Posted on 06/04/2004 1:21:20 PM PDT by MikeJ75
GRAND BLANC - Bringing flags bearing the Confederate insignia to school could cost two Grand Blanc High School seniors their diplomas.
School administrators met Thursday to determine the fates of the two students and a third who was involved in an altercation sparked by the flags. School officials wouldn't announce the outcome of the meeting.
The Confederate flag has sparked a heated debate at the school about whether it's simply a symbol of the South or one of racial discrimination and slavery.
The two students who brought the flags to school Wednesday said there's nothing racist about the Confederate flag. They said it represents Southern pride, among other things, although one of the students said he wanted to apologize to peers who were offended.
(Excerpt) Read more at mlive.com ...
that is what i'm looking for. (opinions are like BELLYBUTTONS, as everybody has one & they mostly stink.)
in point of fact, i'll use the data (IF there is any TRUE source data!) in a monograph for the local roundtable.
free dixie,sw
NATO was built as a war-fighting alliance to oppose the Red Army, about whom it was said in the later '40's that all they would need to reach the Atlantic seaboard was boots.
Having seen first hand the tragedies of war (unlike G.W. Bush) and having had been responsible for the lifes of thousands of young Americans in World War II, he believed in the concept of containment and restraint.
Not true. He authorized and allowed to be carried forward both a long-running CIA field operation in the Ukraine that supported Ukrainian separatists who successfully fought the Red Army in a number of fights, including setpiece engagements with forces ranging up to battalion size. The Red Army and KGB crushed this independentist movement with field operations and assassinations, the best-known being the murder of Ukrainian patriot Stepan Bandera in 1959 by KGB assassin Bogdan Stashinsky.
Besides the Ukrainian operation, which was doomed by the treason of H.A.R. "Kim" Philby of MI-6, Eisenhower signed off on the operation plan, training, and preparation for the Bay of Pigs invasion of 1961, which was intended to recover Cuba from Fidel Castro and the Communist international.
A true leader (unlike G.W.).....
Cheap shot. I don't support some of his policies, either, but that's a cheap shot.
... recognizes the importance of containment and how useful it is in the efforts to protect our nation. ....Thank God Kennedy had restraint and was not a cowboy quick on the draw.
"Cowboy" is another cheap shot, and a regional and cultural slur much beloved by candypants European elitists. Funny you should criticize Dubya on that ground.
As for Kennedy's "restraint"..........how "restrained" was he when he:
a. Committed the United States to support South Viet Nam in their struggle with the Communists? It wasn't an inherited situation; doctrines evolved by Kennedy aides like John McCloy, Robert Macnamara, Maxwell Taylor and others emphasized developing guerrilla-warfare capabilities to meet and defeat Communist-run "wars of national liberation", or
b. Carried through with the Bay of Pigs operation, or
c. Acquiesced in the South Vietnamese coup d'etat against President Ngo Dinh Diem in 1963? or
d. Got involved with two teenaged girls nicknamed "Fiddle" and "Faddle" by the Secret Service, with Marilyn Monroe, and with Sam "Momo" Giancana's girlfriend, Judy Campbell (Exner), in a series of satyriac flings in the White House whenever Jackie was away?
You got some 'splainin' to do, Rucy.
Meanwhile, a couple of general observations:
You say you're a Southerner, in particular a Mississippian, but you post like a Northern liberal who's been brainwashed by the NEA and by PC academia.
You also sound quite young, so your political education is only beginning. You will find a lot of it here at FreeRepublic.
Meanwhile, you can help your cause a lot by reading as much about history as you can. History, with its anecdotal compilation of what becomes, in the aggregate, data (and the aggregate of data is information, and the next order above information is knowledge, and then wisdom, in a steady staircase climb to atman-consciousness and direct knowledge of divinity, which is promised to just and righteous Christians upon their decease, and which Indian mahants, sufi mystics, Jewish cabalists, Christian hermits, and Buddhist monks strive for while still alive. Upon your arrival at that exalted state of consciousness, you won't need history any more. Until then, it's your surest guide -- and the antidote for Left-wing feelgood bromides about nonjudgmental inclusivity in a Barney-the-Dinosaur world.
I once read an interesting article about the worldview of Constantinople in the age of Heraclius and Charlemagne, and how it was, rather than cosmopolitan as might befit a cosmopolis, narrow and provincial instead. Byzantines insisted on viewing actors like Charlemagne through the prism of imperial experience with barbarism, even as they gathered great artworks of antiquity in the Baths of Zeuxippus like some great lumber-room, rather in the manner of what Germans would in the High Middle Ages and Renaissance call a Kunstzimmer, in which the German prince, in his capacity as host, would entertain his guests with a roomful of bric-a-brac, a collection of novelties, curiosities, decorations, furniture, and art.
