WOULD ANYONE CONDEMN HIM?
HIS NAME IS H.K. EDGERTON, BORN IN NORTH CAROLINA, AN ACTIVIST, A PROUD MEMBER OF 'SONS OF CONFEDERATE VETERANS', PRESIDENT OF SOUTHERN HERITAGE 411 .
I LEARNED A LOT BY VISITING HIS WEBSITE,VERIFIABLE FACTS THAT I DIDN'T KNOW.
IN 2000, AT AGE 55, HE BEGAN A MARCH FROM NORTH CAROLINA TO TEXAS, CARRYING A LARGE CONFEDERATE FLAG.
IN 2009, HE MARCHED AGAIN, THIS TIME TO WASHINGTON, D.C.
"Edgerton, 65, a member of the Sons of Confederate Veterans, is marching from his Black Mountain, N.C., home to ask President-elect Barack Obama to extend an olive branch to traditional Southerners. His improbable journey for an unlikely cause seeks what may be the politically impossible: official U.S. government recognition of the Confederate battle flag as a symbol of Southern heritage.
“I’m an African-American and I’m a Southerner and I believe my heritage, which is represented by the flag bearing the Christian Cross of St. Andrew, is being ignored and destroyed. It’s continuing to divide the black folks and the white folks who have a lot in common,” Edgerton said, stopping his forward march for a hot beverage at the Dunkin’ Donuts just north of Fray’s Mill Road.
“Mr. Obama said he is about unity and bringing this nation together. If he is truly a man of unity, I hope he will consider showing the Southerner that [the Southerner] is an important part of this country,” he said.
Edgerton offers advice on how that can be accomplished.
“He could have a Confederate color guard at the White House,” he said. “He could give the Confederate flag a respected place as part of the history and heritage of this country.”
That is unlikely to happen. The flag has become a magnet for racial division. Racists and white supremacy groups wave the flag to represent their cause and civil rights leaders point to the flag as a symbol of repression and slavery.
Edgerton insists that’s wrong.
“It does not represent slavery, although slavery was a fact of life. The flag represents a heritage, a way of life that my forebears had. It represents the men and the families that lived together and fought together to preserve their country from invasion,” Edgerton said. “My family volunteered for the Confederacy and fought side-by-side with white Southerners and Indian Southerners. They are all my family.”
HE IS A VERY OUTSPOKEN GENTLEMAN...
"During a ceremony Sunday on the spot where North Carolinians signed themselves into the Confederate army in 1861, Edgerton accepted a Confederate battle flag and prepared to begin a 1,385-mile march to Texas on behalf of Confederate heritage.
He plans to walk 21 miles a day, six days a week to raise money for the Sons of the Confederate Veterans and Southern Legal Resource Center.
Based in Black Mountain, the Southern Legal Resource Center is a nonprofit tax-exempt civil rights public law firm that litigates disputes involving Confederate heritage.
Edgerton believes that both white and black Southerners can embrace the Confederate flag. He blames the Civil War for causing bitterness between the races, and says black people would have earned the same freedoms they have today and suffered much less if the United States had allowed the South to secede.
Edgerton said that instead of white people giving reparations to black people for slavery, the North should pay reparations to the South for what he calls the North’s war crimes. He said the North stole their gold, raped their women, and after the war was over, robbed them of their history.
“America will never be truly great until it pays its debt that it owes to the South,” Edgerton said.
HE ASKS PEOPLE TO ....
HOW MANY WOULD WHO READ THIS?
WHETHER YOU WOULD SUPPORT THE MAN OR NOT, THIS ENTIRE CONFEDERATE FLAG THING IS SIMPLY ANOTHER CASE OF AMERICANS LOSING ANOTHER FREEDOM, ISN'T IT?
WE GOT NO VOTE ON THE ISSUE,
THERE WAS NO MEDIA ATTENTION GIVEN TO MEN LIKE MR. EDGERTON, JUST RHETORIC AND TALKING HEADS CONDEMNING THE FLYING OF A FLAG (WILL IT BE THE STARS AND STRIPES NEXT?) AND REPEATING THE SAME SONG...."THIS FLAG IS ABOUT RACISM AND HATE."
MR. EDGERTON WOULD NOT AGREE.
TRUE HISTORY WOULD NOT AGREE, BECAUSE YOU SEE, THE CIVIL WAR WAS NOT ABOUT SLAVERY, CONTRARY TO WHAT MOST HISTORY BOOKS STILL TEACH...IT WAS ABOUT UNFAIR TAXATION AND STATES' RIGHTS.
AND IF YOU THOUGHT ONLY THE SOUTH HELD SLAVES, YOU WERE WRONG.
"It is highly misleading to look only at the small percentage of slaves in eighteenth-century colony-wide populations - for example, 8 percent in New Jersey or under 4 percent in Connecticut.
In the mid-eighteenth century black slaves performed at least one-third of all physical labor in New York City. By 1750 slaves made up 34 percent of the population of Longs County (Brooklyn) and 18 percent of New York County."
[From the book Inhuman Bondage : The Rise and Fall of Slavery in the New World, by David Brion Davis]
"Less than one third of Southern families owned slaves in 1860, on the eve of the Civil War.
In the Lower South, 37.6% of white families owned slaves.
In the Middle South, the percentage was 25.3%, and the combined total for the Confederacy was 30.8%.
In the Border States (those slave states that stayed in the Union), the percentage was 15.9%.
[FROM Selected Statistics on Slavery in the United States]
"Congress, at that time, heavily favored the industrialized northern states to the point of demanding that the South sell its cotton and other raw materials ONLY to the factories in the north, rather than to other countries, WHERE THEY COULD GET A BETTER PRICE.
Congress also passed laws that heavily taxed the finished materials that the northern industries produced, making finished products that the South wanted unaffordable.
