The Hatewatch blog is managed by the staff of the Intelligence Project of the Southern Poverty Law Center, an Alabama-based civil rights organization.

Klan Rally Planned for Memphis, But Threat of ‘Thousands’ is Baseless

By Mark Potok on February 21, 2013 - 4:12 pm, Posted in Anti-Black, Extremist Propaganda, Klan

It began about two weeks ago, when a local television station in Memphis, Tenn., allowed a man with a hooded face, identifying himself only as “Edward” and speaking on what was apparently his own rear deck, to announce to the world that he would soon be bringing “thousands” of Klansmen to a protest with no date.

From there, the thin little tale morphed into something of a national story about what is being characterized as “one of the biggest KKK rallies of all time.” Articles have run in New York City newspapers and even abroad about the event, now planned for March 30 while officials weigh the Klan’s permit application, and national TV networks are considering covering it. Memphis Police Director Toney Armstrong is asking for help from local and federal law enforcement agencies. The NAACP has decried the event, and a local university art professor created a 600-member Facebook page called “Challenging the Klan’s Message.”

But is the rally — which is a protest of an earlier decision to rename three Memphis parks that honored the Confederacy, including one named after the first national leader of the Ku Klux Klan — really going to be that big? Not even remotely likely. It would be a surprise if the event drew 40 Klansmen, and it will likely be considerably fewer than that.

In the meantime, the group that organized the event — the North Carolina-based Loyal White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, created last year from the rubble of a group called the Rebel Brigade Knights of the Ku Klux Klan — is reaping a publicity bonanza. On its website, it claims that the Northern Mississippi White Knights of the KKK and the International Keystone Knights of the KKK will be joining its protest. All this began with a comment to WMC-TV from Edward, later fully identified by The Commercial Appeal as Edward Beasley: “It’s going to be thousands of Klansmen from the whole United States coming to Memphis.”

The Loyal White Knights are headed by Chris Barker of Pelham, N.C., who told The Commercial Appeal that Armstrong had suggested that the group could be liable for some $150,000 to cover the cost of police protection. Whether or not the chief said that, many courts have found that charging groups for police protection or insurance or similar costs is an impermissible abridgement of the freedom of speech.

The whole brouhaha stems from the City Council’s unanimous decision earlier in the month to change the names of Forrest Park, named after Confederate cavalry lieutenant general Nathan Bedford Forrest, to Health Sciences Park; Confederate Park to Memphis Park; and Jefferson Davis Park, honoring the president of the Confederacy, to Mississippi River Park. The bulk of the controversy has swirled around Forrest Park, in part because Forrest’s remains and an equestrian statute honoring him are also there.

The Memphis drama has provoked some unusual sideshows. Last week, a spokesman for the Sons of Confederate Veterans (SCV), a Southern heritage group that doesn’t like to see the Klan take up its issues, denounced the Klan’s plans even as he opined hotly that the names of the parks should never have been changed. “If the Klan comes to Memphis due to the inappropriate actions of the City Council,” a scolding Lee Millar told The Commercial Appeal, “then any results are entirely the responsibility of the Council.” He went on to urge the Klan to stay away from the city.

Millar acted, presumably, to protect the SCV from the racist stench of the Klan. But Millar may be closer to that group’s views than he lets on. In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) revealed that Millar was listed as the contact for a band called Snowflake’s Minstrels that was to play for an event celebrating the dedication of a statue of Forrest. It turned out that Snowflake’s Minstrels were known among SCV members for the “wildly entertaining” “grand blackface performances” that they apparently regularly put on. Millar claimed he didn’t know why he was listed as the contact for the band and knew nothing about it — and then, in an apparent contradiction, added that the band had called him later to cancel its scheduled appearance.

Curiously, Millar was then a musician with something called the 52nd Regimental String Band, which specialized in Civil War era music and had recorded “The Minstrel Skit,” featuring two well-known black minstrel characters. Millar told the SPLC at the time that the two bands were not the same group, although another member of the 52nd Regimental String Band said that he had performed in blackface as a member of that band. But he argued that the blackface performance was not intrinsically racist and, in any case, had been done only to please audiences.

The man whose name both Lee Millar and the Ku Klux Klan want to see reinstated in a Memphis park is wildly controversial in his own right. Although the SCV and Millar, who is a member of the Forrest Historical Society, see Forrest as a great and noble defender of the South, they are utterly wrong. Forrest is rightly known as a great cavalryman who repeatedly fought against long odds, but he was also a violent, guttural racist.