But the Byzantine Greek would recoil from any such comparison, persisting in his view of himself as civilized, and of others as barbarians. The bulk of the article was taken up with examples, and with illustrating the various ways in which Byzantine Greeks hurt themselves and their interest with their peculiar parochialism.
New Yorkers exhibit something of the same sort of worldview today, when they talk about the country beyond the Palisades as "flyover country" and despise presidents produced by that vast and powerful country as "cowboys" and "yahoos".
Now it is you who appear confused. Let me try to clarify.
I do not see Al Qaeda as Freedom Fighters, I see them as they are – fanatical, evil extremists and terrorists who are determined to weaken, if not destroy the United States - the nation I love, the nation I owe my allegiance to. It is you who refuses to see the confederates for who they were, unpatriotic terrorists and traitors to the United States of America. How patriotic is it to abandon your country (the United States) and take up arms against her (Fort Sumter)? Call it state’s rights if you like, try to sugar coat it as you will, but slavery was at the root of the conflict and slavery and slavery practices were as wrong as Saddem Hussein’s rule of his people. In the 1860's the United States was fighting for freedom, freedom of the slaves. What would have been the outcome if the South had won the Civil War. Would we still be practicing slavery? Would you condone that? There is no justification for the Civil War.
Our country is based upon the ideal that “All men are created equal” and that was what the federal government, the United States government, was attempting to ensure, that is what you try explain away as to states rights versus federal authority. The confederate states were part of the United States. That they chose to secede was clearly a treasonous act against the United States and each member of the government and each citizen of the states who supported secession were traitors. (Traitor - one who commits treason. Treason the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance or to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign's family.) (Abraham Lincoln, the President of the United States was killed by a confederate sympathizer.)
Okay, let's get this straight. Osma Bin Laden is not the same man as Saddam Hussein. Though both are evil, it was Osma Bin Laden, Al Qaida and the Taliban that have claimed responsibility for:
1993 World Trade Center
1995 bombing in Saudi Arabia,
1996 Khobar Towers bombing
1998 bombing of U.S. embassies in Africa
2000 bombing of the USS Cole
2001 destruction of the World Trade Centers
2002 killing of Daniel Pearl
2004 killing of Nicholas Berg
Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, one of the main architects of the “war” in Iraq, has admitted that Iraq had nothing to do with the September 11 terrorist attacks, contradicting public statements made by senior White House and Pentagon officials whose attempt to link Saddam Hussein and the terrorist organization al-Qaida was cited by the Bush administration as one of the main reasons for launching a preemptive strike in March against Iraq. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4372.htm
Osma bin Laden and his top soldiers (the Al Qaida) are still out there, still causing havoc and have continued with their terrorist assaults since 9/11/2001. G.W. Bush does not have the war on terrorism covered, he and his administration have covered up their ulterior motives for waging a undeclared war in Iraq. They have used their assault on Iraq to cover up the fact that they have failed to stop Osma bin Laden and the Al Qaeda and have failed to bring to justice Osma Bin Laden and his soldiers. G.W. (Dubya) used the tragedy of 9/11 to attack Iraq and finish what his father failed to do in 1991. He and his friends have used 9/11 to seize one of the largest oil fields in the world, for profit and gain, not for justice and democracy, but out of greed.
As a “true” American you should be appalled that Dubya has cut and continues to cut the benefits to veteran's and his party and administration constantly threaten base closings while we have people being maimed and killed in a war that he created, a war that is his tar baby - he is stuck in it - with no real exit strategy. (Daddy George tried to persuade him not to go to war in Iraq and warned him that if he did, he better have a great exit strategy.) By going to war he showed he has no respect for the U.N., NATO, the citizens of this country (he lied regarding the reasons for the war, REMEMBER), the soldiers who are fighting and dying, the soldiers families, the citizens of the world and HIS FATHER. What an honorable man he is! The ones profiting from this war are the private contractors who have been given the bids to provide security and other services in Iraq. Outsourcing costs are outrageous. A member of a private security force can make tax free $100,000.00 a year, if not more, in Iraq and are provided all of the weaponery they need (part of the contract to provide the outsourced services). Our military is paid next to nothing and they don't have enough bullets, protective vests or armoured vehicles. Bases are being closed, the military has to pay taxes on benefits (housing) it receives, VA hospitals are being shut down and military benefits have been cut by Dubya and his administration. Do you not see the inequites? We are not fighting terrorism in our nation, we are not fighting to maintain our Nation's freedom -- the "war" in Iraq is justifying (in their minds) the actions of the terrorists and putting our nation in a more perilous position than it was before 9/11.