President James Buchanan was much more accommodating to the views of the secessionists and the 'slave' states—in the midst of the pre-War secession crisis.
In his final State of the Union address to Congress, on December 3, 1860, he acknowledged his view that the South, "after having first used all peaceful and constitutional means to obtain redress, would be justified in revolutionary resistance to the Government of the Union"; but he also drew his apocalyptic vision of the results to be expected from secession.
HE WAS RIGHT.
SLAVERY did not become a major issue, with the exception of John Brown's raid on Harper's Ferry, until after the Battle of Antietam in September 1862, when Abraham Lincoln decided to free the slaves in the Confederate States, in part to punish those states for continuing the war effort.
HE DID NOT ISSUE AN ORDER FREEING NORTHERN SLAVES UNTIL 1863.
The Emancipation Proclamation was enacted when the South was WINNING the war.
The proclamation had the effect of destabilizing the South, improving Lincoln's chances of being re-elected by appealing to Republican abolitionists, and effectively cut off military support to the South from Britain and France.
It was THE best political move of Lincoln's career.
The war had been in progress for two years by that time. "
The Civil War did NOT begin over slavery.
The President before Lincoln affirmed that.
Slavery became the main issue only after it looked like the South might win.
LEST WE FORGET, ALMOST ALL THE "FOUNDING FATHERS" OWNED SLAVES.
WASHINGTON DID.
JEFFERSON CERTAINLY DID.
SLAVERY WAS ACCEPTABLE UNTIL 1862, EVEN TO ABRAHAM LINCOLN, BECAUSE IT WAS SANCTIONED BY THE CONSTITUTION!
IN THE CONSTITUTION WE CAN READ THE "FUGITIVE SLAVE LAW", THE "THREE-FIFTHS" LAW, AND SEE HOW SLAVERY WAS VIEWED THEN.
LINCOLN DID NOT BELIEVE BLACKS SHOULD HAVE THE SAME RIGHTS AS WHITES!
"Though Lincoln argued that the founding fathers’ phrase “All men are created equal” applied to blacks and whites alike, this did not mean he thought they should have the same social and political rights.
His views became clear during an 1858 series of debates with his opponent in the Illinois race for U.S. Senate, Stephen Douglas, who had accused him of supporting “negro equality.”
In their fourth debate, at Charleston, Illinois, on September 18, 1858, Lincoln made his position clear.
“I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races,” he began, going on to say that he opposed blacks having the right to vote, to serve on juries, to hold office and to intermarry with whites.
What he did believe was that, like all men, blacks had the right to improve their condition in society and to enjoy the fruits of their labor.
In this way they were equal to white men.
On Aug. 22, 1862, President Lincoln set the stage for his Emancipation Proclamation in a letter to the New York Tribune that included the following passage:
"If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves, I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that.
What I do about slavery and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union."
The Southern states would not have seceded and the war would not have occurred had Congress not levied such unjust taxes AND had not prevented the southern states from selling their products abroad.
DO STATES HAVE A RIGHT TO SECEDE FROM THE 'UNION'?
In a March 15, 1833, letter to Daniel Webster (congratulating him on a speech opposing nullification), Madison discussed "revolution" versus "secession":
Madison affirms an extra-constitutional right to revolt against conditions of "intolerable oppression"; but if the case cannot be made (that such conditions exist), then he rejects secession—as a violation of the Constitution.PRESIDENT JAMES BUCHANAN, 1860
ADDRESS TO CONGRESS:
"In order to justify secession as a constitutional remedy, it must be on the principle that the Federal Government is a mere voluntary association of States, to be dissolved at pleasure by any one of the contracting parties. [emphasis added] If this be so, the Confederacy [here referring to the existing Union] is a rope of sand, to be penetrated and dissolved by the first adverse wave of public opinion in any of the States. In this manner our thirty-three States may resolve themselves into as many petty, jarring, and hostile republics, each one retiring from the Union without responsibility whenever any sudden excitement might impel them to such a course. By this process a Union might be entirely broken into fragments in a few weeks which cost our forefathers many years of toil, privation, and blood to establish."
SO IS IT JUST A MATTER OF SEMANTICS?
IT CERTAINLY SEEMS TO BE.
OR MAYBE THAT EVER PRESENT "INTERPRETATION" MESS ABOUT THE SIMPLY WORDED ORIGINAL CONSTITUTION?
In Texas v. White, the United States Supreme Court ruled unilateral secession unconstitutional, while commenting that revolution or consent of the States could lead to a successful secession.
THAT CERTAINLY LOOKS LIKE SECESSION WOULD BE ALLOWED, DOESN'T IT?
A SECESSIONIST MOVEMENT HAD STARTED IN AMERICA IN THE 18th CENTURY!
According to historian John Ferling, by 1786 the Union under the Articles of Confederation. was falling apart.
"Rumors of likely secessionist movements were unleashed. There was buzz as well that some states planned to abandon the American Union and form a regional confederacy. America, it was said, would go the way of Europe, and ultimately three or four, or more confederacies would spring up. ... Not only would these confederations be capable of taking steps that were beyond the ability of Congress under the articles, but in private some portrayed such a step in a positive light, in as much as the regional union could adopt constitutions that secured property rights and maintained order."
[Ferling, John. A Leap in the Dark: The Struggle to Create the American Republic. (2003)]
THERE WAS A SECESSIONIST MOVEMENT IN NEW ENGLAND 60 YEARS BEFORE THE CIVIL WAR!
After a quarrel with President John Adams over Adams's plan to make peace with France, Timothy Pickering was dismissed from the office of Secretary of State in May 1800.
In 1802, Pickering and a band of Federalists, agitated at the lack of support for Federalists, attempted to gain support for the secession of New England from the Jeffersonian United States.