In fact, Forrest was infamous even before the Civil War for becoming a millionaire by running one of the country’s most brutal slave yards in Memphis. During the war, he presided over the massacre of several hundred black Union soldiers who were attempting to surrender at Fort Pillow, Tenn. And after the war, Forrest, who had a richly deserved reputation for stunning violence, became the first national leader of the Ku Klux Klan and presided over one of its most violent periods. He disbanded the Klan only after it had essentially cleared the way for the imposition of Jim Crow laws.

Yesterday, The Commercial Appeal reported that both Barker and Beasley, the national and state leaders of the Loyal White Knights, said they weren’t sure exactly how many KKK members would attend, although Beasley said it could be as many as 2,000. Barker, however, was more careful, claiming that other protests were scheduled elsewhere at the same time, and that that “could reduce the numbers able to travel to Memphis on March 30,” in the words of the newspaper.

And that is the one Klan prediction you can count on.

  • Brock Henderson

    Race and religion are common ties that bind, whether you accept it or deny it, Ruslan. Yes thank you for teaching me something I learned in gradeschool – the fact of different nationalities! Yes I’m aware I’m American and not British, and so I’m not in the habit of pretending to be the latter, thank you. We are all Westerners, though. Civilization is a common bond that different nations and nationalities share. And should I care that America be a world power or not? Due to our present circumstances, I’ll trade America’s status as world power #1 for – well, something much less – any day of the week. And did I ever say I’m totally against all immigration? Oh, and are all immigrants the same? Is the current wave – one designed to never end, that is – of immigrants the same as the Ellis Island wave?

  • Erika

    You know that i don’t think that anyone has pointed out that Brock is wrong about the individual states becoming independent countries after independence – independence was declared collectively by the colonies as the United States of America and the Treaty of Paris (1783) was signed as the United States of America. The only “states” that previously even claimed to be independent countries were Texas (rebelled against Mexico using U.S. support in order to have slaves in Texas), California (briefly declared independence from Mexico during the Mexican American War), and possibly Vermont. All of those were very brief with Vermont and California joining the U.S. within about a year or two after their declaration of independence and Texas lasting about a decade as an independent country. And Texas was the only state which was legitimately recognized as an independent country (the Californians who declared independence from Mexico specifcially planned to ask for admission to the U.S. for example)

    Other than those three, none of the other 47 states ever claimed to be independent countries before joining the U.S. Some may have briefly claimed to be independent prior to the creation of the Confederate States of America, but the others only acted in unison with the other colonies. And again note that the Confederacy was quickly created as a central government by the states who left the union in 1861.

    Hence your entire premise rests upon a foundation of being glaringly obvious wrong.

    i know that you said you are from California which makes me think that you are looking solely at California’s history of briefly claiming to be a sovereign country and extending it to the entire U.S. The 13 colonies didn’t independently declare themselves as 13 independent countries in 1776 or 1783 with the Treaty of Paris. The Continental Congress did which was a union of 13 countries. The goal of the revolution was to create one new country not 13 new counties. The Treaty of Paris (1783) was signed between the United States and Great Britain (and France, Spain, and The Netherlands who all actively supported the U.S. – in part because of the various wars going on in Europe).

    Furthermore, declaring to be 13 separate sovereign countries would have been an extremely stupid step in 1783. Spain, the Netherlands, and France entered into allignments with the Continental Congress – not the individual states. Spain still controlled much of the U.S. and could have reclaimed Georgia, South Carolina, and other states. England still controlled Canada and had alliances with many of the Native American tribes who could have retaken many of the individual countries back. Hence, unity was the only was to secure independence – and yes, the U.S. initially tried a very weak central government in the Articles of Confederation but it failed misarably due to the international forces mentioned. Acting as 13 individual states after the revolution would have been a quick path to recolonization by someone. The states had no choice but to unify if they wanted to survive.

  • Ruslan Amirkhanov

    Well it’s obvious as to why Brock obsesses over Erika. Deep down he knows that she has an actual legal education whereas his was pasted together from various pamphlets or self-published books he picked up at gun shows or internet sites. Worse still, Erika is a woman, obviously not afraid to stand up to him. The rage that causes in his type is white hot.

    One thing I find funny though, is that when America was this “states rights” loving, mostly white/Christian nation, it wasn’t very powerful or influential. The US really wasn’t seen as a world power until the interwar period or at least immediately after WWI. Then of course it became a superpower and then the sole superpower after WWII- in other words, when a lot more people of other “races” and religions started showing up. If Brock’s narrative had any merit, America should have quickly rose to imperial status, then declined all across the board say, in the late 19th century when lots of Irish, Italians, Jews, Poles, and Chinese were showing up.

