The procession of Egyptian royal mummies arrives at the Museum of Civilization amid a solemn historical celebration
In a majestic historical scene, the procession of royal mummies set off from the Egyptian Museum in Tahrir Square, in the center of the Egyptian capital, Cairo, on Saturday evening, to the National Museum of Egyptian Civilization in Fustat, south of the capital, where the royal mummies will rest in their final resting place
The royal procession, consisting of 22 mummies (18 kings and four queens), was greeted upon its arrival at the Civilization Museum by President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi, and the honor guard fired 21 rounds of salute to the kings of Egypt in front of the museum.
Egyptian Minister of Antiquities Khaled El-Anany said that King Seqenen Ra will lead the procession of kings on their last trip to the Museum of Civilization in a reverent manner. And that's after they spent 100 years in the Egyptian Museum in Tahrir.
The procession proceeded through wagons decorated with pharaonic drawings and inscriptions and equipped with a special atmosphere that contains nitrogen so that the mummies are in suitable conditions for transportation.
The procession took about 40 minutes, covering seven kilometers. It was led by King Seqenen Ra of the Seventeenth Pharaonic Dynasty (16th century BC), and at the back by King Ramses IX of the Twentieth Dynasty (12th century BC). It also included King Ramses II and Queen Hatshepsut.
As a lifelong liberal I have been instinctively wary of military establishments, both ours and those in countries all over the world. Much of world history can be tracked with the endless ways military leaders and resources have limited both individual and collective freedom -- social, political, philosophical. Too much "freedom" is contrary to the disciplined order that is essential to an effective military. So now, once again, objections to vaccinations has reached a level of discontent among the ranks that military leadership is moving to eliminate what has become a threat to good order.
Over the past several days, the Defense Department has taken its first steps to separate scores of personnel across different services for refusing to comply with the department’s COVID vaccine mandate — either by being vaccinated or by demonstrating a genuine religious exemption. Given this policy, potentially thousands of other active-duty, reserve and National Guard troops may also face separation.
While this will be a challenge for maintaining cohesion and a team-focused culture while ensuring readiness for possible homeland and worldwide deployments, there is also a risk that domestic extremist groups in the United States will seek to ramp up recruitment, propaganda and disinformation to draw in former service members with continued resentment over the vaccine mandate and other COVID-related measures. Thousands will now have the even greater grievance of being separated from the service.
Former members of the military are most certainly not the dominant component of those who subscribe to anti-government, white supremacist or other extremist beliefs in the United States. But research has shown that extremist groups target military personnel for recruitment, and at least 81 of those suspected in the Jan. 6 insurrection against the U.S. Capitol had military backgrounds. Extremist groups are likely already thinking about the prospect of recruiting thousands of personnel separated from the military because of their opposition to the vaccine mandate.
In other circumstances I would be suspicious of yet another threat to individual freedom, especially since many of the vaccine hesitance crowd claim either civil or religious objections to being vaccinated. Even among medical professionals there is a segment who would rather lose their employment than be vaccinated, so this is a serious challenge to the overwhelming need to stop the spread of the Covid-19 pandemic. Though I'm solidly in the pro-vaccination camp, I sympathize with the vaccine hesitant folks in principle. But in this case I approve of what the military leadership is doing.
My usual suspicion of military over-reach is tempered in this case by personal experience of having been drafted as a conscientious objector during the Vietnam conflict. I was among that segment of the population, some older professionals but mostly young people, who objected to the US involvement in Vietnam. Arguments about that war are well-known but my purpose in writing here is not to re-litigate those days. Here I want to discuss specifically how the military handles conscientious objectors and endorse the stops military leadership is taking to identify and isolate today's vaccine objectors, and to document here how impressed I was with the professionalism with which we were trained and integrated into the ranks of active duty forces.
Conscientious objection to war has a long history, not just in America but other places as well. Even in Russia draft legislation allows people to choose an alternative civilian service for religious or ideological reasons. Most objectors are employed in healthcare, construction, forestry and post industries, serving 18 to 21 months. The Wikipedia article about conscientious objectors has more information than most people care to know about the subject. This is not remarkable, but at the time I reported for basic training I didn't know what to expect.
As a college freshman I was obliged to take part in ROTC and I hated every minute of it. I was amazed at the narrow simplicity of what passed for academic studies, and as a member of the college marching band I couldn't stand the ROTC uniform. It was later when the draft started, that I decided to apply for conscientious objector status. I had no idea what to expect, but following guidelines from a couple of organizations I persuaded my local draft board to change my status from 1-A to 1-A-O (CO in uniform, as opposed to 1-O, civilian service only). Draft status is determined by local draft boards and once that status is granted the military cannot change it. All COs went into the US Army (none in other branches) and all would become Army Medics. With two years as a music major in a college band I could not be assigned to a military band because band members are issued weapons and are classified as a combat position.
Since that time conditions may have changed, but in 1965 all conscientious objectors were sent to Fort Sam Huston, Texas (San Antonio) for modified basic training. The modification was a heavy emphasis on first aid because following basic training all COs were sent to MOS (Military Occupational Specialty) to join the Medical Service Corps. But the reason we went to Ft. Sam was that was where Army Medics were trained. Hand-to-hand combat and weapons training was optional for those who wanted that training, either for self-defense or to protect the lives of patients in the field should they have that responsibility.
I was surprised and pleased at the time to discover the professionalism of the men and women who did the training. They knew we were conscientious objectors and we were treated with total respect. They knew we were being prepared to go into a combat environment and lives were at stake, both ours and those of others whom we would be caring for as part of the Medical Service Corps. I have mostly good memories of those days, believe it or not, and have contact now, more than fifty years later, with one of my buddies.
Based on my own experience I have no suspicions about all branches of the military taking steps to identify and separate individuals refusing to be vaccinated. The January 6 attack on the capitol was poorly organized, but it was orchestrated to include extremist militia groups aiming to take control of the country by overturning the results of the presidential election. There may or may not be a clear connection between anti-vax individuals and known violent extremist groups, but it's better to err on the side of safety than leave their objections to fester and spread. The result will be more focused forces.
Government workers are unpaid and the future of girls’ education is uncertain, but life goes on in the Afghan city of Herat
Taliban members patrol in the western Afghan city of Herat on Oct. 7, 2021 / Majid / Getty Images
The dress is red and revealing. On show in the window of a wedding gown rental emporium here in Herat, it appears to challenge the conventional wisdom that women are being airbrushed from public venues with the Taliban’s return to power.
The reality of life in Afghanistan almost four months since the movement’s fighters took control is more complex than many reports suggest, especially those on polarized social media platforms. A mood of anxiety and uncertainty prevails, amid a humanitarian crisis exacerbated by a U.S.-led embargo that could leave millions starving this winter.
While many working women were sent home, many remain in their jobs — including in some government offices in Herat. Most girls of high school age are not going to class, but the situation is ambiguous, with no blanket ban. Teenage girls have been readmitted in the northern province of Balkh, and even in the traditional Taliban stronghold of Zabul, in the south. So the group once dubbed “Islamic Maoists” has not been quite as ruthless as many feared — so far.
Therein lies the issue. There are no rules to Taliban rule, only exceptions. Until recently, girls of all ages were going to school in Herat — and then the policy changed and many were not. The confusion is mirrored in Taliban statements, with different figures saying different things. And there is no trust. Even women who still have their jobs have little faith it will last. Meanwhile, continued reports of vendetta-style killings and beatings puncture a hole in the supposed amnesty that Taliban leaders offered to Afghans who worked for the former government. Their response has been that renegade elements are responsible and that this is not policy.
