New Book!

[Paul Trejo]

Furthermore, Kenneth, perhaps the classic volume on the Citizens Council history is by Neil R. McMillen. His 1971 book is entitled: The Citizen's Council: Organized Resistance to the Second Reconstruction, 1954–1964.

One of the interesting facts there was that the ratio of White to Black Americans in any given region provided a measure of the White Resistance in the region. For example, in the North, where Black Americans totaled about 10% of the population, conformity to the Brown Decision was swift and largely uneventful.

On the other hand, in areas in the South, where Black Americans totaled 20% or more, the Citizens Councils were very active. Then, in areas where Black Americans totaled more than 40% of the population, the KKK was most active.

That's an interesting social statistic. The North doesn't have the same sociological challenges as the South, so in a sense the application of the Brown Decision was un-even between North and South to begin with. One cannot say that the White attitudes were different -- only that the population ratio of White/Black made the decisive difference.

Speaking of California, my own home State, we still notice sharp racial divisions in neighborhoods, for example, Oakland vs. San Francisco, or East Palo Alto vs. West Palo Alto (i.e. Stanford University), or Watts vs Los Angeles.

The Northern culture -- and that could include California -- is still largely segregated in practice, if not in the popular imagination. Yet again, the stress of Racial Division in California is about the same as in Chicago and New York -- the Northern cities -- mainly because the Black/White ratio is about 10%/90%.

That was one of the key sociological facts that Neil McMillen emphasized.

So -- I'm not trying to say that people in the South are different -- but that the sociological culture of the South reflects a different sociological profile. During the Cold War, the Brown Decision was treated in the South as a Communist Plot. That reflected the great stress that the South felt -- especially in States like Mississippi where the Black/White ratio approaches 50%.

It's a sad fact that this Southern doctrine (that the Brown Decision was Communist) also became popular in California -- specifically among the John Birch Society and Congressmen like John Rousselot of California of my District in deep East Los Angeles.

I conclude by noting that the resigned General Walker was a frequent speaker for the Citizens Councils from Mississippi to Dallas.

JFK shocked the South on 11 June 1963 when he came out publicly in support of Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. At midnight on the very night of his speech, the NAACP man who helped James Meredith register at Ole Miss a few months before, namely, Medgar Evers, was shot in the back in his own driveway. A 1996 movie was released about the failed trials of his killers, namely, Ghosts of Mississippi (starring James Woods, Alec Baldwin and Whoopi Goldberg) and the justice that came 30 years later.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited September 9, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Stephen Roy]

Hmmm...

As soon as I saw it available on Amazon (about 2 weeks ago) and noticed that there were 4 in stock, I "one-clicked" it, and it was in my mailbox two days later (really weighing down the mailbox, too - a heavy book)!

If anybody wants me to check anything, just ask.

Thanks, Stephen, for your offer. Would you briefly summarize Dr. Caufield's characterization of the relationships between General Walker and the members of Interpen -- especially Gerry Patrick Hemming and Loran Hall?

Many thanks,

--Paul Trejo

The index lists Hemming on only 4 pages, and it mostly concerns a Jan 1963 meeting between Walker and Hemming and Hall, where Walker expressed interest in Cuban issues. There's more on Hall, which I'll check (if you don't get your copy in the meantime!)

[Ernie Lazar]

Thanks for that response. I've never made a 'study' of the KKK. However I grew up in the South and have lived here always and I've never seen any KKK activities. Seems as if they're always some other place. Much of it in the North.

So I guess I kinda interpret your use of the sentence "Extreme Right Wing of the South" just as a repetition because someone else used it.

I certainly don't see any reason to associate the assassination of JFK with the South, yes it did happen there but could just as easily have been in Chicago or some northern city. I think it was unrelated to geography.

Well, Kenneth, what I said was that I made a study of the Citizens Councils that began in the mid-1950's in response to the Brown Decision. I didn't say I made a study of the KKK.

I've read a lot about the KKK, however, and I agree that they haven't disappeared -- however, their power and influence -- even in the 1960's -- cannot be compared to their vast power and influence at the turn and the early part of the 20th century.

I refer to the era of President Woodrow Wilson, who encouraged the KKK in the South, and invited them to a massive march in Washington DC. The 1915 movie by D.W. Griffith, Birth of a Nation (which adulates the KKK), was extolled by President Wilson not only as great art, but as historical fact.

(We should remember the roots of the US Democratic Party in the South as the party opposite Abe Lincoln, which often bowed to the Dixiecrats in the South until the arrival of FDR. Woodrow Wilson was favored for the Presidency by those who praised his successful efforts to keep Princeton University purely white.)

The 1910's were the days when the KKK was truly powerful -- because they had the backing of the President of the USA.

Matters were sharply reduced for the KKK by the 1950's, because the brutality of arbitrary lynching in the South became widely reported. Things got so bad for the KKK that when Earl Warren passed his Brown Decision, political leaders in the South struggled to distance themselves from the KKK, knowing that their brutal methods would only bring damnation down from Washington DC.

So, the Citizens Councils were born in order to torment the NAACP -- without resorting to KKK methods.

In no way did I imply that the KKK had vanished. As Larry noted, the 1988 movie, Mississippi Burning (starring Gene Hackman, Willem Defoe and Frances Louise McDormand) offers a graphic portrayal of KKK activity suppressing the Civil Rights movement using murder in 1964.

This is precisely what the Citizens Councils were hoping to avoid.

Rather, the methods of the Citizens Councils were to telephone the employers of NAACP members, and harass them until each employee was fired, and to telephone the mortgage bankers of NAACP members, and harass them until their loans were called in. Firings and evictions were the methods of the Citizens Councils -- rather than beating, shooting and lynching methods of the KKK.

And their slogan was: "Impeach Earl Warren!"

As for the geography of the JFK assassination -- I truly believe that too little is made of it. Yes, there were also JFK murder plots in Miami, in Chicago and even in Washington DC. However all those plots were quickly foiled by the FBI and Secret Service.

It is historically significant, IMHO, that the FBI and Secret Service were blind-sighted specifically in Dallas -- in the South.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Thanks Paul. Unlike you, I've not done a study of the Citizens Councils. As I've said, I was born in south Georgia, grew up there, have lived in Va, NC, SC, AL, FL, Ms and La and I have never seen or known a member of the Klan. Edit: I have also never known a member of a 'citizens council'. end edit. I have known several members of the NRA but it is especially a non violent organization.

From what I've read about the Klan of the early century, circa 1915, it seems to have been primarily against the Catholic Church, for some reason.

Any or all klan activities I heard of back in the 50's-60's were always somewhere else, not near where I was.

The Democratic party of the south prior to 1960 were the racists. They converted over to complete racial pandering with the arrival of the civil rights decisions of the 50's 60's. So while they are still the racists in the South today, they at least hide it well enough to keep the black people voting for them. My opinion is if you didn't have the Democrats with their racial pandering, especially in the South but actually throughout the US, there would be little noticeable racism remaining in the US. Especially with Repubs in the south, race is a non issue except for the Democrat pandering for votes.

Back to the issue of Extreme Right Wing. You know that many people refer to Nazi's as 'extremist and right wing', etc? Well, of course they were extremist, but it is all 'left wing'. The very name is National Socialists and very few socialists would come down on the 'right' in politics.

As I say though, I know you didn't invent the term, but I think it is a much 'misused' term and is often only repeated without thought being given as to the meaning.

Just a casual observation, if I were putting 60's pols in their proper alignment. I would put LBJ on the left, I would put JFK a little to the right. I would think the lefties would have more reason to kill JFK than the righties. It would bring LBJ to the presidency so that he could improve the pandering to the civil rights groups.