The irony of a Federalist moving against the national government was not lost among his dissenters. He was named to the United States Senate as a senator from Massachusetts in 1803 as a member of the Federalist Party.
WELL, LET'S JUST SAY A LOT OF STATES WANTED TO SECEDE BEGINNING SHORTLY AFTER THE REVOLUTIONARY WAR HAD ENDED AND THE STATES WERE RAILROADED INTO ACCEPTING THE NEW FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OR GETTING LEFT TO THEIR OWN DEVICES.
WHAT MADE THE SOUTHERN STATES' ATTEMPT TO DO SO BRING ABOUT A CIVIL WAR IS SOMETHING THAT WILL BE ARGUED UNTIL THE END OF TIME.
GREAT BRITAIN ONCE OWNED A LOT OF TERRITORY, BUT, OVER TIME SHE GRANTED INDEPENDENCE TO ALMOST ALL WHO WANTED IT, GIVING UP INDIA, AUSTRALIA, CANADA....
THE USSR HAD TO LET GO OF ITS "SATELLITE STATES" AND AMERICA WAS HOWLING FOR THAT EACH TIME ONE WANTED TO BREAK AWAY FROM "MOTHER RUSSIA"...OH, FREEDOM, LET FREEDOM RING....
LET FREEDOM FLOURISH!
JUST NOT AT HOME!
NOT WITHIN THE BORDERS OF THE CORPORATION WE CALL THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!
HERE, SECESSIONISTS ARE TARGETED FOR EXTERMINATION, THOSE WHO TAKE TO THE STREETS TO PROTEST LOSS OF CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS OR FREEDOMS ARE, AT THE LEAST, BLASTED WITH WATER CANNONS, GET A TASTE OF BILLY CLUBS, GET ARRESTED AND CHARGED WITH WHATEVER THEY FEEL LIKE CHARGING PROTESTERS/DEMONSTRATORS WITH ON WHATEVER DAY OF THE WEEK THEY GET DRAGGED IN TO JAIL.
HERE, INDEPENDENT THINKERS ARE LABELED "POSSIBLE TERRORISTS", AND WE ABSOLUTELY MUST SUBMIT TO "HOMELAND SECURITY" FEELING US UP WHEN IT PLEASES THEM, SUBMIT TO "BORDER CHECKS" FOR 100 MILES OF ANY OF OUR BORDERS WHERE THE CONSTITUTION DOES NOT APPLY TO SEARCH AND SEIZURE OR UNLAWFUL DETENTION OF U.S. CITIZENS.
I'VE NEVER FLOWN A CONFEDERATE FLAG, BUT I HAVE FLOWN THE MIA/POW FLAG, THE FLAG OF THE EASTERN BAND 'CHEROKEE', AND A "JOLLY ROGER" ON A BOAT.
I WON'T BE RESTRAINED FROM FLYING THOSE.
I'LL FLY WHAT I PLEASE ON MY OWN PROPERTY.
I'LL WEAR ODD BUTTONS ON HATS, SHIRTS, JACKETS, WHATEVER SUITS ME.
I'LL SING IN PUBLIC, READ WHATEVER I CHOOSE TO READ IN PUBLIC, AND PAINT MY VEHICLE TO RESEMBLE A HORSE'S BEHIND, IF THAT SHOULD EVER PLEASE ME TO DO SO.
I AM AN AMERICAN CITIZEN!
I'LL SING IN PUBLIC, READ WHATEVER I CHOOSE TO READ IN PUBLIC, AND PAINT MY VEHICLE TO RESEMBLE A HORSE'S BEHIND, IF THAT SHOULD EVER PLEASE ME TO DO SO.
I AM AN AMERICAN CITIZEN!
I AM ONE OF "THE PEOPLE" THE FOUNDING DOCUMENTS SPEAK OF.
SO IS MR. EDGERTON.
"WE, THE PEOPLE OF THE united STATES OF AMERICA..."
WE CALL THE SHOTS HERE.
SO IS MR. EDGERTON.
"WE, THE PEOPLE OF THE united STATES OF AMERICA..."
WE CALL THE SHOTS HERE.
WE ELECT POLITICIANS TO SERVE US.
STATES RIGHTS STILL EXIST.
STATES RIGHTS STILL EXIST.
CITIZENS' RIGHTS STILL EXIST.
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS OVERSTEPPED ITS BOUNDS.
STATES THAT ARE BEING UNJUSTLY OPPRESSED BY THE "NATIONAL GOVERNMENT" MUST STAND UP AND SAY SO.
THE STATES HAVE GIVEN UP TOO MANY RIGHTS...AS HAVE "WE, THE PEOPLE".
SO...YES, YES INDEED, MR. EDGERTON, I SUPPORT YOU, SIR.
AND I WILL SUPPORT YOU AS LONG AS I LIVE TO FLY THE FLAGS I FLY, ONE OF WHICH IS THE "STARS AND STRIPES".
IN ADDENDUM:
THE FOLLOWING IS PART OF AN INTERVIEW GIVEN BY THE LEGENDARY TALK SHOW HOST, MR. JERRY HUGHES, WHEN ASKED IF HE THOUGHT THE BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, FIREARMS AND EXPLOSIVES WAS CONSTITUTIONALLY LEGAL.
IT ADDRESSES MANY ISSUES WE SHOULD CONSIDER TODAY.
MR. HUGHES WAS CONSIDERED AN EXPERT ON THE CONSTITUTION, A DOCUMENT HE HAD STUDIED FOR ALMOST 50 YEARS WHEN THIS INTERVIEW WAS GIVEN.
IT IS LENGTHY, BUT IT IS THOUGHT-PROVOKING AND MIND-CHANGING.
