 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK
|
|
|
Subject: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: katlaughing Date: 16 Apr 01 - 12:38 PM This wonderful bit of follow-up on the news courtesy of Durham Herald-Sun columnist Carl Daniels-Kinney: Many of you are aware that about two weeks ago, the US Supreme Court ruled that the state of Missouri cannot discriminate against the Ku Klux Klan when it comes to groups that want to participate in the adopt-a-highway program. Of course, while the name of the Klan is aesthetically disgusting, most of would agree that this decision is a victory for free speech and equal protection under the law. Well, the DOT in Missouri has gotten their revenge, and boy is it sweet. Sure, they can't remove the KKK's adopt-the-highway sign, but few would dispute the state's ability to name the highway itself. The KKK is now cleaning up a stretch of the newly-christened Rosa Parks Freeway. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Amergin Date: 16 Apr 01 - 12:40 PM ROFL!!!! How very fitting!!! Some one sure has a wonderful sense of humour! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: GUEST,Matt_R Date: 16 Apr 01 - 12:43 PM Heard a joke about this on Jon Boy & Billy. Seems didn't want the KKK doing adopt-a-highway since they were afraid they'd only pick up the white trash... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: mousethief Date: 16 Apr 01 - 12:45 PM Love it! Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: GUEST,ceiliwidow Date: 16 Apr 01 - 12:47 PM That DOES sound like sweet revenge! To be honest though the Ku Klux Klan started out as a religious club in which members would meet to discuss the bible and help out the community. My husband's grandparents were actually members probably around the 1920s! Unfortunately those with hatred in their hearts began acting out and hiding behind this club's banner. It ruined the very good intentions that this group had in its early years. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Amergin Date: 16 Apr 01 - 12:47 PM This would make quite the song challenge..... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Peter K (Fionn) Date: 16 Apr 01 - 01:26 PM I heard years ago that the Marlborough tobacco company has KKK connections and that its branding incorporates KKK insignia in some way. Anyone know if there's any truth in this? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: mousethief Date: 16 Apr 01 - 01:30 PM Boy that sounds like certain "urban legend" material to me, Fionn. So I went to Urban Legend Central, aka www.snopes.com and found the following: It's an urban legend, all right. Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Jon Freeman Date: 16 Apr 01 - 01:33 PM Love it kat! Fionn, I'd heard that too but it looks to be a myth - click here. Jon |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Sourdough Date: 16 Apr 01 - 01:43 PM I had never heard that the KKK started out as a religious club without racist overtones. Has anyone else heard of this? As I recall, the KKK has had several incarnations. The first was as a violent anti-Negro, anti-carpetbagger organization in he first decade after the Civil War. I believe it lapsed into somnolence for a while after a violent twenty or thirty years. Did someone dust off the name of the old violent organization and try to start it out as a religious club? Sourdough |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Bert Date: 16 Apr 01 - 01:44 PM I did hear that in it's early days, it was also against Jews and Catholics. Bert. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: mousethief Date: 16 Apr 01 - 01:44 PM Still is, ain't it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: GUEST,ceiliwidow Date: 16 Apr 01 - 01:59 PM You're right, Sourdough! At least I can't find anything on-line that backs up the religious club beginnings. My husband's grandmother was a member of several religious groups (REAL religious groups). Among her belongings my husband found a cloth badge he didn't recognize. He asked his grandmother what is was and she said, "Just the badge from some old club I used to belonged to." It wasn't until we were watching the movie "Mississippi Burning" that my husband saw that badge again being worn by Klansmen in the film. Well, there's another skeleton out of HIS family's closet! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: SINSULL Date: 16 Apr 01 - 02:21 PM Makes me want to visit Missouri for the pure pleasure of throwing trash on the highway and having the Klan pay to pick it up while honoring Rosa Parks at the same time. Wonderful story! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: wysiwyg Date: 16 Apr 01 - 02:28 PM Ow! Ow!! Laffin so hard it hurts! Made Hardi quit fiddlin' I was laffin' so hard, he had to know why! Now he's laffin too! ~S~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: GUEST,ceiliwidow Date: 16 Apr 01 - 02:35 PM What a great idea! Mudcatters in Missouri please let us know if there is an increase in litter on that stretch of road. May as well keep them busy in a legal way... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Kim C Date: 16 Apr 01 - 03:04 PM Heeheeheeheeeheee!!!!!!! Serves em right. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: GUEST,Butch Date: 16 Apr 01 - 03:19 PM The Klan is not and was not a religious organization. It was started as a Confederate vets. organization after the Civil War. It became violent very early on. By the 1920's it was VERY popular, but it was still an anti black, anti Jew, anti Catholic, and anti immigration organization. Do not take this from me. The "holy" book of the KKK is in the Lib. of Congress. I believe it is call the Kolan , read it for yourself and see what they have always been about. Having been a Missouri resident for the first 34 years of my life, I can tell you that the Klan is big there. I was a police officer in the late 1980's and earlly 1990's and the Klan was a pain in my butt. I am glad to see Missouri get back at the Klan in any way they can! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: wysiwyg Date: 16 Apr 01 - 03:19 PM What would be the fine then for dumping shredded KKK literature on that stretch? I know, it's a BAD idea, but.... it has some attraction.... ~S~
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Mark Cohen Date: 16 Apr 01 - 03:38 PM The Klan was known to Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes, in 19th century England: read "The Five Orange Pips." I remember reading that the name "Ku Klux" was chosen to imitate the sound of a rifle being cocked, which, if it's true, should say something about the orientation of the group from the beginning. Aloha, Mark |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: GUEST,ceiliwidow Date: 16 Apr 01 - 03:41 PM One of the on-line search sites shows the name to be derived from the Greek word "kuklos" meaning circle or wheel. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: gnu Date: 16 Apr 01 - 03:53 PM Well, it came full turn for the ********s, didn't it !!?? