Speaking of Threats of Violence (continued) …

Here’s a picture of Michael Hill, President of the League of the South, with Pat Hines, who is vice-chairman for the league’s South Carolina chapter.
Hill and Hines
Yes, that Pat Hines … the one who apparently advocated the murder of schoolchildren.

Of course, Connie Chastain didn’t take that threat seriously, either. She never doesunless it will help her sell books.

Are you angry enough yet?

At least Ben Jones and the SCV can no longer say they haven’t heard or read about this. Will they say that Hill, Hines, and company are simply using their First Amendment rights?

44 thoughts on “Speaking of Threats of Violence (continued) …

  1. I do not understand why you give these people a forum, which is what they want! They should be ignored. This is the opposite of what Ulysses Grant ever did. There is so much about Grant, the war, the period, that is fascinating, but using up space to broadcast hatred is a mistake. It does nothing but feed their warped egos.

    • Brooks D. Simpson September 12, 2014 / 1:42 pm

      How do I give these people a forum? I assume you know what a forum is. Michael Hill and Pat Hines aren’t here exchanging ideas or engaging in debate.

      I guess we can all ignore people, just as we did in the past, before they did something to us. Then we wondered why we didn’t know about them before. We wondered why we didn’t take their threats seriously. But if you confuse exposing hatred with broadcasting hatred, I guess you can get people to agree with you.

      I just proceed from different assumptions. It seems to me that in the end this is my blog, and so the best answer I can give you is … because I choose to. You can choose whether to read what I have to say.

      I’m always amused when mostly academics come on this blog to tell me what I should be writing about. I don’t think they would accept my telling them what to write about.

      • Rosemary September 12, 2014 / 2:33 pm

        I’ve wondered, Dr. S., why you give attention to racists and I like your reply above. I think information, the truth, should just be put out there. One can’t make informed decisions without knowing truth. I also wonder if you enable hate posts in order to collect research — the professor’s inquiring mind and all that not to mention understanding problems in order to brainstorm solutions. I don’t understand desire for long-term conflict, for debate among the entrenched. I wonder if it is sport of a sort. Don’t rightly see how this kind of debate can end ever — but you know what the politicians say: never say never.

        • Brooks D. Simpson September 12, 2014 / 4:06 pm

          I see no need to debate these people. I think it’s enough to shed some light on what they say. Were they not to provide such ample material, no one would notice them.

          I would draw a distinction between people like Hill and Hines and people like Hathaway, Chastain, and Lewis. One of these groups is funny as well as misguided, and that’s being kind. But we should not let the goofy behavior of one group obscure what the other group advocates. Note, however, that while openly white supremacist groups do not hesitate to criticize their more timid associates, the groups that say that they are about heritage and nothing more tend to have a problem taking on those folks who advocate political action, offer explicitly white supremacist perspectives, and openly speak of violence. After all, we know that these more timid groups have no problem going after other critics, including me. In turn, I simply can’t take seriously those people who seem more upset that I highlight the ugly underside of certain heritage groups instead of confronting those groups straight on. It seems that those people would like to tell me what to write to suit their preferences. Too bad.

          • Rosemary September 12, 2014 / 4:41 pm

            posters debate….

          • Rosemary September 12, 2014 / 10:22 pm

            And that is a-okay by me.. it is fascinating to observe, s’all I’m sayin’…. also, sometimes puzzling.

  2. Spelunker September 12, 2014 / 12:32 pm

    The kicker is that they run around screaming, “All we want is to secede”, however that’s not all they want. Hill has defined Southerners as only being White, therefore, the new “Dixie” ethnostate they are salivating over will not include Jews, Blacks, Mestizos and many others. You never hear them talking that part of their plans up. They are afraid to. Hill recently told Alan Colmes he does not want people like Colmes (read Jews) in his new South. Get ready for it, if Scots vote for secession, this bunch is going to get very loud, feeling emboldened and vindicated. Problem is, they ARE NOT only concerned with secession. Secession without exporting “undesirables” (aka non-Whites) out of the South is not the outcome they desire. They will not be happy with just being a separate Southern Nation, they want the whole enchilada.

    • Rosemary September 12, 2014 / 2:45 pm

      Do they have a land mass in mind? A state? They’d never get that. Majority rules. Bummer. A big city? A large presently-rural area? An island in a lake? Will they take over land and run people off? Will they keep the riff raff out? Guards with guns at their borders? What will be their currency? Gold backed? Will they grow their own food? Will USA charge them a toll when they want to come back in for visits to the WalMart?

      • Rosemary September 12, 2014 / 2:49 pm

        Will they have to design a new flag? I mean, their favorite one is taken.

  3. Lyle Smith September 12, 2014 / 2:16 pm

    Their secession movement has no real hope of going very far. If they get violent we the people can get violent too. It will be a tragedy if there is violence, but we will have to just wait and see. We can’t go around arresting people base on the words coming out of their mouths or what is posted on Facebook. That would be discrimination.

