Kevin Levin Ain't the Voice of God

Kevin Levin writes:

I suspect that the Confederate flag story out of Lexington will go viral by the end of the day. No doubt, we will be treated to the standard mainstream media narrative of an unfinished Civil War as well as the overly defensive posture of the SCV. Already we’ve heard from Brandon Dorsey, who is the local SCV commander in Lexington:

As far as I am concerned, this is little different that some states shutting down all their public schools to avoid desegregation and then claiming their motivation for closing them is of no concern because they screwed over everyone.

Oh brother. Pass the hyperbole. The SCV and other heritage groups have staked everything on the display of the Confederate flag. It’s all or nothing. Any attempt at limiting its visibility is seen as an attack on their history and heritage as if they alone have a monopoly on the Southern past.

What tripe! Just because the SCV's defense of the flag is the only thing Kevin Levin pays attention to does not meant that's the only thing the SCV cares about or works on. Sheesh.

The days when the Confederate flag represented a people, a culture, and a history are over. Thankfully, we now live in a time when an ever wider spectrum of voices are able to make their voices heard and they are adamant that the flag ought not to be displayed on public property and/or supported with taxpayer dollars. Why? Because of its history and nothing the SCV or anyone else says or does can change the flag’s symbolic connection to a history of violence and racism. I suspect that most reasonable people would agree that there are settings in which its display is appropriate and even necessary, but that is a discussion the SCV will not consider.

The days when the Confederate flag was connected with violence and racism are over. Today, hysterical charges of racism are the last gasp of the sick and weakened left struggling for relevance. Thankfully, we now live in a time when all voices are supposed to be heard. Unfortunately, people like Kevin Levin apply that principle selectively. Regardless, Southern heritage advocates are slowly turning the tide of public opinion despite the best efforts of Dixie-bashing bloggers like Levin to prevent it. Keeping Southern history and heritage "evil" is what "memory" type blogs like his are all about.

This has nothing to do with hating the South or “evilizing” the Confederacy. That is as unimaginative an argument as one can make and as we have seen it will lead to the SCV’s continued marginalization in society. The SCV’s decision to stake everything on the flag reflects a simplistic understanding of the very history and heritage that they claim to defend. Instead of wasting limited resources on court cases, television ads, and airplane banners they should be thinking of creative ways to share the rich history of the Confederacy and their ancestors in their local communities.

It has everything to do with hating the South and evilizing the Confederacy, which is Kevin Levin's whole motivation for teaching, blogging and writing. The SCV isn't marginalized in society because of anything it does; it is marginalized for the same reason family, religion and tradition are attacked and marginalized by the insidious forces participating in Gramsci's long march though the institutions. Moreover, the SCV hasn't staked everything on the flag. The are defending it because it is the number one target of the heritage erasers....

When it comes to the Confederate flag the SCV is doomed to fail and they deserve everything they get.

Ah, yes. The hubris... the arrogance. Spoken as if by someone who thinks it's the voice of God speaking...

It ain't.

He doesn't seem to realize that the courts aren't the only legitimate way to change things.... There's already efforts organizing to replace at the ballot box Lexington's elected officials who are evilizing the South and its history and heritage by targeting its symbols for erasure.

Strange blog fellows....

There's a discussion in the comments at Crossroads about Brooks Simpson's pet white supremacist, Hunter Wallace. Apparently some of the regulars over there aren't comfortable with the forum Simpson gives to Wallace. One of them asks, "Any chance of him getting permanent deleted?"

Simpson pontificates, "I make my decisions on a case-by-case basis. In this instance Mr. Wallace has not attacked another poster and has offered an explanation of a term much in use in some places. Should I ban the posting of comments with which I disagree simply because I disagree with them?"

Why not, Simpson? You ban mine because you disagree with them.

He continues, "I suspect that Mr. Wallace is not making any converts here; what interests me is how much he has in common with those Confederate “heritage” advocates who feel uncomfortable about his acceptance of the role of white supremacy in the Old South and the Confederacy. I suspect they share much more in common when it comes to present-day attitudes about race, as we’ve seen."

Wonder which Confederate "heritage" advocates he's talking about. I haven't noticed that many of us feeling uncomfortable about Wallace's acceptance of the role of white supremacy in the Old South and the Confederacy. I think, quite the opposite from what Simpson suggests, it's that most Confederate heritage advocates do not share his blatant racism and resent his using Confederate heritage to promote it.