    What we see, however, is the exact opposite. As America grew more powerful and its standards of living outstripped the world, diversity and civil rights grew along with it. Now obviously correlation does not equal causation(in other words, ‘diversity’ did not make the US a superpower), but I’d say the claim that diversity somehow brings down a nation has been falsified. This is also true if you look at Norway. Norway is still mostly Norwegian and they are the top country in terms of living standards. Yet this was not always the case, and immigrants from outside Norway(yes, including from Europe) have increased since the time Norway occupied the number one slot. So if outsiders truly lower the quality of life for a nation this should not happen.

  • Ruslan Amirkhanov

    ” Oh, how about the ones with many children – you know, the ones who have created a legacy to leave to the world when they themselves leave it behind”

    I know it wasn’t addressed at me but I can’t leave this alone. I find many of the big families folks like you love to wax on about are nothing but broods of perpetually smiling, brainless, homeschooled morons with no critical thinking skills. And I’ve also read the personal stories of women who escaped from those “caring, husbands.” Far from being “real men,” they are insecure, pathetic individuals who fear women’s independence because they know that the more choice women have, the more they will choose to be with superior men and not whiny little worms.

  • Ruslan Amirkhanov

    “Uh, wow, so the presence of an ocean between us and residence on a different continent completely breaks off our ties?”

    That and many centuries, yes.

    “Don’t know if you got the memo, but the British colonists DIDN’T completely intermarry and interbreed with the Natives and then adopt their religions.”

    It doesn’t matter. You are not British, English, Welsh, or otherwise. You are American. Go to Britain and they will happily tell you with a huge dose of sarcasm to boot.

    “Do they? I disagree. Thank you.”

    Well nobody cares what you agree or disagree with because your historical narrative isn’t backed up by evidence.

    “Please explain. I acknowledged them as the two most important precursors, but part of it?”

    Yes, part of it. Ever hear of the Roman republic? Roman law? Anglo-Saxon common law(which predates the conversion to Christianity by those tribes)? The philosophy of Plato, Socrates, etc.? These are all generally considered to be elements of Western Civilization.

    “Most importantly, kudos to you for not being a total left-wing moron of morons. I mean, it took you THIS LONG to trot out that meaningless r-word.”

    It’s really funny when you call other people morons, seeing as how you’ve done nothing but make a complete ass of yourself and prove that your historical education was a total failure.

    ” You at least attempted some slightly meaningful dialogue up to this point. Saying that silly word – invented by Magnus Hirschfeld just in the early part of the last century for the exclusive purpose of being used ONLY by the Left as a slur to shame Rightists – from the very outset, would have indicated that you have absolutely no original thought going on in that noggin.”

    Are you speaking of the word “racist?” As usual you have a conspiracy theory behind the word. And leftists get accused of racism all the time, and sometimes deservedly so.

    “Oh and yes, the Left always accepts the consequences for their actions! They’re quite willing to give in to the demands of the flesh AND accept responsibility for the new life coming forth 9 months later – rather than, say, demand contraception as a “human right” that somebody else must pay for!”

    Changing the subject again I see. Boy you sure are both hysterical and emotional. Most rightists are. What does the availability of abortion have to do with any of this? Plenty of studies show that the most surefire method of reducing abortions is easy access to birth control.

  • Aron

    Brock, you’re really starting to cross the line, here.

    You are dangerously approaching ‘stalker’ status regarding Erika. Back off, buddy.

  • Brock Henderson

    Erika, I won’t ask you about it, because I know due to all evidence heretofore gathered that you are not an honest person, but honestly I do not know much about the history of Mexico. I don’t know whether the states of Guadalajara, Oaxaca, Baja California, Jalisco, Chihuahua, etc. were independent states after achievement of independence from Spain, which then freely gave small measures of their sovereignty to a new federal Mexican government to exercise jurisdiction over them. Doesn’t sound right, so I’m going to assume that in the case of our neighbors to the sur, that really is nothing more than a name they call themselves, and the Mexican “states” are really and functionally just provinces or counties. In that case they could still very well be federal entities in their relation to the Mexican government – only top-down rather than bottom-up. You know, Mexico City makes the decisions as to what powers the CENTRAL GOVERNMENT gives to the “STATES.”

    When the Constitution of the land to the norte is being truly honored and obeyed by Washington, D.C., it’s the other way around, get it? The American states WERE independent sovereign states after the war with Great Britain. They created the feds, the feds did not create them. This is where your theory enters the realm of twisted and dishonest logic. You are saying the United States ceased to exist, and were abolished with the ratification of the Constitution. Even though a few thousand pages of ink were expended reassuring people like Patrick Henry that the Federalist Party had no such intentions and the new Constitution would do no such thing. You remember the conversations between Madison and Henry that I posted, Erika? Yes, literally several thousand pages were written by the Feds reassuring the Anti-Feds that the nefarious designs and dreams of an American Empire – dreams of people like you – were NOT being realized in legal form with the ratification of the proposed Constitution. Only the amount of sovereignty and power befitting a federal government founded by independent states, was surrendered by said states. The states retained all the rest. No, under the Constitution the U.S. are no longer COMPLETELY sovereign states, Erika, are you happy to read that I’m admitting that? I’m quite sure I already have. The key issue is the LEVEL or AMOUNT of sovereignty. It’s not a yes-or-no, black-or-white, all-or-none issue. There are differing amounts of sovereignty. It was explained ad nauseum just how unique the new government would be in that regard. Unitary national states, which are not themselves in any form of union with other states, can and do possess the full and unlimited powers of sovereignty you describe, Erika. That unitary national American state, fully eliminating the United States, was never created willfully by the consent U.S. between 1787 and 1789. It was created by conquest and with the cost of hundreds of thousands of lives between 1861 and 1865.

