WAR OF PERCEPTION

GEORGIA LEGISLATURE APPROVES CONFEDERATE HISTORY MONTH

White lawmakers fail to pass a measure to "apologize" for their ancestor's role in slavery. However, they did OK a bill that would create a Confederate History month.

Let's take a look at the politically correct language of the bill:

[Sen. Jeff Mullis' bill would dub April as Confederate History and Heritage Month to honor the memory of the Confederacy and "all those millions of its citizens of various races and ethnic groups and religions who contributed in sundry and myriad ways to the cause of Southern Independence."]

A multicultural Confederate History month??? It will be interesting to see how many Asians, Mexicans, Blacks, Indians, and Pakistani were fighting for the South during the War Between The States. I'm sure the Jews that create the curriculum for our government schools will come up with plenty of Women and non-Whites to obscure the role of Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson and Jefferson Davis. They'll find non-Whites that used to shine Robert E. Lee's boots and say that they masterminded the battle of Gettysburg and convinced General Lee to surrender at Appomattox.

I have an idea. The next time the NAACP or any other "Civil Rights" group asks for an apology from Whites for slavery, we can propose this:

Ask your fellow Africans and the Jews for an apology. If it wasn't for them, you would have never even made it on the slave ship. The Africans captured your fellow countrymen and sold them to the Jewish slave traders who sold them to a small percentage (less than 10%) of White Southerners. It's like asking Junkies to apologize to their pushers for bringing them dope.

"The West India Company, which monopolized imports of slaves from Africa, sold slaves at public auctions against cash payments. It happens that cash was mostly in the hands of Jews. The buyers who appeared at the auctions were almost always Jews, and because of this lack of competitors, they could buy slaves at low prices. On the other hand, there was also no competition in the selling of the slaves to the plantation owners and other buyers ... Profits up to 300 per cent of the purchase value were often realized with high interest rates ... If it happened that the date of such an auction fell on a Jewish holiday the auction had to be postponed." [Arnold Wiznitzer, Jews in Colonial Brazil, in SEC. LIFE, p. 29]

Slavery still goes on today in the Middle East and parts of Africa, with the Jews still holding the monopoly on the trafficking of White slaves. Mainly, young White girls from Russia.

I would say we paid our debt to the African slaves by freeing them and killing off 2 million White men in the process. That's payment in full with interest, according to my accounting.

(PS)

Ga. Senate panel OKs Confederate month   

A panel of Georgia lawmakers signed off Thursday on a plan to create a Confederate heritage month, even as legislative leaders reacted coolly to a push to apologize for the state's role in slavery.

Sen. Jeff Mullis' bill would dub April as Confederate History and Heritage Month to honor the memory of the Confederacy and "all those millions of its citizens of various races and ethnic groups and religions who contributed in sundry and myriad ways to the cause of Southern Independence."

The unanimous vote by the Senate Rules committee — which sent the plan on to the full Senate for consideration — comes days after black lawmakers announced plans to ask the state to officially apologize for its role in slavery and segregation-era laws.

Virginia's legislature last month passed a resolution expressing "profound regret" for the state's role in slavery, and lawmakers in Missouri and Congress have proposed similar measures.

Democratic Rep. Tyrone Brooks, chairman of the Georgia Association of Black Elected Officials, said it's discouraging to see the Confederate month proposal moving ahead after leaders of the Republican-controlled House and Senate said they're not in favor of apologizing for slavery.

"Georgia needs to recognize and apologize and atone for its part in the slave trade, as Virginia has done," Brooks said. "Until we do, I think there will continue to be resistance from African-Americans and others who are serving in the General Assembly" to efforts like Confederate month.

Mullis, a Republican, said his bill was not a response to the slavery-apology movement.

"I'm from Chickamauga, so it seemed pretty appropriate for me to do something to commemorate the War Between the States," Mullis said. His family owned land at the site of the Battle of Chickamauga, the Civil War's second-bloodiest battle and the South's last major victory.

Mullis has supported efforts to create a Civil Rights History Month in Georgia but opposes a slavery apology. "If I had done something personally, yes, I would apologize," he said.

The state's branch of the NAACP called the push for a Confederate month hypocritical.