Most of us know quite well that white supremacy existed in the Old South and the Confederacy. We also know it existed in the north and the USA as well, and we simply don't relate to folks like Brooks Simpson and his Dixie-bashing brethren giving the north a pass by ignoring its white supremacy and its crucial role in slavery to focus their total evilization campaign on the South.

More Devious Deception from Brooks D. Simpson

(So, what do y'all think the D. stands for, Devious or Deception?)

Here'a a stellar example of how Simpson lies. And so many of them in such a short space!

From Crossroads:

"Seems there’s been a call to denounce “Confederate Flag porno blogging,” whatever that is; failure to do so, we are told, means “Silence Equals Consent.” So this is evidence that I haven’t been silent (I have no idea what this is about).

Whatever that is? When Simpson goes jackbooting through Confederate blogs and groups in order to find stuff to lie about and heritage advocates to savage, does he even read what he's lying about? Confederate flag porno blogging is clearly explained and identified in the blog entry he's verbally brutalizing.
http://one80dts.blogspot.com/2012/06/coupla-days-ago-somebody-using-facebook.html

"I haven’t see “Confederate Flag porno blogging” denounced by the Virginia Flaggers, so I guess they are expressing consent."

Members of the Virginia flaggers reported the porno blog to Blogger and so noted on Facebook. That's not silence, and it is most definitely denouncing. That Simpson doesn't know about it is yet another example of his infantile attitude that if he doesn't know about it, it doesn't exist.

"I’m afraid to ask why certain folks are so excited by this 'issue.'”

Denouncing pornographic filth created to denigrate the Confederate flag and heritage advocates (and misportray them) is not being excited, it's being concerned.

Seeking to identify the person who did it and concluding from the available evidence that it was probably an outspoken critic of Southern heritage (who has a track record for lying just like Brooks D. Simpson does) is not being excited. It is pursuit of truth.

Perhaps Simpson, a professor at a major state university, doesn't know the difference between excitement and concern. Nah. More likely, he's playing dumb in order to lie. He's done that before.

"Maybe they’re interested in new images for their ever-changing cover art."

If Simpson is talking about me, he's lying. (What a surprise, huh?) My cover art is not "ever-changing." One of my three published covers has been changed.

However, even if it was true, my book with a redesigned cover would be in good company:

To Kill a Mockingbird covers: http://bit.ly/LKuZLi
Others: http://www.flavorwire.com/101979/now-then-redesigned-book-covers

Obviously, this unwarranted criticism about cover art (he'd call it satire or parody to cover his sorry behind) is just gratuitous irrelevancy of a very mean-spirited kind, and illustrates just what a petty little man he is.

"The same blogger insists that the Virginia Flaggers are achieving great things, only we don’t know about them. I’d say they are well-kept secrets."

Lie #1. I didn't insist anything. Didn't use the word "great," either. I said they are effective. As they are used here, "insist" and "great" are manipulative words designed to wrongly influence Simpson's readers. Judging by past comments, some of them are quite gullible and thus easily swayed by his manipulative language.

Lie #2. I didn't say we. I said, "A lot of hard (and effective) work takes place off the sidewalk and many successes aren't known to the public."

Lie #3. I said," But the major visible accomplishment of the Virginia flaggers is that they are desensitizing the public to the image of the flag that has been the object of removal campaigns from one end of Dixie to the other. In the minds of observers, they are associating the flag with ordinary, decent folks and not the scum-sucking racists people have been conditioned to associate with the flag." This is hardly a well-kept secret.

"Of course, this is the same person who has already testified about the ineffectiveness of Confederate heritage groups."

Blatant.baldfaced lie. I said, to paraphrase, one particular Confederate heritage group on Facebook is ineffective against the powerful forces arrayed against Southern heritage and I clearly explained why -- they're informal discussion groups without funds or legal status.