All of this has contributed to an impression of indecision, drift and denial, amid reports of festering divisions among Taliban factions. That came through clearly during several weeks in the fall I spent traveling around Afghanistan, meeting various Taliban figures and seeing the results in daily life. The key province of Herat, with its mixed demographics and its strategic location as a gateway to Iran, may be a barometer for the next stages of Taliban-ruled Afghanistan.
I came across the wedding rental store on one of several walks around the city, and I was intrigued by this display of the old-new Afghanistan: the country that emerged after the 2001 U.S.-led invasion ended the Taliban’s first period in power.
With a history dating back more than 2,000 years, Herat has always had a distinct identity. Alexander the Great came through the area with his army and the city became a key hub on the old Silk Road, linking Afghanistan and Asia with Iran and the Middle East. Now it feels as though there is an unspoken link between the intricately decorated, ancient shrines and mosques that symbolize Herat’s past and the lovingly painted rickshaw taxis that stand out on its streets. Earlier this year, the United Nations’ cultural agency recognized the city’s unique past by placing it on the list for World Heritage status. It is not clear what will happen with the Taliban back in power.
When the movement’s fighters swept across Afghanistan in August, photos circulated on social media of beauty salons and dress stores across the country changing their appearance in anticipation of a return to the repression of the old Taliban regime, painting over pictures of women and removing Western-style dresses from windows. But the tide had apparently passed by this emporium and others like it in the city. The striking wedding dresses on show tally with the city’s reputation as a relatively liberal, cosmopolitan part of Afghanistan.
“Some people said we should cover our windows and all the pictures, but we decided to wait and see,” said Ahmad, the son of the wedding gown emporium’s owner. I am not giving his real name or identifying his store, in case writing about them brings unwelcome attention. “So far the Taliban have not said anything about our dresses. But maybe this will change in six months or so.”
During the U.S.-led occupation, Herat enjoyed a reputation for relative prosperity, fueled by trade with neighboring Iran, including revenue from illicit gas and drug smuggling. It was an early sign of the Taliban’s intent when they seized the border crossing at Islam Qala, some 75 miles from Herat, in July. The steady flow of trucks moving through the city’s outskirts at night speaks to the fact that trade has quickly resumed. And in some ways, life in Herat seems little changed, except for the knots of Taliban fighters wandering through the crowds, U.S. weapons slung over their shoulders.
The traffic is as busy as I remember from past visits, with the distinctive painted rickshaws leading the charge when the lights change. Herat’s famous sweet shops have a steady flow of customers. There is no sign of a consistent Taliban policy to keep women at home, as they did in the 1990s. With an estimated 80,000 to 100,000 Taliban nationwide, one reason may be that they just don’t have that many people to enforce such edicts. While more women are now going out with a male guardian, I still saw many alone or in pairs, often in scarves and long coats or billowing, Iranian-style chadors, rather than burqas. Chadors were a common sight in Herat in the past too, a testament to Iran’s proximity. There is no monolithic picture.
Yet there is also a sense that this is all a fragile illusion. A short drive from the city center gave me another view, in the settlements of people displaced by both conflict and drought in the surrounding region. Their numbers have been rising for years, with families pushed out of their homes from as far afield as Helmand, where the fighting was fiercest. More recently, people have been moving to Herat from nearby provinces such as Badghis and Faryab because of dying fields and collapsing farm incomes. It was a process already underway before the Taliban took power, helping to undermine support for the previous government.
Back in the city and the wedding dress store, Ahmad told me he should have returned to Herat university by now, where he is studying to be a doctor. But after the fall of the previous Afghan government, it never reopened its doors. And months later, with the banking system and money supply paralyzed by U.S.-led sanctions, it cannot afford to pay staff. “I am not sure if there are any teachers left,” he said.
If there is one clear Taliban position, it is their demand that Washington lift its embargo and release billions of dollars in Afghan government reserves frozen after the fall of Kabul.
Iwanted to try to get a clearer sense of the movement’s thinking — as well as a local perspective — so I called up an old friend from previous visits to Herat to see if he could arrange a meeting with the recently appointed Taliban governor of the province. I knew my friend — who preferred to remain anonymous — had good contacts, but I was surprised at how quickly he came back to me to say the governor was offering an interview the next day.
The only change to the Herat provincial governor’s office since my last visit was the guards at the gate and the Taliban white flag with its inscription of the shahada — the Islamic profession of faith — flying from the roof. Gone were the police in matching uniforms, replaced by Taliban fighters with their trademark no-fixed-rules attire. Some wore waistcoats over shalwar kameez (a traditional shirt and trousers combination), others leather or camouflage jackets. All of them had the same American weapons. Once past the outer gate, they gave me an impressively thorough search — taking everything out of my bag and inspecting it before allowing me into the ornate reception hall at the center of the complex.
I remembered being in the same hall years earlier, watching the veteran mujahedeen leader, Ismail Khan, when he was the provincial governor, receiving petitions for help from local people. It was a faintly medieval scene, with Khan barely even glancing at each supplicant before scribbling a command on a piece of paper and handing it to them. He made Herat his own fiefdom, before then-U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad, working with then-President Hamid Karzai, orchestrated his removal in 2004. But few Heratis remember the many governors who came after him, and he retained his influence in the city, leading a last-ditch effort to stop the Taliban from seizing Herat this past August.
With an ironic smile, the new governor, Nur Ahmad Islamjar, said he had been in Herat the whole time, hiding in plain sight — running a local madrassa. “I was with them [the Taliban], but the leaders told me to stay there and keep teaching,” he said. He would have preferred to stay at his madrassa, he said, as I sipped the first of several cups of green tea. Our conversation lasted well over an hour, with the governor also seeking to question me about my views on Western policies toward the Taliban. It was time to be friends, he said: “The war is over.”
Then he delivered a surprise, saying that he had taken on the governorship at the personal request of the movement’s supreme leader, Haibatullah Akhundzada. “The amir ul-mumineen asked me to do this job and I accepted,” he said, using the Taliban’s honorific for their leader, a title that means prince of the believers.
It was an intriguing detail, given the continuing speculation that Akhundzada may be dead. Only one purported photo of him exists, and he has not appeared in public to mark the Taliban’s triumph. Such doubts are also based on solid precedent: The Taliban managed to hide the death of their founding leader, Mullah Mohammad Omar, for two years. A claim by Taliban officials that Akhundzada visited a madrassa in Kandahar in October did little to quell such rumors, as no video or photos were released.
Gov. Islamjar said it was because of “security concerns” that Akhundzada never appeared in public, and he refused to say how or where he had met him. He also followed his leader’s example, refusing to have his own photo taken.
The governor was more outspoken on the subject of the Biden administration’s freeze on Afghan central bank reserves. “That money is for paying doctors and nurses and teachers,” he said. “The United States talks about human rights. How can it claim to stand for human rights if it keeps blocking this money?”
When it came to universal education, it was harder to pin Islamjar down. “The Islamic Emirate is not against girls going to school or university,” he said. He qualified this by adding, “We are discussing a policy to implement in all provinces. We worry about the girls’ security, that when girls come and go from school to home, they may be abused or harassed. So this is part of our discussion: how to deal with this problem.”
This is a variation on a common theme, with Taliban officials voicing either fears about the security of female pupils or concerns that they may not be segregated from their male counterparts in class, under vaguely defined Islamic principles. But as teachers and activists often point out, separate classes for girls and boys have long been the norm in Afghan schools anyway.