So, it still remains my problem as to the association of Walker to Extreme Right Wing except as to the benefit to the Extreme lefties that it brought to them by the reference.

Kenneth Drew is parroting the Birch Society argument that nazis belong on the left side of a political spectrum. What Kenneth can never explain, however, is why "leftist" nazis nevertheless recommend and sell extreme right-wing publications. For example, the American Nazi Party sold John Stormer's 1964 classic, None Dare Call it Treason. NDCIT was written by John Birch Society member Stormer and Stormer was a Republican Party official in his home state!

Then there is the acknowledgements page of George Lincoln Rockwell's autobiography. Rockwell created the American Nazi Party. In his autobiography, This Time The World, Rockwell wrote:

Acknowledgements: The author gratefully acknowledges the inspiration he received in his political career from three great Americans: Senator Joseph McCarthy, General Charles Lindbergh, General Douglas MacArthur.

Are these "leftists" that Rockwell is acknowledging as "great Americans"? In fact, in 1952, Rockwell publicly supported Gen. Douglas MacArthur for President and he organized a pro-MacArthur rally in San Diego. Did "leftists" endorse MacArthur in 1952?? After Rockwell got out of the Navy, he went to work for right-wing causes such as Robert Snowden's Campaign for the 48 States. Why would a leftist go to work for a prominent right-wing conservative in Tennessee??

Robert B. DePugh (leader of right wing paramilitary group, The Minutemen) stated that Rockwell received financial support from Dallas millionaire Clint Murchison Sr. – an ultra-conservative who was on a first name basis with J. Edgar Hoover. If this is true, how does Kenneth explain why a prominent right-winger and Hoover friend would give money to a "leftist" like Rockwell??

Then we need to consider all of the neo-nazis who have run for political office. WHOM did they target for support? Did they seek endorsements and financial contributions from (alleged) fellow "leftists"? Is it Kenneth's contention that the thousands of people who vote for neo-nazis in our country when they have run for political office did so because their personal background and political objectives are LEFT-WING?

Take George R. Carlson for example.

In 1980 (and 1984) Carlson ran for the GOP nomination for the 15th Congressional District seat in Michigan. Despite massive media publicity which pointed out his membership in the neo-nazi National Socialist Movement and the National Christian Democracy Union, he WON the GOP primary election in the August 5, 1980 state primary and despite blistering attacks from and disavowal by Republican Party officials --- he WON that primary election with 55% of the vote. He lost the general election on 11/5/80 but he still got 32% of that vote (53,570 votes). Carlson’s candidacy was supported by Robert E. Miles, the head of the United Klans of America chapter in Michigan. [in the 11/6/84 general election, Carlson won 66,172 votes for the 15th CD seat.]

So, first of all, why would a neo-nazi choose to run as a GOP candidate? Is the GOP known for welcoming extreme leftists into its ranks?

Is it Kenneth's contention that....

(1) the majority of Michigan Republicans in Carlson's Congressional District in August 1980 were neo-nazi and LEFTISTS (or at least 55% were?)

(2) 32% of the general electorate in Carlson's Michigan district (i.e. 53,570) were neo-nazi supporters and LEFTISTS?

(3) That Carlson obtained his 55% vote, his support, his financial contributions, his volunteers, and his endorsements predominantly from LEFTISTS and he campaigned on LEFTIST themes policies and proposals?

OK -- let's now turn our attention briefly to the Birch Society. Is it Kenneth's contention that the JBS is a "left-wing" organization that supports "left-wing" ideas, candidates, and policy proposals?

If Kenneth agrees that the JBS is predominantly composed of right-wing ultraconservatives, then how does Kenneth explain that all of the following neo-nazis joined the JBS?

(1) Robert Surrey, JBS member and National Socialist White People's Party officer in Dallas, attended organizational meeting for Assembly of Racist Movements in Lexington KY on April 18, 1968 sponsored by White Party of America (headed by neo-nazi Karl R. Allen Jr.). After the actual ARM conference on April 20-21, 1968 in Washington DC, Surrey established their Speakers Bureau and he contacted influential, wealthy contributors in Dallas to secure funding for the WPA and the ARM coalition. H.L. Hunt made a $150 contribution to Karl Allen and asked him to come to Dallas to make a presentation regarding his principles and movement. Is H.L. Hunt known for funding LEFT WING groups and causes?

(2) Well-known U.S. Hitler admirers (and JBS members)

Willis Carto (Liberty Lobby and about 2 dozen other groups; pro-nazi; JBS CEO Congressman Larry McDonald testified in a libel lawsuit which involved Carto. He described Liberty Lobby as "an organization founded by Willis Carto who seeks to use American populist causes as the method to bring about a National Socialist (Nazi) regime." )

Bernard Klassen (Nationalist White Party / Church of the Creator)

Kevin Strom (National Alliance / creator of Stormfront neo-nazi website)

William Pierce (National Alliance - formerly Information Officer of American Nazi Party and editor of National Socialist World)

David E. Lane (The Order)

Revilo P. Oliver (National Youth Alliance / contributor to George P. Dietz's Liberty Bell neo-nazi magazine)

George P. Dietz (Liberty Bell Publications; member of Hitler Youth and subsequently publisher of neo-nazi publications distributed throughout the world)

J.T. Ready (Arizona GOP precinct committeeman, unapologetic neo-nazi, and prominent spokesman for the state's "immigration control" movement. )

Why would all these purported "leftists" become JBS members and be attracted to extreme right ideas?

[Ernie Lazar]

During 1951 and 1952 the homes of 40 black Southern families were bombed. Among the more notorious murders by Klan members:

The 1951 Christmas Eve bombing of the home of NAACP activists Harry and Harriette Moore in Mims, Florida, resulting in their deaths.

The 1957 murder of Willie Edwards, Jr. Klansmen forced Edwards to jump to his death from a bridge into the Alabama River.

The 1963 assassination of NAACP organizer Medgar Evers in Mississippi. In 1994, former Ku Klux Klansman Byron De La Beckwith was convicted.

The 1963 bombing of the 16th Street Baptist Church in Birmingham, Alabama, which killed four African-American girls. The perpetrators were Klan members Robert Chambliss, convicted in 1977, Thomas Edwin Blanton, Jr. and Bobby Frank Cherry, convicted in 2001 and 2002. The fourth suspect, Herman Cash, died before he was indicted.

The 1964 murders of three civil rights workers, Chaney, Goodman and Schwerner, in Mississippi. In June 2005, Klan member Edgar Ray Killen was convicted of manslaughter.

The 1964 murder of two black teenagers, Henry Hezekiah Dee and Charles Eddie Moore in Mississippi. In August 2007, based on the confession of Klansman Charles Marcus Edwards, James Ford Seale, a reputed Ku Klux Klansman, was convicted. Seale was sentenced to serve three life sentences. Seale was a former Mississippi policeman and sheriff's deputy.

The 1965 Alabama murder of Viola Liuzzo.

The 1966 firebombing death of NAACP leader Vernon Dahmer Sr. in Mississippi. In 1998 former Ku Klux Klan wizard Sam Bowers was convicted of his murder and sentenced to life. Two other Klan members were indicted with Bowers, but one died before trial, and the other's indictment was dismissed.

The 1967 multiple bombings in Jackson, Mississippi of the residence of a Methodist activist, Robert Kochtitzky, and those at the synagogue and at the residence of Rabbi Perry Nussbaum on Old Canton Road were executed by a Klan member named Thomas Albert Tarrants III who was convicted in 1968. Another Klan bombing was averted in Meridian the same year.