I HOPE YOU READ IT ALL...IF YOU LOVE AMERICA...ONLY IF YOU DO.
" In theory, the Government of the United States, the government of each and every state, and the government of every community and every agency of those governments are supposed to serve We the People.
There is only one reason for government or any government agency to exist and we find that the logic for that in the Declaration of Independence by Mr. Jefferson.
To secure these rights, governments are instituted among men deriving their powers from the consent of the government, so to secure the rights, we have government.
To secure the rights of the people, we would have government agencies.
I don’t know that the BATFE is there to secure the rights. I think, if anything, they seem to be there to serve the government rather than the people.
The government too often doesn’t serve the people today and their activities are not in support of the people but indeed the diametric opposition to them.
If we look at the history of the BATF and now the BATFE, we can see that it is just time and time again filled with examples of abuse of patent rights, or excessive control, excessive authority, those kinds of things, but I don’t think that goes to serve anyone except the BATFE and perhaps some in government.
Congress is in the business of growing government.
That is the reality today.
Government has grown tremendously.
The rate of taxation according to the National Taxpayers Union, in the 20th century, the rate of taxes to America grew at 175,000%.
The government under this particular administration, the George W. Bush Administration, has grown to a greater extent than at any time since the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Administration.
Government is today a self-serving, self-sustaining, self-beating, self-growing bureaucracy, and once a government entity is created, seldom is it ever abolished, so I don’t think these folks are the least bit concerned about getting rid of the ATF.
Now they have might been a few years ago before the Waco tragedy as there was concern, and of course, the agency, the BATF, at that time the BATF, was exceptionally concerned about what their future was going to be.
Were they going to be around and of course, they came up with the Waco issue and it supposedly proved to congress, “Oh, see you need us, we have to continue our existence and such”, but I think it is there to serve the members of congress.
It is there to serve the interests of some of the members of congress and to serve the Federal Government and agenda of some who are not freedom-loving people, but they seem to be just determined to control every aspect of American life.
This nation, obviously, we are a people of laws, and the laws that we have should be obeyed.
When they are not obeyed, there generally is a punishment, but the punishment should fit the offense.
We should not, for instance, do like China and we should not kill people because somebody would steal a pack of cigarettes or perhaps take a woman’s purse.
Now nobody should do either one of those things, but I would argue that those are not capital offenses.
However, let’s look at Ruby Ridge.
A man by the name of Randy Weaver who served his country very well as a Green Beret who had sought the office of sheriff in the county in which he was living, a gentleman apparently who had a good reputation.
He had some thoughts that maybe some of us might not have regarding racial separation and such, but nonetheless, Randy Weaver was enticed to sell a shotgun to a man who was an undercover agent, if you will, or acting as an undercover agent or a resource.
That shotgun he sold had a barrel that was one-quarter of one inch too short.
Now I would argue that the average man’s wedding ring would probably be somewhere between an eighth and a quarter of an inch, so we are talking about a piece of steel about the size of the average man’s wedding ring.
Because that barrel was one-quarter of an inch too short, it ended up costing the life of a federal agent, a 13-year-old boy who had not even reached puberty who was shot in the back by a high powered rifle of a federal agent; a woman, Vicki Weaver, who was unarmed holding only a 10-month-old child in her arms when a sniper took half of her head off while she was standing in the doorway.
Two other people were seriously injured and almost lost their lives.
So the crime was not that the gun had been sold but that the gun had been sold with a barrel that was a quarter of an inch too short and that would have been okay if the tax had been paid on it.
So it comes down to a $200 tax cost three human lives, almost two more.
It costs the taxpayers of the United States about six million that was paid to the Weaver family for what was ruled unconstitutional shootings for which no one was every prosecuted.
Now think about that .
Three lives gone, two lives seriously injured, two little girls without a mother for the rest of their lives, a man losing his wife and his 13-year-old son, those little girls without their brother also, all because a $200 tax was not paid on a quarter of an inch of steel.
I would argue that that is not serving America.
That is not preserving what we are supposed to be preserving in this country, that is government in a very self-serving and ridiculously inefficient and inept attitude, and that should not be tolerated.
That one thing should have called for the absolute abolishment of the BATFE and the kinds of laws that we see that restrict firearm ownership.
No human life should be taken because somebody doesn’t pay a $200 tax or because somebody cuts a quarter of an inch of steel off of a shotgun barrel.
[QUESTION ASKED: If someone who was not part of the government, you for example, and we committed the same crimes as the government agents did under the color of law, what do you suppose would happen to us?]
We would be in prison right now. There is no doubt about that. We would absolutely be in prison.
There is a charge that is often used called negligent homicide. Sometimes negligent homicide is used even in a vehicle accident where somebody because perhaps they are talking on their cell phone, they weren’t paying attention, they weren’t actually drunk or driving under the influence to the degree that law would mandate as illegal, but there would be a contributing factor there that caused this person to be negligent, and because of their negligence, a human life would be taken.
People are prosecuted, they are imprisoned, they are fined tremendously.
In this case, not only was no one prosecuted and no one fined, but the people who took part in the homicides were promoted.
That again gives you a little bit of an insight into the thinking of some of these government agencies.
Now again what is the purpose of government?
To secure these rights.
What is the purpose of a government agency?
To help the government secure these rights.
For a $200 tax and a quarter of an inch of steel, a 13-year-old boy was shot in the back with a high powered rifle. His mother was shot in the face with a high-powered rifle. A federal agent lost his life. Two others were nearly killed. Taxpayers were out six million dollars.
If that is justified for the loss of a $200 tax, this country needs to fold our tent, turn off the light and call it a day.
...if we look at the Waco situation, the same thing there. You know here was the Government of the United States of America using a chemical agent, using a gas, using a weapon of mass destruction if you will, that we were not even allowed to use in war.