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: chip a Date: 16 Apr 01 - 03:54 PM Hooray for Missouri & Hooray all over again for Rosa Parks. The biggest heros are usually little people. Chip |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: catspaw49 Date: 16 Apr 01 - 04:02 PM Love it kat. Thanks. The Klan was never anything religious except in the minds of the members, and in that sense they have a dogma, an entire catechism of sorts, and are quite similar to any other church. The interpretation of the bible and what it means is so bizarre that it can only make sense as religion if you step back and say, "Okay, here's what they believe, now how can I fit the bible into it?" Started just after the CW, its first real leader was Nathan Bedford Forrest, a confederate general and cavalry officer of great renown. It has been most active and popular whenever racial and ethnic changes have begun to occur.....and not just in the south! The small towns in the midwest were hotbeds of Klan activity and some still are. And remember, the focus in the 20's was more toward the Jewish than the blacks, because they were the threat economically. There were many klaverns then with huge memberships and it was then that the idea was pawned off that it was no more than a social club. Hit the library folks, there is some great stuff in print. Much of what you find on the web is written by current neo-nazi/white supremacists and is couched in a form of bigotspeak that requires some interpretation, to say the least. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: mousethief Date: 16 Apr 01 - 04:16 PM There are a lot of "churches" which are just like the KKK inasmuch as their chief activities/beliefs are political rather than religious. The white separatist movement usually cloaks itself in an aura of religiosity -- most of the main groups are self-styled "churches." Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Lonesome EJ Date: 16 Apr 01 - 04:23 PM There was some justification for a secret vigilante organization like the Klan in the early years following the Civil War, when Union troops still occupied the Southern States, Carpet-bagging political con-artists dominated all local government and law enforcement, and corruption and theft were common behavior by those in power. My grandfather said that they were active in civil emergencies like fires and floods, in helping to clothe and feed the poor, and in making sure that land and business owners weren't dispossessed. When the Reconstruction ended in the late 1870's though, and the justification for its existence was removed, the organization had grown widespread and powerful, and began to focus its efforts primarily on the racist doctrines that had always been a part of it.It's opposition to the influx of immigrants at the turn of the century, and its opposition to Socialist movements in the 20s and 30s gave the Klan additional surges back into popularity, and the continuing life of this organization lies not in its philosophy of hate, but in its ability to appeal to the angry and disaffected. Witness its rebirth during the Civil Rights movement of the 60s and again among the American farmers who have been losing their land in the 80s and 90s. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: kendall Date: 16 Apr 01 - 04:42 PM As stated, the kkk was first organized in Pulaski TN. right after the war by N.B. Forest for the sole purpose of "keeping the niggers in their place. It was nothing more than a group of terrorists. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: katlaughing Date: 16 Apr 01 - 04:44 PM You are right about it not being only in the South, Spaw. I remember seeing a newspaper article and photograph of a huge cross burning on the lawn of the local college, courtesy of the local klan in the 1950's, here in Wyoming. Some people are just ignorant. A father of a good friend of my daughter's told her the other day that it just wasn't right for whites to mix with "niggers." Then he remembered her nephews who are mixed race, apologised all over the place. This is a man who really has a good heart, but has spent his entire life in Wyoming. She's talking to him, sharing pictures, and information, so I am hopeful he will learn to understand and feel differently about it. There is a lot of fear of the unknown and falling back on "that's just the way it's always been." Great info, phoaks, Thanks, kat |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Kim C Date: 16 Apr 01 - 05:02 PM While Forrest was the first Grand Wizard, he did not organize the Klan. It is also my understanding that he disbanded the Klan in 1869. (I will have to look that up.) While he may have "officially" disbanded it, I have no doubt that some activities continued. Forrest accepted the position of Grand Wizard after Robert E. Lee turned it down on account of old age and poor health. The Klan we know today was revived sometime in the 1920s. During that time its largest membership was in - get ready - INDIANA. Not a Confederate state, last time I checked. Several years ago one of the TV networks did an intriguing movie about Douglas Stephens, Klan Wizard and Indiana resident. Not a very nice man. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Kim C Date: 16 Apr 01 - 05:10 PM Try this: Klan history It was David Stephenson, not Douglas Stephens. But I was close! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Peter K (Fionn) Date: 16 Apr 01 - 05:26 PM Thanks for nailing that urban legend Alex. Amazing how these stories take root. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Greg F. Date: 16 Apr 01 - 05:45 PM Trying to paint( or whitewash?) the Klan in the immediate post-bellum period as a kindly community service group, sort of a proto-Rotary, is the most comical thing I've heard in a long time. Maybe we DO need a national history curriculum after all. Thread Creep Alert! Lets not forget the flag that the Klan proudly marches under, folks- yup, the Stars and Bars. MS is proud of its Klan heritage too, it seems? Guess Phil Ochs was right. best, Greg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Liz the Squeak Date: 16 Apr 01 - 05:55 PM HAAAA HAAAAA!! Divine Retribution...... Please God let them progress to the Malcolm X roads!! LTS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Lonesome EJ Date: 16 Apr 01 - 06:11 PM My point, Greg, was that the Ku Klux Klan has never relied on race-hate alone for its existence, but has been an opportunistic organization from the onset. My point is also that those who are, indeed, students of American History in general, and the history of the Reconstruction years in particular, will be aware that injustices perpetrated in the Army-occupied South of that period provided fertile ground for the development of groups such as the Klan. It is also a fairly primitive and obvious tactic to attribute ignorance to those with whom you disagree. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Greg F. Date: 16 Apr 01 - 06:47 PM It is also a fairly primitive and obvious tactic to attribute ignorance to those with whom you disagree Um, ya mean, like you're patronizingly doing here? :those who are, indeed, students of American History in general, and the history of the Reconstruction years in particular, will be aware... That out of the way,I'll agree that the Klan did not SOLELY rely on race hatred, intimidation, murder, lynching, &c &c., but that the exercise of these and the intimidation of Blacks (a.k.a. 