The Herat authorities created confusion by allowing high schools to readmit girls in early November, but then appeared to reverse course by barring them from taking the annual exam. Yet some teenage girls are still going to class, at least in private schools. This lack of clarity in fact sent a clear message that the Taliban are not yet ready to spell out their position.
Later on, after leaving Herat, I tried to get some insight from an expert in navigating these treacherous currents. After seeing his own school in his native Kandahar burned down in 2003, Matiullah Wesa went on to set up the education advocacy group Pen Path, with a particular focus on helping more girls go to school. And much of his work has been in the more conservative Taliban strongholds of southern Afghanistan, such as Kandahar. To those who try to say that educating girls is against Islamic principles, Wesa has a succinct response: “Girls go to school in Qatar and Saudi Arabia. Are they not Muslim countries?”
The fundamental problem, argues Wesa, is the divide between the two main constituencies in the new Taliban, what he calls its “politicians and its fighters.” The politicians — centered around those who spent time in Qatar and who negotiated the U.S. withdrawal agreement signed in February 2020 — largely back girls’ education. But the fighters are more powerful, said Wesa.
“Over the past 20 years they have had less access to social media or education. They don’t know about the world, and they don’t want girls’ education,” he told me.
Such internal splits may be behind the uncertainty over admissions policies for schools in Herat. Though it is not clear which side Islamjar came down on, local forces in the province may also have been a factor. The province has historically been seen as a bastion of anti-Taliban resistance, with Dari-speaking Tajiks holding most of the power. And for much of the past 20 years, it was one of the more stable parts of Afghanistan, overseen by troops from Italy, one of several nations that barred its forces from offensive operations against the Taliban.
The anti-Taliban resistance was personified by Ismail Khan, but his once ubiquitous image has now been expunged from the city. When the Taliban captured Khan after overrunning the city on Aug. 12, many expected its fighters would execute him. Instead, after distributing photos of his capture on social media, they took him to the border and sent him to Iran, where he is believed to remain.
What was often forgotten was the significance of Herat’s large Pashtun minority, especially in outlying districts such as Ghoryan, Gulran and Shindand — previously home to a large U.S. airbase. These areas provided a launchpad for the Taliban to gain strength in the province. Taliban taxes imposed on opium and methamphetamine producers in these same districts supplemented revenue extracted from licit and illicit cross-border trade.
I felt the change firsthand in trips to Herat in recent years, with areas on the way to the border seeing increasingly frequent Taliban attacks on the security forces of the former U.S.-backed administration. Today, the views of those same fighters have to be heeded in any decisions on social and political matters.
Some see the Taliban’s equivocation over female education as simply its own form of window dressing — an attempt to give the impression of being less repressive without actually making any big concessions, as its leaders try to coax Washington to ease its embargo.
What may also be constraining the Taliban’s space for maneuver is its intensifying ideological contest with the Islamic State group. Since it claimed responsibility for a mass-casualty suicide bombing at Kabul airport on Aug. 26 during the U.S.-led evacuations, the Islamic State has conducted a string of other attacks around the country.
It has taken particular aim at Afghanistan’s minority Shiites — whom it calls apostates — positioning itself as the true custodian of radical Islamic credentials and trying to tempt recruits away from the Taliban. Although hard to confirm, there have been reports of Islamic State recruiters offering large sums to those who sign up.
With nearly a fifth of Herat’s people thought to be Shiite, the city is seen as a possible target for Islamic State suicide bombers. “We fear an attack could happen,” Islamjar confirmed. Tackling the threat has meant a rapid switch for the Taliban from insurgents to security forces — and struggling just as much as their former NATO opponents did in stopping such attacks. Islamjar said there was “very close coordination” with members of the Shiite community, though the extra Taliban guards placed around mosques at every Friday prayers do not appear much of a deterrent.
While there is little prospect of the Islamic State being able to oust the Taliban, its continued attacks are a direct challenge to the Taliban’s claim to have restored security to the country with their takeover.
The situation is at an impasse with no likelihood of the U.S. easing its sanctions. For the Biden administration, still smarting from its humiliation in the Hindu Kush, there is nothing to be gained from helping the Taliban, even if it is under pressure from the Islamic State. There is also a strong mood in Western capitals that it is up to the Taliban to make the first move on issues such as girls’ education.
It is the Afghan people who are paying the price. The sanctions include a suspension in World Bank funding for Afghanistan’s provincial health services and IMF credit support. Together, they have had a crippling effect in Herat and surrounding provinces, tipping more people into poverty amid a worsening drought in the region. And with an increase in malnutrition cases, hospitals are struggling to cope.
Already one of the poorest countries in the world — even after years of Western aid — Afghanistan has now been partially cut off from the international economy by the embargo, with knock-on consequences everywhere.
With the banking system paralyzed by the sanctions, there is not enough cash for large employers to pay their staff, be they universities, hospitals or government offices. In Herat and elsewhere, I made a point of asking staff in any office I visited whether they were being paid. In almost all cases, the answer was no — and that often included Taliban officials.
Many workers are still turning up for work for a few hours, partly because they have been told to by the Taliban and partly to keep their options open. At Herat airport, the security checks are still being carried out by staff appointed under the previous government. Female staff are still at work there, but one of them confirmed she hadn’t been paid since July. I also noticed another reminder of the recent past, with the distinctive colors of the Italian flag still painted across the military side of the airport. The Taliban can still tolerate some symbols of the Western presence, it seems, though the Italian tricolor is not quite as well known as the Stars and Stripes.
UNICEF recently committed to pay teachers’ salaries, and there have been reports that the Taliban may use some of the revenues raised from customs fees to pay some civil servants. Yet for many of these key staff, such measures have come too late. They have either joined the growing exodus out of Afghanistan — contributing to a mass brain drain — or moved to other parts of the country to try to find work to support their families.
It all adds to a sense of malaise, with an ominous feeling of worse to come.
Back at the wedding dress store, Ahmad admitted that takings were well down. “We can survive for longer, but it is much harder for other families,” he said. After we had finished talking, one of his assistants came up to me. “Can you take me to America?” he asked.
I am a former senior civilian military analyst for the Dept of the Army. I look at political warfare thru the lens of warfare, esp John Boyd, Sun Tzu, and Bill Lind. Think of the Left or Progressive Movement as a combined arms combat unit. Maybe not so well organized and not uniform, without similar training across branches or segments. Some are professional regulars--Dems in Congress --some irregulars--women/POC protesters, some are heavy artillery, some are demolition engineers, some are special operators, some are intel, some reg infantry.
We are all in the right-wing Order of Battle. We are all in their target deck for delegitimation or destruction. Lind, our strategist opponent, wants to "delegitimize the Left" and destroy the secular, multicultural, democracy in favor of white, evangelical, Xian white men. Much of what Lind learned about Fourth Generation Warfare he cribbed from John Boyd, America's greatest strategist, who thought Sun Tzu was without error. Boyd posited there were 3 levels of conflict: Physical, Mental, and Moral. Moral is the highest. Moral dominates. Guerrilla war is moral conflict. You can conceptualize guerrilla war also as non-kinetic. Thus, the principles of guerrilla warfare can be used in kinetic and non-kinetic warfare. For example, mass/disperse vs troll/bot swarm/disperse.
The essence of moral conflict is in your head. Literally. It is epistemological warfare. It is a mindfuck. It is intended to be a mindfuck. Boyd: The aim of moral conflict is "to destroy moral bonds that permit an organic whole to exist." How?
Boyd: You create, exploit, and magnify: menace, uncertainty, and mistrust.
Menace is the sense of danger to your well being and survival.