My exact words:

I think it's very important to fight the efforts of those who war against Southern heritage. What I said was that the Southern Heritage Preservation Group does not have the power or influence of, say, the SCV, which has tens of thousands of members, a treasury, and a legal arm for use of the courts. The SHPG is a Facebook group. It has officers, but no legal status, no dues collected from members, no treasury... and it takes money to fight the powers and principalities arrayed against us, make no mistake about it. Individual members of the group may be very effective in fighting those who war against Southern heritage; they may be members of other organizations that are also effective. But the SHPG itself is for the dissemination of information and sharing of opinions.

I've also stated that that my own personal efforts -- this blog and my proSouthern novels -- also have little to no power or influence. I'm just one person. I also don't have a lot of money. My outside activism is restricted, as I cannot walk or stand except for very brief periods. I do what I can online, and with my writing. Thus far, my writing has had little effect. So why do I perist? Because I have faith. I may never accomplish great things for Dixie -- but who knows but what something I write will inspire someone who can, and will, accomplish great things for the South?

* * *

Simpson's finale:

"The war within continues."

There is no war within, only people in Southern heritage that have differing opinions. There are, however, vicious verbal attacks from without, rooted in hatred (you got a better explanation?) and a totalitarian mindset that reviles anyone who dares to see things differently -- at which Brooks D. Simpson is a master.

What the Virginia Flaggers Are Accomplishing

Listen to Dixie-bashing bloggers like Kevin Levin, Andy Hall, Brooks Simpson and Corey Meyer and you'd think the Virginia flaggers are completely ineffective activists or self-absorbed attention seekers.

The flags aren't back up at the Pelham Chapel. The UDC has sicced the law on the flaggers. The MoC/Appomattox has ignored them. Thus, flagging is unproductive.

What we have here is the infantile mindset, "If I don't know about it, it doesn't exist.," or "...it hasn't happened."

We also see among the critics folks whose patience isn't as long as their p--pinky. Changing public perception and opinion doesn't happen overnight, or in a few months, and sometimes not for years. I'm sure the Dixie-bashing bloggers know this, but when your aim is to insult and denigrate, truth is the last thing you care about.

If the experience and history of the Georgia Flaggers are anything to go by, there's more to the phenomenon that staging public flaggings. A lot of hard (and effective) work takes place off the sidewalk and many successes aren't known to the public.

But the major visible accomplishment of the Virginia flaggers is that they are desensitizing the public to the image of the flag that has been the object of removal campaigns from one end of Dixie to the other. In the minds of observers, they are associating the flag with ordinary, decent folks and not the scum-sucking racists people have been conditioned to associate with the flag.

That has to be distressing to folks are dedicated to dishonoring and evilizing the flag to justify its removal from the Southern landscape. There's nothing they'd like more than to see it stashed in the bottom drawer in the dank, cobwebby basement of some museum.

The emergence of the flaggers means the accomplishment of that goal is no longer as certain as it once was.

_______________________

Photo source: Confederate Flaggers Facebook Group

Oh, What a Tangled Web They Weave...

Coupla days ago, somebody using the Facebook profile Tyler Ratke posted on his wall, and on Backsass, a link to a blog titled "Confederate Flaggers" which combines hatred for the flag as well as hatred of Southern heritage and its advocates, with pornographic filth.

The wall post included Tyler's very poorly feigned "outrage" over the site ("What a damned disgrace of our Noble Flag. Is there anything that can be done about sites like this?" (http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003842692868&sk=wall)

Now, I and some others had long suspected "Tyler Ratke" of being yet another in a long line of fake Facebook profiles for ultra-Dixie-hater Corey Meyer. I also suspected the pornoblog of being Corey's creation because (1) he has a track record of obsession with scantily clad babes and (2) because back in May, using his fake profile as "Robert Billy," he had contacted me via Facebook messenger promoting the pornoblog for inclusion on the Backsass list of Anti-Southern Heritage Blogs. He called it my "list of prey," which, of course, would have outed him as an anti-Confederate right there, if he hadn't already outed himself. I advised him that site was not prey, it was carrion.

Never again heard from "Robert Billy".

So a day or two ago, when "Tyler" posted a link to the same pornoblog in a Backsass thread, I asked him a few leading questions. He gave some really lame answers, disappeared from the thread for a while, and then returned to announce that the site was gone.

Click to see full size image.
"It does not seem to work now. Maybe blogger pulled it due to its content not being set as 'adult'. Gone. Good enough for me." Interesting that he has such knowledge of Blogger, but elsewhere claimed to not know much about Facebook because he was "new" (a claim not unlike one "Robert Billy" made to me).