'carpetbaggers')in government certainly were the primary reasons for its existence. There's also a large difference between stating that the military occupation of the south created conditions conducive to the creation of virulently racist anti-Black organizations (what military occupation doesn't involve "injustices") and using Reconstruction to justify, mitigate or condone these groups and the horrors they perpretrated, and CONTINUE to perpetrate. Best, Greg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Peg Date: 16 Apr 01 - 08:32 PM EXCELLENT! Thanks for letting us know, kat... BTW there is an amazing documentary film about the white supremacy movement in America entitled "Blood in the Face." It won several awards (including Oscar for best documentary) and must be seen to be believed... Peg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: GUEST,Claymore Date: 16 Apr 01 - 08:48 PM As one who enjoyed the opportunity to arrest, and later help convict, the former Grand Dragon of the Pennsylvannia chapter KKK (Roy Frankhouser of Reading PA, for a conspiracy with another great American, Lyndon LaRouche) I'm often amazed at how the Reconstruction era birth of the Klan gets demonized as a result of the violent bigotry it exhibited in later years. I was further amazed at the bloviation of the encyclopedia article linked earlier. At the end of the Civil War, one of the acts passed by Congress, which has not even been mentioned by anyone, was the Act of Reconciliation. It required an oath be taken in support of the United States government, before any male, black or white, could vote. It further stated that no person serving in the Confederate armed forces could take the oath for ten years after the surrender. Its practical effect was to give the vote to only black males and any Northerner who could get South in time to take the oath and vote. The result was that for the ten years the Act was in effect, every State in the South had almost their entire political hirearchy filled with black Governors, Senators, Congressmen, Sheriffs, aldermen. etc. (You will often note, but never look up, the statement "First black _______ since the Reconstruction"... it saves really messy explainations). Next, began a chapter that has not been mentioned in any history book for many years. There was an outbreak of rape by Federal troops against Southern women, that spread rapidly and was fed by the belief that the women deserved it for previouly owning slaves. There were several problems with this thought, in that most of the women raped were not of the slave owning class, and the rapes were primarily done by black troops. The Southerners reacted by forming the Klan, and began shooting Federal troops in the act of rape. The Federal Provost Marshall response, seeing active rebellion in the offing, and realizing that even though they had won the war, armed guerillas could inflict serious damage on a peace-time Federal occupation force that was already being challenged by the Native Americans out West, began to investigate the behavior of it's own troops, shooting 11 black and 8 white troops for rape in 1869 alone. It was at this point that Forrest disbanded the Klan, as the executions made an impression on the Federal troops, and the rapes subsided. Unfortunately the damage had been done. The black politicians, being lured by the wealth and corruption of absolute political power, were unprepared for the onslaught brought by the secession of the strictures of the Act of Reconciliation ten years later in 1876, and no Southern white man was bound to forget. D. W. Griffith attempted to portray this period as the "Birth of a Nation" in the first full length motion picture and has been castigated as a "Racist" ever since, yet, as one who knows, it's hard to protect the truth and freedoms we enjoy today, if we only know history that's convenient. This is all open knowledge, and can readily be accessed on the net. I'm sure one can find the racial make up of the post-Civil War Congress and State legislatures, the Army records of executions, and the wording of the Act of Reconciliation, but apparently not in Encarta. (Incidently, Roy got out of prison after five years, and recently was named in a Federal enjoinment, requiring him to provide a written apology to some black folks he had maligned in a series of public pronouncements). The Klan has moved into several areas of Constitutionally protected activities; Religion- with the rise of the Christian Identity Movement, which believes that the Lost Tribe of Israel, was really a group of Anglo-Saxons who made it to America before the Asian "Indians" crossed the Bering Strait (a view which got a helluva boost recently, with the discovery of the Kennibuck Man skeleton and the Farmville, VA sites, pointing to the existence of a an earlier European "Native American" civilization 5 thousand years before the Asians crossed). Free Speech- Newspapers and the Web, which thankfully due to education required to read, or access the net, has not resulted in any great increase of Klan membership. (I am further amazed at how Klan membership is vastly overreported by anti-Klan groups seeking donations and visability. My own investigation, covering several years, demonstrated that most of the Klan groups were made up of the same essential membership but with a different uniform and leader. The Morris Dees outfit was reporting on the Klan in PA that had some ten groups with some two hundred members. In fact, it was some ten idiots, each with their own klan, and the other nine idiots belonging to it. Freedom of Assembly- political and group activities which, until they show signs of breaking a law, allow them to form militia groups, and run through the woods, shooting blanks at imaginary black rapists... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Greg F. Date: 16 Apr 01 - 09:26 PM Okay, when we've got to the lunatic fringe fantasy stuff and history written to order and while-you-wait, lauding "Birth of a Nation" as fact and the Klan as a patriotic response to wholesale rape of southern women by Federal Troops, and citing the source to substantiate this utter nonsense as "the web", no point in hanging around this thread any longer seeking rational discussion. One of the great American Freedoms of long standing is the freedom to cherish your delusions. 'Bye y'all- Greg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Lonesome EJ Date: 16 Apr 01 - 10:01 PM I'm not familiar with the rape report that Claymore has sited and, although it might have indeed been the nominal call-to-arms to justify Klan activity, I feel the actual motivations for Klan organization run deeper. The Freedmen's Bureau, established in 1865 to affirm the economic and political rights of blacks, was a humanitarian ideal realized, that became tainted through its accumulation of power. It did in fact accomplish much good, including gaining voting rights for blacks, and offering them educational opportunities that had never existed. Thousands of blacks, as well as poor whites, were given food and housing by this agency. The main source of its corruption came in the areas of economic redistribution of industry and land. It was relegated to the Bureau to annex and give over to former slaves some 800,000 acres of farm land, and to redistribute plantations and businesses in like manner, in an attempt to make reparations to blacks. Land was also promised to state residents determined to be loyal to the union, including recent arrivals. This process was highly resented by the white property-owners, who saw the Bureau as ceding land to northern speculators as well as the blacks. Contrary to what Greg stated, the individuals known as "carpetbaggers" were nearly all white. Many were Freedmen Bureaucrats who not only assisted in what Southerners saw as theft of their property, but in the appointment or election of blacks and union-loyal whites to all government posts, through what amounted to pure bribery and manipulation of the vote. These carpetbagging governments were often dishonest and graft-ridden profit centers for their northern bosses. I am not in any way attempting to defend the Klan. It has become a wretched organization dedicated to hate and fear. I am, however, attempting to examine the multitude of reasons which gave birth to it, and to declare that there were distinct reasons for its creation apart from the lynching and terrorization of blacks, and that it may indeed have begun as some sort of attempt at self-defense by a defeated people. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: GUEST Date: 16 Apr 01 - 10:14 PM EVERYBODY SING!!! SAIL AWAY (Randy Newman)
