Posted on 11/13/2004 11:12:00 AM PST by LouAvul
....snip......
Based on Margaret Mitchell's hugely popular novel, producer David O. Selznick's four-hour epic tale of the American South during slavery, the Civil War and Reconstruction is the all-time box-office champion.
.......snip........
Considering its financial success and critical acclaim, "Gone With the Wind" may be the most famous movie ever made.
It's also a lie.
......snip.........
Along with D.W. Griffith's technically innovative but ethically reprehensible "The Birth of a Nation" (from 1915), which portrayed the Ku Klux Klan as heroic, "GWTW" presents a picture of the pre-Civil War South in which slavery is a noble institution and slaves are content with their status.
Furthermore, it puts forth an image of Reconstruction as one in which freed blacks, the occupying Union army, Southern "scalawags" and Northern "carpetbaggers" inflict great harm on the defeated South, which is saved - along with the honor of Southern womanhood - by the bravery of KKK-like vigilantes.
To his credit, Selznick did eliminate some of the most egregious racism in Mitchell's novel, including the frequent use of the N-word, and downplayed the role of the KKK, compared with "Birth of a Nation," by showing no hooded vigilantes.
......snip.........
One can say that "GWTW" was a product of its times, when racial segregation was still the law of the South and a common practice in the North, and shouldn't be judged by today's political and moral standards. And it's true that most historical scholarship prior to the 1950s, like the movie, also portrayed slavery as a relatively benign institution and Reconstruction as unequivocally evil.
.....snip.........
Or as William L. Patterson of the Chicago Defender succinctly wrote: "('Gone With the Wind' is a) weapon of terror against black America."
(Excerpt) Read more at sacticket.com ...
¿Dónde está mi sombrero?
You presume too much. Jefferson is on the record, posted to you here, as being in favor of continued union among the States, but not fanatically so. He contemplated with equanimity the possibility that some States might want to go their own way someday. That is a major point which you, I think dishonestly, attempt to gloss over here.
Madison passed over into the republican camp in later life. You presume to speak for him on the subject of the Civil War crisis.
You are just engaged in unwarrantable name-dropping now, conscribing Founders for your propaganda willy-nilly.
[GOPcapitalist, to capitan] Returning to Scalia's dissent, though, we find that his recognition of Congress as the sole authority that may suspend Habeas Corpus is downright unequivocal regardless of what equivocation-boy says. From Scalia: "It follows from what I have said that Hamdi is entitled to a habeas decree requiring his release unless (1) criminal proceedings are promptly brought, or (2) Congress has suspended the writ of habeas corpus."
[Emphasis supplied.]
Scalia is pretty clear: Congress should suspend habeas corpus, if there is to be any suspension. I'm still not happy about the idea that Congress can "authorize" the Executive to suspend it -- that's a copout by Congress, if they did it (as they did in 1863, to wash fellow Republican Lincoln -- and at that, as has been noted above, Lyman Trumbull had to pull a dark-of-night parliamentary maneuver to get the indemnity bill through).
So, capitan, you don't think Scalia is tall enough? He's taller than Jack Rakove! Or your boy Wood.
So why don't you think Scalia's scholarship is authoritative enough, when Wood practically crayfished out of the room when Scalia walked in? Metaphorically speaking, of course.
And of course you have a clear Supreme Court holding, in an opinion, stating that the Executive may, on its own initiative, suspend habeas corpus? Cough it up.
Hitler acted in a crisis, too -- think that washes him of burning the Reichstag?
You don't read very well, do you? The Taney Court upheld Lincoln's exercise of war powers in the Prize Cases (1863). Farber writes (p 140-141), quoting from the opinion:
"'If war be made by invasion of a foreign nation, the President is not only authorized but bound to accept the challenge without waiting for any special legislative authority.' Whether the hostile force is a foreign invader or a rebellious state, 'it is none the less war.' When the rebellion burst out, the president 'was bound to meet it in the shape it presented itself, without waiting for Congress to baptize it with a name; and no name given to it by him or them could change the fact.'"
Farber adds, "The Court roundly rejected the argument that 'insurgents who have risen in rebellion against their sovereign' are 'not enemies because they are traitors.' As a belligerent, the United States was entitled 'not only to coerce the other by direct force, but also to cripple his resources by the seizure or destruction of his property.' this applied to everyone living in Confederate territory. 'They have cast off their allegiance and made war on their Government, and are none the less enemies because they are traitors.'"