For additional examples, see:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Racially_motivated_violence_against_African_Americans

So, you listed some 17 persons killed by the Klan from 50 thru 67 and you say that the lives taken in Chicago can't compare with those deaths. Sounds like an opinion of someone from California, or something.

I wonder how many of the parents of the 8 persons murdered in Chicago this weekend would agree with you that their child was less valuable and didn't compare to the death of a child in Mississippi. Get me a list of those, would you?

This significant event: " Another Klan bombing was averted in Meridian the same year." was really newsworthy, I wonder how many additional murders were averted in Chicago this weekend. I live in a small city of about 10,000 and no one was killed this weekend, so I guess we could say that 'the deaths of 10,000 local citizens was averted this weekend.

When you start throwing words like 'ignorant' around, you're only inviting comparisons. Having a different point of view is not necessarily ignorance. I personally think the lives of the folks in Chicago are of the same value as the persons in Mississippi. I guess it's 'who is doing the killing' that makes it unimportant to you.

Almost all the murders in Chicago are gang-related black-on-black violence.

Nobody except a bigot would try to claim that what happened in our southern states during the 20th century was in any way comparable. The murders, the bombings, the arsons, the lynchings, the castrations were NOT gang-related. And they were NOT black-on-black crimes. And they were NOT motivated by anything other than whites (and in many cases, Klan members and Klan sympathizers) wanting to inflict severe punishment and impose terror upon an entire category of human beings based SOLELY upon their racial identity.

Furthermore, the violence and murders and bombings and arsons in southern states were often organized and/or executed by local law enforcement officials OR they knew who committed those actions but did nothing to prevent them or prosecute the perpetrators. That certainly is not true of the crimes in Chicago.

Nobody is fooled into believing your bigoted nonsense.

[Kenneth Drew]

Thanks for that response. I've never made a 'study' of the KKK. However I grew up in the South and have lived here always and I've never seen any KKK activities. Seems as if they're always some other place. Much of it in the North.

So I guess I kinda interpret your use of the sentence "Extreme Right Wing of the South" just as a repetition because someone else used it.

I certainly don't see any reason to associate the assassination of JFK with the South, yes it did happen there but could just as easily have been in Chicago or some northern city. I think it was unrelated to geography.

Well, Kenneth, what I said was that I made a study of the Citizens Councils that began in the mid-1950's in response to the Brown Decision. I didn't say I made a study of the KKK.

I've read a lot about the KKK, however, and I agree that they haven't disappeared -- however, their power and influence -- even in the 1960's -- cannot be compared to their vast power and influence at the turn and the early part of the 20th century.

I refer to the era of President Woodrow Wilson, who encouraged the KKK in the South, and invited them to a massive march in Washington DC. The 1915 movie by D.W. Griffith, Birth of a Nation, was extolled by President Wilson not only as great art, but as historical fact. We should always remember the roots of the US Democratic Party in the South, as the party that opposed Abe Lincoln's Republican Party, and which quickly bowed to the Dixiecrats in the South. Woodrow Wilson was favored for the Presidency by those who praised his successful efforts to keep Princeton University purely white.

The 1910's were the days when the KKK was truly powerful -- because they had the backing of the President of the USA.

Matters were sharply reduced for the KKK by the 1950's, because the brutality of arbitrary lynching in the South became widely reported. Things got so bad for the KKK that when Earl Warren passed his Brown Decision, political leaders in the South struggled to distance themselves from the KKK, knowing that their brutal methods would only bring damnation down from Washington DC.

So, the Citizens Councils were born in order to torment the NAACP -- without resorting to KKK methods.

In no way did I imply that the KKK had vanished. As Larry noted, the 1988 movie, Mississippi Burning (starring Gene Hackman, Willem Defoe and Frances Louise McDormand) offers a graphic portrayal of KKK activity suppressing the Civil Rights movement using murder in 1964.

This is precisely what the Citizens Councils were hoping to avoid.

Rather, the methods of the Citizens Councils were to telephone the employers of NAACP members, and harass them until each employee was fired, and to telephone the mortgage bankers of NAACP members, and harass them until their loans were called in. Firings and evictions were the methods of the Citizens Councils -- rather than beating, shooting and lynching methods of the KKK.

And their slogan was: "Impeach Earl Warren!"

As for the geography of the JFK assassination -- I truly believe that too little is made of it. Yes, there were also JFK murder plots in Miami, in Chicago and even in Washington DC. However all those plots were quickly foiled by the FBI and Secret Service.

It is historically significant, IMHO, that the FBI and Secret Service were blind-sighted specifically in Dallas -- in the South.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

As usual, Paul has his facts wrong. In many previous messages, I have pointed out that fiction writers are not constrained by any rules of logic or evidence. Consequently, they can simply invent whatever they want -- and substitute their fertile imagination for fact. Paul often makes bold declarations but please notice that he NEVER directly quotes his sources -- especially primary source documentation to support his contentions. That is because Paul is primarily a fiction writer and he does not want to be constrained by actual factual evidence.

FOR EXAMPLE:

The "Movement to Impeach Earl Warren" slogan came into usage in January 1961 as a result of a John Birch Society project on its monthly agenda for its members, The precipitating event given as justification for the impeachment campaign was a series of Supreme Court rulings which the Birch Society considered to be damaging "to our Constitution and to our whole system of safeguards which a constitutional republic offers against the powers of demagogues to manipulate majorities..."

The JBS claimed that the Warren Court was consciously destroying the established notion of "state's rights". [Check out the JBS "Impeach Warren" packet for details and see info quoted below].

The "Grounds For Impeachment" portion of the argument for replacing Warren does not focus just upon or primarily upon the Brown decision. But Paul does NOT want anybody to know that because it undermines his fictional narrative.

The "Impeach Warren" packet refers to the Brown decision as "only a horrible beginning". Most of the "grounds" listed focus upon Smith Act case decisions by the Court. In particular, the JBS discusses the Steve Nelson case, the Koninsberg case, and the Sweezy case.

It is therefore, anti-historical to claim (as Paul does) that the Brown decision was the primary motivation behind the Impeach Warren movement.

The Birch Society produced a one-page flyer which contains what they considered to be their best anti-Warren arguments. There are six (6) itemized reasons which I am going to quote below---because (unlike Paul Trejo) I believe in primary source documentation.

As will be seen below, JBS reasoning was focused upon something quite different from what Paul wants us to believe.

(1) "Chief Justice Warren had no judicial experience when appointed to his present position. Many of his decisions have shown abysmal ignorance of, and utter contempt for, the most fundamental principles of law"

(2) "In cases involving Communist purposes and personnel Warren has voted as desired by the Communists more than ninety percent of the time."

(3) "Among the immediate effects of some of the Warren Court decisions have been: to free known Communists, who had been properly convicted of some crime, from sentences already imposed; to force both local and federal government agencies to re-employ, frequently with huge sums of back pay, employees who had been dropped for supporting Communist purposes; to deprive the separate states of all power to protect themselves against Communist subversion."

(4) "Chief Justice Warren has taken the lead in both the decisions and the attitude of the Supreme Court, aimed at doing away with those safeguards of law which would maintain this nation as a constitutional republic, and at converting it into a democracy---in which all individual rights, minority rights, and property rights would be completely subject to the whims and views of demagogues temporarily in power".

(5) "Chief Justice Warren has been accused by his fellow Justices of the Supreme Court, in various dissenting opinions, of many different usurpations of power; and of invasions of the Constitutionally guaranteed rights of private citizens, of states, and of Congress. These violations of the Constitution by a Supreme Court Justice are certainly impeachable offenses.