In America you'll get food to eat
Ain't no lions or tigers-ain't no mamba snake
Sail away-sail away
In America every man is free
Sail away-sail away |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: GUEST, Gobstruck Date: 16 Apr 01 - 10:33 PM OK, listen up: The South, which STARTED the war by an unprovoked attack on a United States Government Military Installation LOST THE FECKING WAR! GET OVER IT!! STOP THE WHINING AND RATIONALIZATION ABOUT THE "GLORY" OF THE 'LOST CAUSE' How were United States troops supposed to deal with people who had been shooting at them for four years, and continued to shoot at them after the surrender? Kiss and make up? You people are unbelievable. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Troll Date: 16 Apr 01 - 10:40 PM Greg, Instead of debunking Claymores post as "utter nonsense", why not do a little research yourself and prove the truth or falsity of his statements with references. I think that would make your point much better than flaming. If you have definite documentation to show that his statements are false, why not share it? If you don't, then fairness would dictate that you clearly state that you are expressing your opinion and nothing more. You are right about one thing though; we do cherish our delusions. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Lonesome EJ Date: 16 Apr 01 - 11:00 PM Rednecks (Randy Newman)
We talk real funny down here
(chorus)We're Rednecks, We're Rednecks
We got no-neck oilmen from Texas
Now your Northern nigra's a Negro
We're Rednecks, We're Rednecks I'd be careful about throwing that first stone
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Banjer Date: 17 Apr 01 - 06:03 AM My only wish is that before people make false satetments they would research what they speak of! It irks me that when the Confederate Battle Flag is used as an example it is improperly named. ie: Lets not forget the flag that the Klan proudly marches under, folks- yup, the Stars and Bars. The Stars and Bars is the name given to the First National Flag of the Confederate States of America. It had three horizontal bars, red at top and bottom with a white one at the middle. In the left upper corner is a blue field containing seven white stars, denoting the original seven states to secede from the Union. If you are going to attack my heritage, please first get your facts straight! Thank You! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Ebbie Date: 17 Apr 01 - 12:13 PM Gobstruck Guest, you might check to see what Abraham Lincoln said regarding how the South, after capitulation, should be viewed and treated. 'Carpetbaggers', nowadays, could be called 'briefcase toters'. Carpet bags were actually carpet-sided (for durability) bags first primarily carried by 'drummers' (no relation to music- so what's changed? *G*) for their wares and then by the speculators as well as other 'visitors' from the north. Ebbie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Kim C Date: 17 Apr 01 - 12:31 PM Didn't Lincoln say something about "malice toward none" at that little cornfield called Gettysburg? Yes we lost. Yes we surrendered. But after surrendering and once again becoming United States citizens, a lot of people were denied their inalienable rights as United States citizens. It's my personal opinion that Andrew Johnson was the lynchpin in the Reconstruction business. He was in the tough position of being a Southerner himself - he couldn't appear to be soft on the rebels, so he was mighty tough on them. If Lincoln had lived I think things would have gone differently. But it's easy to Monday-morning quarterback, isn't it? And don't call me "you people." Thank you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: mousethief Date: 17 Apr 01 - 12:39 PM And don't call me "you people." Thank you. Being a Southerner, she would prefer "y'all." :-) (Just kidding Kim! Don't shoot!) Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Kim C Date: 17 Apr 01 - 12:42 PM Actually, I would prefer "y'all"! (heeheehee) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Amergin Date: 17 Apr 01 - 12:43 PM Kim, what I was taught in my history classes was that Johnson wanted to be lenient on the former confederacy.... It was that he had no power/influence in the government. The Republican majority would pass some vengeance law and he would veto it.....then they would just override his veto. Which needs a 2/3 majority and therefore alot of trouble....They eventually got tired of this game and tried to impeach him to get him out of the way..... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: paddymac Date: 17 Apr 01 - 12:48 PM An interesting thesis topic for a persistent student might be to investigate possible linkages and commonalities between the KKK and the Orange Order. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: GUEST,Claymore Date: 17 Apr 01 - 01:16 PM I think if we attempted to find some common point of agreement that no portion of history is as simple as it seems, we could at least weed out the rationally impaired. Before focusing on the some of the specifics, let me point out that in 1987 I was given a national award by the ADL for my investigations while in law enforcement concerning the Klan and later the next year recieved one from the FBI (not that that in any way intitles my offerings any more credence than any one else - YOU must seek, find, and decide). I have found that some intellectually rigid cowards with the "Big Keyboard, Small Dick" complex are often found on far too many internet exchanges, and as soon as the discussion turns to the complex, or the morally ambiguous, (which any human endeavor must entail), they swope down from the belfry with high pitched squeals of dismay. I suspect that they've run into the clapper too many times on the way down, or worse, on the way back up. There were several comments about the South losing the Civil War and since I'm from West Virginia, it would take only the most ignorant from outside the US, or the most stupid from within the US, not to note that the Viginia counties, comprising what was to become West Virginia in 1863, voted to stay with the North, as each State was choosing up sides. This vote was, in many cases, extremely close. For example, Loudoun County just over the border in Virginia, voted to go with the Confederacy by just 38 votes, with the German population in the northern portion of the County almost carrying it for the North. In contrast, Jefferson County, the first county in West Virginia, and scene of John Brown's Raid, trial and execution, voted to stay with the North by some 12 votes. This region was horse country and not