Uncertainty is the creation of events that "appear ambiguous, erratic, contradictory, unfamiliar, chaotic, etc."
Mistrust is to create an "atmosphere of doubt and suspicion that loosens human bonds among members of an organic whole or between organic wholes."
The aim is to "surface fear, anxiety, and alienation in order to generate many non-cooperative centers of gravity [turn on each other], as well as subvert those that adversary [you] depends upon, thereby magnify internal friction [turn on each other]. End Boyd.
Now, this is the deep strategy being used against you as individuals, as a movement, as an organization, as a party, as lawyers. Now, I will go back to my analogy.
When they pick on Michael Avenatti they are saying we don't like you using heavy artillery against our positions.
When they say we don't like your "mobs" and "paid" protesters, they are saying we think it is very unfair to deploy special ops and heavy infantry.
When they complain about Dems on Judiciary, they are saying we think it is very unfair to deploy professional combat forces.
We are in a political war fought at the moral plane in which the legitimacy of everything you hold dear is at stake. There is more to Boyd, but his keys to moral victory: Moral Strength: the capacity to overcome menace, uncertainty, and mistrust. Develop Moral Values that "permit one to carry on in the face of menace, uncertainty, and mistrust." Moral Authority: a "person or body that can give one the courage, confidence, and esprit to overcome menace, uncertainty, and mistrust." Moral Defeat is the "triumph of fear, anxiety, and alienation over courage, confidence, and esprit when confronted by menace, uncertainty, and mistrust."
Now, in the military we are very self-critical. We want to have "lessons learned" when we win, but especially and most importantly, when we lose. War is a constant struggle of adjustments. Tactics, weapons, organization changes as enemy changes. So, criticism is good and healthy. But, when the enemy criticizes you for being effective, stop and think.
Why are they criticizing my regular army? My special ops? My heavy infantry? My heavy artillery? Why do they want us to not deploy this weapon system or use this tactic? Don't let them mindfuck you. Trust your comrades or fellows or resistors.
On December 10, 2017, I gave a 45-minute briefing to the Humanists of West Florida, a group I belong to, on "Fourth Generation Warfare, Dominionism, and 7 Mountains Doctrine." Below, the talk is presented in three parts. In addition, each slide is presented along with any information I had previously written on the Notes Page. Virtually every Notes Page has a citation to sources and some explanation of the slide. But, what I briefed and what is on the Note Page are not identical. My briefing style is to simplify and condense. Any errors are mine alone and not the cited materials.
These images are part of a 36-panel presentation at the link. No need to replicate them here. This blog post is my footnote/marker for future reference to a comprehensive overview of Scamanaci's presentation.
FIGURE 2 NOTE:
This slide depicts how the white nationalist, nativist anti-immigration movement founded by John Tanton, became partners with various ad hoc Christian Right coalitions on immigration issues. These included the short-lived Secure Borders Coalition, the Families First on Immigration coalition, and the Declaration Alliance.
And, the bottom depicts the relationships that Tanton’s network of anti-immigration groups forged with racist, white nationalist groups.
It is interesting to note how the 1990s concern of white nationalist groups regarding “white genocide” has now migrated further into the Christian Right, the Tea Party movement, the Patriot militia, and, now into the White House.
This story appears in an unbelievably dense book of genealogy about the Miller family of central Kentucky where I was born. We have a copy of "The Miller Book" which I used long ago when compiling our family tree, and I later discovered the book is available online, having been digitized by someone I never identified. It is not searchable and was obviously done with zero editing, but it is a rich repository of names and stories for anyone patient enough to drill around to discover them. This is one such story. Incidentally, there is a Wikipedia article about this character.
~~~
William Wallace, born in 1816, emigrated to Texas, and the same person known in Texas as Big Foot Wallace. (See Chap. 1, Sec. 37.) A sketch of whose life dictated by Captain David McFadden, a veteran of three wars, and a personal friend, chum, and comrade of Wallace, now living at Waco, Texas, is here given, towit:
"Sketch of William Wallace."
"I became acquainted with Big Foot Wallace in 1849. I think his real name was William, but am not certain as to that. He was from Virginia to Texas, in the year about 1835. He had a brother and cousin who were in Fannin's massacre at Goliad* and he came to Texas to avenge their death. He spent his life understanding their mode of fighting best.
Maier [?] prisoners of Mexico, while in prison he drew a white bean. Mexican's shot their prisoners in those days, except those drawing white beans. Every tenth bean was white (black) and every one who drew a white one was spared. He being one of the lucky ones. He served through the Mexican War, belonging to Ben McCulloch's Company and Jack Hay's Regiment of Texas Rangers. I understand he was a descendant of the Wallaces of Scotland. He was about six feet, two inches tall, weighed about 200 lbs., raw bone, and a powerful man.
My first association with him was at Austin, Texas, our Capital where he was camped under a big Live Oak Tree. He was fond of hunting and there being plenty of game he kept himself in amunition in this way, and was always ready to go for the Indians. While in camp at Austin, he fell in love with a girl, he made up his mind the next time he called on her, he would propose to her, but he was called out, and before he got back he took fever and all his hair came out, so he decided not to go back until his hair grew out again, as he was a hard looking customer anyway. He went up on the Colorado river to a cave in which he had stayed often, this cave being on an Indian trail. Then he greased his head with bear's oil, thinking that would grow hair, but it failed to do the work, and while he was in this cave, they made up a scout in Austin and he went with them upon the Llano river about 150 miles above Austin, Texas. They wanted him with them because he was a good scout and Indian trailer. When they reached the Llano river the Indians began to shoot up smokes, which could be seen for miles around, these smokes were signals used by the Indians as their knowledge of the enemy being in the country. So Wallace and his men struck camps for the night. Wallace told the Captain of the scout that he wanted to get up the following morning about two hours before day, prospecting and looking for signs of Indians, as he knew there were plenty of them in the surroundings.
The Llano river is a tributary of the Colorado river, which is surrounded by a very rough and mountainous country and exceedingly deep gulches. On the morning he was awakened and started for a trail and while he was rounding the bend in one of these gulches which made a very short and narrow bend, he found himself face to face with a very large Indian, being too close to each other to use their fire arms, and also, being somewhat surprised, they each stood eyeing the other for a minute and then they made a dash at each other and clinched.
Wallace stated that he could throw his enemy very easily, but on account of the Indian being naked and greased with bear's oil, which made him so very slick that he could not hold him on the ground. After throwang him several times repeatedly and finding that he was not accomplishing much, he decided he must try some other means of conquering his enemy, or else he would never peruse the smiling countenance of his lovely maiden in Austin, Texas, again: after clinching once more his breath coming short, he made a desperate effort to throw the Indian as hard as possible, and in this he succeeded, throwing him very hard with his head upon a rock, which rendered him unconscious, this affording Wallace an opportunity to get his knife, he did so, and stabbed the Indian a death blow, but the Indian revived for a little, and stood throwing himself upon Wallace once more, he drew his knife, but being too weak by this time, he fell dead with the knife in hand which planted
its point in the earth.
Wallace stated that he buried him to the best of his ability with chunks and rocks, and then returned to camp with a report of his mornings adventures. The scouting party remained in this camp for about one week, but accomplished very little, as the Indians had discovered them and fled. Wallace said afterwards that on account of his hair being so slow in growing out that he lost the pride of his heart, as some other man had captured her during his absence. He afterwards was captured by the Indians who were very much afraid of him. and at their Chief's command he was tied to a stake to be burned alive.