In any case, he (Corey/Tyler) was completely wrong (as he well knew). He didn't originally set the pornoblog as "adult" because the people he wanted to insult with it generally don't/won't visit blogs when there's a pre-warning like Blogger's, telling them it's an "adult" (i.e.,filth) blog. And we know Blogger didn't just up and decide to pull it, because some Southern heritage folks had reported it to Blogger some time ago, and it stayed up until yesterday, when "Tyler" got skeered of being outed as Corey-the-porno-blogger and took it down in a state of panic.

He put the blog back up in a matter of hours, but with the filthy pictures removed! It now displays some SCV symbols. It's still built on a lie, though. The anonymous blogger, named "Rebel Flag," purports to be a charter member of the Virginia flagger -- none of whom are anonymous.

"Tyler" disappeared again, along with all his messages on Backsass. Too bad; I was going to show some of the similarities between his comments and those that "Robert Billy" messaged to me. I'm thoroughly convinced they're one and the same, but perhaps not everyone is. So the similarities would have greatly heightened for the uncertain the probability that "Tyler" is Corey Meyer. How? Well, because Corey admitted to me in a message thread that "Robert Billy" was a fake profile he made to get access to, and spy on, the Southern Heritage Preservation Group, from whom his actual profile (Kindred Blood) and previous fake ones had been blocked.

I took screenshots of the message thread where Corey admitted being Robert Billy and posted on Backsass a link to the resulting graphic.

Click to see full size image.
Shortly thereafter, in a comment thread on his blog, Corey waxed indignant:

"You are hereby banned from The Blood of My Kindred. You continue to accuse me of doing things that I have not done. Your latest is a photoshop image of a Facebook page where I “claim” to be a person named “Robert Billy”…nice bit of work Connie, you should work in the computer industry for some two-bit dictator doctoring documents. From this point on Connie you will have no access to comments on this site…post all you want, none of them will see the light of day."

Yep, it's photoshopped, no doubt about it, and I have no problem whatever admitting it. I had to put two screenshots together to show all the related messages, and that required graphics processing. I smeared out the info on my left sidebar. And I put a big red border around Corey's admission that Robert Billy was his fake profile. But not one word of the text was changed.

Since he had lied about me on his blog comment thread, I emailed to him (and to one of his buddies, the Dixie-bashing, self-styled "intellectual" -- Mr. Tu Quoque himself -- Rob Baker) the actual messages off the Facebook thread, using Facebook's email.

So far, he hasn't accused me of hacking Facebook.

In any case, I sufficiently established that Corey Meyer/Robert Billy were the same "person" and while Robert Billy's promotion of the anti-Confederate pornoblog is not proof that Corey is the pornoblogger (and very likely "Tyler Radke," too) it shows extreme probability that he is.

It'll be interesting so see whether Cousin Perfesser, in his usual persona or his attempted disguise persona, will condemn Confederate Flag porno blogging, whether or not he agrees with my conclusion that the pornoblogger is his good friend Corey Meyer. Be interesting to see if Andy Hall and Kevin Levin have any thoughts on Confederate Flag porno blogging, too.

Frankly, I expect dead ringing silence from all of them. And you know the saying -- Silence Equals Consent.

Cousin Perfesser Lyin' Again

Cousin-Perfesser-trying-to-be-anonymous is doing what he does best -- lyin' like a rug....

My blog essay about the sins of the USA absolving the Confederacy for the "sin" of slavery did not make the point "two wrongs make a right (or make the first one right)," as he's trying to claim, and was never intended to.

I've had others disagree with my opinion, and that's fine. It is just my opinion; and when the disagreeing is civil and thoughtful, I don't mind the challenge.

What makes the sins of the United States government relevant in this issue is that the Union made brutal war on the South. It wasn't without sin but it cast the first stone at the Confederacy, and then, buried the South with boulders of brutality -- why? For being no worse than the union. And then the United States went for a hundred and fifty more years accumulating more sin -- one of them the continued economic and social oppression of Southerners.

The reason I originally put "sins" in irony quotes is because the people (with a handful of exceptions) who convicted the South of this particular sin never considered it a sin when THEY were doing it -- and thus had no moral authority for their barbaric war on the South. All the sins of the USA that came afterward just underscores their unfitness for taking it upon themselves to judge and punish.