The Geneva Convention said that United States Military cannot use this against its most aggressive enemy and we used it on women and children.
We actually invaded, we raided, we took down a church, a church in America with men, women and children inside, and we used weapons that are not even allowed in war, and we the American people sit back and say, oh, that’s horrible, that’s terrible, and again, why did it happen?
Because allegedly the Branch Davidians, some of them, may have had parts of a firearm or may have had a firearm on which a $200 tax had not been paid.
So for the $200 tax that was not paid, we ended up killing almost 100 people, about 17 of them children.
[QUESTION: Why do you suppose the American people keep voting for politicians, congress critters as I call them? Who authorized the BATF? And who won’t take action to abolish it?]
The deliberate dumbing down of America.
According to the Department of Education, 44 million adult Americans are either illiterate or functionally illiterate, cannot read a bedtime story to their children. Certainly could not read the Bills of Right nor the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence.
Another 50 million Americans are at one level above illiteracy.
There are five levels of literacy according to the Department of Education. We have roughly 95 million American adults at level 1, which is illiterate, functionally illiterate, or level 2.
We are a dumbed-down society.
For the average American citizen, they don’t know about the Constitution, don’t know about the Bill of Rights.
One out of five Americans can name all of the characters or members, if you will, of the Simpson Cartoon series on television.
Only one of a thousand can name the rights that are supposed to be protected in the First Amendment.
We put more emphasis and more priority to the Simpson Cartoon series than we do to the Bill of Rights and when a society does that, it goes back to Thomas Jefferson in his letter to Colonel Yancey that a society that expects to remain ignorant and free in a state of civilization, is expecting what never has been and never can be.
But I will tell you something, it is a lot easier to enslave ignorant people than it is to enslave smart people, and in fact, in my history education, I have never seen where a wise, well-educated, well-read electorate has ever been enslaved for any period of time.
America was a great country.
It is no longer great, but it is a good country,
and I know this may be controversial to some people, but I don’t think America is a great nation any longer. We were at one time. We have the potential to be great again.
I think we are a good nation by comparison to many others out there, but we are not the country we used to be. We are not the country we are supposed to be. We are not the freedom loving people that we were at one time.
In fact, one of the things that I often challenge our listeners is to name for me anything of any substance, anything of any value that an America citizen can do without government directly or indirectly being involved.
And people say, well go to the bathroom.
There are all kinds of regulations and sanitation laws and such.
Well, sleeping.
Well, the very mattress on which we sleep is regulated.
Well procreation.
In Florida a couple of years ago there was a law introduced in committee that before a couple could engage in an act of procreation, they had to call a state hotline and register and wait 24 hours for an answer.
Government is involved in everything in our lives and yet we go to our football games and basketball games and we stand and we sing about the land of the free.
By definition, the word freedom is without arbitrary control. We are not a free society any longer. We are a controlled people in every aspect of our lives.
I don’t know what has happened to us. We have become so complacent, we have become so apathetic that I really fear for the future of this country. I really truly believe sir and I hate to say this, but I believe that I probably, and you probably, and many of us as baby boomers and older, we have probably lived through the last great years of America unless we and our children get a little bit of initiative, educate ourselves a little better than what we are to a great extent than what we are now, and turn it around.
[QUESTION: When you say that we should learn and educate ourselves, what areas would you suggest that people focus on?]
We need sir, a Bill of Rights mentality in America.
You talked about it.
We need a Bill of Rights culture.
We need a Bill of Rights test.
Any law that is enacted by any legislative body, if it does not pass the Bill of Rights test, it should not be allowed.
It should not be tolerated.
Any politician who attempts to repetitively enact or propose laws that fail the test, needs to be tossed out on his or her ear.
It is time that we the people of the United States of America take our government back.
It belongs to us.
It is we the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union.
We the people.
Over one million American souls have been given for a concept, an idea, a thought, and it is called freedom, and to disallow that, to disavow that is nothing but a slap in the face and a profession that those one million souls have been given in vain. God help us if we turn around and walk away from the memory and the actions of great men and women who have fought, bled and died for what we are supposed to have.
I think that probably the patriots of the early America, if the founders of this country were to come back and look at us today, they would probably weep.
I think they would probably break down and cry like children.
They would probably be very angry after having expressed their emotion.
They would probably want to know how in God's name could you have allowed this to happen?
How could you have dishonored the memory of what we have tried to create for you?
How could you allow yourselves to get into a situation that is actually worse than what we fought the King of England over?
I think they would probably be very disappointed in us as their children, as their posterity, and would probably express dissatisfaction as well as be very remorseful.
We are going to have to replace our body politic.
We are going to have to replace the people who make the rules.
I know exactly what you are saying and sometimes I get these letters and it says “well this guy has a B- or a C+ and the other guy has an F, do you want to vote for the guy with the C+, he is a little better or whatever.”
I have been told and I have told others for so longer than when we choose the lesser of two evils, we are still choosing evil, and we have to accept the consequences if we are going to choose less than evil.
I would ask husbands or wives how many times will you allow infidelity?
Is it okay if your husband only cheats on you ladies once a month, twice a month?
Guys, is it okay if your wife only cheats on you seven times a year, eight times a year, and the answer I get is well, no, never, one time was too much.
Well, why don’t we have hold the people who impact our lives and the lives of our children through these legislations, through these regulations, why don’t we hold them accountable in the same fashion, that you are going to have to follow the law, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and when you commit an infidelity, we may allow it one time and forgive you, but you better not do it a second time, and some of us aren’t even going to allow the first time.
I don’t think we take it seriously.
They say politics is the art of compromise.
I don’t want to compromise free speech.
I don’t want to compromise freedom of religion.
I don’t want to compromise freedom of the press.
