12th NC PATCON October 4th - Octob...
11th NC PATCON May 31st - June 5th...
AAR & Pictures X NC PATCON +
10th NC PATCON September 28 - October 3rd 2016
Pictures: 9th NC PATCON
9th NC PATCON June 1 - June 6th 2016
PICTURES: NC PATCON VIII
8th NC PATCON September 30 - October 5th 2015
7th NC PATCON May 6th - 11th 2015
Pictures: 6th NC PATCON October 1st - 6th 2014
AAR - 6th NC PATCON October 1st - 6th 2014 SCALAWAG OF THE MONTH: TRAITOR SESSIONS
Sunday, September 2, 2012
A new lawsuit filed by an independent American oil and gas company charges that the Obama administration is blocking legitimate efforts to find and produce oil from offshore wells.
“Given the challenges still facing the U.S. economy, the government needs to move aside and let private industry do what private industry does best: create jobs and increase our oil supply to help lower the price at the pump,” a report from the Heritage Foundation states.
“And yet the Obama administration remains committed to strangling America’s economic revival by doing everything in its power to prevent companies that obtain offshore leases from actually drilling and producing oil — a fact evidenced by a new lawsuit just filed in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims by an independent U.S. oil and gas company.”
By March 2010, ATP Oil & Gas Corporation received oil leases and necessary permits to drill in the Gulf of Mexico, and installed state-of-the-art drilling and processing equipment to safely access already-penetrated oil reservoirs, according to the report. The project was financed with $1.5 billion from J.P. Morgan.
Then in April 2010, the BP-operated Deepwater Horizon rig in the Gulf exploded while drilling a well into a previously unexplored reservoir. In response, the Obama administration ordered moratoria on deep-water drilling and barred consideration of new permits.
As a result, the ATP operation was shut down.
ATP has now struck back by filing a lawsuit alleging that the Interior Department “improperly and illegally suspended all deep-water offshore drilling activities and imposed two illegal moratoria on the deep-water drilling permit application process and then unreasonably and unlawfully delayed the issuance of drilling permits after the lifting of the formal moratoria.”
ATP is essentially asserting that the government breached its offshore leases with ATP by violating the Administrative Procedure Act in two ways, according to the Heritage Foundation report written by Hans von Spakovsky and Nicolas Loris: “By issuing overbroad moratoria, and by manipulating seven experts from the National Academy of Engineering (NAE) to bolster a recommendation for the moratoria.”
They also point out that all seven NAE experts denied supporting moratoria recommendations, and a previous court case concluded that a White House official had changed the report used to justify the moratoria.
The authors write: “ATP’s lawsuit provides a revealing glimpse into the capital-intensive oil and gas industry where unfair and illegal actions by a government agency can cost companies (and the U.S. economy) enormous sums of money.”
Opening the outer continental shelf to drilling, they add, “would generate hundreds of thousands of new jobs, generate hundreds of billions of dollars in government revenue, and bring more oil to the world market, thereby lowering gas prices.”
Full size 2000 x 1338, roughly a wallpaper. Original Photograph by Oleg Volk , Post-Production by April.
My first attempt at a classic illustration pin-up. Self-defense from murder and rape is well within the parameters of conscientious marksmanship.
*The last picture is of a 14 year old boy killed at Fort Mahone and a member of the 53rd NC.
Requiem Aeternam - Eternal Rest Grant unto Them
**General Gordon promised the men a gold medal and 30 days leave if they accomplished their task and many years after the War my great grandfather wrote General Gordon, who was then governor of Georgia about this incident. They exchanged several letters which I have framed. See The Attack On Fort Stedman
Bernhard Thuersam, Chairman
North Carolina War Between the States Sesquicentennial Commission
"The Official Website of the North Carolina WBTS Sesquicentennial"
McClellan’s Two to One Odds Against Lee:
“At the battle of South Mountain….The enemy were exceedingly anxious to force the passage of this mountain gap and by overtaking Lee and bringing on a decisive engagement, relieve their beleaguered friends at Harper’s Ferry, who numbered more than eleven thousand men, with thirteen thousand small arms and seventy-three cannon.
(My Great Uncle, John W Pippen, was captured at the pass and sent to Fort Delaware. He is buried in my graveyard. BT)
But the heroic [Southern] defenders of the *pass, though but a handful in comparison with the immense and thoroughly equipped force assailing them, and though subjected to very heavy losses from first to last, yielded not an inch of their ground until nightfall, and then, their purpose being accomplished, retired unmolested to take their place in the ranks of death at Sharpsburg.
The historic battle of Sharpsburg, or Antietam – “this great battle” as General Lee called it in his report – occurred on the 17th day of September, three days after the fight at South Mountain, and D.H. Hill’s division, with [General George] Anderson’s brigade on its right, wearied and worn out by continuous marching and fighting, took position in the centre of the line on the left of the Boonesboro road.
[General James] Longstreet was on the right, and [Stonewall] Jackson, who had captured Harper’s Ferry with its little army and all its supplies, occupied the extreme left. McClellan and Lee at last stood face to face.
General McClellan said, before the Committee of Investigation on the Conduct of the War: “Our forces at the battle of Antietam were: total in action, eighty-seven thousand, one hundred and sixty-four.” General Lee, in his report, says: “The great battle was fought by less than forty thousand men on our side” – that is to say, that the Confederates were outnumbered by more than two to one.
The first [enemy] assault was made on the Confederate left, where Jackson was posted, and the unequal struggle between the six thousand men under him and the eighteen thousand of the attacking columns was one of the most desperate and sanguinary of the war, as the list of casualties abundantly proves, but the enemy were repulsed.