(6) "Many of the Warren Court decisions, which he has written, or in which he has concurred, have given aid and comfort to our Communist enemies. This is unmistakably proved by the actions of the Communists themselves. After the infamous 'Red Monday' decisions, on June 17, 1957, a leading Communist on the west coast exulted: 'This is the greatest victory the Communist Party ever had'. And in September, 1957, the Communists held a rally in New York 'To pay honor to the U.S. Supreme Court and its recent decisions' and to 'Hit out at attempts to undo the decisions.'

The closing paragraph summarizes the JBS position -- i.e. the primary reason why the JBS wanted Warren impeached was because of "the incredible distortions of law, precedent and justice required to make such decisions and the gaping holes which those decisions have punched in the Constitution of the United States..."

The Citizens Council movement began in 1954. Obviously - they did not need any slogan regarding Earl Warren to energize or justify their movement. Their concern was triggered by one Supreme Court decision that directly affected their entire existence and the underlying arguments which justified the prevailing practices which were extant in our southern states at that time. The Councils correctly understood that overturning "separate but equal" could never be limited to only public education. Over time, the Court would inevitably make comparable decisions about other areas of southern life.

1. " Paul often makes bold declarations but please notice that he NEVER directly quotes his sources" Doesn't matter. I rarely 'quote' anyone. That's mostly because it is way too much trouble to hunt it up and lift the 'exact quote'. I usually just paraphrase, with credit. It's much simpler and doesn't make any difference.

It makes no difference to me or to many others as to the 'exact' cause of the desire to impeach Earl Warren. He was way too creative in the many ways to violate the constitution and not just one specific reason is/was necessary. So to give one or more specific quotes from someone that only has an opinion is not of much use. Paul seems to have a reasonable opinion as to why the impeach Warren movement existed.

Just a memo, too many elements of History are written by the media or taken from the media. Most persons know that the media has a very poor grasp of reality.

[Ernie Lazar]

Kenneth needs to review the webpage I previously linked -- and actually read what is presented to see how totally different these violent crimes were in comparison to what takes place in Chicago:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Racially_motivated_violence_against_African_Americans

The following graph gives the number of lynchings and racially-motivated murders in each decade from 1865 to 1965. Data for 1865-1869 and 1960-1965 are partial decades. [24]

The same source gives the following statistics for the period from 1882 to 1951. 88% of victims were black, and 10% were white. 59% of the lynchings occurred in the Southern states of Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, and Florida. Lynching was not uncommon in the west and midwest, but was virtually nonexistent in the northeast. The most common reasons given for the lynchings are murder and rape, but as documented by Ida B. Wells, such charges were often pretexts for lynching blacks who violated Jim Crow etiquette, or engaged in economic competition with whites. Other common reasons given include arson, theft, assault, and robbery; sexual transgressions (miscegenation, adultery, cohabitation); "race prejudice," "race hatred," "racial disturbance;" informing on others; "threats against whites;" and violations of the color line ("attending white girl," "proposals to white woman").

Edited September 8, 2015 by Ernie Lazar

[Ernie Lazar]

Thanks for that response. I've never made a 'study' of the KKK. However I grew up in the South and have lived here always and I've never seen any KKK activities. Seems as if they're always some other place. Much of it in the North.

So I guess I kinda interpret your use of the sentence "Extreme Right Wing of the South" just as a repetition because someone else used it.

I certainly don't see any reason to associate the assassination of JFK with the South, yes it did happen there but could just as easily have been in Chicago or some northern city. I think it was unrelated to geography.

Well, Kenneth, what I said was that I made a study of the Citizens Councils that began in the mid-1950's in response to the Brown Decision. I didn't say I made a study of the KKK.

I've read a lot about the KKK, however, and I agree that they haven't disappeared -- however, their power and influence -- even in the 1960's -- cannot be compared to their vast power and influence at the turn and the early part of the 20th century.

I refer to the era of President Woodrow Wilson, who encouraged the KKK in the South, and invited them to a massive march in Washington DC. The 1915 movie by D.W. Griffith, Birth of a Nation, was extolled by President Wilson not only as great art, but as historical fact. We should always remember the roots of the US Democratic Party in the South, as the party that opposed Abe Lincoln's Republican Party, and which quickly bowed to the Dixiecrats in the South. Woodrow Wilson was favored for the Presidency by those who praised his successful efforts to keep Princeton University purely white.

The 1910's were the days when the KKK was truly powerful -- because they had the backing of the President of the USA.

Matters were sharply reduced for the KKK by the 1950's, because the brutality of arbitrary lynching in the South became widely reported. Things got so bad for the KKK that when Earl Warren passed his Brown Decision, political leaders in the South struggled to distance themselves from the KKK, knowing that their brutal methods would only bring damnation down from Washington DC.

So, the Citizens Councils were born in order to torment the NAACP -- without resorting to KKK methods.

In no way did I imply that the KKK had vanished. As Larry noted, the 1988 movie, Mississippi Burning (starring Gene Hackman, Willem Defoe and Frances Louise McDormand) offers a graphic portrayal of KKK activity suppressing the Civil Rights movement using murder in 1964.

This is precisely what the Citizens Councils were hoping to avoid.

Rather, the methods of the Citizens Councils were to telephone the employers of NAACP members, and harass them until each employee was fired, and to telephone the mortgage bankers of NAACP members, and harass them until their loans were called in. Firings and evictions were the methods of the Citizens Councils -- rather than beating, shooting and lynching methods of the KKK.

And their slogan was: "Impeach Earl Warren!"

As for the geography of the JFK assassination -- I truly believe that too little is made of it. Yes, there were also JFK murder plots in Miami, in Chicago and even in Washington DC. However all those plots were quickly foiled by the FBI and Secret Service.

It is historically significant, IMHO, that the FBI and Secret Service were blind-sighted specifically in Dallas -- in the South.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

As usual, Paul has his facts wrong. In many previous messages, I have pointed out that fiction writers are not constrained by any rules of logic or evidence. Consequently, they can simply invent whatever they want -- and substitute their fertile imagination for fact. Paul often makes bold declarations but please notice that he NEVER directly quotes his sources -- especially primary source documentation to support his contentions. That is because Paul is primarily a fiction writer and he does not want to be constrained by actual factual evidence.

FOR EXAMPLE:

The "Movement to Impeach Earl Warren" slogan came into usage in January 1961 as a result of a John Birch Society project on its monthly agenda for its members, The precipitating event given as justification for the impeachment campaign was a series of Supreme Court rulings which the Birch Society considered to be damaging "to our Constitution and to our whole system of safeguards which a constitutional republic offers against the powers of demagogues to manipulate majorities..."

The JBS claimed that the Warren Court was consciously destroying the established notion of "state's rights". [Check out the JBS "Impeach Warren" packet for details and see info quoted below].

The "Grounds For Impeachment" portion of the argument for replacing Warren does not focus just upon or primarily upon the Brown decision. But Paul does NOT want anybody to know that because it undermines his fictional narrative.

The "Impeach Warren" packet refers to the Brown decision as "only a horrible beginning". Most of the "grounds" listed focus upon Smith Act case decisions by the Court. In particular, the JBS discusses the Steve Nelson case, the Koninsberg case, and the Sweezy case.

It is therefore, anti-historical to claim (as Paul does) that the Brown decision was the primary motivation behind the Impeach Warren movement.

The Birch Society produced a one-page flyer which contains what they considered to be their best anti-Warren arguments. There are six (6) itemized reasons which I am going to quote below---because (unlike Paul Trejo) I believe in primary source documentation.

As will be seen below, JBS reasoning was focused upon something quite different from what Paul wants us to believe.