I certainly don’t want to compromise the right to be armed to protect myself, my family, or my country, and I think any of us who do want to compromise, I think we fall short of understanding what freedom is and again what this country is suppose to be about.
When we have elected officials who compromise our freedom, they are not worthy of upholding the office. They are not worthy of the respect that they think they are if they are going to compromise the very foundation of our nation.
America is not a stupid country.
We are an ignorant people today because of the dumbing-down of America, but we are not a stupid people.
We can fix our ignorance and if we fix our ignorance, we can put this country back on the right course.
-------------------------------
THANK YOU, JERRY HUGHES!
SADNESS AT YOUR GOING, PEACE TO YOUR ASHES.
THE STATES HAVE GIVEN UP TOO MANY RIGHTS...AS HAVE "WE, THE PEOPLE".
SO...YES, YES INDEED, MR. EDGERTON, I SUPPORT YOU, SIR.
AND I WILL SUPPORT YOU AS LONG AS I LIVE TO FLY THE FLAGS I FLY, ONE OF WHICH IS THE "STARS AND STRIPES".
IN ADDENDUM:
THE FOLLOWING IS PART OF AN INTERVIEW GIVEN BY THE LEGENDARY TALK SHOW HOST, MR. JERRY HUGHES, WHEN ASKED IF HE THOUGHT THE BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, FIREARMS AND EXPLOSIVES WAS CONSTITUTIONALLY LEGAL.
IT ADDRESSES MANY ISSUES WE SHOULD CONSIDER TODAY.
MR. HUGHES WAS CONSIDERED AN EXPERT ON THE CONSTITUTION, A DOCUMENT HE HAD STUDIED FOR ALMOST 50 YEARS WHEN THIS INTERVIEW WAS GIVEN.
IT IS LENGTHY, BUT IT IS THOUGHT-PROVOKING AND MIND-CHANGING.
I HOPE YOU READ IT ALL...IF YOU LOVE AMERICA...ONLY IF YOU DO.
" In theory, the Government of the United States, the government of each and every state, and the government of every community and every agency of those governments are supposed to serve We the People.
There is only one reason for government or any government agency to exist and we find that the logic for that in the Declaration of Independence by Mr. Jefferson.
To secure these rights, governments are instituted among men deriving their powers from the consent of the government, so to secure the rights, we have government.
To secure the rights of the people, we would have government agencies.
I don’t know that the BATFE is there to secure the rights. I think, if anything, they seem to be there to serve the government rather than the people.
The government too often doesn’t serve the people today and their activities are not in support of the people but indeed the diametric opposition to them.
If we look at the history of the BATF and now the BATFE, we can see that it is just time and time again filled with examples of abuse of patent rights, or excessive control, excessive authority, those kinds of things, but I don’t think that goes to serve anyone except the BATFE and perhaps some in government.
Congress is in the business of growing government.
That is the reality today.
Government has grown tremendously.
The rate of taxation according to the National Taxpayers Union, in the 20th century, the rate of taxes to America grew at 175,000%.
The government under this particular administration, the George W. Bush Administration, has grown to a greater extent than at any time since the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Administration.
Government is today a self-serving, self-sustaining, self-beating, self-growing bureaucracy, and once a government entity is created, seldom is it ever abolished, so I don’t think these folks are the least bit concerned about getting rid of the ATF.
Now they have might been a few years ago before the Waco tragedy as there was concern, and of course, the agency, the BATF, at that time the BATF, was exceptionally concerned about what their future was going to be.
Were they going to be around and of course, they came up with the Waco issue and it supposedly proved to congress, “Oh, see you need us, we have to continue our existence and such”, but I think it is there to serve the members of congress.
It is there to serve the interests of some of the members of congress and to serve the Federal Government and agenda of some who are not freedom-loving people, but they seem to be just determined to control every aspect of American life.
This nation, obviously, we are a people of laws, and the laws that we have should be obeyed.
When they are not obeyed, there generally is a punishment, but the punishment should fit the offense.
We should not, for instance, do like China and we should not kill people because somebody would steal a pack of cigarettes or perhaps take a woman’s purse.
Now nobody should do either one of those things, but I would argue that those are not capital offenses.
However, let’s look at Ruby Ridge.
A man by the name of Randy Weaver who served his country very well as a Green Beret who had sought the office of sheriff in the county in which he was living, a gentleman apparently who had a good reputation.
He had some thoughts that maybe some of us might not have regarding racial separation and such, but nonetheless, Randy Weaver was enticed to sell a shotgun to a man who was an undercover agent, if you will, or acting as an undercover agent or a resource.
That shotgun he sold had a barrel that was one-quarter of one inch too short.
Now I would argue that the average man’s wedding ring would probably be somewhere between an eighth and a quarter of an inch, so we are talking about a piece of steel about the size of the average man’s wedding ring.
Because that barrel was one-quarter of an inch too short, it ended up costing the life of a federal agent, a 13-year-old boy who had not even reached puberty who was shot in the back by a high powered rifle of a federal agent; a woman, Vicki Weaver, who was unarmed holding only a 10-month-old child in her arms when a sniper took half of her head off while she was standing in the doorway.
Two other people were seriously injured and almost lost their lives.
So the crime was not that the gun had been sold but that the gun had been sold with a barrel that was a quarter of an inch too short and that would have been okay if the tax had been paid on it.
So it comes down to a $200 tax cost three human lives, almost two more.
It costs the taxpayers of the United States about six million that was paid to the Weaver family for what was ruled unconstitutional shootings for which no one was every prosecuted.
Now think about that .
Three lives gone, two lives seriously injured, two little girls without a mother for the rest of their lives, a man losing his wife and his 13-year-old son, those little girls without their brother also, all because a $200 tax was not paid on a quarter of an inch of steel.