But maybe the simplistic notion of two wrongs don't make a right is the greatest depth of complexity Cousin Perfesser can conceptualize. If that's the extent of his analytical abilities, attempting to explain it to him will be futile. It's hilarious, though, in view of his talking about seeing "how someone's excuse for a brain works."

He loves to disparage the intelligence of people he hates, and does it in both of his blogs. I guess calling other folks "stoopid" gives people like him a boost of confidence about their own ... intellectual abilities....and feeds his self-aggrandizement. Wonder if he does it to students in his classroom....

I don't like throwing off on people's mental capabilities except as satire, as it was in this case. Generally speaking, people have no control over the level of their intelligence. Anyone who sincerely and seriously denigrates another person's intelligence is behaving reprehensibly, the same as making fun of someone who is mentally retarded. So I confine my comments about Cousin Perfesser's intelligence to satirical counter-attacks -- i.e., in response to his attacks on other people's intelligence.

I know he's intellectually capable... That's why I prefer to keep my genuine denigration of him focused on something else -- his questionable ethics, basically, his lying about me, about Southern heritage, about others he takes a dislike to -- sometimes with big, baldfaced lies, sometimes with sneaky, snide innuendo...

Of course, he can't do satire -- slapstick schtick is as close as he can come -- so lies are about the only thing he has to fall back on...

So he lies like a rug....

Dixie-basher Makes Mendacity an Art Form

Cousin Perfesser continues to violate the copyright notice on my blog, copying and pasting my original content to his bizarro Crossroads blog. This is obviously his admission that he doesn't take copyrights seriously, and his permission for me to violate his copyright notice and copy-paste content from his blog to mine....

It's always fascinating to see his smear-by-association attempts (even when it's a fabricated association that exists nowhere but his imagination). Take this comment, for example:

I find this an absolutely bizarre statement, but I also find it a revealing one. **After all, I’ve also come across declarations from fans of the Confederacy about the policy of the United States government towards Native Americans as offering what these folks think is some absolution of white southerners for slavery.

As if what other "fans of the Confederacy" do is relevant to what I posted... What's really interesting his how he goes on to "refute" a claim I never made -- that two wrongs make a right. An honest reading of my essay will reveal no such claim. It just another of his noxious fabrications he couldn't prove if his life depended on it.

What do I care what he has "come across"? I didn't mention native Americans in my blog post Besides, I've rarely run cross heritage folks who use the Confederacy's policy toward Indians as some kind of absolution of Southern whites for slavery.

What Cousin Perfesser, and all the other Dixie-bashing bloggers can't seem to grasp (or pretend that they can't grasp) is this (pay close attention folks):

I do not point out the Union's sins/flaws in an attempt to absolve white Southerners of slavery. I simply note that those Union sins do absolve the South. I note that the Union's sins do establish that the Union had no moral authority for making brutal war on the South ... no moral authority for devastating the South economically and culturally far above what was necessary to win a war, out of a motive of sheer, frenzied hatred...and no moral authority for continuing the economic and cultural oppression of Southerners and their region for generations after the war -- from the same motive.

To reiterate: The Union's sins rendered it morally unqualified to punish the South -- for slavery, secession, or anything else.

Then, predictably, Cousin Perfesser puts forth another irrelevant tangent after posting this passage from my blog essay:

In any case, Confederate heritage advocates know the Union did not have the moral authority to make brutal war upon the South in the 1860s, and it has steadily degenerated into further evil since then. The whole purpose of evilizing the South is so “good Americans” won’t have to face up to their country’s ongoing malevolence.

Cousin Perfesser writes,

"Oddly enough, this sounds like Hugh G. Lawson, a retired history professor trained at Tulane and who taught at Murray State University. You can still come across Professor Lawson, now retired (and prematurely so) if you want to visit usenet’s alt.war.civil.usa, where for years he offered as original with him the notion of “the South as Other” until it was revealed that he was engaged in presenting a rather well-known argument advanced by others as his own. This has not stopped him, although he was forced to admit his attempt at deception (guess what else we call this practice? Hint: it begins with a “p”)."

