc., a war against the enemies of Mankind and Civilization, i.e. the enemies of LaRouche. These enemies are “exposed” by LaRouche and his obsessive and wild “conspiracy-theories”. The world is about to be plunged at any time into the abysses of a New Dark Ages, a World War III, etc. Their clock always shows “One minute to midnight” for the last thirty-five years and LaRouche (a self-professed economist) has “predicted” a world financial crashnearly every year… for the last thirty-five years! The larouchies believe that “saving the world” is the “end-goal” of the “LaRouche organization”.
So, to use this lady (who is probably very nice) as my whipping boy, would God have anything to do with the above? Murder, hatred of Jews, brainwashing, quarantining people, multiple conspiracy theories, etc??? And their comparison of Obama’s health plan — horrible monstrosity that it is — is like Hitler’s T4 program is just plain weird.
The medias lack of care for the LaRouchites showing up at meetings with Obama/Hitler signs (as mentioned in a previous blog) is pointed out by the Weekly Standard as well:
CNN’s Larry King showed the above video of Barney Frank laying the smack down on a woman at a townhall meeting who compared Obama to Hitler. CNN left out the fact that this woman is a Lyndon LaRouche Democrat.
In the full video (via Allahpundit), the woman says, “This policy is already on the way out. It already has been defeated by LaRouche.” She also underscores her crazy LaRouchite beliefs by claiming that the U.S. has “30% real unemployment”. No one disputes that LaRouchites are on the fringe — but it’s indisputable that they are fringe Democrats. They oppose Obamacare because they want a single-payer plan.
While Nancy Pelosi and liberal talk-show host Bill Press have been smearing protesters as fascists and Nazis, left-wing bloggers have been attacking protesters for comparing Obama to Hitler. It seems townhall attendees just can’t win….
I have nothing but contempt for their organization and bewilderment at people who say they love Glenn Beck and want to do what God wants them to, and then proceed to write checks to this wacky organization.
Ideological Swings:
In 1977-78, LaRouche initiated an ideological change, an evolution from “socialism” to “nationalism”, well documented by Denis King and Chip Berlet.
This “evolution” was marked by a radical re-definition of “Fascism”. To this purpose he wrote in 1977 “What Actually Is Fascism?” where he said:
“The Nazi propaganda emphasis on “Krupp steel” and other symbols of industrial development points up the fact that to rule Germany the Nazis were obliged to play upon the deep desire for industrial and technological progress within even the ranks of numerous layers of nominal Nazi supporters and party members. There was a profound discrepancy between the systematic destruction of industry and the labor force under Schacht and the nationalist impulses of important varieties of German citizens who went over to support of the Nazis largely on the basis of hatred of Versailles and a commitment to restoration of Germany’s industrial progress.” “In short, all of those features of Nazi Germany’s policy which are generally attributed to fascism are not the ideological excretion of a fascist “sociological phenomenon” but are properly termed Schachtianism in its natural course and consequences. The essence of fascism, if we mean by fascism the deprecated features of the Nazi order, is Schachtian economics.” (6)
In other words there are “good” and “bad” Nazis:
“The majority of Nazi supporters were not fascists, but nationalists.” (6)
and consequentially:
“What is to be stressed most emphatically in this connection is the fallacy of the “conservatism tends to fascism” argument.” (6)
To confirm his ideological move from “socialism” to “nationalism”, he wrote that year:
“I never had the conception of founding a “true Marxist” association. […] We have never been Marxists, except as regarding Marx as the highest preceding advancement of essential human knowledge. […] More profoundly, as we change we do not change.” (7)
contradicting himself from what he wrote a year earlier:
“Labor Committee and allied Communist forces within the capitalist sector generally are working overnight, constantly, to bring into being a new Marxist International throughout the capitalist sector.” (11)
when he wanted to establish “socialism” world-wide:
“The important point to be added to that, is that such a form of society is within reach during this century. We have before us the immediate need and possibility to establish an intermediate form of society known as workers’ government, out of which in approximately a generation’ s time, an actual socialist form of human existence can emerge.” (4)
LaRouche redefined Marxism from a “higher”, philosophical standpoint; “higher” Marxism meant “good” industrial Capitalism, Marx and Benjamin Franklin were said to share the same, common ancestry and philosophical outlook: Plato’s Republic, trying to combine “socialism” (Soviet Republics) and… the Republican party! ({“republican” in LaRouche’s code-words, meaning Plato’s “Republic”).
In his “Creating a Republican Labor Party” pamphlet, LaRouche wrote:
“The republican party is thousands of years old. It is traced in terms of formal historical knowledge available to us today to the writings of Plato and Plato’s Academy at Athens, and to Alexander the Great’s city-building policies.”