The Indians then begun to bring their wood and fuel, piling it around him when an old Indian squaw interferred by begging for his life, pleading with the chief not to kill him, but turn him over to her. She succeeded in her pleadings and Wallace remained with her and chumned with one of her sons who was near his own age for about six months, but all the time he was watching his chances of escape, so finding an opportunity he left them and returned to his own Texas settlements.
Wallace died in Freeo County, Texas, south west of San Antonio, Texas, on his ranch last February two years ago, 1904, having reached the age of eighty years and never was married, but lived the lonesome life of a bachelor. Wallace was a fearless, but kind hearted man, spending the earliest and best days of his life on the frontiers of Texas, protecting the many helpless settlers therein.
I have given you the history of Wallace to the best of my remembrance from first acquaintance with him, but I am sorry to say that most of the dates I have forgotten. The other parties you refer to I have either forgotten, or else was never associated with them. I forgot to state that on one of his scouting trips with a company he killed a very large Indian who had an enormous foot, hence his name Big Foot Wallace.
Yours Truly,
January 11, 1907. D. McFadden.
Captain McFadden, the veteran of three wars, was a comrade, associate, and chum of Wallace, and he himself had had many thrilling experiences on the Texas frontiers, and had many engagements with the Comanches and Mexicans, and was no mean scout. He is now resting at his home in McLennon County, enjoying the comforts of home, peace and happiness, the reward of the services of such men as himself and Wallace.
Additional sketch, furnished by Mrs. Rebecca J. Fisher, President of the William B. Travis Chapter, Daughters of the Republic of Texas, Austin, Texas, Capital "State Librarian."
"William A.. "Big Foot" Wallace."
William A. Wallace was born in Lexington, Rockbridge County, Va., in the year 1S16. He went to Texas in 1836, a few months after the battle of San Jacinto, for the purpose, he says, of taking pay out of the Mexicans for the murder of his brother, and his cousin. Major Wallace, both of whom fell at "Fannin's Massacre." He landed first at Galveston, from Galveston. Wallace went to La Grange, then a frontier village, where he resided until the spring of 1839, when he moved to Austin, just before the seat of Government was established at that place.
He remained at Austin until the spring of 18-10, when finding that the country was settling up around him too fast to suit his notions, he went over to San Antonio, where he resided until he entered the serivce. He was in the battle of Salado, in the fall of 1842. In the fall of 1842, he volunteered In the "Mier Expedition." After his return from Mexico, he joined Colonel .Jack Hays's Ranging Company, and was with it in many of those desperate encounters with the Comanches and other Indians, in which Hays, Walker, McCulloch and Chevalier gained their reputation as successful Indian fighters.
When the Mexican War broke out in 1846, Wallace joined Colonel Hay's regiment of mounted volunteers, and was with it at the storming of Monterey, where he says he took full toll out of the Mexicans for killing his brother and cousin at Goliad in 1836.
After the Mexican War ended, he had command of a ranging company for some time, and did good service in protecting the frontiers of the state from the incursions of the savages. Subsequently he had charge of the mail from San Antonio to El Paso, and though often waylaid and attacked by Indians, he always brought it through in safety. He is now (1870) living upon his little ranch, thirty miles west of San Antonio.
Sketch of Wallace's life in "The Adventures of Big Foot Wallace, The Texas Ranger and Hunter, by John C. Duval."
Wallace paid a visit to his old stamping ground, Austin, in 1889. For a longer sketch see "Early settlers and Indian Fighters of South west Texas. By A. J. Sowell" pp. .53-88.
As one of the few people still around who went to a one-room school, I wanted to find a document validating that part of my childhood. After contacting Eastern KY University where this school was located they sent me links where I can now drill around to learn more about the history of that school.
To my happy surprise I discovered this image of the school I attended in most of third and fourth grades. I just found it this morning and there is much to say about it, but for the moment this is as much as I care to put on social media.
EKU sent me a couple of links I am now exploring, one of which led to this image. My thanks to them included these remarks:
These links will give me lots to do now. My school was called, in fact, the Rural Training School, specifically identified as separate from the Model School (which I never learned about until much later).
It was not exactly "one room", though all the desks were in one big room. After two or three steps to the entrance there was a short entry to the classroom, but there was what we called the cloakroom to the right and a tiny room to the left with enough room for a student teacher and about four or five students. At the front of the room a door to the right went to a kind of utility space where tempera paint powders, hectographs, paper and other supplies were kept. A back door and a few steps led to the yard, playground and outdoor boys and girls privies.
My memory was wrong about it's being a brick bulding. I found this image of the school, correctly identified as a Rural Training School on what we called Lancaster Pike. The main room had those big windows on one side and the other side had the cloakroom, entry hall and little satellite room.
I first learned of Naomi Wolf about fourteen years ago in my early blogging days. Back then she was a darling for those of us on the left who saw her analysis of how right-wing dictatorships develop as a warning. Since then she has apparently moved diametrically opposite, with her Ten Steps shifting from warnings to a punch list for people like Steve Bannon.
Many old friends and admirers of Naomi Wolf are horrified. The great figurehead of 1990s "third wave" feminism, who bestrode the highest pinnacles of literature and politics to become an inspiration to a generation of young women, has morphed into something other than the Naomi they thought they knew.
On Saturday, Steve Bannon had two leading and highly credible Covid skeptics on the show, from the Left and the Right, Naomi Wolf and Peter Navarro. They basically said something very similar. They argued that the fact that these Covid tactics to destroy civil liberties are being rolled out in country after country in such similar ways, with such similar earmarks, make it obvious that it is a coordinated attack - they speculate that it is a global cabal of elites.
The discussion goes on for about 90 minutes, and it is excellent, covering the key failures of the covid narrative. The first two videos are the full discussion, the videos below them are interesting excerpts in case you don't have time for the whole thing. Their reporting on the massive demonstrations in Europe is fascinating - and completely covered up by the mainstream media.
~~~
Naomi Wolf and the defeat of the Dream Act
Last night Amanda Baggs posted a 45-minute video of Naomi Wolf giving a talk about her book, The End of America: Letter of Warning to a Young Patriot. I watched a bit of it and continued reading while the audio continued to run, expecting to catch the gist of the thing and file it away for future reference. But the more she spoke, the more curious I became. A search tossed up Sunday night's Book-TV interview which I had watched for a few minutes. Watching that video, I recalled my initial reaction, basically the same as I was having to the other video: Here is a smart, passionate young woman peddling a powerful and timely idea that is sure to sell books and articles. She's from way out in left field, feels the market potential, and is selling cotton candy at the fair. I was in general agreement but since she speaks in generalities it is hard for me to send "non-believers" in her direction. Besides, she has a sharp edge ...not as odious as a Coulter or Malkin, but something like that... which can turn people off when they hear it. Pushy. That's what she is. Pushy with a smile.
This morning I am changing my mind about Naomi Wolf. After the last hour of reading I have come to the conclusion that her thesis is solid as a rock and if something is not done to curb a dangerous social and political drift our children and grandchildren will pay a penalty that none of us, conservatives as well as those of us left of center, really wants.
Yesterday's post from David Neiwert does not make any connection with Naomi Wolf. Once again he talks about sundown towns and how the phenomenon is spreading . For those who don't know what is meant by the term, sundown town refers to a community that makes it clear, one way or another, that the good people of that place do not want anyone there who is not like them in every fundamental way. (Gives meaning to the word fundamental, by the way.)