slave country, and was the scene of numerous cavalry engagements throughout the War. In fact the only relative of mine to die in the Civil War was from Boston, (where I was born) and died in Aldie, VA at the hands of J.P.Morgan's men in a raid (some fifty miles from here). Secondly, over all, the South has had a far better record on race relations than most of the US. When I was living in Virginia, I was privledged to vote for Doug Wilder as the first black governor in any state in the Union, since (listen to this catch phrase) the Reconstruction. (There were 17 by my count, with virtually none of them celebrated during Black History Month - would anyone care to enlighten us as to why?). The KKK individual I mentioned in my first post, was from Reading PA ("North", for you euro types, or "Stupid" for you northern types). The current race riots are in Ohio, and the biggest collection of KKK type militia are located in Idaho and Montanna (please refer to previous comments in parentheses immediately preceding this sentence - you really must pay attention... ). And to close for now, I was not defending Griffith's "Birth of a Nation", as I have only seen it once, and thought the use of black-faced whites in the perported role of the "Negro Rapists", was way overdone, but then so has every work I've seen by Oliver Stone and Spike Lee. Was the Klan the first or last organization formed with what were conceived at the time as good intentions, and later devolved into something considerably more evil? I quickly evoke images of the Teamsters and Mine workers unions, the Molly McGuires, the IRA, the German Bunds, the Vigilantes,etc. And if Lord Acton was right, none of us should preclude the possibility in our own associations... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Amergin Date: 17 Apr 01 - 01:24 PM Well, those "KKK militia types" in North Idaho and in Montana are for the most part from out of state. They come from all over the US including the South. Damn I get tired of explaining this to people.....
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: GUEST,ceiliwidow Date: 17 Apr 01 - 01:26 PM Thank you for writing Claymore!! My husband's grandmother was also from WV (around Charleston). Even though she was a memeber of the Klan way back when I seriously doubt she took with murder. She really was more of the "Christian fellowship" type albeit probably only amongst her own group. I certainly don't hold with the organization but I don't feel it's my right to condemn this lady based only on what has been written about the group. Sometimes you actually have to TALK to individuals to get their viewpoints because they are not always written down in books. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Amergin Date: 17 Apr 01 - 01:32 PM Yeah, being from North Idaho, I only go to Klan meetings to pray around a burning cross on some black fellows lawn... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Uncle_DaveO Date: 17 Apr 01 - 01:33 PM Claymore said, in part: Religion- with the rise of the Christian Identity Movement, which believes that the Lost Tribe of Israel, was really a group of Anglo-Saxons who made it to America before the Asian "Indians" crossed the Bering Strait (a view which got a helluva boost recently, with the discovery of the Kennibuck Man skeleton and the Farmville, VA sites, pointing to the existence of a an earlier European "Native American" civilization 5 thousand years before the Asians crossed). Since the earliest physical remains of what I'll call proto-Indian people in the United States is the recent (2, 3 years?) discovery in what is now the State of Mississippi, reliably dated as 16,000 years ago, just shortly after the presumptive crossing over the Bering land bridge, Claymore's "European native American" people must have been here 21,000 years ago! I sure would like to see some authority for that! Dave Oesterreich |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: GUEST,Wavestar Date: 17 Apr 01 - 02:01 PM Boy, this got awful serious awful fast. Still, I'm amused by the original post :) I, too, would like to know more about this 'Anglo-Saxon' European civilization Claymore speaks of being in North America 21,000 years ago, I have not heard of it. (Ignoring the fact that the term Anglo-Saxon would have meant less than nothing 21,000 years ago. There were no such people.) I'd also like to know more about the history regarding the Restoration and the forming of the Ku Klux Klan. I don't think anything can justify forming a hate group and using vigilante justice, although I know horrible things happen in and after war - but I'm curious. Obviously, despite the fact that our nations history is short, it's tremendously complex. -J |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: GUEST,ceiliwidow Date: 17 Apr 01 - 02:12 PM Well, evidently all the "experts" on the subject are on this thread so if you just hang on I'm sure they tell you everything they know ;) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Kim C Date: 17 Apr 01 - 03:24 PM Amergin, I think you're right about Johnson... I think he probably did want to be nice but had to save face somehow. He was in a pretty tough position that most of us wouldn't envy, and is not very well liked around Nashville even to this day. I have never been to WV but my daddy was from there. Mister lived in Nashville, Indiana, back in the 70s, where there were maybe only two black families in the whole county. He was friends with one of the guys, nicknamed Pookie. Pookie got a cross burned in his yard because he was dating a white girl. Who knows if it was the Klan or just some local goobers showing their stupidity. Wavestar, I am not an expert and do not claim to be one but I'll tell you what I know. Socioeconomic disaster and unrest often give rise to people or groups that promise to make things better. Reconstruction was a hard time throughout the South. Thousands upon thousands of men and boys did not come back from the war, which left a lot of widows and orphans to fend for themselves. Thanks to looting, burning and other forms of pillage, many people were left destitute. If you watch the news even now, you know that whenever there's a disaster, somebody steps out of the shadows to take advantage of the situation. Enter the carpetbaggers. Now imagine if you were returning home after surrendering your arms, to discover that your home was not only demolished, but you had no rights anymore. You couldn't vote, but your former slave suddenly could. You couldn't wear any of your Confederate uniform in public, even if that was the only clothes you had in the world. Now who's the second class citizen? I have read accounts of some people who said they were not against freedmen having the right to vote, but felt that their rights should be restored to them as well. They surrendered. They went home. They felt like they were being treated unfairly. Anyway that's all I know. Cheers ---- Kim
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Greg F. Date: 17 Apr 01 - 04:22 PM Apologies, Banjer- let me try again: Trying to paint( or whitewash?) the Klan in the immediate post-bellum period as a kindly community service group, sort of a proto-Rotary, is the most comical thing I've heard in a long time. Thread Creep Alert! Lets not forget the flag that the Klan proudly marches under, folks- yup, the Confederate Battle Flag. MS is proud of its Klan heritage too, it seems? Guess Phil Ochs was right.