"No supreme court ruling has ever upheld Lincoln's claimed power to suspend habeas corpus unilaterally. Two supreme court rulings have rejected the notion that the power he exercised belongs to the president though..."
No Supreme Court ever directly ruled on the constitutionality of Lincoln's action with regard to the suspension (of the privilege of) the writ of habeas corpus.
Supreme Court quotation time bump. Cough it up, capitan -- you got a ruling? Post it now.
Okay, then, any ruling on Executive suspension of habeas corpus? Any quote at all, allowing the Executive to suspend the writ at a time and place of the Executive Branch's choosing?
Truth time.
Oh, so it's "war powers" now? You going to try to sweep suspensions of habeas corpus into a catchall "war power", and then claim that Lincoln has infinite authority if a gun goes off?
Oh, brother.
Where is Farber getting all the purple rhetoric you're quoting, anyway? (Let's pretend for five seconds he has any authority to put up against Scalia, who's saying Farber is full of it.)
Oh I read just fine, capitan, and considering that your comments came in the middle of a discussion about habeas corpus in which you specifically made your comment,
You are a broken record. Lincoln acted in a crisis and his warpowers were upheld by the Supreme Court.
...in response to my comment, which you also directly quoted...
Affirmation of the consequent. Habeas Corpus had to be constitutionally suspended in the first place and Lincoln never established that it had been"...that is the context that I read it in. Did you intend for there to be any other? Or, being the habitual filthy liar that you are, did you simply intend to divert attention onto another subject so as to obfuscate the fact that you cannot sustain your illogical and irrational position on habeas corpus.
Farber, pg 194-195:
"An 1863 statute [Habeas Corpus Act] provided that 'any order of the president, or under his authority, amde at any time during the existence of the present rebellion, shall be a defense in all courts to any action or prosecution ... for any search, seizure, arrest, or imprisonment.' The statute also gave the defendant the power to remove state litigation to federal court and provided a two-year statute of limitations (even if the case remained in state court) for any action brought against an officer acting 'under color of' presidential or congressional authority.
"The Supreme Court upheld this statute in Mitchell v Clark. When the Civil War began, the Court explained, no legal authority had existed to deal with dangerous, disloyal individuals, thus requiring officials to take extralegal action. 'For most of these acts there was a constitutional power in congrss to have authorized them, if it had acted in the matter in advance.' In addition, perhaps, 'in a few cases, for acts performed in haste and in the presence of an overpowering emergency, there was no constuitutional power to make them good.' The Court had no doubt about the validity of the statute: 'That an act passed after the event, which, in effect, ratifies what has been done, and declares that no suit shall be sustained against the party acting under color of authority, is valid, so far as congress could have conferred such authority before, admits of no reasonable doubt.' For 'these are ordinary acts of indemnity passed by all government when the occasion requires it.'"
Short version: retrospective authorizations actions made by Congress are valid (this was also the conclusion in the Prize Cases); actions taken by Lincoln, and retrospectively authorized by Congress, are also valid.
What? Don't like taking a dose of your own medicine??
I don't feel the least bit embarrassed. Watching Larry, Curly, and Shemp goose-step to cowardly Moe's pronouncements, gives me a great deal of enjoyment. You guys have redefined the meaning of "clown."
When you are ready to get serious, let me know.
You, no doubt, will someday draw a pension or retirement, if you do not already. The taxpayer will still support you. I can hear the suckling noises now.
"If you assert all your lies were really mistakes, then you are so mistake prone you have no credibility."
A lie is an intentional act. I post no lies. You, on the other hand, intentionally misrepresent. That is a form of lying.
"As you are an untrustworthy LIAR, and your miserable pathetic attempt to whine your way out of all your LIES is laughable, I will continue to just sit here an laugh at you along with the rest of the chorus."
You must understand, that if we agreed upon the terms, and used a neutral third part, such as a Nevada-based escrow, there would be no room for backing out. If I was an "untrustworthy liar," as you say, my part of the deal would be held by the escrow and then you could laugh all the way to the bank!
Of course, you are a blowhard and a coward. I would nail your ass to the wall because the proof is so easy to come by. That's why you continue to dodge the challenge.
I won't demean your manhood any longer. You have shown that you are genitally challenged.
"I would be surprised if anything in your profile is real."
I have nothing to hide. I would be surprised if you even posted a profile. Cockroaches like you don't like the light.
The American Declaration of Independence was a revolutionary act. It was opposed by the former sovereign. We recognize July 4, 1776, as the day we established the United States of America because we sustained our independence, and concluded a treaty with the former sovereign. Along the way we received the diplomatic recogntion from several world powers.