I am familiar with the term from childhood. I never saw an actual sign, but my dad said there were places in Georgia, Kentucky and Tennessee where signs were posted at the city limits that said "Nigger, don't let the sun go down on you in [town or county name]." The meaning was clear. If you were black you are not only unwelcome but likely to be at risk for injury or death if you were still there at sundown. It's one thing to visit, spend your money or work in a place. It's very different if you expect to live and be accepted there socially.
I was spoon-fed racial prejudice from an early age. I know what it feels like, tastes like and how it penetrates to the core of your very being. Thanks to an epiphany sometime in my youth, I left that part of my heritage behind. Unfortunately, like a reformed alcoholic or abuser, I was left with a higher awareness of the problem than normal, and so the rest of my adult life it has been my portion to point and inform every chance I get. This is the purpose of my post this morning.
Flashback: as I wrote that last paragraph, I remember a story about my maternal grandmother. About 1959 I was listening to a record of someone reading short-stories by Somerset Maugham. There was a passing reference to "Blind Tom, a Negro half-wit who played the piano." We were living in Columbus, GA at the time which is where Blind Tom, a slave, also had lived. I noticed a historic marker about that which piqued my curiosity.
My grandmother, who was in failing health, was living with us at the time, and I mentioned Blind Tom to her in conversation. She said that her father got a chance to see Blind Tom once while traveling on a train. He didn't hear him play the piano, but he met Blind Tom's master, or as she said, "the man who owned him." He asked permission to feel the man's head, which he did, because it was thought at the time that the shape and growth patterns of the skull had something to do with mental development. It was nothing more than a layman's interest in phrenology, but this great-grandfather of mine didn't want to miss the chance to feel for himself this remarkable man's head to see if he noticed it to be any different from anyone else's head.
My grandmother told the story as dispassionately as if she were remembering a dress her mother had made. There was no hint that there was anything out of the ordinary, other than what we now call a savant's gifted ability to play the piano. No hint of racism, note. It was not necessary to mention that. The Brown decision was not yet five years past and a national movement was not to reach where we lived for a couple more years.
Getting back to Naomi Wolf and Dave Neiwert...
At the end of Neiwert's post he referred to yesterday's defeat of the DREAM Act, a test vote in the Senate that once again reveals that the country is not yet ready to come to terms with what to do with illegal immigrants. That piece of legislation would have opened the doors of opportunity to the children of undocumented immigrants to start the slow, tedious process of becoming Americans the old-fashioned way: facing an uphill struggle like that which faced the progenitors of nearly everyone who lives here now. I remembered a great story from two years ago of some kids in Arizona who make the realization of the "dream" a possibility.
Scanning down the list of hits, I realize that the opposition to that piece of legislation is widespread and tight-knit. The angry rhetoric of shock-jocks, Fox News and journalists who claim to speak for the "conservative" side of American society is gripping the body politic in a way that makes Naomi Wolf's arguments sound a lot less shrill. Her credibility shoots way up when I come across one blog's commentary. Documenting statistics from Investor's Business Daily about widespread opposition to the DREAM Act, the blogmaster feels the need to add:
Please consider this: no matter how large or small the turd is and, no matter what color one paints said turd, the fact remains as follows; a turd is still a turd and no, you cannot pick up a turd by the clean end.
That language is not remarkable. It is an idiom not only understood but appreciated by a growing number of otherwise decent Americans. Lots of folks will think it's cute.
Nor is the Congress to blame. They know, both in the Senate and the House, that their jobs depend on not pissing off their constituencies too much. They can lean this way or that and call it leadership... but in the end, if they don't do pretty much what they were sent there to do, they will not be re-elected. Simple as that. Why else do earmarks outweigh common sense? The old-fashioned dilemma was "guns or butter" We now face "guns or bacon." Why else would a multi-billion-dollar war keep sucking up money when the price of S-CHIP is trivial by comparison? And yet, the bacon (earmarks) keeps coming home.
End of rant. The day ahead beckons and I have other things to do. When I was young, I got radicalized by events around me. Now that I'm older, the same disease is returning. I don't know which is easier to take, a young person who doesn't know his head from a hole in the ground, or an old person getting ready to go into one.
From the 1890s to the 1960s, many state governments in the Southern United States administered literacy tests to prospective voters, purportedly to test their literacy in order to vote. In practice, these tests were intended to disenfranchise racial minorities. Southern state legislatures employed literacy tests as part of the voter registration process starting in the late 19th century. Literacy tests, along with poll taxes, residency and property restrictions, and extra-legal activities (violence and intimidation)[3] were all used to deny suffrage to African Americans.
Absentee ballots cannot be picked up at that office. They must be sent by mail.
Received and completed ballots must be returned sealed in the appropriate envelope which will be placed inside the main envelope.
To save the cost of a postage stamp, the "absentee" ballot, when suitably completed, can be brought to one of the drop boxes at the election office.
Detailed instructions about completing the application leave nothing to the imagination. Required sections are numbered in red ink.
Optional sections: > temporary address > contact information, voter assistance ID > "opt-in request to receive an absentee ballot for the rest of the elections cycle without making another application" (Disabled, Elderly 65 or older, uniformed service member, spouse or dependent)
The form is impressively comprehensive. including ID number or photo of other "acceptable ID". If the BACK PAGE of this application is not signed that form can be tagged incomplete. This is voter suppression in action.
Frances Haugen is an American data engineer and scientist, product manager, and whistleblower. She disclosed tens of thousands of Facebook's internal documents to the Securities and Exchange Commission and The Wall Street Journal in 2021. She also answered questions and discussed her impressions with members of the UK parliament. The C-SPAN record runs well over two hours and the exchanges stuck me as much more thoughtful than the Congressional appearance. This seven-minute exchange covers some of the challenges involved with parental oversight and access to data
First to market with a purpose-built cloud software and data analytics platform, Flexport today serves more than 10,000 clients and suppliers across more than 200 countries, offering a full range of services, including ocean, air, truck and rail freight, drayage & cartage, warehousing, customs brokerage, financing and insurance – all informed and powered by our software platform.
Yesterday I rented a boat and took the leader of one of Flexport's partners in Long Beach on a 3 hour of the port complex. Here's a thread about what I learned.
First off, the boat captain said we were the first company to ever rent his boat to tour the port to see how everything was working up close. His usual business is doing memorial services at sea. He said we were a lot more fun than his regular customers.
The ports of LA/Long Beach are at a standstill. In a full 3 hour loop through the port complex, passing every single terminal, we saw less than a dozen containers get unloaded.
There are hundreds of cranes. I counted only ~7 that were even operating and those that were seemed to be going pretty slow.
It seems that everyone now agrees that the bottleneck is yard space at the container terminals. The terminals are simply overflowing with containers, which means they no longer have space to take in new containers either from ships or land. It’s a true traffic jam.
Right now if you have a chassis with no empty container on it, you can go pick up containers at any port terminal. However, if you have an empty container on that chassis, they’re not allowing you to return it except on highly restricted basis.
If you can’t get the empty off the chassis, you don’t have a chassis to go pick up the next container. And if nobody goes to pick up the next container, the port remains jammed.
With the yards so full, carriers / terminals are being highly restrictive in where and when they will accept empties.
Also containers are not fungible between carriers, so the truckers have to drop their empty off at the right terminal. This is causing empty containers to pile up. This one trucking partner alone has 450 containers sitting on chassis right now (as of 10/21) at his yards.
This is a trucking company with 6 yards that represents 153 owner operator drivers, so he has almost 3 containers sitting on chassis at his yard for every driver on the team. He can’t take the containers off the chassis because he’s not allowed by the city of Long Beach zoning code to store empty containers more than 2 high in his truck yard. If he violates this code they’ll shut down his yard altogether. With the chassis all tied up storing empties that can't be returned to the port, there are no chassis available to pick up containers at the port.