    It probably behooves certain folks to denounce these imbeciles, which I think is what you’re getting at. More power to you and thanks for letting for us who read your blog have our say too.

  4. Schroeder September 12, 2014 / 2:31 pm

    Those two buffoons simply need to purchase an island with like-minded fools. No more Social Security, Disability, Voting, Public Water, Public Gas (auto fuel too), Electricity, Internet – nothing to do with our country. These fools look like two Santa Clauses with nothing better to do with their time off from the mall (no more malls either unless they build them on their own). Eventually, this troublesome generation of old farts will die off – to be replaced by buffoon spawns that dwell in the mountains somewhere in a commune – living in Yurts made from whatever natural resources they manage to find. They will also have to build their own cars – using the Flintstone car as their model. Every human on this earth has Sub-Sarharan African in their DNA – science has proven this. And no more Viagra for either of them either – they need to develop their own medical system, including vaccines. These two are the “Jacks” of all “Asses”; they look like complete idiots and are doing nothing more than trying to incite unrest in our communities.

    • Rosemary September 13, 2014 / 3:23 am

      tee hee..I thought of Santa, too. Bad Santa in this case, I suppose.

  5. Hunter Wallace September 12, 2014 / 6:18 pm

    Schoolchildren are shot all the time by black thugs in Birmingham, Memphis, Chicago, New Orleans, Detroit, etc. I’ve seen it happen several times over the past few years.

    • Brooks D. Simpson September 12, 2014 / 6:44 pm

      But you don’t associate with those thugs. You do associate with Pat Hines.

      • Hunter Wallace September 12, 2014 / 6:48 pm

        Pat Hines has never shot anyone. There’s no League of the South militia either. OTOH, black thugs who kill schoolchildren with stray gunfire in drive by shootings are very real, and sadly it happens all the time.

        • Brooks D. Simpson September 12, 2014 / 7:00 pm

          I was just curious as to whether you would take issue with Pat’s remarks. You haven’t. Thanks.

          • Hunter Wallace September 12, 2014 / 10:45 pm

            I write about real crimes.

          • Brooks D. Simpson September 13, 2014 / 12:22 am

            And you associate with someone who thinks killing schoolchildren is a good idea. I think that covers it.

          • Hunter Wallace September 13, 2014 / 7:10 am

            When Pat Hines kills someone, anyone, I promise I will write about it. Didn’t a commentator here get busted with child pornography?

          • Brooks D. Simpson September 13, 2014 / 9:32 am

            Someone who frequented several Civil War blogs and groups, including Connie Chastain’s and this one, was indeed apprehended for possession and distribution of child pornography. I had already kicked him off this group. Chastain did not do so until she finally learned of the charges. The Virginia Flaggers also embraced a person later revealed to have been convicted of sexual assault. They have failed to mention this. So exactly what is your point? Does this make threatening to murder schoolchildren acceptable practice in your world? Apparently so. A commenter on this block is not a member ofanorganization. After all, you comment here, too. I don’t approve of your politics or your cause. You can’t say they same about Pat Hines. Wonder why Michael Cushman and Michael Hill embrace him, too.

        • Spelunker September 12, 2014 / 7:55 pm

          Stay on message Brad. Good boy.

    • msb September 14, 2014 / 2:39 am

      And presumably you are equally upset about all the schoolchildren shot by whites, no?

  6. The other Susan September 14, 2014 / 10:34 pm

    Pat Young it looks like we both have doppelgangers 😀

    • John Foskett September 18, 2014 / 10:10 am

      At least he’s not hearing bombings in churches.

      • Brad Griffin September 18, 2014 / 1:29 pm

        I will see your 4 Little Girls and raise you The First 48.

      • Brad Griffin September 18, 2014 / 1:30 pm

        Mayor Bill himself was involved in a drive-by shooting.

  7. Al Mackey September 18, 2014 / 7:48 am

    And so what? The most wanted guy in Pennsylvania right now is a white guy who ambushed two state troopers, killing one and critically injuring the other, with a rifle from a distance. What does the race of the perpetrator prove?

    • Lyle Smith September 18, 2014 / 10:50 am

      Uneducated, poor black America has a serious violence problem Al. Do you not pay attention and care what is happening with these folks?

      As a white supremacist Brad may not care about these people. I don’t really know, but I do care and he is right to point out examples of day in and day out real acts of violence.

      The Southern Poverty Law Center and other people who should know better should think harder about the real problems facing black America, and not overreact to the “violent rhetoric” of some yahoos who have no personal history of violence. White southerners just aren’t like they used to be. You should know Al, because you are one of them yourself.