On the other hand, the southern states purported to secede through legal means. They then purported to form their own country. Neither in their unitary status, or in their confederacy, wer they ever recognized by any of the world powers, or even the neighboring countries.
The legitimate government reasserted its authority and the illusionary and illegitimate CSA was no more.
"It is no fantasy to note the very real fact of diplomatic recognition, capitan."
If SCG's "diplomatic recognition" was a "very real fact," then you should have no trouble actually posting the document of quoting from it in full. (Please don't repeat your dodge that it is on file in Richmond - that is getting old. You make a claim that is contrary to most, if not all, published accounts.) Let's see what you can come up with.
Read #1690. I should have pinged you on that as well.
The Prize Cases irrefutably recognizes the President's power to answer the insurrection and to meet force with force. It clearly states that the President does not have to wait for a Congressional authorization.
Congress, at least twice during the war, retrospectively authorized and ratified the President's emergency actions. Lincoln took decisive action, and the Congress and the Court backed him.
The text Farber quoted from Mitchell v Clark suggests that if Congress had was empowered to take an action before the fact, it could take action retrospectively. (Do not confuse this with an ex post facto prohibition - those deal only with criminal activity.) Mitchell also suggests that Congress had broad authority to make right any extralegal actions taken to deal with an emergency.
So even if you believe that Lincoln was not entitled to invoke the Suspension Clause, you must admit Congress was entitled. Congress was also entitled to "ratify what had been done" (Mitchell v Clark). Congress authorized the President to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus as his discretion and ratified his past suspensions (Habeas Corpus Act of 1863).
It seems to me, that if the Congress and the President are in agreement with respect to war policy, there is little at issue for the Court to object to.
There are two cases, just discussed, which reflect on the ability of the Congress to "ratif[y] what ha[d] been done." Congress both ratified Lincoln's emergency suspension and authorized additional suspensions by the President. Ergo: Lincoln's habeas suspensions, even if "extralegal" at the time (which I do not concede), were validated.
See #1696.
Now why did you insult those Brave Confederates like that? :)
"An 1863 statute [Habeas Corpus Act] provided that 'any order of the president, or under his authority, amde at any time during the existence of the present rebellion, shall be a defense in all courts to any action or prosecution ... for any search ...
Now stop right there, John Adams. Explain to me how Congress by itself has the power to overturn the Fourth Amendment.
[Non-Seq #1668] No.
But you said, "Foreign countries can accept a cereal boxtop as a passport, if their laws allow," conceding that the American Indian tribal passports were being accepted internationally. Disparaging the international community that accepts their passports does not change the international recognition of said passports.
btw, can you name any nation which accepts a cereal boxtop as a passport? Would that include the UK or Australia?
[Non-Seq #1666] However the U.S. government does not recognize Indian-issued passports as legal.
[nc] If they are not recognized by the U.S. government, however are they entering and exiting the U.S.?
[Non-Seq] Just a guess but I'm thinking by airplane or car. Maybe train. They might drive, if they are going to Mexico or Canada, but neither of those countries requires a passport.
Just a guess???
But the Harvard Gazette said that "an internationally recognized Native American lacrosse team whose members travel abroad using passports issued by their Indian nation...."
The travel abroad requires a passport. There are exit and entry visas.
http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/hpaied/hn/hn_2002_lacrosse.htm
HONORING NATIONS: 2002 HONOREE
Iroquois Nationals Lacrosse
Haudenosaunee/Iroquois Confederacy: the Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga, Seneca, and Tuscarora Nations
Officially sanctioned by the Grand Council of Chiefs to represent the Haudenosaunee (Iroquois), the Iroquois Nationals Lacrosse Team is the only Native national sports team in international competition. The Team, which has won numerous medals and awards, travels overseas using Haudenosauneee passports, and in so doing, has successfully engaged state departments, embassies, and consulates around the world in recognizing the sovereignty of the Iroquois Confederacy and its member nations. Team members comprise a corps of Iroquois ambassadors who build international goodwill and educate fellow athletes, government officials, and the public about the Iroquois.
