A Weak Non-Denial Denial From the Flaggers

The Virginia Flaggers continue to find themselves in one big mess. Oh, they are trying to do what they can to wriggle out of revelations that they have welcomed white supremacist spokesperson Matthew Heimbach into their ranks as a fellow Flagger, but these efforts simply sink them deeper into the quicksand.

Take their latest effort at public relations spin.

Let’s focus on a few points:

Flagger Excuses

Ah, not exactly. First, let’s share some more pictures of Matthew Heimbach secured from a leading Flagger’s photo album:

mh vaflag 01

… and …

mh va flag 2

Hey, Tripp Lewis! Don’t hide behind that flag!

These pictures, of course, come from a February 25, 2012 rally, contrary to what the release states. Our source is a Flagger. Guess which one.

The release also overlooks the fact that Matthew Heimbach continued chatting away on the Flaggers’ own FB page (most recently in May 2013) with no one expressing any opposition to his views. We posted that information.

aaaa CF FB page

Again, another Flagger lie.

The Flaggers’ weak explanation also overlooks what Tripp Lewis himself said about Mr. Heimbach:

Lewis on Heimbach

That’s not exactly an expression of disassociation, now, is it?

There is absolutely nothing here decrying or disavowing the views of Matthew Heimbach. There is no explanation as to why his contributions are welcomed on their Facebook page. Nothing.

Here’s a screenshot taken today of the Flaggers’ Facebook page members list.

Heimbach Flagger FB

Note who is still a member in good standing … and who added him.

In short, Matthew Heimbach remains a member in good standing of the Virginia Flaggers. They welcome his input and his membership in their Facebook group. Susan Hathaway herself welcomed him into the group.

Yesterday I speculated on how the Flaggers were going to handle what was becoming a public relations disaster. I wondered when Susan Hathaway would openly repudiate her association with Mr. Heimbach. She has not. But never did I expect the Flaggers to lie so brazenly in such a way that was so easy to discredit so quickly.

The Flaggers have had their chance to disassociate themselves from Mr. Heimbach, repudiate his white supremacist views, and decry his misuse of the Confederate flag. They have failed. Ms. Hathaway remains silent, a profile in lack of courage.

Your time has passed.

28 thoughts on “A Weak Non-Denial Denial From the Flaggers

    • Brooks D. Simpson September 2, 2013 / 11:51 am

      For such a media-savvy person, Susan Hathaway’s certainly botched this one. She’s being done in by her own people.

  1. M.D. Blough September 2, 2013 / 12:30 pm

    It’s not like he’s low profile. The SCV award is impossible to explain away. The reality is he may be there because a lot of people in the group agree with him.

    • Brooks D. Simpson September 2, 2013 / 12:37 pm

      I believe Chastain does. They have too much in common. Hathaway’s doing herself no favors, and this time the damage is going to remain. Time to put a call out for Rob Walker or get Tripp Lewis arrested again.

  2. lenastorheim September 2, 2013 / 5:34 pm

    Personally, I have never viewed Susie as being media savvy – that’s apparent now.

  3. lenastorheim September 2, 2013 / 5:41 pm

    I would like to know why Susie has not condemned the white supremacist principles of Heimbach. Why would she want that associated with her Flaffer group? I think we all know the reason why – and it’s unspoken, but we know.

  4. lenastorheim September 2, 2013 / 8:49 pm

    There is a secession sight – silly stuff. If they do not like the US or our government, they should purchase land outside of the US and live – very simple. These people serve to terrorize others with symbols of hate from times long since past.

    • SF Walker September 3, 2013 / 4:59 am

      Good point. In fact, something similar has already been done–there is an enclave in Brazil whose inhabitants are called “Confederatos.” They’re all descended from Southerners who went into voluntary exile there after the war. Perhaps these people could move there.

    • M.D. Blough September 3, 2013 / 9:15 am

      It would serve them right if they were allowed to secede. The states where secession and/or nullification talk is the highest tend to be states that receive far more federal money than they pay in federal taxes. Even Texas, which, in 2010 received less in federal money ($.85 received for every $1.00 paid out) than it payed out in gross received (Federal spending received for every tax dollar paid per capita: $1.19) http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/11/states-federal-taxes-spending-charts-maps.

    • Thelibertylamp September 3, 2013 / 10:42 am

      They all cry about secession, and yet they still take Fed $’s, drive on public roads, (I’d say use public libraries but I am not sure about that) they have cleaner water and air because of Fed regulations, relatively safe food as well.

      These people are losing their white privilege and so they are also losing their grip on reason and reality.

      If they actually did go off and form their own whites only fairytale land it would be one big extremist militia compound where they could get away with beating up women, rape, young girls being forced to marry old men, slavery, theocracy …

        • Thelibertylamp September 3, 2013 / 11:20 am

          This Neo-Confederate/ Southern Nationalist movement is part of the white nationalist movement and probably many of the are part of the secessionist/sovereign citizen movement as well.

          Our next write up is going to be about these militia/secessionists.

          By next week we might have some interesting information about any connections.

      • Jimmy Dick September 3, 2013 / 4:02 pm

        Actually, this has been attempted several times recently and so far as I can tell every plan fell apart long before they became reality. See, the problem is in order to create the white Christian nationalist utopia you have to have laws that eliminate the concepts of freedom, liberty, and justice for all. You end up with a totalitarian government that prohibits freedom of speech and then freedom of thought.

        Think of Waco, Texas and the wonderful compound there where people were forced to marry against their will and child molestation was a common event. Yet, jeepers those folks were white Christians so they must have been doing right because they had guns.

        These groups end up the same with the strong preying on the weak and making laws to justify anything they do. They are anything but American.