It may sound like that to Cousin Perfesser, but I doubt it. As I've never heard of Lawson or what notions he offered as his, I see this for what it is -- another malevolent attempt on the part of Cousin Perfesser to perpetrate guilt-by-association, and it's particularly revealing of the depths of dishonesty his animosity takes him to.

Then he goes on to try amateur psychology with this:

"Beneath all this, however, rests a feeling of guilt and a need for absolution … sometimes by pointing out that someone else does it, too. "

Cousin Perfesser, don't quit your day job indoctrinating students in your classes in PC-approved history -- you're too dishonest in your approach to practice psychology. Pointing out that "someone else does it, too," (which I didn't do, by the way) isn't guilt OR the need for absolution. It is simply pointing out (and I say it again, though I have no hope it will sink into a mind encased in hardened liberal concrete) that the Union's sins rendered it morally unqualified to punish the South -- for slavery, secession, or anything else.

Cousin Perfesser probably does not realize it, but his statement -- "... it’s who we need people in the past to be for our own purposes, not who they really were..." -- is far more applicable to him and his fellow Dixie-bashers and self-appointed civil war thought cops than it is to Southern heritage folks.

He wraps up with more fabricated guilt-by-imaginary-association and ends with a typical, but still breathtaking, lie:

One is responsible for one’s understanding of history and for one’s use or misuse of that understanding. When one resorts to distorting that understanding of the past in order to seek absolution for sins, real or alleged, then we know where the problem lies.

The observations of the participation of others in slavery is not an attempt by Southern heritage folks "...to not accept responsibility for and make restitution for their kind’s generational race crimes...." It is stating that people who practiced such things had no moral authority to destroy others for the same or lesser practices.

Nobody's seeking absolution. Noting that the Union's sins -- worse than the Confederacy's and ongoing to this day -- rendered it morally unfit to make war upon the South, is not "seeking" anything. It's just stating reality.

I predict dead ringing silence from the self-appointed civil war thought police and Dixie-bashers over this:

I do not point out the Union's sins/flaws in an attempt to absolve white Southerners of slavery. I simply note that those Union sins do absolve the South. I note that the Union's sins do establish that the Union had no moral authority for making brutal war on the South ... no moral authority for devastating the South economically and culturally far above what was necessary to win a war, out of a motive of sheer, frenzied hatred...and no moral authority for continuing the economic and cultural oppression of Southerners and their region for generations after the war -- from the same motive.

========

** Note: When you see him start a sentence with, "After all," know he's about to go off into an irrelevancy designed for no other purpose than bashing or lying, and someimes both.

Vampires in D.C.

I recently read this somewhere, in connection with the movie about Abe Lincoln hunting vampires....

"In May, while making a first person Lincoln simulcast presentation to three middle school classrooms, I was asked at the very end of the event, ‘Are you a vampire hunter?’ I responded with: ‘All men are created equal in the fact that all men are entitled to the wages earned by their labors. If some one steals your labor then they are stealing your work, your sweat and blood. Whether it is just your work and sweat or just your blood, the thief may be understood to be a vampire.’ Light bulbs came on over the heads of the students and teachers."

I guess that makes the U.S. government a vampire, since it steals people's labor -- their work, sweat and blood -- for about a third or more of every year....

The Sins of the United States Government

In my opinion, the federal government's involvement in, and sponsorship of, the CIA's Project MK Ultra and similar horrors (the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiments, for example) completely absolves the Confederacy of whatever "sins" it may have incurred from slavery.

____________________

The published evidence indicates that Project MKULTRA involved the use of many methodologies to manipulate people's individual mental states and alter brain functions, including the surreptitious administration of drugs and other chemicals, hypnosis,[5] sensory deprivation, isolation, verbal and sexual abuse, as well as various forms of torture.

