Posted on 04/01/2018 9:05:49 AM PDT by Simon Green
Over the decades, this quiet coastal hamlet has earned a reputation as one of the most liberal places in the nation. Arcata was the first U.S. city to ban the sale of genetically modified foods, the first to elect a majority Green Party city council and one of the first to tacitly allow marijuana farming before pot was legal.
Now it's on the verge of another first.
No other city has taken down a monument to a president for his misdeeds. But Arcata is poised to do just that. The target is an 8½-foot bronze likeness of William McKinley, who was president at the turn of the last century and stands accused of directing the slaughter of Native peoples in the U.S. and abroad.
"Put a rope around its neck and pull it down," Chris Peters shouted at a recent rally held at the statue, which has adorned the central square for more than a century.
Peters, who heads the Arcata-based Seventh Generation Fund for Indigenous People, called McKinley a proponent of "settler colonialism" that "savaged, raped and killed."
A presidential statue would be the most significant casualty in an emerging movement to remove monuments honoring people who helped lead what Native groups describe as a centuries-long war against their very existence.
The push follows the rapid fall of Confederate memorials across the South in a victory for activists who view them as celebrating slavery. In the nearly eight months since white supremacists marched in central Virginia to protest the removal of a Robert E. Lee statue, cities across the country have yanked dozens of Confederate monuments. Black politicians and activists have been among the strongest supporters of the removals.
This time, it's tribal activists taking charge, and it's the West and California in particular leading the way.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
As was Bedford Forrest at Fort Pillow, Wirz at Andersonville, and the Confederate Government for their refusal to treat captured black soldiers as prisoners of war.
Did you mean Stand Watie?
A diet too rich in deloranzo?
Nope - well sorta.
Soon it’s all statues of historical figures except the few approved by the radical left. And then it’s history books.
LOL...I thought so...(I am part Ani Yun Wiya, myself)
The ship owners who brought the slaves to America were almost entirely northerners. Northerners, the people who ended up forcing the South to count blacks as 3/5’s of a person for representational purposes. Northerners, who had rigged the tariff and export laws to the extent that they (northerners) were making almost as much money off of slavery as were the plantation owners of the South. Yea, north good, South bad. Stick it.
I never said the north did nothing. I said the south did to africans worse than lincoln did to them. Bite on that reb
Stop playing the fool.
Lieber Code, Article 85: "War-rebels are persons within an occupied territory who rise in arms against the occupying or conquering army, or against the authorities established by the same. If captured, they may suffer death, whether they rise singly, in small or large bands, and whether called upon to do so by their own, but expelled, government or not. They are not prisoners of war; nor are they if discovered and secured before their conspiracy has matured to an actual rising or armed violence."
Lieber Code, Article 89: "If a citizen of the United States obtains information in a legitimate manner, and betrays it to the enemy, be he a military or civil officer, or a private citizen, he shall suffer death."
Leiber Code, Article 91: "The war-traitor is always severely punished. If his offense consists in betraying to the enemy anything concerning the condition, safety, operations, or plans of the troops holding or occupying the place or district, his punishment is death."
Leiber Code, Article 92: "If the citizen or subject of a country or place invaded or conquered gives information to his own government, from which he is separated by the hostile army, or to the army of his government, he is a war-traitor, and death is the penalty of his offense."
Sherman's suggestion to General Watson was in response to continued guerrilla attacks on Union trains. Activities that the Lieber Code, which you revere but never read, takes a dim view of.
Oh its absolutely true. And you can suck it extra hard.
The same could’ve been said by any of a number of other war criminals.
You really don't know much about the history of the period, do you?
No thank you
Only what was presented in his “My Little General” neo-confederate coloring book.
There’s this mistaken impression many seem to have, that the southern United States somehow invented the African slave trade, uniquely participated in it and was the sole enforcer of the practice. Fact is, the entire country allowed it at one time, chattel slavery came to us in the colonial era prior to the existence of the United States and certainly prior to the very short existence of the Confederacy. It continued to exist well after the defeat of the Confederacy and still exists in the world. There’s not a one of us whose ancestors escaped slavery in one form or another, if you go back far enough in history. It just was, it was a legal status of certain people in society that had been accepted for thousands of years. So, maybe a little perspective is in order. This simplistic grunting out “north good, grunt, south bad” is embarrassing to FR.
The Federal Governments only cash payments to the railroads before the Civil War was for hauling Federal freight and the United States Mail. They paid those monies to the railroads in the North and to the railroads in the South. The Federal Government did not directly subsidize any railroad construction in the United States until the Transcontinental Railroad project, which started after the Southern States seceded from the Union.
What arrogance. Killing all those young men in the prime of their lives wasn’t good enough. You have to live with the guilt of massaging the truth to justify the truth that Confederacy was created on the concept that it was justifiable to own people as one owned a dog or a horse. Creating a constitution that codified that principle to the point that it was illegal for any state of the Confederacy to outlaw the institution of slavery. To be a member of the Confederacy you had to recognize the legitimacy of the Slavery.
When that's all you've got it's what you bring out. And that's basically all the Bird has.
Really? Leaving aside the fact that the Leiber Code is not an international agreement, where does it forbid that?
Just so we’re clear. You’re arguing that the Lieber Code does not forbid the deliberate targeting of civilians?
You’re arguing that the deliberate targeting of civilians had been acceptable as general practice among Western powers and by the Lieber Code?
That’s funny. This is precisely what I’ve noticed of you.
You mean like the arch-criminal jeff davis?
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.