        • Thelibertylamp September 3, 2013 / 6:48 pm

          Jimmy-

          Exactly my point. Those who are fantasizing about white fairylands and secessions might not have these horrible scenarios in mind, but every example of what they are looking for ends up that way.

          Colonia Dignidad in Chile is another example.

        • Flamethrower September 4, 2013 / 9:24 am

          “You end up with a totalitarian government that prohibits freedom of speech and then freedom of thought.”

          I know of a Confederate “Heritage” website (SaveYourHeritage.com), for the first time I’ve ever seen in life, claiming as a ‘fact’ that all white men of the antebellum South, the dirtiest of the dirt poor to the weathiest of the rich, had absoluted undenied equality in law and social status, when I’ve been told countless times by major historians how hated the Southern aristocracy was by the poor white trash. It cites a few quotes from Jefferson Davis. Then it fallsback back on the old canard of “southern Negro slaves had better care than Northern factory workers”. I know too that Jefferson Davis wasn’t all that liked during his one term and some tried to depose him. He practiced cronyism in his cabinent much as Lincoln did. He defied public opinion and tried to screw over the Southern middle classes. Would it be probable that he’d go out and make friends with the dirtiest of the dirt poor Southerns, and invite them into his elaborate stereotypical Southern mansion. I’d think not. Another reason why so many Southerners fought for the Union than vice versa. They enjoyed working on Northern railroads in the South and wanted to continue industrialization. If a post Confederacy repubilc came about in some other parrallel universe I bet it ended up like a Brazilian dictatorship. All of those Southern Nationalists websites want to return to feudalism anyway. They harp on the evils of Yankee capitalism.

        • Flamethrower September 4, 2013 / 9:55 am

          In addition to the first post, I must add that for all the baying and howling of the evil Lincoln administration, Jefferson Davis’s 4 years produced its own grand ironies.

          From a Jefferson Davis scholar:

          “Many of these measures involved legal or military compulsion. Jefferson Davis sought and obtained three suspensions of the writ of habeas corpus. Not only were many citizens arrested under this authority, but generals in the field imposed extra-legal military arrests on many others, so that the Confederacy’s restrictions on civil liberties rivaled those of Lincoln’s government. In addition to the efforts of the Conscription Bureau, units of the army occasionally conducted dragnets through the countryside to round up deserters. (North Carolina had three such expeditions within one year.)”
          http://www.wfu.edu/wowf/2009/20090210.escott.html

        • Flamethrower September 4, 2013 / 9:57 am

          Well, I’ll be!

          “With all these measures, I submit, Jefferson Davis took enormous political risks, and in attacking the fundamental institution of the slave South’s economy and social system he exposed himself to the public’s ire beyond any risk considered by Abraham Lincoln. In the last six months of the war, Davis campaigned (especially through Robert E. Lee) for the arming and freeing of the South’s slaves. This proposal caused one prominent senator to say, “What did we go to war for, if not to protect our property?” while the Richmond “Examiner” denounced the idea as “totally inconsistent with our political aim and with our social as well as political system.” These were only two of many statements that swelled a chorus of often apoplectic outrage.”
          (Same site)

        • Andy Hall September 4, 2013 / 11:00 am

          “See, the problem is in order to create the white Christian nationalist utopia you have to have laws that eliminate the concepts of freedom, liberty, and justice for all. You end up with a totalitarian government that prohibits freedom of speech and then freedom of thought.”

          It was Michael Cushman himself who said, about me, “there will be no room for traitors in a free South.” So yeah, dissent will not be welcome in the “free South” as envisioned by these guys.

          • Flamethrower September 4, 2013 / 12:46 pm

            Palmetto Patriot wants the Dixie Republic to have small government but rule by ‘natural elites’. The upper classes. Then he half contradicts himself when he admits to a pro-monarchist that he has sympathy for monarchies of the old.

          • Andy Hall September 4, 2013 / 4:34 pm

            Yes. They always seem to assume they themselves are included in the “natural elites,” too. Funny how that works.

          • Jefferson Moon September 6, 2013 / 8:48 am

            Cushman looks like something the Spartans would have threw off a mountain at birth..

          • Flamethrower September 7, 2013 / 10:53 am

            All the dumb nuts of Dukes of Hazard cast would measure far superior leaders in appearance and sense than the like of Cushman.

          • Flamethrower September 7, 2013 / 10:52 am

            It further supports my guess is that the Confederate states in an alternative history degrading into states like that of a Colombian dictatorship and never able to achieve that libertarian, we-have-the-rights-of-Englishman pipe dream of theirs.

          • Michael Rodgers September 8, 2013 / 2:03 pm

            But 98% of the Confederate soldiers never owned slaves….

          • Michael Rodgers September 8, 2013 / 3:13 pm

            Ughh, I misplaced my comment; it was supposed to be a reply to Andy’s comment: “Yes. They always seem to assume they themselves are included in the ‘natural elites,’ too. Funny how that works.”

          • M.D. Blough September 8, 2013 / 2:58 pm

            As a friend of mine said, in their imaginations, the flaggers and their ilk are sitting on the verandah, drinking mint juleps that were just handed to them by immaculately dressed house slaves. They are never the poor white dirt farmers scrambling to survive.

          • Flamethrower September 12, 2013 / 12:24 pm

            Palmetto Patriot To the degree that we have a state I want to be governed by my own people. And I want to be governed by the natural elites of society. Wade Hampton, as I have noted, is a great example of this. I favour the rule of Wade Hamptons, not the masses.
            Thursday at 11:12pm

            http://www.conniechastain.com/LeagueThreadPageOne.html

            Then he ‘sympathizes’ with traditional monarchy. So what if the new Dixie in its libertarian governance transforms into the absolute divine rights of kings under the Wade Hamptons? It seems that libertarianism cannot ever remotely quantify into the realms of monarchial desires.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s