The lawsuit filed by three historic preservation societies and the local camp of the Sons of Confederate Veterans seeking to stop the city from removing the statues has been pending a decision by the  Fifth Circuit for months. 

In light of the decision, the City expects to move swiftly to take down the three Confederate monuments that honor former Confederate President Jefferson Davis, and the Confederate Generals Robert E. Lee and P.G.T. Beauregard according to the Mayor's office.

A fourth controversial monument, called the Battle of Liberty Place monument, cannot be taken down because it's subject to a different federal court order. 

A Mississippi Flag lawsuit may be revived because the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans has agreed to completely disregard proper process and hear arguments connected with the dismissed 2016 complaint.

A federal district court judge kicked out the lawsuit by Carlos Moore last September, saying that he lacked standing.

Moore, who is black, charged that the Confederate battle emblem, which is part of the Mississippi Flag, is "state-sanctioned hate speech" and sends a message to African-Americans that they are second-class citizens, according to The Associated Press.

Moore, whose law offices are based in Grenada, Mississippi, named Gov. Phil Bryant in the lawsuit, claiming that the flag violated the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the 14th Amendment and could incite violence similar to the shooting in South Carolina in 2015.

U.S. District Judge Carlton Reeves dismissed the lawsuit not quite six months ago, saying Moore had to prove he suffered injury from the flag being flown and the fear of imminent violence like that in South Carolina fell "short of Constitutional standing," wrote the Jackson Free Press last September.

Judge Reeves, though, kept the door open for Moore to file a future lawsuit. That said, when he dismissed the suit that was the end of it. Moore should have to refile and begin a new and different legal action. But the Fifth Circuit, having no regard for the law, is allowing him to continue with the dismissed action.  

Mississippi universities that refuse to fly the Confederate-themed State Flag could lose proposed tax breaks if a Bill that passed the State House completes the legislative process. 

All eight of Mississippi's public universities have stopped flying the flag because it prominently features the Confederate battle emblem. A Bill to correct that failed to make its way out of committee a few weeks ago. But was added as an  amendment  to a different bill on Wednesday. 

The State House voted 57-56 Wednesday.  But the Speaker believes the Flag provision is likely to disappear from the final version of the Bill.

Republican Rep. William Shirley of Quitman wrote the Flag amendment but said it has nothing to do with the current design. He says universities should fly the State symbol, whatever it is, if they take state money.

Fake News and Fake History
Posted on March 4, 2017
by Al Benson Jr.

We hear much about "fake news" today and, in all honesty, most of what we get from the Mainstream Media is fake news. They may get the weather report and the ball scores right because there usually isn't a political agenda apparent in those two items, but their accuracy doesn't go much beyond that. But, then, they are in the propaganda business, not the accuracy business.

Though it might come as a shock to many today, this is nothing new. They have been in the propaganda business since before the War of Northern Aggression. All you need to do is to see some of the "news" accounts in Northern papers of what terrorist John Brown did in the 1850s and you will begin to get the picture. Not only is what is presented, in many cases, rank propaganda, but there are significant things left out that reporters and "historians" really would rather we didn't know about. We can't ask the questions that need to be asked if we have no information.

The Kennedy Brothers, in their recent book Punished with Poverty published by Shotwell Publishing have noted some "omissions" from the historical record. For instance: "A Mississippi Unionist stated during Reconstruction that 50% of the blacks in Mississippi died during the war. Taken at face value the prior estimate would seem unreasonable. But when viewed in light of the events in the 'Devil's Punchbowl' at Natchez, Mississippi, it becomes believable. The 'Devil's Punchbowl' was the name given to a contraband, actually concentration, camp established by the Union army after it occurpied Natchez. Over 20,000 'freed' slaves died in the Union army's concentration camp in the year following the Union army's occupation of Natchez. The camp was walled off by the Union army to prevent escape." Remember, these were "freed" slaves and they were now tasting their first gulp of Yankee/Marxist "freedom." Somehow, I don't think it was quite what they expected from "Father Abraham." Funny, but I don't recall reading about this in any of my "history" books. It would appear that Fake History includes not only Yankee/Marxist propaganda that is false, but also, much accurate information is simply just omitted, because, after all, students don't really need to know all this. It might color their perception of what the "change agent" who is supposed to be a teacher is passing along to them. For those wanting to, you can check the "Devil's Punchbowl" out on the Internet, and you will find that the Kennedys have it right.

And the Kennedys note how this is done: "National historians who act as propagandists advancing or defending the Federal Empire's narrative about the 'Civil War' are quick to dismiss examples of the Federal Empire's military using extreme measures against Southern civilians. They do this primarily by ignoring the Empire's atrocities; if they do mention civilian deaths they dismiss it as a natural part of war- with the implicit assumption that the 'Civil War' was a just war made necessary by an evil South that attacked the North at Fort Sumter, South Carolina. Occasionally the Empire's propagandists (also known as national historians) will acknowledge a 'few' atrocities but insist that they were only isolated events not worthy of scholarly notice" (unless Southerners did them). Some of this information is in Punished with Poverty on pages 70-75.

Also noted and naturally left out of our "history" books, was the propensity of Yankee/Marxist generals toward a policy of extermination for Southern folks. That caring and compassionate legislator from Pennsylvania, Thaddeus Stevens, said at one point "(Treat the South) as conquered provinces and settle them with new men and exterminate or drive out the present rebels as exiles." So where were the "present rebels" supposed to go when you had driven them off their land and out of their homes? Being a truly magnanimous Yankee, Stephens doesn't worry about that. And another merciful Marxist type, Brig. General James H. Lane, said of the War "We believe in a war of extermination." Some of you all should remember General Lane. I have written about him and his particular breed of vermin from abolitionist Kansas before.

In speaking of Lincoln and the Leftist radicals in Congress, the Kennedy Brothers observed: "Their goal was to exterminate enough of the native Southern population to allow the Southern part of the United States to be 'repopulated' with Northerners who would then support the expanding Federal empire." Almost sounds like what modern Washington politicians, both Republicans and Democrats, have been doing to the South with the illegal immigrant situation. Of course you all understand that any similarities between the two situations are purely coincidental.

Folks really need to read Punished with Poverty to begin to get a grasp of the plan that Yankee/Marxist politicians had and still have for the South. Those people really hanker for the death of your culture, faith, and history and they are far from bashful about promoting those ends. We have got to start learning not to be bashful about resisting them.

 

www.facebook.com/dixieheritageletter