    It’s very telling, the way you refer to women, by the way. Are you jealous, Erika? You know, of those women who are not at war with men? Those women who really seem to be in the middle of happy and loving relationships with caring husbands? Oh, how about the ones with many children – you know, the ones who have created a legacy to leave to the world when they themselves leave it behind – your hatred and jealousy for those ones knows no bounds, does it, Erika?

  • Brock Henderson

    Ah, Ruslan’s back after a bit of a hiatus, so let’s start with him as idiot nutjob to reply to #1:

    “You realize you have absolutely no connection to that civilization, right?”

    Uh, wow, so the presence of an ocean between us and residence on a different continent completely breaks off our ties? Don’t know if you got the memo, but the British colonists DIDN’T completely intermarry and interbreed with the Natives and then adopt their religions. Yes there was a little bit of interracial relations here and there but for the most part they went in the total opposite direction. America is a New World outpost of Western Civ. Go back to school, moron.

    “If we listen to the “Clash of Civilizations” intellectuals, some of them also being crusaders against “Cultural Marxism”, they claim that secularism is a virtue of Western Civilization.”

    Do they? I disagree. Thank you.

    “Western Civilization is often considered(by people far more educated than you) to include Greece and Rome,”

    Please explain. I acknowledged them as the two most important precursors, but part of it?

    Most importantly, kudos to you for not being a total left-wing moron of morons. I mean, it took you THIS LONG to trot out that meaningless r-word. You at least attempted some slightly meaningful dialogue up to this point. Saying that silly word – invented by Magnus Hirschfeld just in the early part of the last century for the exclusive purpose of being used ONLY by the Left as a slur to shame Rightists – from the very outset, would have indicated that you have absolutely no original thought going on in that noggin.

    Oh and yes, the Left always accepts the consequences for their actions! They’re quite willing to give in to the demands of the flesh AND accept responsibility for the new life coming forth 9 months later – rather than, say, demand contraception as a “human right” that somebody else must pay for!

    Jerk.

  • concernedcitizen

    Did Brock leave? I hope so,

    @Erika: don’t listen to that clodpoll you’re both funny and intelligent and I enjoy reading your posts. :)

  • Ruslan Amirkhanov

    “So nations, regions, clans, what have you, of people are accountable to the whims of global opinion, Aron?”

    Recognition has existed a long time before “global opinion.” The first country to recognize the United States when it declared its independence was Morocco.

    ” Uh, that’s a slippery slope all the way downhill to the total eradication of nations and their borders and sovereignty. Isn’t a diverse range of feelings toward the politics and institutions of other countries – from love to hate – part of the very concept of DIFFERENT nations, regions, cities, etc.?”

    If your heroes really believed this there would be no United States today.

  • john

    You can’t change history. If you thecan you need to remove the civil rights museum

  • Erika

    Brock, one question, do you feel the same way about the United Mexican States (the official legal name of Mexico – okay, its actually Unitas Estatos de Mexico but Mexico is also a federal republic just like the U.S.)?

    Or is your problem simply that you fail to realize that “states” in the United States means something different from “states” in the international law sense? (okay two quetions)

    Seriously, you are so stupid that your entire ideology is based upon failing to understand that in language the same word can mean two different things? (oopsie, three questions)

    The Constitution specifically gives in Article I, Section 8 ALL of the powers of sovereign states in the international law meaning to the federal government – and denies those powers to the individual states. Hence, the individual states of the United States are not states under international law at all.

    A sovereign state under international law can declare war, enter into treaties, regulate international commerce, legally recognize other governments, conduct foreign relations, and probably some other things i can’t rember – ALL of those powers are specifically delegated to the federal government and the sovereignity clause makes it clear that the federal government is supreme.

    Hence, the states of the United States are not really states at all. They may be called states, but legally they are not states. Alabama cannot declare war on Georgia, regulate goods imported in from Georgia, or enter into a treaty with Georgia. If they were really sovereign they would be able to. By ratifying the Constitution the states gave up any claim to the being sovereign.