(1) "Chief Justice Warren had no judicial experience when appointed to his present position. Many of his decisions have shown abysmal ignorance of, and utter contempt for, the most fundamental principles of law"

(2) "In cases involving Communist purposes and personnel Warren has voted as desired by the Communists more than ninety percent of the time."

(3) "Among the immediate effects of some of the Warren Court decisions have been: to free known Communists, who had been properly convicted of some crime, from sentences already imposed; to force both local and federal government agencies to re-employ, frequently with huge sums of back pay, employees who had been dropped for supporting Communist purposes; to deprive the separate states of all power to protect themselves against Communist subversion."

(4) "Chief Justice Warren has taken the lead in both the decisions and the attitude of the Supreme Court, aimed at doing away with those safeguards of law which would maintain this nation as a constitutional republic, and at converting it into a democracy---in which all individual rights, minority rights, and property rights would be completely subject to the whims and views of demagogues temporarily in power".

(5) "Chief Justice Warren has been accused by his fellow Justices of the Supreme Court, in various dissenting opinions, of many different usurpations of power; and of invasions of the Constitutionally guaranteed rights of private citizens, of states, and of Congress. These violations of the Constitution by a Supreme Court Justice are certainly impeachable offenses.

(6) "Many of the Warren Court decisions, which he has written, or in which he has concurred, have given aid and comfort to our Communist enemies. This is unmistakably proved by the actions of the Communists themselves. After the infamous 'Red Monday' decisions, on June 17, 1957, a leading Communist on the west coast exulted: 'This is the greatest victory the Communist Party ever had'. And in September, 1957, the Communists held a rally in New York 'To pay honor to the U.S. Supreme Court and its recent decisions' and to 'Hit out at attempts to undo the decisions.'

The closing paragraph summarizes the JBS position -- i.e. the primary reason why the JBS wanted Warren impeached was because of "the incredible distortions of law, precedent and justice required to make such decisions and the gaping holes which those decisions have punched in the Constitution of the United States..."

The Citizens Council movement began in 1954. Obviously - they did not need any slogan regarding Earl Warren to energize or justify their movement. Their concern was triggered by one Supreme Court decision that directly affected their entire existence and the underlying arguments which justified the prevailing practices which were extant in our southern states at that time. The Councils correctly understood that overturning "separate but equal" could never be limited to only public education. Over time, the Court would inevitably make comparable decisions about other areas of southern life.

1. " Paul often makes bold declarations but please notice that he NEVER directly quotes his sources" Doesn't matter. I rarely 'quote' anyone. That's mostly because it is way too much trouble to hunt it up and lift the 'exact quote'. I usually just paraphrase, with credit. It's much simpler and doesn't make any difference.

It makes no difference to me or to many others as to the 'exact' cause of the desire to impeach Earl Warren. He was way too creative in the many ways to violate the constitution and not just one specific reason is/was necessary. So to give one or more specific quotes from someone that only has an opinion is not of much use. Paul seems to have a reasonable opinion as to why the impeach Warren movement existed.

Just a memo, too many elements of History are written by the media or taken from the media. Most persons know that the media has a very poor grasp of reality.

If you do not understand WHY someone begins a movement or participates in a movement -- then you cannot speak intelligently or honestly about its origins or development. No surprise that such primary source factual evidence has no importance to someone like yourself.

Edited September 8, 2015 by Ernie Lazar

[Kenneth Drew]

During 1951 and 1952 the homes of 40 black Southern families were bombed. Among the more notorious murders by Klan members:

The 1951 Christmas Eve bombing of the home of NAACP activists Harry and Harriette Moore in Mims, Florida, resulting in their deaths.

The 1957 murder of Willie Edwards, Jr. Klansmen forced Edwards to jump to his death from a bridge into the Alabama River.

The 1963 assassination of NAACP organizer Medgar Evers in Mississippi. In 1994, former Ku Klux Klansman Byron De La Beckwith was convicted.

The 1963 bombing of the 16th Street Baptist Church in Birmingham, Alabama, which killed four African-American girls. The perpetrators were Klan members Robert Chambliss, convicted in 1977, Thomas Edwin Blanton, Jr. and Bobby Frank Cherry, convicted in 2001 and 2002. The fourth suspect, Herman Cash, died before he was indicted.

The 1964 murders of three civil rights workers, Chaney, Goodman and Schwerner, in Mississippi. In June 2005, Klan member Edgar Ray Killen was convicted of manslaughter.

The 1964 murder of two black teenagers, Henry Hezekiah Dee and Charles Eddie Moore in Mississippi. In August 2007, based on the confession of Klansman Charles Marcus Edwards, James Ford Seale, a reputed Ku Klux Klansman, was convicted. Seale was sentenced to serve three life sentences. Seale was a former Mississippi policeman and sheriff's deputy.

The 1965 Alabama murder of Viola Liuzzo.

The 1966 firebombing death of NAACP leader Vernon Dahmer Sr. in Mississippi. In 1998 former Ku Klux Klan wizard Sam Bowers was convicted of his murder and sentenced to life. Two other Klan members were indicted with Bowers, but one died before trial, and the other's indictment was dismissed.

The 1967 multiple bombings in Jackson, Mississippi of the residence of a Methodist activist, Robert Kochtitzky, and those at the synagogue and at the residence of Rabbi Perry Nussbaum on Old Canton Road were executed by a Klan member named Thomas Albert Tarrants III who was convicted in 1968. Another Klan bombing was averted in Meridian the same year.

For additional examples, see:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Racially_motivated_violence_against_African_Americans

So, you listed some 17 persons killed by the Klan from 50 thru 67 and you say that the lives taken in Chicago can't compare with those deaths. Sounds like an opinion of someone from California, or something.

I wonder how many of the parents of the 8 persons murdered in Chicago this weekend would agree with you that their child was less valuable and didn't compare to the death of a child in Mississippi. Get me a list of those, would you?

This significant event: " Another Klan bombing was averted in Meridian the same year." was really newsworthy, I wonder how many additional murders were averted in Chicago this weekend. I live in a small city of about 10,000 and no one was killed this weekend, so I guess we could say that 'the deaths of 10,000 local citizens was averted this weekend.

When you start throwing words like 'ignorant' around, you're only inviting comparisons. Having a different point of view is not necessarily ignorance. I personally think the lives of the folks in Chicago are of the same value as the persons in Mississippi. I guess it's 'who is doing the killing' that makes it unimportant to you.

Almost all the murders in Chicago are gang-related black-on-black violence.

Nobody except a bigot would try to claim that what happened in our southern states during the 20th century was in any way comparable. The murders, the bombings, the arsons, the lynchings, the castrations were NOT gang-related. And they were NOT black-on-black crimes. And they were NOT motivated by anything other than whites (and in many cases, Klan members and Klan sympathizers) wanting to inflict severe punishment and impose terror upon an entire category of human beings based SOLELY upon their racial identity.

Furthermore, the violence and murders and bombings and arsons in southern states were often organized and/or executed by local law enforcement officials OR they knew who committed those actions but did nothing to prevent them or prosecute the perpetrators. That certainly is not true of the crimes in Chicago.

Nobody is fooled into believing your bigoted nonsense.

If I appear to be laughing it's because it's unavoidable. And "I'm" bigoted?

"Almost all the murders in Chicago are gang-related black-on-black violence." Oh well, hell they're not even worth mentioning. If they can't at least be killed by a white person then it's not worth mentioning? That's an interesting point of view.

"Nobody except a bigot would try to claim that what happened in our southern states during the 20th century was in any way comparable."