Once Project MKULTRA officially got underway in April, 1953, experiments included administering LSD to CIA employees, military personnel, doctors, other government agents, prostitutes, mentally ill patients, and members of the general public in order to study their reactions. LSD and other drugs were usually administered without the subject's knowledge or informed consent, a violation of the Nuremberg Code that the U.S. agreed to follow after World War II. The aim of this was to find drugs which would irresistibly bring out deep confessions or wipe a subject' s mind clean and program him or her as "a robot agent".[28]

Efforts to "recruit" subjects were often illegal, even though actual use of LSD was legal in the United States until October 6, 1966. In Operation Midnight Climax, the CIA set up several brothels in San Francisco, California to obtain a selection of men who would be too embarrassed to talk about the events. The men were dosed with LSD, the brothels were equipped with two-way mirrors, and the sessions were filmed for later viewing and study.[29] In other experiments where people were given LSD without their knowledge, they were interrogated under bright lights with doctors in the background taking notes. The subjects were told that their "trips" would be extended indefinitely if they refused to reveal their secrets. The people being interrogated this way were CIA employees, U. S. military personnel and agents suspected of working for the other side in the Cold War. Long-term debilitation and several deaths resulted from this [28]

Given the CIA's purposeful destruction of most records, its failure to follow informed consent protocols with thousands of participants, the uncontrolled nature of the experiments, and the lack of follow-up data, the full impact of MKULTRA experiments, including deaths, will never be known.[20][24][43][44]

Forty-four American colleges or universities, 15 research foundations or chemical or pharmaceutical companies and the like including Sandoz (now Novartis) and Eli Lilly and Company, 12 hospitals or clinics (in addition to those associated with universities), and three prisons are known to have participated in MKULTRA.[60][61]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_MKULTRA

As one CIA reviewer wrote: "Precautions must be taken not only to protect operations from exposure to enemy forces, but also to conceal these activities from the American public in general. The knowledge that the agency is engaging in unethical and illicit activities would have serious repercussions in political and diplomatic circles."
http://science.discovery.com/stories/mkultra.html

Joseph Mengele did similar work, experimenting extensively with children and adults using mescaline, electroshock therapy, hypnosis, sensory deprivation, torture, rape, starvation, and trauma bonding. He was so successful with the latter technique that survivors expressed strong affection for him.

The CIA and US military copied the Nazi methodology through numerous programs, including MK-ULTRA, MK being an abbreviation for words "mind control" in German. According to obtained documents, it works best when severe trauma (such as rape) occurs by age three, the result often causing the personality to split or dissociate (called dissociative identity disorder or DID) to repress painful memories.
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2010/02/mk-ultra-cias-mind-control-program.html

Developed at the cost of billions of dollars, the CIA's method combined "sensory deprivation" and "self-inflicted pain" to create a revolutionary psychological approach—the first innovation in torture in centuries. The simple techniques—involving isolation, hooding, hours of standing, extremes of hot and cold, and manipulation of time—constitute an all-out assault on the victim's senses, destroying the basis of personal identity. McCoy follows the years of research—which, he reveals, compromised universities and the U.S. Army—and the method's dissemination, from Vietnam through Iran to Central America. He traces how after 9/11 torture became Washington’s weapon of choice in both the CIA's global prisons and in "torture-friendly" countries to which detainees are dispatched. Finally McCoy argues that information extracted by coercion is worthless, making a case for the legal approach favored by the FBI.

Scrupulously documented, A Question of Torture is a indictment of inhumane practices that have spread throughout the intelligence system, damaging American's laws, military, and international standing.

"An indispensable and riveting account of how monstrous CIA-funded experiments on psychiatric patients and prisoners in the 1950s turned into a template for what he calls 'no-touch torture.'"—Naomi Klein, The Nation

"From the start of the Cold War to the early nineteen-sixties, the C.I.A. spent billions of dollars developing psychological tools for interrogation. The agency cast a wide net, funding a Canadian study that involved administering electric shocks to subjects in drug-induced comas, and recruiting people like Kurt Plotner, a Nazi scientist who, in his search for a truth serum, had tested mescaline on Jewish prisoners at Dachau. The eventual conclusion was that cheap, simple methods (for example, enforced standing) worked best, and were also more acceptable to the public than outright physical violence. McCoy skillfully traces the use of these methods from the Phoenix program in Vietnam—which was designed to ferret out high-level Vietcong, although of the more than twenty thousand people it killed most were civilians—to the actions of agency-trained secret police in Honduras in the nineteen-eighties, and the treatment of hooded detainees at Abu Ghraib."—The New Yorker
http://books.google.com/books/about/A_Question_of_Torture.html?id=FVwUYSBwtKcC

Declassified documents
http://michael-robinett.com/declass/c000.htm

____________________

We will never know how many people, including children, were tortured and experimented upon by this agency of the United States Government, because the vast bulk of the records were destroyed by the CIA when they were about to be exposed in the 1970s.