The “new” Karl Marx was redefined in “The Karl Marx Karl Marx Did Not Know” (Fall 1977).
His 1980 U.S. presidential election was based on an alliance between “labor” (socialist) forces and “republican” (nationalist) forces and geopolitically between the “East” (USSR) and the “West”.
This ideological and philosophical reshaping can be measured with help of three key-documents during that period: 1/ “The Case of Walter Lippmann” (May 1977), 2/ “Two Tactics of the Inner PCI” (April 1978) and 3/ “The Secret Known Only to the Inner Elites” (May-June 1978). This last document is still considered by the LaRouchies as the real founding document of LaRouche’s Organisation.
In this 1977 revisionist document “What Actually Is Fascism?” he explained that “Fascism” was in fact synonymous with… “financial austerity” imposed by Hjalmar Schacht, a “cannibalization” of the German economy which led to Hitler’s war!
Capitalism therefore still leads to Fascism/Imperialism…
The “real enemy” is still “Capitalism” or rather “Capitalists”, not Fascists who are victims of these “Capitalists”.
But who was Schacht? What really happened to the German economy under his influence? Why does LaRouche focuses exclusively on somebody who was a German financial expert and Minister of Economics from 1935 until 1937 only (and who began to lose power after the implementation of the Four Year Plan in 1936 by Hermann Göring which put Germany on the brink of bankruptcy)?
Because by reducing “nazism” only to one single cause: “Hjalmar Schacht”, it is more convenient to re-write History. Forget about Hitler’s and the Nazis’ open intentions to start a war against their neighbors from the onset…\\ LaRouche only needs to claim Hjalmar Schacht was a “British agent”, an “environmentalist” or a “Jewish protege” and then, LaRouche could conclude that “Nazism” was an “ecologist”, a “British” or a “Jewish” conspiracy (and vice-versa)! Consequently, any economic policy or economist or politician could be labeled as “schachtian” or “nazi”!…
Swastikas:
…The LaRouche committee has staged dozens of protests nears Trader Joe’s entrance and exit doors, of which there are usually only two, the grocer claims in Superior Count. It says LaRouche’s members display pictures of Obama with a Hitler-style moustache and of Obama Photoshopped next to Hitler.
“At the Trader Joe’s in Irvine, the LaRouche Activists wore swastikas, which brought some customers to tears,” according to the complaint.
Tension between activists and customers nearly led to a fistfight outside one store, and in screaming matches have forced police to be called to remove the activists, driving customers away, the complaint states…
…(read more)…
July 30th-Today In History
Today, in 1866 (July 30th), the Democratic government in New Orleans ordered a raid on a racially integrated meeting of the Republican Party. 40 people were killed and 150 were injured. Remember. (BREAITBART)
AMERICAN COWBOY CHRONICLES has this:
….While it was also known as the New Orleans Race Riot, the New Orleans Massacre of 1866 took place on July 30th of that year. What became a massacre took place when white Democrats attacked Republicans outside the Mechanics Institute in New Orleans. The Democrats were made up of former Confederate soldiers, and members of the local police and fire department, as well as others. The Republicans were whites, but mostly “freedmen” — that is freed black men and former slaves.
It started when the Republicans in Louisiana called for a state constitutional convention because they were angry over the Democrat controlled state legislature enacting Black Codes. Among other things, Black Codes enabled state officials to refuse black men the ability to vote. through their .
Black Codes were laws passed by former Confederate states in 1865 and 1866. The intent of the Black Codes was to restrict the freedoms of blacks, while forcing newly “freedmen” to work in low wage labor jobs that were akin to “slave labor.”
[….]
On the corner of Common and Dryades Streets, across from the Mechanics Institute, an armed group led by New Orleans Mayor John T. Monroe waited. Their mission was to disrupt the convention. As they saw it, the Republican Party was the party of the freed slave, the black man, and the convention was a threat to Democrat power in the state legislature. They saw it their duty to stop the threat of the increasing political and economic power of black men, but more so of Republicans in Louisiana.
Monroe’s group was composed of Democrats who opposed abolition, former Confederate troops, and members of the New Orleans Police Department. They carried pistols, rifles, shotguns, clubs, knives, and were known to have even used bricks in their attack. At the Mechanics Institute, the group attacked the marchers with a hatred that should be reserved for enemies of war.
The marchers were beaten on the spot. Soon shots rang out as the marchers where shot in cold blood. Yes, some attempting to flee. The ones who fled were chased and beaten and killed. Some of the marchers made it inside the building. Yes, they made it inside the building thinking there would be safety in the building.