    Yes, they (well, other than Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Kentucky which call themselves Commonwealths) may call themselves “states” but legally they are not states. They lack all of the powers given under international law to sovereign states.

    And you special little teacup, what you seem to consider well educated appears to really mean extremely ignorant and ultimately miseducated – because there is no way that someone as arrogant as you can tolerate disagreements. And no one truly well educated would see you as anything but an ignorant nutcase. And i’m pretty sure your ideal of women comes from corny 1950s sitcoms where the women would be ignorant and submissive and wear high heels, nice dresses, and makeup while doing the housework.

    Maybe you should try looking for women at the Greenville, South Carolina campus of Bob Jones University. You’d probably consider women educated there as being “well educated” (you may well not like their dating rules though) :P

  • Ruslan Amirkhanov

    In any case, Brock, your refusal to call the South’s secession “rebellion” is just indicative of your kind’s utter refusal to take responsibility for the things you do. I’m not a Gandhi fan, but one of the greatest things he said about civil disobedience is that the person practicing it takes responsibility for the legal consequences of his or her disobedience. That means if you defy the authorities by breaking the law, you need to be prepared to suffer the consequences.

    Now right-wingers like you don’t like taking personal responsibility for things. That’s something OTHER people are supposed to do. When it comes to you, well, the reason why you failed or at least didn’t achieve your full potential is because…the government, taxes, welfare queens, illegal immigrants, feminists, gay rights activists, “Cultural Marxism”, diversity training, the decline of Christianity, socialists, the War on Christmas, government regulation, bankers, political correctness, Dora the Explorer, rap music, and McDonalds.

  • Ruslan Amirkhanov

    “Ruslan, it is the translation of the originally economic and historical ideology of Marxism into cultural and social terms.”

    Well let’s see, since a great deal of Marxism entails social science, I get the social part, but the cultural part…How does it apply? Like does it mean that people are allowed to receive cultural expression only to the extent that they contribute to culture, i.e. a “cultural” embodiment of “from each according to his abilities, to each according to his work,” the principle defining socialism as Marx wrote in Critique of the Gotha Programme?

    Marxism itself was a product of what you would call “Western Civilization.”

    ” Western Civilization is its target, the civilization in the northwest quadrant of the Old World that grew out of the ashes of the Roman Empire by the conversion of the communities and nations of the area to Christianity. Ancient Greece and Rome were its prequels or precursors. To such degrees that two certain changes occur ,”

    You realize you have absolutely no connection to that civilization, right?

    “1) the inundation with and replacement of their populations with non-Caucasoidal or non-Christian people,”

    Hold on a second, Western Civilization is often considered(by people far more educated than you) to include Greece and Rome, both of which made important scientific and philosophical contributions to society, some of which continue in one way or another to this day. Both of these societies were non-Christian, for obvious reasons.

    ” and 2) the Christian faith according to its most basic historical tenets continues to die and give way to secularism, Western Civilization vanishes.”

    Nonsense. If we listen to the “Clash of Civilizations” intellectuals, some of them also being crusaders against “Cultural Marxism”, they claim that secularism is a virtue of Western Civilization.

    Face it, you’re a racist and a religious fundamentalist. That means you’re actually a step below a Taliban fighter or Al Qaeda supporter; at least they aren’t racist and don’t believe that a person’s skull shape somehow determines their worth.

  • Brock Henderson

    So nations, regions, clans, what have you, of people are accountable to the whims of global opinion, Aron? Uh, that’s a slippery slope all the way downhill to the total eradication of nations and their borders and sovereignty. Isn’t a diverse range of feelings toward the politics and institutions of other countries – from love to hate – part of the very concept of DIFFERENT nations, regions, cities, etc.?

  • Aron

    This is like talking to a wall. The difference between the Revolution and the Civil War is that during the Revolution, the REBELS received foreign recognition.

    The CSA received none.

    And if your knees buckle and give way before educated women, I think that explains a great deal about your horrendous misogyny, Brock. Your mother must be so very proud.

  • Brock Henderson

    Erika, my knees usually buckle and give way before women who are educated, as I have great respect for them. Oh, when I say “educated,” I mean just that, a woman who possesses both knowledge and wisdom. You’ve got a firm handle on the former, that’s for sure. Your law schooling packed your head full of Supreme Court rulings and what they mean. You think that intimidates me, let alone causes my apprehension toward you? Dream on. To borrow Twain’s old quip, you’ve obviously let your schooling get in the way of your education.

    And when I say “women,” I also mean just that. Feminists, no matter their biological sex, are by definition declaring war against nature, and forfeit their claim to either manhood or womanhood. My mother and grandmothers are WOMEN. You are not.