Hope that's OK. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Greg F. Date: 17 Apr 01 - 04:45 PM Troll, I must be missing something; help me out here, OK? Other folks can post the most preposterous perversions of historical fact in this thread, and you don't ask them to "prove the truth ... of [their] statements with references". Why is that? Why don't you berate them for not "sharing their definitive documentation to show that their statements are true? And why shouldn't the Klan Apologists have to "clearly state that [they] are expressing [their] opinion and nothing more."
Why assume that I haven't done the research? I certainly don't have the time or inclination to do OTHER FOLKS research FOR them. If they can't be bothered to expend the minimal effort required to check out which version is more accurate and/or which claims are absolute nonsense, why the hell should I spoon feed them? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Kim C Date: 18 Apr 01 - 12:03 PM I have a feeling that some people got sucked into the Klan thinking it was a "gentleman's club" or some such. Different chapters may have painted themselves that way. And maybe Granpappy is a little too embarrassed to say he was in the Klan because he was one of those unsuspecting nice guys who got sucked in. But that's just speckalatin'. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: GUEST,Claymore Date: 18 Apr 01 - 02:40 PM Dave O, Sorry I didn't get back to you sooner, work often intrudes. You theory has one really major problem, most archaeologists believe the land bridge from Asia didn't open until 11,200 to 11,500 years ago. Please find your own sources for the opening of the asian Bering Strait landbridge through the Cordilleran Ice Sheet before that. If your dates are correct for the Mississippi mounds builders, then you need to be real clear on the Clovis Point or Landbridge Theory dates, which you apparently defend in one statement and then utterly destroy in the next. As for those with access to Newsweek (www.newsweek.com) get the April 26, 1999 issue and read the 10 page feature article entitled "The First Americans. New digs reveal an ancient land that was a mosaic of peoples - including Asians and Europeans. Now the debate rages: Who got here first...?" Then get the half page Washington Post (www.washingtonpost.com) article of April 5, 2000 (Page A3) entitled "Debate Around the Old Campfire, Burning the Bridge, Viginia Archeological Find Challenges Theory of Migration to North America..." As I made clear, I'm not an archaeoligist, but neither of these articles could be characterized as hatched in the wussy wackoid world of the web. Once these articles are read, I think I'm going to hear the sound of closed minds getting their hatch door rung... Those that have a problem of reading the English language for content need to reread my comment about "THEY believe the lost tribe was Anglo-Saxon" vs MY comment about THEIR belief "getting a helluva boost" in current theories about an earlier european migration to America. I suspect that Wavelength merely took Dave O's comments as having legitimate dates, and then tried to be cute about it, with his comment about the Anglo-Saxons. (I will apologize if he is indeed a ESL type.) Also would someone please point out where I said that the theorized european migration took place TWENTY-ONE THOUSAND YEARS AGO? I said the diggings "pointed to the existence of a european civilization 5,000 years before the asians crossed". Taking every thing I've written, this puts those dates at 16,200 to 16,500, well within the theorized datelines of 17 to 25 thousand years ago mentioned in both articles (and the reason that Dave O has bombed his own runway). (Incidently, since we seem to have gone FAR afield from the wonderful article that posed this thread, might I suggest that whoever does the follow-on research to the above articles, kick it over to a new thread? Thank you) Ah! duty calls... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: GUEST,Wavestar Date: 18 Apr 01 - 03:09 PM Oh, you're charming, Claymore. I didn't even insult you. Oh, and I'm female. Yes, as you speculate, I did take Dave's dates, but that hardly matters. Even given later dates, the terms Anglo-Saxon and the culture they imply to us was non-existent at the time. However, I understand from your clarification that the theories of somewhat confused groups are being encouraged by this evidence, and it's they that use the term Anglo-Saxon and not you. This is rather relieving - despite your apparent tendency to jump on my back for being curious, you seemed smarter than that. Apologies for misunderstanding you. I will, as you have kindly provided links, take a look at the articles you mention. I'm out of the country, many news stories escape my notice. Greg F, although you seem loathe to share your research, I think you should perhaps take a moment and review the post of Troll - I don't think he was criticising your facts or your research, he just wanted you to share it, for those of us who haven't necessarily got time to research it, but are curious, as Claymore has (whether you agree with him or not.) If you're not willing to do so, I understand, but I don't think you need to be so defensive :) Now, is it so hard to be nice? -J |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Greg F. Date: 18 Apr 01 - 04:00 PM Hullo, Wavestar-
Claymore didn't "lay out any research"- he simply made a series of statements & said they were true because he said they were true. He cites no independent sources. Best, Greg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: GUEST,Claymore Date: 18 Apr 01 - 06:25 PM Wavestar, my apologies for being testy. My time at work requires due diligence, and sometimes the brevity, and an increasing level of urgency to just get the thing submitted before the next emergency strikes, causes pungency to become boorishness. (I work in Emergency Management with a specialty in Weapons of Mass Destruction, often abbreviated to NDMS-WMD). Most of the first submission was the result of research conducted in response to what are called "stipulations" during the Frankhouser case in Boston, Mass in 1987. Stipulations are facts which are agreed to by both sides in order to avoid presenting them at trial and going through unnecessary evidentary hearings on undisputed facts. In Frankhouser's case, he was trying to present some background that would lessen the impact of his past Klan activities(which included refusing to testify during the HCUAA in the early 60's). He had also been involved in the Pontiac school bus bombings, the Jewelbox bombings in PA ghetto neighborhoods, and the Aerflot office bombing in the early sixties. At the time, I obtained the warrants for his arrest, he was the nominal head of the White Socalist Workers Party which was headquartered