Then the unthinkable happened. Monroe’s group surrounded the Institute and immediately opened fire on those in the building. Shooting into the windows at anyone they could see, the attackers then rushed into the building. Once inside, the Democrat attackers kept firing into the crowd of Republican delegates. They unleashed such a barrage of gunfire on those in there that they literally ran out of ammunition.
Out of ammunition, they were soon beaten back by the delegates. While the Republican delegates thought the worst was over, it wasn’t. The Democrats ran out away from the building, but little did those inside know that they simply regrouped, rearmed, found more ammunition, and returned. This time they broke down the doors, only to again resume shooting the mostly unarmed Republican delegates inside.
It’s said that when the shooting first started, some of the delegates actually attempted to surrender. Most of those who surrendered were blacks, and they were summarily shot and killed on the spot. Others fled in panic and the Democrats actually chased them down to kill them. That’s the reason that the killings were spread over a several block area around the Institute. Victims were being chased down the streets. That’s how innocent blacks were shot and killed even though they were not connected to the convention. Blacks were shot on the street, and they were pulled off of streetcars, and from hiding places to be beaten or killed.
By the end of the massacre, it’s said that the inside the Mechanics Institute looked like a bloody slaughterhouse. Thick blood made the floors slick. Since most all of the delegates were unarmed, it’s said that it was indeed a massacre.
To stop the ongoing carnage, the governor declared martial law and called for assistance from Federal troops who responded quickly. Many of the Monroe’s Democrats, those former Confederate troops, and the city policemen, who took part in the killings were jailed. But frankly, I couldn’t find any evidence of anyone ever being charged or punished for the deaths of those killed — both black and white.
Depending on what sources one uses when looking into this, the numbers of killed varies. When the Democrats finally ran out of ammunition, it is believed that at least 50 people lay dead in the building. Most were black Republicans, but some were white.
Some sources say that there were anywhere from 150 to 200 casualties, either beaten with clubs and bricks and such. Some say 44 blacks and 12 whites were killed there as Republican delegates at the convention. Of course, there are sources that say altogether, counting everyone that was found dead in and out of the building and scattered around the several block area, then it’s possible that more than 130 people were killed in that massacre.
As a result of the New Orleans Massacre of 1866, anger and resentment against the Democratic Party over what took place was clear. So much so that in the 1866 nation election for the House of Representatives and Senate, because of what took place in New Orleans, Republicans won in a landslide and gained 77% of the seats in Congress.
Louisiana Republicans wanted to extend the suffrage, the right to vote, to freedmen and completely eliminate the Black Codes. In the end, they reconvened the convention and succeeded in achieving their goals — but at a price……..
In this linked post, there are many comments, but the one that caught my eye was a long one that ended with this:
….BE PROUD TO BE WHITE!\
It’s not a crime YET…. but getting very close!
To which I replied:
Growing up in Detroit as a honkey, I can say that I am not proud to be white, like I believe people shouldn’t be proud to be brown, or black. Coming from a background of three-felonies and a life redeemed through Christ, these “pride in one’s color” are nothing but mild racism. I am proud to be an American. I am proud to be a Christian in the Judeo-Christian Western culture sense. These types of pride incorporate black, white, brown, etc. Having “pride in your color” is kowtowing to the multi-cultural metanarrative that has divided our country since its inception in the 1920’s and the “Fabian Socialist” [anti-capitalists/anti-religionists] insertion of it into our schools via progressive secularism. This is a battle of worldviews, and taking pride in one’s skin-color is using a worldview that is anathema to the Judeo-Christian one (Genesis chapters 1-3; Mathew 19:4-6; and Acts 17:26). You should see the first 7-minutes or so of my “documentary” and understand the battle of the views of nature involved: Obamacon – Twenty Years In A Racist Church
Juan Williams-A Black NPR Liberal-On Tea Party Racists
From The Hill:
Four in 10 Tea Party members are either Democrats or Independents, according to a new national survey. The findings provide one of the most detailed portraits to date of the grassroots movement that started last year. The national breakdown of the Tea Party composition is 57 percent Republican, 28 percent Independent and 13 percent Democratic, according to three national polls by the Winston Group, a Republican-leaning firm that conducted the surveys on behalf of an education advocacy group. Two-thirds of the group call themselves conservative, 26 are moderate and 8 percent say they are liberal.
Here is 10,000 pennies on the subject that explains why many conservatives jumped ship from Bush’s spending policies:
- 6 of 6
- « Previous
- 1
- …
- 4
- 5
- 6