Let me be sure I understand that. If you are the mother of a black child and he is killed by a black hoodlum on the streets of Chicago, it's ok, it's understandable, it's just part of life and the fact that your child lost his life is not important because..... what? At least another black child got some experience at killing someone?..... Or something like that? But, if that same child were killed by a white person in the South, it's much worse? Well, ok you said so, so it must be true.

I guess every mother should just overlook their children being killed by others as long as it's black on black or gangland related. I guess that's the 'ideal' way for black children to be killed, or something?

"Furthermore, the violence and murders and bombings and arsons in southern states were often organized and/or executed by local law enforcement officials" Uh, but I guess if the law enforcement person were black, then it would make it a 'black on black' thing and no one would mind. Right?

So let's make sure I understand. Chicago mothers expect their children to be killed by another black person or a member of a gang so that is acceptable, but it would be unbearable for them if that child were killed by a white person just because he happened to live in Mississippi. Would the mother in Chicago even report their child if it got killed by a black on the streets, or would it just be another mark on a tote board?

bigoted or not. If my child got killed by another person of the same race or a different race, I would want that person prosecuted. I would not be inviting the killer over for milk and cookies and singing cumbaya.

bigoted nonsense? Black on black.....ok white on black.....hell no. interesting perspective, bigoted or not.

[Kenneth Drew]

Thanks for that response. I've never made a 'study' of the KKK. However I grew up in the South and have lived here always and I've never seen any KKK activities. Seems as if they're always some other place. Much of it in the North.

So I guess I kinda interpret your use of the sentence "Extreme Right Wing of the South" just as a repetition because someone else used it.

I certainly don't see any reason to associate the assassination of JFK with the South, yes it did happen there but could just as easily have been in Chicago or some northern city. I think it was unrelated to geography.

Well, Kenneth, what I said was that I made a study of the Citizens Councils that began in the mid-1950's in response to the Brown Decision. I didn't say I made a study of the KKK.

I've read a lot about the KKK, however, and I agree that they haven't disappeared -- however, their power and influence -- even in the 1960's -- cannot be compared to their vast power and influence at the turn and the early part of the 20th century.

I refer to the era of President Woodrow Wilson, who encouraged the KKK in the South, and invited them to a massive march in Washington DC. The 1915 movie by D.W. Griffith, Birth of a Nation, was extolled by President Wilson not only as great art, but as historical fact. We should always remember the roots of the US Democratic Party in the South, as the party that opposed Abe Lincoln's Republican Party, and which quickly bowed to the Dixiecrats in the South. Woodrow Wilson was favored for the Presidency by those who praised his successful efforts to keep Princeton University purely white.

The 1910's were the days when the KKK was truly powerful -- because they had the backing of the President of the USA.

Matters were sharply reduced for the KKK by the 1950's, because the brutality of arbitrary lynching in the South became widely reported. Things got so bad for the KKK that when Earl Warren passed his Brown Decision, political leaders in the South struggled to distance themselves from the KKK, knowing that their brutal methods would only bring damnation down from Washington DC.

So, the Citizens Councils were born in order to torment the NAACP -- without resorting to KKK methods.

In no way did I imply that the KKK had vanished. As Larry noted, the 1988 movie, Mississippi Burning (starring Gene Hackman, Willem Defoe and Frances Louise McDormand) offers a graphic portrayal of KKK activity suppressing the Civil Rights movement using murder in 1964.

This is precisely what the Citizens Councils were hoping to avoid.

Rather, the methods of the Citizens Councils were to telephone the employers of NAACP members, and harass them until each employee was fired, and to telephone the mortgage bankers of NAACP members, and harass them until their loans were called in. Firings and evictions were the methods of the Citizens Councils -- rather than beating, shooting and lynching methods of the KKK.

And their slogan was: "Impeach Earl Warren!"

As for the geography of the JFK assassination -- I truly believe that too little is made of it. Yes, there were also JFK murder plots in Miami, in Chicago and even in Washington DC. However all those plots were quickly foiled by the FBI and Secret Service.

It is historically significant, IMHO, that the FBI and Secret Service were blind-sighted specifically in Dallas -- in the South.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

As usual, Paul has his facts wrong. In many previous messages, I have pointed out that fiction writers are not constrained by any rules of logic or evidence. Consequently, they can simply invent whatever they want -- and substitute their fertile imagination for fact. Paul often makes bold declarations but please notice that he NEVER directly quotes his sources -- especially primary source documentation to support his contentions. That is because Paul is primarily a fiction writer and he does not want to be constrained by actual factual evidence.

FOR EXAMPLE:

The "Movement to Impeach Earl Warren" slogan came into usage in January 1961 as a result of a John Birch Society project on its monthly agenda for its members, The precipitating event given as justification for the impeachment campaign was a series of Supreme Court rulings which the Birch Society considered to be damaging "to our Constitution and to our whole system of safeguards which a constitutional republic offers against the powers of demagogues to manipulate majorities..."

The JBS claimed that the Warren Court was consciously destroying the established notion of "state's rights". [Check out the JBS "Impeach Warren" packet for details and see info quoted below].

The "Grounds For Impeachment" portion of the argument for replacing Warren does not focus just upon or primarily upon the Brown decision. But Paul does NOT want anybody to know that because it undermines his fictional narrative.

The "Impeach Warren" packet refers to the Brown decision as "only a horrible beginning". Most of the "grounds" listed focus upon Smith Act case decisions by the Court. In particular, the JBS discusses the Steve Nelson case, the Koninsberg case, and the Sweezy case.

It is therefore, anti-historical to claim (as Paul does) that the Brown decision was the primary motivation behind the Impeach Warren movement.

The Birch Society produced a one-page flyer which contains what they considered to be their best anti-Warren arguments. There are six (6) itemized reasons which I am going to quote below---because (unlike Paul Trejo) I believe in primary source documentation.

As will be seen below, JBS reasoning was focused upon something quite different from what Paul wants us to believe.

(1) "Chief Justice Warren had no judicial experience when appointed to his present position. Many of his decisions have shown abysmal ignorance of, and utter contempt for, the most fundamental principles of law"

(2) "In cases involving Communist purposes and personnel Warren has voted as desired by the Communists more than ninety percent of the time."

(3) "Among the immediate effects of some of the Warren Court decisions have been: to free known Communists, who had been properly convicted of some crime, from sentences already imposed; to force both local and federal government agencies to re-employ, frequently with huge sums of back pay, employees who had been dropped for supporting Communist purposes; to deprive the separate states of all power to protect themselves against Communist subversion."

(4) "Chief Justice Warren has taken the lead in both the decisions and the attitude of the Supreme Court, aimed at doing away with those safeguards of law which would maintain this nation as a constitutional republic, and at converting it into a democracy---in which all individual rights, minority rights, and property rights would be completely subject to the whims and views of demagogues temporarily in power".

(5) "Chief Justice Warren has been accused by his fellow Justices of the Supreme Court, in various dissenting opinions, of many different usurpations of power; and of invasions of the Constitutionally guaranteed rights of private citizens, of states, and of Congress. These violations of the Constitution by a Supreme Court Justice are certainly impeachable offenses.

(6) "Many of the Warren Court decisions, which he has written, or in which he has concurred, have given aid and comfort to our Communist enemies. This is unmistakably proved by the actions of the Communists themselves. After the infamous 'Red Monday' decisions, on June 17, 1957, a leading Communist on the west coast exulted: 'This is the greatest victory the Communist Party ever had'. And in September, 1957, the Communists held a rally in New York 'To pay honor to the U.S. Supreme Court and its recent decisions' and to 'Hit out at attempts to undo the decisions.'