in Reading PA (in the "North"). Reading, PA has had a long history of German Bund associations which provided fertile ground for other racist/bigot groups, which as I noted before, had many of the same members. In the course of researching the proposed stipulations, the prosecution team had to concede those issues in which such proof as the Congressional copy of the Act of Reconcilation, the northern Army of Occupation discipline records, and the written pleas from soldiers about to be shot (capital punishment was swift in those days, one plea went from trial to execution in three weeks). It was a fascinating period of study which, as I noted above, is never studied by northerners or blacks, yet the record is there. I recently visited the home of Frederick Douglas in Anacostia, D.C in which the walls are covered with ingravings of the numerous Governors Senators and Congressmen elected in the ten years following the Civil War. Many had correspondance with him, and he occasionally chastised them for their graft and sexual license. He points out in one letter that the Union Army does not head up the black units out of racism, but because the orders are transmitted by handwriting, and the black troops can't read. He further mentions that both his sons are officers in that army, and urges education on the complainants. No one seems to ask the question how did all these blacks got elected to Federal office in the years following the Civil War, and how did they lose it after ten years of unobstructed sufferage? Ten years is a long time, and I cannot help but feel that here was a missed opportunity to attempt some form of moral reconstruction, which no one, defeated southerner, politically advantaged blacks or victorious northerners, took advantage of. I have fought a war (Marines, Viet Nam '69) and it was my experience that no one combatant had a clear idea why they were fighting. Some fought because their buddies did, some because their parents raised them "right", others because the prison was the other alternative, or the uniforms could get girls or enhance their otherwise dull lives. SLA Marshall got the closest to my thoughts when he said that, they generally fight for their buddies on either side of the foxhole, and no one else. Yet, we have individuals who have no doubts (and no clues) as to why these men fought for whatever side. I'm sure there were political, social, economic, and moral reasons for each and every action taken by either side. I'm also sure that some of these reasons were laudable and some were desispicable at the time. But I'm equally certain that those who have not seen the elephant, and portend the motives of those who fought many years before, submit themselves to the knowing glance of those who have. As I stated in an earlier submission, it's on each individual to seek, find, and understand by themselves. Life's mysteries are not solved by a blue clicky thing. Again Wavestar, my apologies. My assumptions were no less faultless than yours. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: GUEST,Wavestar Date: 18 Apr 01 - 06:47 PM Greg - That does clear things up. I'd still like to see more of what you have to say, bibliography or not. Claymore - Apology accepted. I appreciate your personal comments on the nature of war and knowing why one fights it - hearing from one who has done so is often more informative than any generalisation. You are clearly taking a lot of time to offer these thoughts to us, as well as your own knowledge of situations like modern activities of the Ku Klux Klan. Once again I seek clarifacation regarding the historical sides of your postings. I gather from your recent post that the information you provided, regarding the reasons for the formation of the Ku Klux Klan after the Civil War and during the Reformation period, to provide vigilante justice and force action from the government, is what was taken as a 'stipulation,' yes? These were the agreed upon truths that were taken as basis for the case hearings. (to my understanding.) So, if Forrest disbanded the KKK, what was the later justification for its re-emergence? Please correct any misapprehensions I may have, I mean no offense, and I'm sorry if I've misread anything. -J |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Greg F. Date: 18 Apr 01 - 10:31 PM Stipulations are facts which are agreed to by both sides in order to avoid presenting them at trial and going through unnecessary evidentary hearings on undisputed facts. Not quite. Stipulations are items that are agreed to by the prosecution and the defense that they will both accept as "fact" for the purposes of the legal proceeding concerned. This doesn't mean that they are necessarily historically accurate, or have been researched and/or documented by historians.Only that the parties have agreed not to dispute them. Best, Greg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Lepus Rex Date: 19 Apr 01 - 03:49 PM Wow, "Newsweek" and "The Washington Post?" If I could pry a copy of one of these fine archaeological journals out of the hands of one of the many rabid archaeologists who stockpile them, I'd probably be forced to agree with whatever Claymore says. Dude, I mean, Kennewick man looks just like PATRICK STEWART! That's, like, CAPTAIN FRIGGIN' PICARD. You can't argue with that shit, man. ---Lepus Rex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: GUEST,Claymore Date: 19 Apr 01 - 05:07 PM Windsong, I have no information on any acceptable reason for it's re-emergence other than to say it was apparent that others, including possibly those from the original band, found, as I wrote earlier, that Lord Acton was right, and that as the northern Occupation forces were withdrawn, the Klan began to fill the vacumn, left by departing carpet baggers, skalawags and black politicians. Certainally within a short period after the end of the occupation, whatever acceptable purpose the Klan might have had, was washed away by it's subsequent actions. As for how historians "research" the past, I am somewhat sceptical about any facet of history that points in only one direction: 1. If we state that "History is written by the victors" can we then believe any historian's view of the past? 2. If we seek to tell both sides of the story to get at the truth, then aren't we telling lies half the time? 3. While the above to questions demand less of an answer than a gut-check, I tend to believe that if all historians, like economists, were laid end to end, they would still end up pointing in different directions... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Greg F. Date: 19 Apr 01 - 06:18 PM I am somewhat sceptical about any facet of history that points in only one direction: So, unless information is contradictory, you don't believe it? Or firmly documenting something invalidates it? Too Orwellian for me...