The Haudenosaunee—also known as the Iroquois or “People of the Longhouse”—have always taken a firm stance on their sovereignty. The Iroquois Confederacy, which serves as the traditional supra-national governing body of the Haudenosaunee, is comprised of six nations—the Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga, Seneca, and Tuscarora Nations—whose ancestral homelands extend from eastern Canada to the American southeast. Within this confederacy, the Onondaga Nation, the Seneca Nation at Tonawanda, and the Tuscarora Nation in New York maintain traditional chieftain forms of government, codified over one thousand years ago in the Guyanashawnagonah, or the “Great Law of Peace.” In defense of their sovereignty, these traditional governments have long resisted interference and support from the federal government. They have instead chosen to maintain their ancient governments, providing services for their own citizenry rather than depending on federal agencies. For the Haudenosaunee, sovereignty is the backbone of their political existence, and they take the rights and responsibilities of sovereignty seriously.
Besides being well known throughout Indian Country for their resolute stance on sovereignty, the Haudenosaunee also are known as the originators of lacrosse: since time immemorial, Iroquois men have played lacrosse, or “ga-chee-qua-is.” To the Haudenosaunee, ga-chee-qua-is is a gift from the Creator, to be played for His enjoyment as a medicine game that heals and rejuvenates individuals and communities. It is also a competitive game, played both on the field (field lacrosse) and in enclosed arenas (box lacrosse).
As a sport, lacrosse has grown increasingly popular among non-Iroquois throughout the twentieth century. Across the United States and Canada, boys, girls, men, and women play at primary education institutions, colleges and universities, and in community and even professional leagues. The game’s popularity has also grown worldwide. Australia, Canada, the Czech Republic, England, Germany, Japan, Korea, Scotland, Sweden, the United States, and Wales have all created national lacrosse teams. These national teams are members of the International Lacrosse Federation, the international governing body of lacrosse.
In 1983, the United States National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) invited the Haudenosaunee to field a team and play an exhibition match at the National Lacrosse Championships in Baltimore, Maryland. They did, and were roundly defeated by the Canadian national team. This loss, while disappointing, mobilized the Iroquois into action. Team members and coaches decided that, as the originators of the game and as citizens of the Iroquois Confederacy, they would participate in international field lacrosse competitions and re-capture their status as the best lacrosse players in the world. More importantly, they were determined that their participation in competitive lacrosse should stand as a symbol of their sovereignty.
With the sanction of the Haudenosaunee Grand Council of Chiefs, a dedicated group of Iroquois citizens organized the Iroquois Nationals Lacrosse Team to represent the Confederacy in international competition. They organized a board of directors; recruited managers, coaches, and trainers; and held try-outs for the hundreds of lacrosse players from the six nations interested in playing on the Iroquois Nationals Lacrosse Team. It was the first American Indian national sports team. As such, the Team decided that when traveling outside of the United States, its members would use their Haudenosaunee passports—passports that are issued by the Grand Council of Chiefs, whose capitol has remained at the Onondaga Nation for over one thousand years.
With a competitive and soundly organized team in place, the forty-five-member Iroquois Nationals Lacrosse Team turned its efforts toward participating in international competition. As straightforward as this might appear—after all, the Iroquois created the sport and introduced it to the world—the hurdles were both high and numerous. Gaining acceptance into the International Lacrosse Federation (ILF) was among the first of the major challenges the Iroquois Nationals encountered. The ILF countered the Team’s petition for membership with weighty demands. The Iroquois repeatedly met and exceeded these demands, even demonstrating their ability to organize and host two international competitions to which they invited the Australian, Canadian, English, and US national teams. Yet despite offering proof of athletic and organizational expertise, the Iroquois Nationals were barred from participating in the 1986 ILF World Games in Toronto, Canada. Still, the Team persevered and, in 1987, the ILF recognized the Iroquois’ status as a nation, and the Team was officially welcomed as a full ILF member.
Additional challenges followed. Members of the Iroquois Nationals were determined to express their nations’ sovereignty not only through admission into the International Lacrosse Federation, but through the use of Haudenosaunee passports for international travel. Although it would have been much simpler for the Iroquois Nationals to acquiesce to US and foreign pressure to travel under US passports, the Team, the Grand Council of Chiefs, and the Clanmothers of the six nations firmly believed that doing so would undermine the Haudenosaunee’s inherent sovereignty. In fact, the Haudenosaunee passport minces no words: “You may lose your Haudenosaunee nationality by being naturalized in, or taking an oath or making a declaration of allegiance to, a foreign state.” Still, obtaining passport approvals from the immigration bureaucracies of the United States as well as every country the team visits is a daunting task. Prior to every international tournament, the Team must introduce the Haudenosaunee passport anew and arrange travel clearance with the host nation prior to the Team’s departure. Even when the tournament’s host country willingly extends such recognition, the clearances are not always transmitted to the appropriate functionaries. Although the negotiations are invariably time-consuming and the process is difficult, the Team and the Confederacy stand firm in their insistence that other nations recognize Iroquois sovereignty.