"Although the supporters of the Confederate history bill feel responsible to honor the past deeds of their ancestors through official governmental action, they resist all notions that they have any responsibility to apologize to their ancestors' victims through official governmental action," said Edward Dubose, president of the group's Georgia chapter. "That reeks of hypocrisy."

Brooks, who said black lawmakers plan to officially introduce their slavery legislation next week, said he hopes Mullis' bill at least will encourage discussion. He said he's not necessarily against the idea of a Confederate month — as long as similar recognition is given to the state's black history.

"All of Georgia's history should be promoted and respected and highlighted," he said. "Hopefully this will lead us into some meaningful dialogue."

By DOUG GROSS, Associated Press Writer

CONGRESS SEEKS TO ABOLISH LAW PROTECTING VETS FROM GREEDY LAWYERS

Two reasons Veterans should be worried about this new law:

1) The Law benefits Lawyers.

2) The Law is being introduced by a Neo Con.

The original headline is entirely misleading (See Below). The law protects Veterans from lawyers that take every last dime from decisions favorable to the injured party. After the Civil War avaricious lawyers cheated many Vets out of their pension money. Congress felt it was necessary to protect these Vets from dishonest lawyers; can we honestly say that lawyers have changed in our day and age?

Maybe the Congress is anticipating claims against our government by Vets of the Middle East invasion of Iraq and Iran? Our leaders have said publicly that they will use nukes if necessary. We are already using depleted Uranium...Just think of the lawsuits from Iranian War Syndrome!!!

Maybe the American Bar Association wants to get a piece of the action generated by World War III? (PS)

Congress Seeks to Change Civil War Law

[By JIM ABRAMS, Associated Press WriterMon May 8, 2006]

Soldiers who survived the Civil War often fared less well with dishonest lawyers who cheated them out of pension money. Congress is now trying to do something about the backlash, lasting 140 years, that has barred veterans from hiring attorneys to help them with benefit claims.

Bills introduced in both the House and Senate would lift the ban on veterans paying attorneys to represent them during the lengthy administrative process of filing a benefits claim with the Veterans Affairs Department.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (news, bio, voting record), R-S.C., sponsor of the Senate bill with Veterans' Affairs Committee Chairman Larry Craig, R-Idaho, said he understood that some people still resist the idea of lawyers making money off veterans. "But the bureaucracy of 2006 is a maze," he said. "Our veterans need legal assistance."

"I suppose that some would still warn that lawyers are not to be trusted," Craig said. "But the reality is that the laws are complex and I want veterans to have the option" of hiring a lawyer.

When Congress awarded pensions to veterans after the Civil War, some unscrupulous lawyers succeeded in bilking clients out of much of the money they had coming to them. In reaction, Congress imposed a limit, first $5 and then $10, on what lawyers could receive for assisting a veteran.

That lasted until 1988, when Congress removed the $10 ceiling and created an independent Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Veterans can seek legal representation when their case reaches the court, but are still prohibited from paying a lawyer for services until the VA's board of appeals makes a decision on their claim, a process that often takes years.

"This has been widely understood to be unfair for many, many years," said Eugene R. Fidell, who teaches military law at American University's Washington College of Law. "It's a museum piece that should have been gotten rid of a long time ago." He said he knew of "no other situation where litigants can't pay a reasonable fee to their attorneys."

One reason Congress has not acted is that the nation's 24 million veterans do have access to free counseling from the major veterans service organizations.

Steve Smithson, deputy director for claims services for the American Legion, said his group has accredited representatives for every VA regional office. Most are not lawyers, he said, but the VA system "is a very unique animal in administrative law" and attorneys would not necessarily be more effective than the Legion's experienced agents in dealing with it.

The Legion has not taken a position on the Senate and House bills, he said, but "we want to make sure the veteran is protected from being taken advantage of."

Sponsors of the House bill — Reps. Lane Evans of Illinois, the top Democrat on the Veterans' Affairs Committee, and Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., a committee member — said they expected that the service organizations would continue to represent most claimants. "Nonetheless, we believe that in this day and age, veterans should not be prohibited from hiring an attorney if they choose to do so."

___

The Senate bill is S. 2694, the House bill H.R. 4914.