The closing paragraph summarizes the JBS position -- i.e. the primary reason why the JBS wanted Warren impeached was because of "the incredible distortions of law, precedent and justice required to make such decisions and the gaping holes which those decisions have punched in the Constitution of the United States..."

The Citizens Council movement began in 1954. Obviously - they did not need any slogan regarding Earl Warren to energize or justify their movement. Their concern was triggered by one Supreme Court decision that directly affected their entire existence and the underlying arguments which justified the prevailing practices which were extant in our southern states at that time. The Councils correctly understood that overturning "separate but equal" could never be limited to only public education. Over time, the Court would inevitably make comparable decisions about other areas of southern life.

1. " Paul often makes bold declarations but please notice that he NEVER directly quotes his sources" Doesn't matter. I rarely 'quote' anyone. That's mostly because it is way too much trouble to hunt it up and lift the 'exact quote'. I usually just paraphrase, with credit. It's much simpler and doesn't make any difference.

It makes no difference to me or to many others as to the 'exact' cause of the desire to impeach Earl Warren. He was way too creative in the many ways to violate the constitution and not just one specific reason is/was necessary. So to give one or more specific quotes from someone that only has an opinion is not of much use. Paul seems to have a reasonable opinion as to why the impeach Warren movement existed.

Just a memo, too many elements of History are written by the media or taken from the media. Most persons know that the media has a very poor grasp of reality.

If you do not understand WHY someone begins a movement or participates in a movement -- then you cannot speak intelligently or honestly about its origins or development. No surprise that such primary source factual evidence has no importance to someone like yourself.

No surprise that such primary source factual evidence has no importance to someone like yourself.

If you do not understand WHY someone begins

Okay Mr. Ernie, "if you do not understand" So since you have now analyzed me, my thoughts and actions, kindly tell me all about me. You've totally analyzed and summed me up in just about 3 or 4 sets of comments

Because then if you can not, does this apply? " then you cannot speak intelligently or honestly about"

[Ernie Lazar]

During 1951 and 1952 the homes of 40 black Southern families were bombed. Among the more notorious murders by Klan members:

The 1951 Christmas Eve bombing of the home of NAACP activists Harry and Harriette Moore in Mims, Florida, resulting in their deaths.

The 1957 murder of Willie Edwards, Jr. Klansmen forced Edwards to jump to his death from a bridge into the Alabama River.

The 1963 assassination of NAACP organizer Medgar Evers in Mississippi. In 1994, former Ku Klux Klansman Byron De La Beckwith was convicted.

The 1963 bombing of the 16th Street Baptist Church in Birmingham, Alabama, which killed four African-American girls. The perpetrators were Klan members Robert Chambliss, convicted in 1977, Thomas Edwin Blanton, Jr. and Bobby Frank Cherry, convicted in 2001 and 2002. The fourth suspect, Herman Cash, died before he was indicted.

The 1964 murders of three civil rights workers, Chaney, Goodman and Schwerner, in Mississippi. In June 2005, Klan member Edgar Ray Killen was convicted of manslaughter.

The 1964 murder of two black teenagers, Henry Hezekiah Dee and Charles Eddie Moore in Mississippi. In August 2007, based on the confession of Klansman Charles Marcus Edwards, James Ford Seale, a reputed Ku Klux Klansman, was convicted. Seale was sentenced to serve three life sentences. Seale was a former Mississippi policeman and sheriff's deputy.

The 1965 Alabama murder of Viola Liuzzo.

The 1966 firebombing death of NAACP leader Vernon Dahmer Sr. in Mississippi. In 1998 former Ku Klux Klan wizard Sam Bowers was convicted of his murder and sentenced to life. Two other Klan members were indicted with Bowers, but one died before trial, and the other's indictment was dismissed.

The 1967 multiple bombings in Jackson, Mississippi of the residence of a Methodist activist, Robert Kochtitzky, and those at the synagogue and at the residence of Rabbi Perry Nussbaum on Old Canton Road were executed by a Klan member named Thomas Albert Tarrants III who was convicted in 1968. Another Klan bombing was averted in Meridian the same year.

For additional examples, see:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Racially_motivated_violence_against_African_Americans

So, you listed some 17 persons killed by the Klan from 50 thru 67 and you say that the lives taken in Chicago can't compare with those deaths. Sounds like an opinion of someone from California, or something.

I wonder how many of the parents of the 8 persons murdered in Chicago this weekend would agree with you that their child was less valuable and didn't compare to the death of a child in Mississippi. Get me a list of those, would you?

This significant event: " Another Klan bombing was averted in Meridian the same year." was really newsworthy, I wonder how many additional murders were averted in Chicago this weekend. I live in a small city of about 10,000 and no one was killed this weekend, so I guess we could say that 'the deaths of 10,000 local citizens was averted this weekend.

When you start throwing words like 'ignorant' around, you're only inviting comparisons. Having a different point of view is not necessarily ignorance. I personally think the lives of the folks in Chicago are of the same value as the persons in Mississippi. I guess it's 'who is doing the killing' that makes it unimportant to you.

Almost all the murders in Chicago are gang-related black-on-black violence.

Nobody except a bigot would try to claim that what happened in our southern states during the 20th century was in any way comparable. The murders, the bombings, the arsons, the lynchings, the castrations were NOT gang-related. And they were NOT black-on-black crimes. And they were NOT motivated by anything other than whites (and in many cases, Klan members and Klan sympathizers) wanting to inflict severe punishment and impose terror upon an entire category of human beings based SOLELY upon their racial identity.

Furthermore, the violence and murders and bombings and arsons in southern states were often organized and/or executed by local law enforcement officials OR they knew who committed those actions but did nothing to prevent them or prosecute the perpetrators. That certainly is not true of the crimes in Chicago.

Nobody is fooled into believing your bigoted nonsense.

If I appear to be laughing it's because it's unavoidable. And "I'm" bigoted?

"Almost all the murders in Chicago are gang-related black-on-black violence." Oh well, hell they're not even worth mentioning. If they can't at least be killed by a white person then it's not worth mentioning? That's an interesting point of view.

"Nobody except a bigot would try to claim that what happened in our southern states during the 20th century was in any way comparable."

Let me be sure I understand that. If you are the mother of a black child and he is killed by a black hoodlum on the streets of Chicago, it's ok, it's understandable, it's just part of life and the fact that your child lost his life is not important because..... what? At least another black child got some experience at killing someone?..... Or something like that? But, if that same child were killed by a white person in the South, it's much worse? Well, ok you said so, so it must be true.

I guess every mother should just overlook their children being killed by others as long as it's black on black or gangland related. I guess that's the 'ideal' way for black children to be killed, or something?

"Furthermore, the violence and murders and bombings and arsons in southern states were often organized and/or executed by local law enforcement officials" Uh, but I guess if the law enforcement person were black, then it would make it a 'black on black' thing and no one would mind. Right?

So let's make sure I understand. Chicago mothers expect their children to be killed by another black person or a member of a gang so that is acceptable, but it would be unbearable for them if that child were killed by a white person just because he happened to live in Mississippi. Would the mother in Chicago even report their child if it got killed by a black on the streets, or would it just be another mark on a tote board?

bigoted or not. If my child got killed by another person of the same race or a different race, I would want that person prosecuted. I would not be inviting the killer over for milk and cookies and singing cumbaya.

bigoted nonsense? Black on black.....ok white on black.....hell no. interesting perspective, bigoted or not.

Again, your "reply" reveals that you are a depraved individual who is totally intellectually dishonest.

YOU are the person who claimed that the Chicago violence should be compared to what happened in our southern states. I did not state or even hint that the Chicago murders or other crimes are not significant or "not worth mentioning". That is YOUR bigoted fabrication.