The Iroquois Nationals Lacrosse Team has excelled in the most straightforward measure of success: it regularly fields a world-class lacrosse team. In the 1998 ILF Men’s World Championships in Baltimore, Maryland, the Iroquois Nationals placed fourth out of eleven competing countries. In 1999, the Iroquois Nationals team took the bronze medal in the Under-19 Men’s World Championships in Adelaide, Australia. That same year, three Iroquois Nationals players were honored through their inclusion on the 1999 Ten Man All World Team. In 2000, the Iroquois Nationals won the first annual Jim Thorpe Award for Native America’s highest excellence in sports. The Team’s ability to endure and sustain the challenges of competition at the international level is particularly impressive given that the Team draws its players from a pool that is a fraction of the size of its competitors’.
The Iroquois Nationals Lacrosse Team’s success on the lacrosse fields has changed the way in which the game—and the Iroquois—are perceived. Although its efforts to join the ILF were met with substantial resistance, the Team’s benefit to the Federation is now widely appreciated. The current president of the ILF credits the Iroquois Nationals with popularizing lacrosse: “The ILF and its members firmly believe that the inclusion of the Iroquois has been a benefit to the sport in helping expand the sport internationally.” He also recognizes that their play has resulted in a deepening appreciation of the cultural origins of the game among lacrosse players and fans alike: “The exchange of cultures that has taken place due to the inclusion of the Iroquois team has been a truly rewarding educational opportunity for the many nations and players that are involved in our sport.” In generating respect for the origins of the game, the Iroquois Nationals have ensured respect for the broader Native American community.
The significance of the Iroquois Nationals Lacrosse Team is felt at home as well as abroad. Among the six nations of the Iroquois Confederacy, the Team has succeeded in sustaining the traditional meaning of lacrosse. To them, lacrosse is a divine gift and there is “medicine” in lacrosse if the game is played traditionally. Specific medicine games play an important role in contemporary Iroquois community life. An individual player may call for a medicine game to bring blessings to a particular person. For instance, if a player’s sister is ill, he might call a medicine game to bring her good health. Many players will ask the spirit of an animal for guidance, so that he may have the eyes of the hawk or the agility of the deer. Thus, while lacrosse is a sport pursued by non-Indian amateur and professional players around the world, it is still a medicine game imbued with a special significance for the Haudenosaunee.
Lacrosse also is viewed as a cultural legacy that succeeds in teaching the lessons of how to live a good life. Lacrosse demands teamwork, leadership, commitment, sacrifice, and, of course, physical prowess—virtues that benefit the Iroquois people on and off the playing field and long after the athletic careers of its players wane. Coaches and parents of young Iroquois boys recognize that lacrosse teaches values regarding competition and social interaction. Iroquois Nationals players knowingly act as role models for the youth in their respective communities. As their season allows, Team members conduct small clinics covering game strategy and skills, sportsmanship, and stories of lacrosse’s origins. It is significant that most, if not all, of the Grand Council of Chiefs is made up of former lacrosse stars. For its part, the Team’s board of directors recognizes the game’s influence and wields it to promote positive trends among the youth. Considering substance abuse to be one of the most dangerous problems facing Indians across America, the board of directors has instituted a zero tolerance policy on drug use. In short, lacrosse serves as the bond that brings the Iroquois together as individuals and nations and, as such, it is used for community advancement.
Lacrosse has deep cultural roots as well as modern implications for the Haudenosaunee: the game not only has a revered place in Haudenosaunee art, religion, and society, but the Iroquois Nationals Lacrosse Team itself is an expression of Indian sovereignty. Through its insistence on admittance to the International Lacrosse Federation and its difficult yet successful engagements with the US and foreign governments to recognize Iroquois passports, the Iroquois Nationals take principled stands about what it means to be self-governing and sovereign. In doing so, the Iroquois Nationals Lacrosse Team extends the role of lacrosse in its players’ home nations from being a primarily cultural and religious touchstone to being an internationally recognized symbol of sovereignty and self-government. Other American Indian nations, indigenous peoples, and indeed, nations everywhere can look to the Haudenosaunee and their Iroquois Nationals Lacrosse Team for evidence of the symbolic and practical power of tribal sovereignty.
Lessons:
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.