To wage war on innocent people because you confuse them with people who have committed the terrorist acts of some who share their culture or look like them is not only preposterous, it is WRONG. The Taliban/Al Qaida is to Muslims as the KKK is to "true" Christians. They are extremists who have confused the messages of their religious faith and have used their confused and warped believes as valid reasons to attack and condemn people who think, act and live differently than they do. Just because their cause may be based in their warped understanding of their religion does not mean that their religion is wrong or evil. The KKK was (is?) a terrorist group who killed hundreds, if not thousands, bombed churches, terrorized hundred of thousands all in the name of white, Christianity and white supremacy. How are they any different than the Al Qaida? Should our country have gone into the states that harbored the KKK and waged war on them, just because a few of its citizens were terrorists?
What I find so amazing is that you so called “true Americans” can support the conflict in Iraq can sit quietly as our government attacks a broken country (Daddy Bush did attack and destroy their military and Clinton’s “containment” was effective, that is why the overthrow was so quick, add to that the sanctions, and Saddam Hussein and the Baath party were just bullies holding on to their power by terrorizing their own people, not us) all in the name of freedom and democracy, yet our nation does nothing to put down the wrongs in North Korea and the Suddan. They have the weapons of mass destruction, they have the bomb and they have continued to torment, terrorize and murder those who opposed them, yet we attack Iraq. I guess Korea and the Suddan do not have the oil fields that can make Bush, Cheney and their buddies millions and millions of dollars.
Yes, the United States is rebuilding Iraq, but remember it was the United States that destroyed it.
What was once a great nation, the United States - once known for its efforts to rebuild nations, not destroy them, has been altered terribly by those in power now, thus the rest of the world hate us. Instead of fostering trust and respect, we have instilled fear and distrust, we have given Osma bin Laden and the Al Qaida further cause to hate us and we have helped their numbers grow.
Instead of replying to this writing with your cute little responses (YGTBSM), I challenge you to research what is happening. Read all information available to you, not just right wing publications but liberal, left wing writings, writings throughout the world, use the internet to your advantage and see for yourself how destructive the “war” in Iraq has been to our nation If you were ever in the military you should know that a platoon is only as strong as its weakest member. Instead of ignoring the weaker member, you help strengthen him, you build him up to make him strong to bolster your platoon’s strengths. That is how it is in the nation, we are only as strong as our weakest members, instead of ignoring them we must build them up, strengthen them so that they can stand on their own and thus strengthen our nation.
Liberalism, like every other species of totalism, thrives best in the dark.
Amen, amen.
Fought for Virginia, btw, notwithstanding that he though secession a bad idea, and notwithstanding that Abraham Lincoln had summoned him from Texas to offer him overall command of the United States Army.
Was it 55% of the black voters?
Wardaddy thought it was 40%.
55% all the better.
Maybe some free speech issues here but the cold, hard facts of life are that the Confederate battle-flag symbol and Osama Bin Laden are well-grounded in anti-Americanism!
I have to respectfully disagree with you (at least about the flag)
The battle flag in question was of The Confederate States of America, just because the North won that war doesn't give them the right to claim they were the ONLY Americans in that fight.
Just because the South seceded (or tried to) we are (and were) still proud to be Americans.
I had kin fighting under that flag just as I had kin fighting under the stars and stripes in Europe and the Pacific.
That old flag may stir up thoughts of hate in some but it still stirs great pride in the hearts of many in the South.
Well said.
General Dwight D. Eisenhower (a well known and respected Republican president), was so against war that when he was president, he formed NATO.
I apologize for my misstatement. Eisenhower was the first Commander of NATO from 1951 until 1953, he did recognize and practiced restraint (from the use of the military). Restraint does not mean we shut down intelligence efforts to monitor and/or identify threats. Eisenhower stated “my enemy’s enemy is my friend” he knew that Communism was a threat. He was meeting with Stalin on the day the bomb was dropped on Japan. At that point, he recognized the danger our nation was in. He saw the dropping of the bomb as unnecessary as we had already defeated Japan. He witnessed first hand how our aggressions put us in harms way, instilling fear and distrust in our allies and enemies. Instead of respect, we were feared and distrusted (sound familiar?).
As for Kennedy's "restraint"..........how "restrained" was he when he:
d. Got involved with two teenaged girls nicknamed "Fiddle" and "Faddle" by the Secret Service, with Marilyn Monroe, and with Sam "Momo" Giancana's girlfriend, Judy Campbell (Exner), in a series of satyriac flings in the White House whenever Jackie was away?
And you chastise me for cheap shots.
What Kennedy did in his private life is of no concern to me. I don’t care what affairs he or Nixon or Washington or Johnson or Eisenhower or any of the other presidents had while in office, it makes no difference to me. I try to look at their accomplishments and how those accomplishments bolstered our standings in this world. In your list you failed to reference the Cuban Missile Crisis. Kennedy’s restraint in October of 1962 prevented a nuclear holocaust. Restraint, yes Ricky, restraint!