I would argue that that is not serving America.
That is not preserving what we are supposed to be preserving in this country, that is government in a very self-serving and ridiculously inefficient and inept attitude, and that should not be tolerated.
That one thing should have called for the absolute abolishment of the BATFE and the kinds of laws that we see that restrict firearm ownership.
No human life should be taken because somebody doesn’t pay a $200 tax or because somebody cuts a quarter of an inch of steel off of a shotgun barrel.
[QUESTION ASKED: If someone who was not part of the government, you for example, and we committed the same crimes as the government agents did under the color of law, what do you suppose would happen to us?]
We would be in prison right now. There is no doubt about that. We would absolutely be in prison.
There is a charge that is often used called negligent homicide. Sometimes negligent homicide is used even in a vehicle accident where somebody because perhaps they are talking on their cell phone, they weren’t paying attention, they weren’t actually drunk or driving under the influence to the degree that law would mandate as illegal, but there would be a contributing factor there that caused this person to be negligent, and because of their negligence, a human life would be taken.
People are prosecuted, they are imprisoned, they are fined tremendously.
In this case, not only was no one prosecuted and no one fined, but the people who took part in the homicides were promoted.
That again gives you a little bit of an insight into the thinking of some of these government agencies.
Now again what is the purpose of government?
To secure these rights.
What is the purpose of a government agency?
To help the government secure these rights.
For a $200 tax and a quarter of an inch of steel, a 13-year-old boy was shot in the back with a high powered rifle. His mother was shot in the face with a high-powered rifle. A federal agent lost his life. Two others were nearly killed. Taxpayers were out six million dollars.
If that is justified for the loss of a $200 tax, this country needs to fold our tent, turn off the light and call it a day.
...if we look at the Waco situation, the same thing there. You know here was the Government of the United States of America using a chemical agent, using a gas, using a weapon of mass destruction if you will, that we were not even allowed to use in war.
The Geneva Convention said that United States Military cannot use this against its most aggressive enemy and we used it on women and children.
We actually invaded, we raided, we took down a church, a church in America with men, women and children inside, and we used weapons that are not even allowed in war, and we the American people sit back and say, oh, that’s horrible, that’s terrible, and again, why did it happen?
Because allegedly the Branch Davidians, some of them, may have had parts of a firearm or may have had a firearm on which a $200 tax had not been paid.
So for the $200 tax that was not paid, we ended up killing almost 100 people, about 17 of them children.
[QUESTION: Why do you suppose the American people keep voting for politicians, congress critters as I call them? Who authorized the BATF? And who won’t take action to abolish it?]
The deliberate dumbing down of America.
According to the Department of Education, 44 million adult Americans are either illiterate or functionally illiterate, cannot read a bedtime story to their children. Certainly could not read the Bills of Right nor the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence.
Another 50 million Americans are at one level above illiteracy.
There are five levels of literacy according to the Department of Education. We have roughly 95 million American adults at level 1, which is illiterate, functionally illiterate, or level 2.
We are a dumbed-down society.
For the average American citizen, they don’t know about the Constitution, don’t know about the Bill of Rights.
One out of five Americans can name all of the characters or members, if you will, of the Simpson Cartoon series on television.
Only one of a thousand can name the rights that are supposed to be protected in the First Amendment.
We put more emphasis and more priority to the Simpson Cartoon series than we do to the Bill of Rights and when a society does that, it goes back to Thomas Jefferson in his letter to Colonel Yancey that a society that expects to remain ignorant and free in a state of civilization, is expecting what never has been and never can be.
But I will tell you something, it is a lot easier to enslave ignorant people than it is to enslave smart people, and in fact, in my history education, I have never seen where a wise, well-educated, well-read electorate has ever been enslaved for any period of time.
America was a great country.
It is no longer great, but it is a good country,
and I know this may be controversial to some people, but I don’t think America is a great nation any longer. We were at one time. We have the potential to be great again.
I think we are a good nation by comparison to many others out there, but we are not the country we used to be. We are not the country we are supposed to be. We are not the freedom loving people that we were at one time.
In fact, one of the things that I often challenge our listeners is to name for me anything of any substance, anything of any value that an America citizen can do without government directly or indirectly being involved.
And people say, well go to the bathroom.
There are all kinds of regulations and sanitation laws and such.
Well, sleeping.
Well, the very mattress on which we sleep is regulated.
Well procreation.
In Florida a couple of years ago there was a law introduced in committee that before a couple could engage in an act of procreation, they had to call a state hotline and register and wait 24 hours for an answer.
Government is involved in everything in our lives and yet we go to our football games and basketball games and we stand and we sing about the land of the free.
By definition, the word freedom is without arbitrary control. We are not a free society any longer. We are a controlled people in every aspect of our lives.
I don’t know what has happened to us. We have become so complacent, we have become so apathetic that I really fear for the future of this country. I really truly believe sir and I hate to say this, but I believe that I probably, and you probably, and many of us as baby boomers and older, we have probably lived through the last great years of America unless we and our children get a little bit of initiative, educate ourselves a little better than what we are to a great extent than what we are now, and turn it around.
[QUESTION: When you say that we should learn and educate ourselves, what areas would you suggest that people focus on?]
We need sir, a Bill of Rights mentality in America.
You talked about it.
We need a Bill of Rights culture.
We need a Bill of Rights test.
Any law that is enacted by any legislative body, if it does not pass the Bill of Rights test, it should not be allowed.
It should not be tolerated.
Any politician who attempts to repetitively enact or propose laws that fail the test, needs to be tossed out on his or her ear.
It is time that we the people of the United States of America take our government back.
It belongs to us.
It is we the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union.
We the people.