Nobody except you is claiming that ANY murder is "understandable" or dismissable. But YOU started this discussion by claiming there was no qualitative difference between gang murders in Chicago versus racially motivated murders in our southern states which had no basis other than terrorizing African Americans. YOU also sought to de-value the evidence I presented as "notorious" murders by claiming they were not significant evidence of anything.

It is YOU (not me) who believes that mothers of black children or wives of black husbands should just "overlook" how their family members were killed. THAT is why YOU claim there is no significant difference between Chicago and what happened in our southern states. However, African Americans who lived in Mississippi understood the DAILY terror they lived under. See my former quotations by George Schuyler (black) and Rev. Delmar Dennis (white). It is YOU (not me) who attempts to trivialize their testimony.

As previously noted --- your approach is to blame the victims and pretend they "had it coming" because of something in their own lives and behavior. So, (to you) organized terrorism by one segment of a community means nothing whatsoever. And (to you) if that terrorism is organized, executed, and/or supported by the political establishment of that community -- that means nothing also. AND if that terrorism is conducted over a period of decades and its intended purpose is to deny fundamental Constitutional rights to an entire category of human beings based solely upon their racial identity -- then that also means nothing.

SHAME ON YOU!

I will not respond to any future messages from you. Everybody here now knows you are a racist bigot. You have no purpose being here other than spewing your venom.

[Kenneth Drew]

Ernie, just above you said:

" I did not state or even hint that the Chicago murders or other crimes are not significant or "not worth mentioning".

in 544, you said:

"Almost all the murders in Chicago are gang-related black-on-black violence.

Nobody except a bigot would try to claim that what happened in our southern states during the 20th century was in any way comparable. The murders, the bombings, the arsons, the lynchings, the castrations were NOT gang-related. And they were NOT black-on-black crimes. And they were NOT motivated by anything other than whites (and in many cases, Klan members and Klan sympathizers) wanting to inflict severe punishment and impose terror upon an entire category of human beings based SOLELY upon their racial identity."

You seem to have a short or non-existent memory for the things you have said.

In your last comment, you seem to be irretrievably lost. You seem to be trying to turn everything you have said around.

Did you stop by the bar on your way home and toss too many? Or is it because your wife cut you off last night?

Then just above you said: "I will not respond to any future messages from you."

And for that I thank you. I'm not surprised, had I lost the argument, I would have given up also. And I hope you keep your word, but I don't expect you to.

Adios,

[Paul Trejo]

The index lists Hemming on only 4 pages, and it mostly concerns a Jan 1963 meeting between Walker and Hemming and Hall, where Walker expressed interest in Cuban issues. There's more on Hall, which I'll check (if you don't get your copy in the meantime!)

Many thanks, Roy. Interesting. Caufield places Walker, Hemming and Hall together with a substantive dialogue. I look forward to seeing that.

Regards,

--Paul

Edited September 9, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Kenneth Drew]

Furthermore, Kenneth, perhaps the classic volume on the Citizens Council history is by Neil R. McMillen. His 1971 book is entitled: The Citizen's Council: Organized Resistance to the Second Reconstruction, 1954–1964.

One of the interesting facts there was that the ratio of White to Black Americans in any given region provided a measure of the White Resistance in the region. For example, in the North, where Black Americans totaled about 10% of the population, conformity to the Brown Decision was swift and largely uneventful.

On the other hand, in areas in the South, where Black Americans totaled 20% or more, the Citizens Councils were very active. Then, in areas where Black Americans totaled more than 40% of the population, the KKK was most active.

That's an interesting social statistic. The North doesn't have the same sociological challenges as the South, so in a sense the application of the Brown Decision was un-even between North and South to begin with. One cannot say that the White attitudes were different -- only that the population ratio of White/Black made the decisive difference.

Speaking of California, my own home State, we still notice sharp racial divisions in neighborhoods, for example, Oakland vs. San Francisco, or East Palo Alto vs. West Palo Alto (i.e. Stanford University), or Watts vs Los Angeles.

The Northern culture -- and that could include California -- is still largely segregated in practice, if not in the popular imagination. Yet again, the stress of Racial Division in California is about the same as in Chicago and New York -- the Northern cities -- mainly because the Black/White ratio is about 10%/90%.

That was one of the key sociological facts that Neil McMillen emphasized.

So -- I'm not trying to say that people in the South are different -- but that the sociological culture of the South reflects a different sociological profile. During the Cold War, the Brown Decision was treated in the South as a Communist Plot. That reflected the great stress that the South felt -- especially in States like Mississippi where the Black/White ratio approaches 50%.

It's a sad fact that this Southern doctrine (that the Brown Decision was Communist) also became popular in California -- specifically among the John Birch Society and Congressmen like John Rousselot of California of my District in deep East Los Angeles.

I conclude by noting that the resigned General Walker was a frequent speaker for the Citizens Councils from Mississippi to Dallas.

JFK shocked the South on 11 June 1963 when he came out publicly in support of Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. At midnight on the very night of his speech, the NAACP man who helped James Meredith register at Ole Miss a few months before, namely, Medgar Evers, was shot in the back in his own driveway. A 1996 movie was released about the failed trials of his killers, namely, Ghosts of Mississippi (starring James Woods, Alec Baldwin and Whoopi Goldberg) and the justice that came 30 years later.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

As I've said, I've lived in most of the southern states and what you say does seem to fit. The racial attitudes in Ga did not seem as harsh as say Mississippi where the ratio was higher. Whereas Virginia there is hardly any racial conflict. The parish (county) that I live in Louisiana is about 13% black and we have few racial incidents or problems here. I see almost complete acceptance of the populations at the schools and athletic programs.

I find it kinda humorous that you mentioned the Brown decision as a Communist plot. And of course it was (just kidding). But I guess that was because everything bad in the country seemed to be because the communists were taking over the world. As you are well aware, there really were a lot of people with communist leanings back at that time. The failure of the Soviet union pretty well took care of that problem, thanks to your former Governor.

Unfortunately it now seems as if many in the government wants to replace that communism with socialism and are still using blacks as tools to keep a wedge issue. Much after Evers time in Ms, in the late 80's I lived near the town that he was from so got familiar with all the stories about him. His brother was the mayor of Fayette at that time.

Living in southern Ga in the 60's though, as i've said, there was very little to no racial friction in that area. I can certainly understand why Walker would have been a popular speaker in Mississippi.

[William O'Neil]

Paul, if you don't get the book by Friday, I would contact Amazon. This is not typical.You should have had it by now.

BTW, there were parts on Hall, Howard and Hemming and the California contingent, that had to be edited down due to book length. That chapter just got too long.

Bill

[Paul Trejo]

...BTW, there were parts on Hall, Howard and Hemming and the California contingent, that had to be edited down due to book length. That chapter just got too long.

Bill

That's even better news, Bill. I hope that this new book by Dr. Caufield will be so popular that a second volume will become viable.

I realize that 900 pages seems like a lot of pages to many folks -- however, the Walker angle on the JFK murder has been so under-developed that one must undergo a major re-orientation to the Radical Right theory of the JFK murder, with the resigned General Walker in the center.

Ultimately, all of the data of the JFK murder -- and I mean all of it -- will need to be recast in the light of this Radical Right orientation. So, if Dr. Caufield's book is successful, I predict that a total rewrite of the works of A.J. Weberman will be pursued with this new orientation.

Interpen will figure very large in a Radical Right theory of the JFK murder, IMHO, so I'm not surprised that the chapter on Hall-Howard-Hemming got too big to manage in this first salvo.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited September 9, 2015 by Paul Trejo