  • Brock Henderson

    Did the Southern States ask officially for aid from the Feds to put down these “rebellions,” Aron? How is secession a form of rebellion? How can a government maintain its status as a federal union of individual republican states – you know, rather than become a dictatorship, empire, etc. – when it FORCIBLY prevents secession efforts? I can understand when EMPIRES do it . . . like Great Britain towards the American colonies a few generations back.

  • Aron

    Brock,

    You’re right. I misunderstood your terrible analogy. The fact that they were putting down an illegal rebellion never occurred to you, but that obviously doesn’t matter.

    And I am most certainly not a donkey. I am a zebra.

  • Erika

    Brock, you seem to be well on your way to taking the crown in “the world’s least charming man” contest. Do you have anything to offer to any conversation besides animosity towards women who are better educated than you?

  • Reynardine

    I’m with Matt.

    Brock, please define “Caucasian”. Do so without making an ass of yourself.

  • CM

    Oops, apparently the SPLC’s comment program doesn’t do Greek. Funny, it looked fine when I typed it in. See Apology 29b and 38a.

  • http://matthershberger.com Matt Hershberger

    Feels like a good compromise would be to just drop one of the r’s in “Forrest Park.” Forest Park sounds like a wonderful place to have a picnic.

  • Erika

    So this explains the guys in Klan robes standing at the intersection the other day holding buckets and signs that say “pleze hellp ned gass muny ad derectuns too Mefis. Wyte powur.”

    i don’t think they were getting many donations although i have to admit if i had more money, the idea of giving them a one way bus ticket to Memphis would be very tempting.

  • Sam Molloy

    Brock, I for one understand what you are saying. As in, Inalienable Rights.

  • uda mann

    KIWIWRITER, you typed: Does hurling sarcasm and sneering at anonymous targets on the Internet actually accomplish anything besides giving you a brief sense of self-importance…

    Well Ki, you and your cohorts do the same thing..pot calling the kettle black much?

  • Brock Henderson

    Oh I forgot – Aron, be a mensch and show me where I said that Grant led or even participated in the March to the Sea. I do not know one way or the other, so I didn’t claim one way or the other. Ass.

  • Brock Henderson

    Erika, you are thinking those things (your low-grade approximation of thinking, that is) – which anybody actually able to think and read would definitely NOT be thinking at this stage of dialogue with me – for one reason: Your ideology has closed and shrunken your mind to the point where you are officially an idiot.

    Ruslan, it is the translation of the originally economic and historical ideology of Marxism into cultural and social terms. Western Civilization is its target, the civilization in the northwest quadrant of the Old World that grew out of the ashes of the Roman Empire by the conversion of the communities and nations of the area to Christianity. Ancient Greece and Rome were its prequels or precursors. To such degrees that two certain changes occur ,1) the inundation with and replacement of their populations with non-Caucasoidal or non-Christian people, and 2) the Christian faith according to its most basic historical tenets continues to die and give way to secularism, Western Civilization vanishes.

  • CM

    Brock,

    I know Socrates. Socrates is a friend of mine. Brock Henderson, you are no Socrates.

    What Socrates and the Socratic method that you so casually and falsely invoked are all about is getting people to examine themselves, and particularly their beliefs/opinions. Clearly, this is not something you’ve ever done, or you wouldn’t be spouting such consistent drivel here.

    No doubt you consider yourself a bold-minded individual amid a world of herd-animals. This is evident from your relentlessly patronizing and pompous style, and it makes you basically the same as a thousand other extremist ideologues who have come to visit the comments on this blog.

    “Bold” might indeed be a good word to describe someone who knowingly subscribes to a fringe, quasi-cultic political ideology, though “stupid” is also a possibility. But I’m not convinced you “knowingly” joined this cause. My guess is that you’re just another consumer “expressing” himself by adorning himself with someone else’s manufactures. You’ve just wandered into the marketplace of ideas and made your selection from the aisle of Crackpot Mindsets.

    Socrates said, according to Plato, “??? ???????? ??? ????? ????. ?????? ??? ??? ?????? ????? ???? ? ????????????, ? ??? ??????? ??????? ? ??? ?????” and “?? ??????????? ???? ?? ?????? ???????.” What it boils down to is asking yourself if you really know what you think you know, before you open your mouth and try to sell it someone else. If you don’t, your ignorance will be out there for all to see.

  • Mitch Beales

    It sounds as if “Brocky” would like to secede from the human race.

  • Ruslan Amirkhanov

    “And everybody knows that that typical cultural Marxist line about something in a nation’s past having “never existed” is just a piece of propaganda designed to make people believe that we must remove ourselves as far as we can from our past, because of it being so – drat, WESTERN!”

    Uh…What? Who claims that? And please define “Western” and “cultural Marxist” if you will.