Over one million American souls have been given for a concept, an idea, a thought, and it is called freedom, and to disallow that, to disavow that is nothing but a slap in the face and a profession that those one million souls have been given in vain. God help us if we turn around and walk away from the memory and the actions of great men and women who have fought, bled and died for what we are supposed to have.
I think that probably the patriots of the early America, if the founders of this country were to come back and look at us today, they would probably weep.
I think they would probably break down and cry like children.
They would probably be very angry after having expressed their emotion.
They would probably want to know how in God's name could you have allowed this to happen?
How could you have dishonored the memory of what we have tried to create for you?
How could you allow yourselves to get into a situation that is actually worse than what we fought the King of England over?
I think they would probably be very disappointed in us as their children, as their posterity, and would probably express dissatisfaction as well as be very remorseful.
We are going to have to replace our body politic.
We are going to have to replace the people who make the rules.
I know exactly what you are saying and sometimes I get these letters and it says “well this guy has a B- or a C+ and the other guy has an F, do you want to vote for the guy with the C+, he is a little better or whatever.”
I have been told and I have told others for so longer than when we choose the lesser of two evils, we are still choosing evil, and we have to accept the consequences if we are going to choose less than evil.
I would ask husbands or wives how many times will you allow infidelity?
Is it okay if your husband only cheats on you ladies once a month, twice a month?
Guys, is it okay if your wife only cheats on you seven times a year, eight times a year, and the answer I get is well, no, never, one time was too much.
Well, why don’t we have hold the people who impact our lives and the lives of our children through these legislations, through these regulations, why don’t we hold them accountable in the same fashion, that you are going to have to follow the law, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and when you commit an infidelity, we may allow it one time and forgive you, but you better not do it a second time, and some of us aren’t even going to allow the first time.
I don’t think we take it seriously.
They say politics is the art of compromise.
I don’t want to compromise free speech.
I don’t want to compromise freedom of religion.
I don’t want to compromise freedom of the press.
I certainly don’t want to compromise the right to be armed to protect myself, my family, or my country, and I think any of us who do want to compromise, I think we fall short of understanding what freedom is and again what this country is suppose to be about.
When we have elected officials who compromise our freedom, they are not worthy of upholding the office. They are not worthy of the respect that they think they are if they are going to compromise the very foundation of our nation.
America is not a stupid country.
We are an ignorant people today because of the dumbing-down of America, but we are not a stupid people.
We can fix our ignorance and if we fix our ignorance, we can put this country back on the right course.
-------------------------------
THANK YOU, JERRY HUGHES!
SADNESS AT YOUR GOING, PEACE TO YOUR ASHES.
AND ALREADY ATTEMPTED COMMENTS THAT DROP THE "F-BOMB", CURSE MR. EDGERTON AND THE TEA ROOM AND ONE STATED HE/SHE DID NOT EVEN READ THE WHOLE ARTICLE BECAUSE THEY WERE OFFENDED BY IT.
ReplyDeleteTHE "F-BOMB" AND A FEW OTHER PIECES OF PROFANITY WILL NEVER BE ALLOWED IN THE TEA ROOM. MY BLOG, MY RULES.
IF ANYTHING HERE OFFENDS YOU, STOP COMING HERE TO READ!
I DON'T CARE IF WHAT I WRITE OFFENDS PEOPLE, AND YOU SHOULDN'T CARE THAT I DON'T CARE.
PUT ON YOUR BIG BOY/BIG GIRL PANTIES AND SUCK IT UP, OR DON'T...YOUR RIGHT TO DO EITHER ONE YOU CHOOSE.
MY RIGHT TO DO THE VERY SAME THING!
OR DIDN'T YOU KNOW THAT?
DO YOU KNOW THE BILL OF RIGHTS?
CAN YOU NAME ALL OF THEM?
CAN YOU RECITE THE CONSTITUTION VERBATIM?
DO YOU HAVE A CLUE WHEN YOUR ELECTED LIARS VIOLATE THE CONSTITUTION OR THE BILL OF RIGHTS?
DO YOU KNOW WHAT THAT BROTHEL ON THE HILL IS VOTING ON TODAY, WHAT "BILLS" THEY HAVE COOKING?
DO YOU GIVE A TINKER'S EARTHEN DAM THAT CONGRESSMEN HAVE ADMITTED THEY NEVER READ THE BILLS THAT COME UP FOR VOTE, BUT GET "SUMMATIONS" OF THEM?
CAN YOU COUNT THE WAYS THEY'VE BROKEN THEIR OATH OF OFFICE, OR DO YOU KNOW WHAT THAT OATH SAYS?
IF YOU HAD READ JUST MR. HUGHES' INTERVIEW YOU WOULD HAVE KNOWN A HELLUVA LOT MORE THAN YOU DID WHEN YOU SENT OFF THOSE COMMENTS THAT SHINE A BLINDING LIGHT ON JUST HOW IGNORANT YOU ARE.
MR. EDGERTON AND ALL OF US HAS A RIGHT TO HIS INDIVIDUAL BELIEFS AND HAS A GUARANTEED CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF SPEECH, WHETHER WE AGREE WITH HIM OR NOT.
ROB ONE CITIZEN OF THAT RIGHT AND YOU'VE ROBBED US ALL!
IN THIS LIFE, WE HAVE TWO CHOICES...WE CAN LEARN, OR WE CAN PERISH IN IGNORANCE.
WHAT YOU CHOOSE IS YOUR BUSINESS.
SAME GOES FOR ALL OF US.
A CLOSED MIND IS A DEAD ONE.
AGAIN, IF ANYONE IS "INTO" KILLING YOUR OWN MIND, BY ALL MEANS, ROCK ON!
THE TEA ROOM IS NOT THE PLACE FOR YOU!
GO IN PEACE...OR NOT...