      • Rosemary September 18, 2014 / 12:33 pm

        God of mercy on you, Mr. Lyle.
        Hate hurts the container that olds it. Your hatred of black people hurts you. You’d be happier if you let it go. Let go and let God, as the saying goes.

        • Lyle Smith September 18, 2014 / 1:10 pm

          Wanting to see fewer of my black neighbors murdered and imprisoned means I hate black people?

          Seriously, read what I wrote again carefully and tell me again how I “hate” black people.

      • John Foskett September 18, 2014 / 1:10 pm

        Unfortunately, some of them are indeed “like they used to be”. And I certainly will listen to folks who force others to confront the issue of black-on-black violence if I have reason to believe that they are earnest in their efforts to fix it. i won’t, however, listen to those who pose as “concerned” because it’s a neat little cloak for their own bleeped-up views on race. Stating that an avowed racist makes a good point about black-on-black violence isn’t a good way to go here..

        • Lyle Smith September 18, 2014 / 1:25 pm

          Fair, fair… but we shouldn’t equivocate the random instant of crazy with the multitudinous violence going on every day in certain communities across our fair land.

          And if white supremacists chiming in on violence in black America leads to less black violence and less black imprisonment, to be honest, I’ll take it.

          • John Foskett September 18, 2014 / 3:09 pm

            You aren’t serious in suggesting that the sage counsel of “white supremacists” can lead to a decrease in violence in black America. Think about it…………..

          • Lyle Smith September 18, 2014 / 8:16 pm

            Yes. Whatever leads to less violence I’ll take it. If we were to judge American subcultures by their levels of violence the white supremacists are showing up black thug culture bigtime. Thems the facts.

          • John Foskett September 19, 2014 / 10:21 am

            You’re not getting it. Having white supremacists criticize back-on-black violence won’t move the ball towards the goal line. It’s called diluting the message based on zero credibility. “Bankitr”. And feel free to clue us in on the other positive attributes of people who spew race hate.

          • Lyle Smith September 19, 2014 / 1:28 pm

            Look, would you prefer Brad Griffin and the likes of David Duke to be violent? The fact is they aren’t violent. Give some credit where credit is due. Brad Griffin is simply pointing out facts. There is no dilution of any message. The truth is the truth.

            We as a society have some issues with addressing black on black violence. It’s a struggle, but whatever gets us confronting the matter directly and forthrightly helps. Even if it is one little millimeter forward. That many people feel the need to start equivocating or prevaricating when it comes to black on black violence helps nothing.

          • John Foskett September 19, 2014 / 3:21 pm

            Nobody said we don’t want folks addressing black-on-black violence or any other form of violence. I, and I’ll wager most others, don’t want “white supremacists”, who by definition hate other races, weighing in on it. Garbage In Garbage Out. Trying to find a redeeming quality in that crowd reminds me of those who point out that Hitler and the National Socialists put a lot of people to work in the ’30’s who otherwise might have had to beg for food. So they spew hate but they’re not violent? Big whoop.

        • Lyle Smith September 18, 2014 / 1:33 pm

          I meant to also add that a few people are “like they used to be” in the use of rhetoric. Brad Griffin is certainly a white supremacist and articulates as much. They aren’t, however, like they used to be in acts of violence. David Duke and Brad Griffin advocate non-violence. That’s not anything like it used to be. Good for them.

          The people who keep alive such white supremacist views are also few and far between in the South today. Professor Simpson uses this blog to good effect to document and share this evidence.

      • Brad Griffin September 18, 2014 / 1:54 pm

        That’s unfair.

        I don’t wish death on black people. I’m simply noting the fact that less than a quarter of a mile from SPLC headquarters there is a sign that says, “Please Montgomery, Stop the Violence.” In reality, there is a “tsunami of violence” in Montgomery, and it has nothing to do with the League of the South or any so-called “hate group” on their stupid enemies list.

        Montgomery is so violent these days (the night manager of Taco Bell was recently bludgeoned to death with a tire iron) that it is the second fastest declining city in America because its citizens are fleeing across the Alabama River. It is declining even faster than Birmingham! The sole cause of the violence in Montgomery (and The Montgomery Advertiser has admitted this) is the materialistic thug culture in the black community and its low regard for human life.

        I’m sorry to report that neither Pat Hines, Michael Hill, Cushman, myself, or anyone involved in the League is shooting black children in the streets. It’s other black people who are shooting black children, attacking people in mobs in grocery stores in Memphis, playing Knockout King, etc.

        • John Foskett September 18, 2014 / 3:07 pm

          None of which excuses racist or violent rhetoric. It’s like video games that show dismemberment and the use of assault rifles on police or innocent bystanders. It ain’t harmless, Pilgrim. And defending or excusing it is flat out wrong. As for the violence you deplore, it might be worthwhile to explore how we got here. Nothing happens in a vacuum.

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 )

Connecting to %s