Yes, I am young and naïve and hopeful and a true believer in the principals upon which our nation was built. Old wise one, I challenge you to go back and study the Revolutionary War and our founding fathers reasons for fighting it. Liberals, our founding fathers were liberals and I proudly stand by them as a liberal, believing in the values and principals upon which our nation was built.
Your clever quips do not respond to the obvious questions that are out there. How has the “war” in Iraq strengthened our nation? How can the “powers that be” claim to support our troops in one breath, yet pass laws that take away veterans benefits, give the profits of this war to private contractors through outsourcing and restore power to the same political power they “overthrew” in Iraq? Remember it was Dubya who announced the mission was over a year ago. Yet, we remain, our soldiers continue to die and the people of Iraq continue to know terror and abuse at our hands.
The GOP is one grand pyramid scam. Their disguises, rationalizations and defenses have a similar ring to all other pyramid schemes. The party claims that they are uplifting people, setting them free, creating new opportunity, and teaching them a new and better way to live and prosper. As in all such abuses of the past, huge amounts of money are spread to peddle influence, stave off regulation, and maintain the false portrayal of legitimacy. Critics are vilified and threatened with lawsuits and prosecution as "anti-business" "losers" and "traitors." The element of the pyramid scheme that has the most in common with past abuses is its appeal to economic justification. Deceptive practices which take money from millions of unwitting people and enrich a small group of promoters and perpetrators are defended as "legitimate business," helping to build the economy, employ people, and provide economic opportunity. (Privatization, outsourcing, et cetera!)
http://www.pyramidschemealert.org/schemes/schemeindex.htm
I will follow your sage advice and continue to study history. I suggest that you go back and study it again. At the same time, open your mind to the world around you and recognize the precarious position our nation is in.
After 9/11 the world was behind us because the assaults were unjustified. Now, because our invasion of Iraq was unjustified and because we are the “oppressive” power, we are feared and distrusted. Someone on this site has stated “Al Qaida for Kerry” when in fact it is the opposite. (Again, I challenge you to go outside of the United States and study the writings of people from other nations.) Al Qaida wants Bush to remain in power, he gives the terrorists purpose and a cause to fight against. Bush is to Al Qaida and its supporters as Bin Laden is to the United States - the perfect example of evil.
Our nation is vulnerable, our home front is not protected, our military is stretched thin and the obvious terrorist targets are not secure. We need to be protected on the home front. Freedom, security and liberty should start at home before we try to force our values on other nations.
Yes, Virginia was a nationstate ~ courtesy of the Treaty of Paris ending the Revolutionary War.
Western Virginia was separately admitted to the Union, and Bobby Lee found no problem whatsoever in raising his sword against his fellow Virginians who resided in that area.
The only fair conclusion is that Lee wasn't really sure why he was raising his sword ~ unless you know how his Daddy went bankrupt ~ selling land in Indiana, et al, for a lower price than he'd paid for it. (One of my own ancestors worked as his land agent for several years peddling the Swamp Lands).
A case can be made that the man was out for revenge and it didn't have anything to do with competing patriotism. Like Tip O'Neil said, "all politics is local", and with Lee, "local" was fairly personal.
"The only fair conclusion is that Lee wasn't really sure why he was raising his sword ~ unless you know how his Daddy went bankrupt "
I wonder what your daddy did to raise a son so morally bankrupt? You would do well to study, learn and emulate Lee.
You gotta' be kidding!
Not everybody shares in the belief that Lee was a great man. I know that's gonna' be hard for some to believe, but it's true.
"Not everybody shares in the belief that Lee was a great man. I know that's gonna' be hard for some to believe, but it's true."
Then you are just ignorant and not merely mis-guided. It it explains your behavior.
Good day, sir.
You are misconstruing words on a screen for "behavior". That's the first step in developing a totalitarian mindset.
"You are misconstruing words on a screen for "behavior". That's the first step in developing a totalitarian mindset."
LOL! I didn't mean to get you off track little man. Return to bashing Lee at will.
You should be more concerned with the prospect of becoming a Canadian!
Hardly.
The U.S. Civil War was fought over the competing principals of secession and union. I.e., states' rights. Had the southern states not seceded, there would have been no Civil War.
If the Civil War had been fought for the freedom of slaves, then the Emancipation Proclamation would have applied to slaves in every state of the union, would it not? However, the Emancipation Proclamation specifically freed only the slaves residing in the states then in rebellion -- the Confederate States. Slaves in Kentucky, Missouri, Maryland and Delaware remained what they had been before, slaves.
Lentulus Gracchus gave you some excellent advice in the final paragraph of #102. I also suggest you become more familiar with history.
and my reply to sage lentulus applies to you -- I suggest you re-educate yourself on the principals that our nation was founded upon and revisit Revolutionary War history. States rights or anti slavery - the confederates fought against the armies of the United States, who, using your own words - had the right to shot back. Secession is treason, especially if the use of force is part of the secession.
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.