And with all the containers piling up in the terminal yard, the longshoremen can’t unload the ships. And so the queue grows longer, with now over 70 ships containing 500,000 containers are waiting off shore. This line is going to get longer not shorter.
This is a negative feedback loop that is rapidly cycling out of control that if it continues unabated will destroy the global economy.
Alright how do we fix this, you ask? Simple. And we can do it fast now, When you're designing an operation you must choose your bottleneck. If the bottleneck appears somewhere that you didn't choose it, you aren't running an operation. It's running you.
You should always choose the most capital intensive part of the line to be your bottleneck. In a port that's the ship to shore cranes. The cranes should never be unable to run because they're waiting for another part of the operation to catch up.
The bottleneck right now is not the cranes. It's yard space at the container terminals. And it's empty chassis to come clear those containers out. In operations when a bottleneck appears somewhere that you didn't design for it to appear, you must OVERWHELM THE BOTTLENECK!
Here's a simple plan that @POTUS and @GavinNewsom partnered with the private sector, labor, truckers, and everyone else in the chain must implement TODAY to overwhelm the bottleneck and create yard space at the ports so we can operate against.
Executive order effective immediately over riding the zoning rules in Long Beach and Los Angeles to allow truck yards to store empty containers up to six high instead of the current limit of 2. Make it temporary for ~120 days. This will free up tens of thousands of chassis that right now are just storing containers on wheels. Those chassis can immediately be taken to the ports to haul away the containers
Bring every container chassis owned by the national guard and the military anywhere in the US to the ports and loan them to the terminals for 180 days.
Create a new temporary container yard at a large (need 500+ acres) piece of government land adjacent to an inland rail head within 100 miles of the port complex.
Force the railroads to haul all containers to this new site, turn around and come back. No more 1500 mile train journeys to Dallas. We're doing 100 mile shuttles, turning around and doing it again. Truckers will go to this site to get containers instead of the port.
Bring in barges and small container ships and start hauling containers out of long beach to other smaller ports that aren't backed up.
This is not a comprehensive list. Please add to it. We don't need to do the best ideas. We need to do ALL the ideas.
We must OVERWHELM THE BOTTLENECK and get these ports working again. I can't stress enough how bad it is for the world economy if the ports don't work. Every company selling physical goods bought or sold internationally will fail.
The circulatory system our globalized economy depends has collapsed. And thanks to the negative feedback loops involved, it's getting worse not better every day that goes by. I'd be happy to lead this effort for the federal or state government if asked. Leadership is the missing ingredient at this point.
JOHN MILLER'S WILL This link is for my Kentucky family and others tempted to imagine they have no connection with the institution of slavery. It can be found in the online transcript of a genealogy book History and genealogies of the families of Miller, Woods, Harris, Wallace, Maupin, Oldham, Kavanaugh and Brown (1907).
In the name of God, Amen, I, John Miller, of Madison County, and State of Kentticky, do make and ordain this my last will and testament, revoking all others by me heretofore made. In the first place, it is my will and desire that all my jtist debts be paid by my
Exectitors hereafter named as soon as conveniently may be after my decease. I give to my beloved wife, Jane Miller, during her natural life, and no longer, the plantation and tract of land whereon I now live, including the tract which I purchased of my son, Robert Miller, and also the tract I purchased of Cornelitis Maupin: also all my negroes, live stock, household and kitchen furniture, all my unmentioned estate, after satisfaction and payments of my just debts, bequeaths and devises, hereafter mentioned, for and during the said term of her nattiral life, to be in full satisfaction of and in lieti of dower in my real and personal estate.
I give to my son, Robert Miller, and his heirs forever, twenty acres of land to be in a square and to be taken off of the east corner of my tract of land on which the town of Richmond stands. Also, one negro.
I give to my son, William Miller, and to his heirs forever, and to my son, John Miller, Jun'r, and to his heirs forever, the tract of land on which the said town of Richmond stands, to be equally divided between them, by stich division line as they may agree upon, but it is to be understood that the devise is not to include or extend to any property I may hold within the boundary of said town, nor to any part of said tract I may have sold by written or verbal contract, nor to the part before devised to my son Robert.
I devise to my son, Thomas Miller, and to his heirs forever, one tract of land lying in the said county near the said town of Richmond which I purchased from Elijah Gaddy, containing one hundred acres. Also, two negroes.
I devise to my son, Delaney Miller, and to his heirs forever, one hundred and forty acres of land, being part of the tract whereon I now live, which I purchased of my son, Robert Miller, and Cornelius Maupin, to be laid off of the south end of said tract, and not to come nearer to the dwelling house than three hundred and fifty yards, to extend up the line between me and John Patrick and the improvement for quantity. Also, two negroes.
I devise to my son. Garland Miller, and his heirs forever, the balance of the aforementioned tract of land whereon I now live, be the same, more or less, except the part already devised to my son Delaney Miller, to be laid off in the manner and form before mentioned, or any other way they may agree upon to suit themselves, to have and enjoy the same after the determination of the other therein before devised to his mother. I, also, give him two negroes.
I devise to my son, Joseph Miller, and his heirs forever, one tract of land lying on the waters of Paint Lick Creek, deeded- to me by David Wells, containing two hundred acres, be the same (more) or less. Also two negroes.
I give to my daughter, Anna Reid, one negro.
I give to my daughter, Elizabeth Kavanaugh, one negro.
I give to my daughter, Jane Lackey, two negroes.
1 give to my daughter, Frances Miller, three negroes.
I give to my sons Delaney and Garland each, and to my daughter Frances, one horse and saddle, and two cows and calves, and one bed and furniture, to be paid them at the time of their marriage, or attaining the age of twenty-one years, whichever shall first happen,
to be allowed to them out of the estate in my beloved wife's hands, by my Executors, if she should be then living, and if she should not be then living, give them the value of said articles in cash, the value to be ascertained by neighbors — one chosen by my Executors, one by such child entitled thereto, and a third chosen by these two; it is to be fairly understood that if I should, in my life time, give to any of my children a negro, and other property herein devised or given, that it is to be considered satisfaction of the devise or bequest of such negro, all as far as it answers the description herein given. It is further to be understood that the negroes herein given and devised are not to be paid to my said children until after the death of my wife, unless she shall choose to part with them, in which case she may at any time pay to any one, or more, any, all, or more of said negroes, with the assent of my Executors, or the survivors of them.
Should any of my children die before me, the devise and bequest herein made to said children are to stand good and effectual to the heirs of such person — according to the laws of descent in the Commonwealth.
JOHN MILLER, L. S.
Signed as the first part of my will.
Presence of us.
WM. GOODLOE.
his
WM. X KARR.
mark
Continuation of John Miller's Will:
"I constitute and appoint my friends, William Irvine, Robert' Rodes, Executors of this my last will and testament. I empower them to make convey — for my lands which at the time of my death I may have sold, and unconveyed, either by written or verbal contract. I, also, empower them to divide my negroes according to the division of them herein made, as equal as may be. I do, also, empower them to sell and convey, as to them may seem best, all my lols in the town of Richmond, and to dispose of any part of my personal estate, if necessary, to raise money for the payment of my debts, and the residue, if any, from the sale of the lots, and collections of my debts, to pay the same to my wife. I declare my wife is not to give security for the keeping of the property left her, nor is she to be answerable for its depreciation in value, etc. And, whereas, I have at sundry times given to my children who have grown to years of maturity, a negro, or negroes, etc., I do now ratify and confirm to them all and every gift which I may before have made, and do declare that when I have delivered them any negro without an express stipulation to the contrary, that it is to be considered a gift.