1. If we state that "History is written by the victors" can we then believe any historian's view of the past?,
2. If we seek to tell both sides of the story to get at the truth, then aren't we telling lies half the time?
3. ... I tend to believe that if all historians, like economists, were laid end to end, they would still end up pointing in different directions... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: GUEST,Claymore Date: 19 Apr 01 - 06:19 PM King of the Lepers, I think I've figured out your problem. If you want to find out what the Post or Newsweek has to SAY about something, you should go to the Op-Ed page (have someone in freshman English explain "Op-Ed"). Now if you read the article (and you have correctly indicated that the cover shows a man who resembles Patrick Stewart as the reconstructed causcasoid face of the skeleton called Spirit Man) you probably need to understand what the words "quotes" and "context" mean (which means going back to the helpful freshman) A quick count shows that the article quotes or attributes the work of some 28 different sources, including anthropologists and archeologists from Stanford, the Smithsonian and the University of Viginia. The Post article has fewer quotes, but it's reporting on the findings and research papers submitted for "peer review" (back to the freshman) indicating migration from the land bridge which later submerged and became the Grand Banks fishing area between the US and Europe. Over and above that, the finding of skeletons and artifacts more than 17,000 years old in Viginia, Pennslyvania, and South Carolina when the Bering Strait landbridge would not open for more than 5,500 years and the center of the US would not be clear of the glacier covering it for 6,5000 years, really has the Clovis Point Sino-American crowd in a bind. I don't think that anybody is advocating calling them the Second Nation or anything, but it's becoming real clear that the Sino-americans had to exterminate someone from the east to stay in the Americas. The one theory that stops me up is the similarity of the spear points that predate Clovis, and are closer to the ones made during the earlier period, in what is now France. God! If it turns out the French were in the Americas first... It's hard enough dealing with the Quebecois crowd now. Finally LR, I would suggest that by publishing these theories in two of the major publications in the States, the air would have been filled with protests from those breathless archeologists whose copies you snatched away. To back down the same newspaper that took down a sitting President, why that would make the career of any lower tier college archeologist. Wonder why it didn't happen...? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Lepus Rex Date: 20 Apr 01 - 02:54 AM Well, Claymore, I don't think these theories have anyone "in a bind." Not even the "Sino-American crowd," whoever they might be. (Please don't tell me you think Siberia is in China...) For whatever reason, you've got a hard-on for crazy "white people invented fucking everything" theories, and that's cool. Knock yourself out. I can't say a thing that will change your mind. Wait... Maybe the Klan was just a reaction to the extermination of white Aryan Atlantean civilizations of Appalachia my the Sino-American hordes of spear-chucking mammoth jockeys? Hmmm... Did I just "publish" that? Feel free to quote me, Clay. Ah, and have someone in freshman Latin explain "lepus" to you. :) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: mousethief Date: 20 Apr 01 - 06:17 AM Ah, reconstructing skin tone from cranial bones. Now THERE is a scientific pursuit we can all be confident of. Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Kim C Date: 20 Apr 01 - 01:18 PM Alex I think there is something to that - supposedly forensics can look at a skull and tell if it belonged to a Caucasian, an African, or an Asian. That has always flummoxed me, like how TV works. I don't understand it at all. History is kind of a funny thing. We have documented facts about a lot of things, and taking that into account, one would assume that these things might not be disputed. But they are. We like to cuss and discuss about what the documented facts actually mean and whether they're even true or not. Sometimes we find out they're not, when an exciting new discovery is made. Then maybe 50 years down the road, we find something else that makes the first discovery obsolete. It's a never-ending process. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: mousethief Date: 20 Apr 01 - 02:23 PM Call me a skeptic, Kim. I've been called worse. Today. Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Kim C Date: 20 Apr 01 - 05:50 PM Not by me, though. ;-) I think it's important to be skeptical about things. That's how great discoveries are made. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: mousethief Date: 20 Apr 01 - 05:54 PM I doubt it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Some Sweet Justice Against the KKK From: Wavestar Date: 20 Apr 01 - 09:15 PM Okay - and once more the air is filled with bile. I guess I'll just step out of this one - I've got a lot of new questions and interests to occupy me next time I have free time in a library (at the moment it's all taken up with research for my actual degree -concept) but I apparently should stop seeking answers here. Anyone offering them is throwing enough insults at someone to make me wish I hadn't asked. Thanks, though. -J PS. Don't make any assumptions regarding my stand and/or scepticism or lack thereof based on where I leave this discussion now - I only asked questions, nevered offered my conclusions. Therefore, no one can bad mouth them. Cute trick I learned in school. |