  • Erika

    Brock, it looks like we can add the “Socratic method” to the already extensive list of things that you simply do not understand.

    And when you advocate seccession and your view of the Civil War is pretty much lifted directly from the “Lost Cause of the Confederacy” myth you are most definitely a neo-Confederate. Seriously, i am thinking that the sole source of your knowledge of the Civil War and Reconstruction has come from viewing The Birth of a Nation at the local Klavern.

    On another related note, did anyone see those idiot kids in North Dakota who thought it would be all funny Haw Haw to show up at a hockey game wearing Klan robes? Sounds like they are going to get an object lesson on what the “Bong Hits for Jesus” case said.

  • Brock Henderson

    Erika, I was employing the Socratic method of questioning to see if little Mitchy was consistent and principled in his mindset. Like all leftists, he proved that he was not. Me, I’m strongly in favor of secession for all groups of people who feel they do not have anything in common with others with whom they’ve been under the same governmental jurisdiction for whatever length of time. South Sudan from the former whole, Montenegro from Serbia, the list goes on of course. That means I’m in favor of the South’s attempted secession of a century and a half ago, AND that of the American colonies from Great Britain.

    Aron, what does the fact of the side that fired the first shot have to do with ANYTHING we’re arguing about here? Anyway as I said to Erika above, I’m simply a secessionist who supports most, if not all, secession. Your mind, blinded by ideology, tells you that anybody who questions the authority of your God, the Feds, must have a whip and some chains in his hand ready to enslave some black people. That’s your own problem. Here’s the fact of the matter: I am from California. During the Late Unpleasantness, California was on the Union’s side. As such, I would have answered the UNION’s call of duty and donned the dark blue suit in preparation for service on the battlefield against the men in gray.

    Ruslan, indeed, your ideology creates for you a completely different belief from my own about what “better” means. No need to open up that can o’ worms. And everybody knows that that typical cultural Marxist line about something in a nation’s past having “never existed” is just a piece of propaganda designed to make people believe that we must remove ourselves as far as we can from our past, because of it being so – drat, WESTERN!

  • Kiwiwriter

    Ruslan:

    Mr. Henderson is not crusading for a “simpler, better America which never existed.” He’s a secessionist. He said so elsewhere. He also dislikes feminism and adores child labor.

    He basically wants to take his ball, go home, and set up his club in a tree house, with a big sign that reads, “No girls allowed.”

    But no, Brock…contrary to your statements elsewhere, I do not hate you, regardless of the silliness, pomposity, and sarcasm of your views. Actually, I pity you…

    You have a great many things you are angry about, a great many straw men you hammer, a great many half-formed ideas in your head, but no real concept of what you are for, how to achieve it, and what it will do.

    And that’s the saddest thing…all this energy and passion you have, mis-directed as it is. Has any of it improved your corner of the world? Has it improved your life? Has it made it a better place? Does hurling sarcasm and sneering at anonymous targets on the Internet actually accomplish anything besides giving you a brief sense of self-importance…people actually paying attention to you must be a novel and highly welcomed sensation.

    Try putting your energy and passion into things that will make your world a better place. Leave a better legacy for your tombstone than: “He sneered and hated.”

  • Ruslan Amirkhanov

    Poor Brock, crusading for a simpler, better America which never existed.

  • Kiwiwriter

    Joe, before you become the leader of the white race, defending America against its manifold enemies, you might want to finish the 8th grade.

  • CoralSea

    I would say that Forrest’s behavior BEFORE the war–even if we were to dismiss the horror at Fort Pillow as just one of those war-time tragedies–should be enough to cross his name off the list for public parks.

    But you know how much some red-blooded ‘Muricans love great war tacticians — and obviously, they don’t really care so much what Forrest was fighting for (you know, evil). So I am thinking that they should be fine with renaming the park “Rommel Park” in celebration of the Nazi General. After all, he was a big fan of NB Forrest and studied his tactics. Or maybe, “Forrest & Rommel Park,” to celebrate slaughter in the name of awful, awful causes.

    I do think they should re-think the whole, “Health Sciences Park.” Isn’t there some piece of local flora or fauna — a tree or flower or bird — that they could use?

  • Sam Molloy

    Erika, that’s a beautiful idea.

  • Aron

    Hey Brock,

    Remind me again, who fired first on Ft Sumter? I think you’re a bit confused.

    And for someone who claims to not be a neo-Confederate, you sure seem to have a lot of empathy for the pro-slavery cause.

    NB Forrest was easily the greatest cavalry commander of the Civil War, better than Stuart, Sheridan, or any of the various Raiders. And he was also an immensely colorful character, a joy to research and write about.