They then attacked the Confederate centre and right with the same overwhelming numbers, and, after temporary success, were again repulsed.”
(Southern Historical Society Papers, XIV, Rev. J. William Jones, editor, January to December 1886, excerpts, pp. 393-394)
McClellan’s Two to One Odds Against Lee
Access North GA
Take me home to the place where I was born, on a early frosty morn, Sweet Dixie, Take me home.
These words are from a LP recording by Mrs. Roz Bowie, an African-American woman, who made the recording called, "Take Me Home-- The Ballad of the unknown Confederate soldier." This song is included on Mrs. Bowie's album called "Dixie."
Mrs. Bowie is said to have been inspired to do the Dixie album by the spirit of events that took place during the War Between States Battle of Ox Hill, Virginia, on September 1, 1862, where a Confederate soldier was killed during a blinding rainstorm. One Hundred twenty four years later the remains of the soldier were unearthed during a construction project near the present day City of Chantily, Virginia. His remains were taken home and a Confederate Memorial Service was held in Columbia, South Carolina, on November 22, 1986. Mrs. Bowie, A Southern Lady, wanted to be part of this event.
Because of the momentous and solemn occasion, thousands would come to pay their respects as they re buried this soldier. Mrs. Roz Bowie sung the song "Take Me Home" as well as Dixie and Bonnie Blue Flag. Mrs. Bowie's music can be found by typing her name in the search engines.
Saturday, April 26, 2008, is Confederate Memorial Day. Find out where many tributes to our men and women of Old Dixie will be held at: http://confederateheritagemonth.com
Lest We Forget!
By Calvin Johnson Jr. Staff
The House of Representatives Definition of “Natural Born Citizen” = Born of citizen “parents” in the US.
During a debate (see pg. 2791) regarding a certain Dr. Houard, who had been incarcerated in Spain, the issue was raised on the floor of the House of Representatives as to whether the man was a US citizen. Representative Bingham (of Ohio), stated on the floor:
“As to the question of citizenship I am willing to resolve all doubts in favor of a citizen of the United States. That Dr. Houard is a natural-born citizen of the United States there is not room for the shadow of a doubt. He was born of naturalized parents within the jurisdiction of the United States, and by the express words of the Constitution, as amended to-day, he is declared to all the world to be a citizen of the United States by birth.” (The term “to-day”, as used by Bingham, means “to date”. Obviously, the Constitution had not been amended on April 25, 1872.)
Notice that Bingham declares Houard to be a “natural-born citizen” by citing two factors – born of citizen parents in the US.
John Bingham, aka “father of the 14th Amendment”, was an abolitionist congressman from Ohio who prosecuted Lincoln’s assassins. Ten years earlier, he stated on the House floor:
“All from other lands, who by the terms of [congressional] laws and a compliance with their provisions become naturalized, are adopted citizens of the United States; all other persons born within the Republic, of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty, are natural born citizens. Gentleman can find no exception to this statement touching natural-born citizens except what is said in the Constitution relating to Indians.” (Cong. Globe, 37th, 2nd Sess., 1639 (1862))
Then in 1866, Bingham also stated on the House floor:
“Every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.” (Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866))
No other Representative ever took issue with these words on the floor of the House. If you read the Congressional Globe to study these debates, you will see that many of the underlying issues were hotly contested. However, Bingham’s definition of “natural born citizen” (born of citizen parents in the US) was never challenged on the floor of the House.
Furthermore, the Supreme Court’s holding in Wong Kim Ark did not address Presidential eligibility, nor did it define “natural born citizen”. It simply clarified who was a “citizen”. Had the framers of the 14th Amendment sought to define nbc, they would have used the words “natural born” in the Amendment. But they didn’t.
Do not allow the opposition to state this definition as “Vattel’s definition”. Challenge that tactic every time. Vattel didn’t make it up. His text on the law of nations compiled known existing law. Vattel was not a legislator.
It is proper to say, with regard to US Constitutional law, that this was the House definition as stated on the floor by Representative Bingham. And this definition was never opposed on the floor. And that is exactly where it should have been opposed if it were not the truth.
Debate upon issues of Constitutional law such as this belong on the House floor. And when an issue this important comes before the nation on the floor of “the people’s House”, and the issue is not challenged by any Representative of the people, then it’s certainly proper to infer that the House of Representatives, as a whole, agreed with that definition. After all, our nation is governed by debate on the floor of the House. But there never was debate on this issue because it was a proper statement of Constitutional law.
The definition of natural born citizen as stated on the House floor = born in the US to parents who are citizens. It’s not like those cats were incapable of correcting each other’s mistakes. Since no Supreme Court case ever stated a different definition of “natural born citizen”, and no Represenative ever challenged Bingham on this point, the House definition stands and officially remains unchallenged as of today. If the House wants to change this definition, let them bring the issue to the floor now and properly debate it.
Until then, call it the House of Representatives definition as offered by the father of the 14th Amendment who was never challenged upon it.
Don’t let history be rewritten by propagandists. The evidence is mounting on a daily basis that the current Commander In Chief is not eligible to hold the office of President. You have a voice. You have freedom of speech. You have access to your federal and state representatives.
The courts don’t want to hear from you.
So find someone who must to listen to you and be heard. The Constitution cannot survive unless you breath life into it. We are responsible to future generations. Do something with that responsibility. Use the law. Obey the law. Respect the law. Fight for the law.
by Leo Donofrio, Esq. (hat tip to my main researcher who shall remain anonymous for now…)