In any case, Confederate heritage advocates know the Union did not have the moral authority to make brutal war upon the South in the 1860s, and it has steadily degenerated into further evil since then. The whole purpose of evilizing the South is so "good Americans" won't have to face up to their country's ongoing malevolence.

When Outsider Interference Is ... A-Okay

Ya know how Dixie-bashing bloggers have complained in blog posts and comment threads about "outsiders" attempting to interfere with the Confederate flag restrictions in the City of Lexington, Virginia? The local community, they say, should be able to decide whether they want Confederate flags on the flag staff attached to city light poles...

Well, I guess it depends on who the outsiders are. Check out this excerpt from a recent comment thread on Andy Hall's blog...

========

BILLY BEARDEN -- The issue in Lexington was initiated by W&L Prof Anna Brodsky, certainly an outsider, being all Russian and stuff. She was the only woman to complain to the media “I am offended in front of my students” and “I have embarrassed feelings” was her quotes. Certainly the stuff that subjects others to lose rights and subjects cities to lawsuits.

She alone initiated the 350 anti flag petition, signed by her students (95% intenerant) and fellow staff members

I have a copy of an email from City Manager Ellistad that states until Brodsky, not a single complaint was lodged about the flags.

Not even the main complaining Lexington store owner, Mr Hockaday, resides in Lexington. But he does sell numerous Confederate items….

----------

ANDY HALL -- But Brodsky is a resident and (I presume) a citizen and a voter, regardless of where she was born. The assumption that her voice in this is somehow invalid, or less important, than those of non-residents who feel like they have some connection to the flag, is problematic for me. Brodsky may have initiated the petition, but I still don’t believe it would have (A) gotten traction, and (B) passed overwhelmingly without wide public support.

----------

BILLY BEARDEN -- Traction without wide support?

Yes, a small segment of well connected lefties brought about September 1st, 2011.

To fully appreciate the current situation in Lexington, you have to go back just prior to 2001…

During his tenure, a former W&L President with the assistance of his wife removed much of the artifacts related to the military career (both USA and CSA) and life history of Robert E Lee from the Lee Chapel. That President passed away in 2001. His name was John William Elrod, and his wife was Mimi Elrod. :O

At the bottom of the obituary for President Elrod, it was requested that in lieu of flowers, donations be sent in his name to the Southern Poverty Law Center. :O

Mrs Elrod entered local politics after statewide attempts failed. As a Councilman in Lexington, hers was the leading voice against the location of the proposed satillite of the Museum of the Confederacy. Even Waite Rawls attempts to appease her by dropping the name “Confederacy” from MoC failed. :O

It was during these hearings in 2007 that 2 local citizens, Mary Alexander and George Pryde made media reports by also speaking against the MoC as racist. :O

Professor Brodsky certainly had a friend in Mimi Elrod. All of the staff signatures on the 350 name petition knew her very well. Quid Pro Quo. :O

By September 1st, 2011, Councilman Elrod is Mayor Elrod, and Alexander and Pryde are now councilmen. I can personally vouch for the fact that Mr Pryde’s vehicle sports an Obama/Biden bumper sticker. :)

I can only assume there are more than double 350 individuals at W&L University. I can also safely guess that whatever the number who spoke up at the council meeting that night for the flag ban, it wasnt even 2% of Lexington’s 7,000+ residents. :)

What is overlooked in all this is the Pro-Flag 1,670 name petition, which wasn’t even considered in the vote that night. :(

It was a well connected stacked deck of Obama Democrats who made it happen. Now the city is made to suffer. :(

Come November 2012, a new day will dawn on America, and the largest removal of one party will occur with the removal of the Obama progressive liberal elites. Mayor Elrod and her heritage haters will have to seek honest jobs. :D

(End of excerpt.)

==========

So somebody wanna explain to me why outsiders (many of them Virginians) protesting the flag ordinance is bad, but student outsiders (many from out of state) signing a petition in support of it is okay?

One of the most reliable things about anti-Confederate, Dixie-bashing, self-appointed civil war police is their adherence to a blatant double standard.