    But he was also a monster. Notwithstanding his slave-trading days, he should have been hanged after the war Ft Pillow. And the difference between Sherman (don’t involve Grant in the March to the Sea during the Savannah and Carolinas Campaigns. It shows your historical ignorance) and Forrest (as if there was only one…) is that Sherman joined the war reluctantly. He only resorted to total war when he realized nothing else was going to work.

  • Erika

    We already knew that Brock was a neo-confederate twit, but it looks like Brock has finally officially come out of the closet as a Tory :P

  • Mitch Beales

    Brock Henderson what Forrest, Arnold, and you have in common is that you are losers. If I were you I wouldn’t hold my breath about having a park named after me anytime soon.

  • concernedcitizen

    That many showed up Erika?
    @Erika you said: Joe, since when has slavery, treason, murder, war crimes,terrorism, and crimes against humanity been “Christian” values?

    My point exactly!

    Change the names get rid of any trace of a poisoned philosophy that has plagued this country for far too long.

  • Brock Henderson

    Mitch, dear boy, why not a park named after Benedict Arnold? He sided with the sovereign government which claimed and exercised legal supremacy and jurisdiction over him, and helped to try and suppress a rebellion towards that government by his fellow countrymen. Isn’t he in point of fact a national hero over all of what should be colonial possessions of Great Britain, just like Grant and Sherman are in the South? I mean, you have principles, don’t you? You don’t advocate secession or rebellion by a people who no longer feel connected to the people of another region of their so-called nation in one instance, but then denounce it in another? Double-talk is a troubling sign of a sinister and untrustworthy character.

  • Brock Henderson

    Ah, so you’re talking about Forrest when you mention war crimes, treason, terrorism, and mass murder against one’s own countrymen, Erika? Not Sherman and Grant who waged the war to destroy and subjugate the South, but a General on the other side who was defending his own land from invasion? I get it! Another op-ed for The Onion! Your silliness makes for a good laugh in a world which affords us many already, Erika my dear. Laughs like Paris Hilton, who probably beats you in the I.Q. department by 20 points.

  • Erika

    accordng to a report from a friend, some morons were out parading around with Confederate flags in this area yesterday for some reason

    what are the odds that this big Klan rally will be similar to that Neo-Nazi rally they had in Washington, DC some time back – you know the one which got canceled at the last moment when only three Nazis showed up?

  • Erika

    Joe, since when has slavery, treason, murder, war crimes,terrorism, and crimes against humanity been “Christian” values? Because Nathanial Bedford Forrest did all of the above. He was a truly evil person even in the context of the Civil War – he should have been hung for what he did at Fort Pillow. And while his apologists point to him abolishing the Ku Klux Klan when they became too violent, in reality he did that to free the local KKK groups to commit even more violence and making it more difficult for the federal government to suppress. Even most Confederate apologists realize that Forrest is not worth defending

    Of course, you seem to be a complete right wing wacko so it is not surprising that you would defend the man who could well be the biggest slimeball in American history.

    And honey, you might want to read the Gospels and The Acts of the Apostles (and the Book of Timothy as well) – Socialism is much closer to the early practice of Christianity and the teachings of Jesus than Capitalism. Much of the New Testament is based upon the need for society to care for the less fortunate and warning against the dangers of wealth.

    And Christianity and Islam are also extremely close in religion – both worship the same God and have many similar teachings. In fact, historically, Islam was actually developed from Christianity with the major theological difference being that Moslems do not accept the divinity of Jesus but instead view Jesus as being a major prophet and teacher. In fact, Christians and Moslems (and Jews for that matter) probably have more religious similiarities than differences. The entire conflict is nothing but fundamentalists from all sides seeking to impose their will on everyone else. Of course, from your comment its pretty clear that you are one of those fundamentalists.

    And Sam, i think they should rename Forrest Park to honor the victims of the Fort Pillow Massacre. Would be highly symbolic..

  • Aron

    Thank you Joe for that beautiful piece of rhetoric. You are a credit to your cause.

  • Joe

    PEOPLE SHOULD LEAVE HISTORY ALONE! That is one of many things wrong with our country. Let us get back to our historical past and Christian ways instead of changing to Moslem ways and socialism ! It is not working and will Mott work. We are not better off THAN 4 YEARS AGO. WE ARE SINKING FAST. OBAMA DOES NOT ACT AMERICA OR CHRISTIAN!!!!

  • Mitch Beales

    I’m happy that Memphis decided they didn’t need parks named after traitors any more than Connecticut needs a Benedict Arnold Park.

  • Sam Molloy

    The SPLC should run a contest for the new name of Forrest Park. Health Sciences Park is so lame. Possibly something to forever remind people of his crimes against humanity. I would leave Jefferson Davis Park as is. Rewriting history can get out of hand quick.