All my estate left after the death of my wife, and not herein otherwise disposed of, I give to my daughters, Anna Reid, Elizabeth Kavanaugh, Jane Lackey, and Frances Miller, to be equally divided between them, and I wish it to be understood that whereas I have by deed given to my daughter, Elizabeth Kavanaugh, and her heirs, a part of a lot in the town of Richmond of the value of fifty pounds, now unless the said gift can be rescinded, and the said lot or the value thereof to be equally divided between the brothers and sisters, she is not to receive any part of my estate as last above mentioned devised to Anna Reid, Elizabeth Kavanaugh, Jane Lackey, and Frances Miller. Shall each of them have received the sum of fifty pounds, should there be any balance, it is then to be equally divided between them.
In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand, and affixed my seal this 24th day of February, 1806.
Signed in the presence of JOHN MILLER, L. S.
WILLIAM GOODLOE.
his
WILLIAM X KARR.
mark
At a court held for Madison County on the 5th day of December, 1806, this will was proved to be the last will and testament of John Miller, dec'd, by the oath of William Karr, a witness thereto, as the law directs, and William Goodloe, another witness thereto, who
swore he subscribed his name to said will in the presence of said
deceased, which was ordered to be recorded.
Attest: WILL. IRVINE, C. M. C.
(This QR image appears at the Facebook link and at the web link above, but is not active in this blog post.)
Addendum... This link has since vanished but I found multiple copies available via ABE Books which has a multitude of out of print books.
This appeared in my Facebook timeline, dated September 2019.
Dear Republicans
You didn’t object when you heard Donald Trump say he likes to grab women “by the pussy.”
You didn’t object when he kicked the American media out of the Oval Office and handed two Russian spies classified data entrusted to him by one of our allies.
You didn’t object when he likened our intelligence community to “Nazis.”
You didn’t object when he stood before the Memorial Wall of Stars at Langley and told lie after lie about himself and the election.
You didn’t object while at the Helsinki Summit, he met behind closed doors with the Russian President.
You didn’t object to him banning the American Press from covering that meeting.
You didn’t object when he emerged from that meeting and sided with the Russian President over the findings of our own intelligence community.
You didn’t object when the Trump campaign admitted to accepting Russian offers to help him defeat SecState Clinton.
You didn’t object when he stood before the cameras and said; “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find 30k e-mails that are missing.”
You didn’t object when the Russians responded that VERY DAY with stolen emails.
You didn’t object when it was confirmed that the basis for the Trump Tower meeting was a total fabrication. That it had nothing to do with adopting Russian children, and everything to do with swinging the election.
You didn’t object when it was revealed that Trump himself floated the cover story of adoptions from Russia.
You didn’t object when it was confirmed that his campaign staff had met with Russian agents over 150 times, after claiming they had never met with them at all.
You didn’t object when the Trump campaign declined to inform the FBI about the Russian advances.
You didn’t object when Trump’s campaign manager gave internal data on four key battleground states to agents working for Putin.
You sure as hell didn’t object when those very same four battleground states miraculously shifted towards Trump on Election Day.
You didn’t object when Trump kicked his Attorney General out of the room and asked the FBI Director to let his National Security Advisor off the hook for lying about his contacts with Russian agents.
You didn’t object when Trump fired that FBI Director for declining to let Flynn off the hook.
You didn’t object when Special Counsel Robert Mueller said he couldn’t establish a conspiracy, largely because so many of Trump’s staffers lied during their interviews, and because Trump himself refused to submit to a live interview.
You didn’t object when Special Counsel Mueller cited no fewer than ten instances of the president himself obstructing justice in his report: an impeachable offense.
You didn’t object when it was revealed he cheated on his wife with a porn star.
You didn’t object when it was revealed that he paid off that porn star to the tune of $130,000.00 to buy her silence just prior to the election, an illegal attempt to hide relevant facts from the electorate.
You didn’t object when he withdrew the U.S. from the JCPOA, which was the first and ONLY treaty that’s successfully kept Iranian nuclear ambitions in check.
You didn’t object when he pulled us out of the Paris Climate Accords.
You didn’t object when he scuttled the Obama administration’s clean air and water standards.
You didn’t object when he opened up vast tracts of protected wilderness to his friends in the oil and mining industries.
You didn’t object to the myriad cases of violations of the emoluments clause.
You didn’t object when he mocked a disabled man at one of his rallies.
You didn’t object to the recently-discovered military stopovers at Trump properties in Scotland.
You didn’t object when after mass shooting after mass shooting, he wouldn’t lift a finger to protect even little school children from gun violence.
You didn’t object when he started putting tariffs on everyone from China to Turkey, which have undeniably hurt millions of people around the world and shaken the stock markets.
You didn’t object when he gave the corporate farming industry $26B in compensation for their losses due to his tariffs.
You didn’t object when he channeled $3.6B in Pentagon appropriations to his wall on the Mexican border.
You didn’t object when Trump called out against “Islamic terrorism” on multiple occasions, but never once for terrorism by white nationalists.
You didn’t object when he forcibly separated little children from their parents.
You didn’t object when he confined those children to chain-link paddocks.
You didn’t object when a whistleblower revealed the president had on multiple occasions said things that potentially undermined our nation’s safety and security.
You didn’t object when the Trump Organization misappropriated $500,000 from a kids’ cancer charity and funneled the money directly to groups that were connected to Trump’s adult children.
You didn’t object when he got caught trying to blackmail the president of Ukraine into smearing a likely Democratic challenger, Joe Biden, in an elaborate extortion scheme that undermined the national security of both the United States and Ukraine.
You didn’t object when his Chief of Staff admitted to it, and said “Get over it. We do that all the time.”
You didn’t object when his personal lawyer, his personal consultant, and his army of sycophants at Fox News have repeatedly and consistently lied about ALL of the above for three excruciatingly long years.
So here’s my question for you: What about any of the above do you believe entitles you to the right to call yourselves “patriots?” In anything other than today’s bizarro-world, you wouldn’t even make the rank of American. When this nightmare ends, we’ll remind you of just how patriotic you were during these days.
I have been aware of Iyad el-Baghdadi for years. He is a Palestinian expat and activist who has lived several places over the years and has never given up his vision for a Palestinian homeland. This video tells more about him than I can describe in words. His Twitter thread reflections this morning strike me as insightful.
A confession that I want to approach respectfully (but honestly). When I compare the radicalization story of my (20-year younger) former self to the radicalization stories of people who got sucked into white supremacism, one main difference really surprises me
What truly surprised me was that while my sense of grievance (as a Palestinian Arab Muslim kid growing up in the Middle East) was based upon real, hard stuff. Meanwhile theirs was based upon "feeling" persecuted. It just seems to me that what broke my psyche was far heavier stuff
Obviously this is a very personal observation and I could be very wrong. It could be that I'm not empathetic enough with their experiences; or these experiences could be distant. I only intimately know my own story. I'm just putting this out there to see how right or wrong I am
But interesting to ask this question at scale. Are people who get radicalized due to immense pressure more de-radicalizable than those who get radicalized absent immense pressure? After all if it's immense pressure, the pressure can ease or normalize or counter-balance somehow
*In 2015 (in the context of ISIS) I noted that people who get radicalized due to "local grievances" (family killed, displaced from homes, property stolen etc) are actually *less* ideological and more de-radicalizable than the foreign fighters who are coming from Western countries
I don't know anything about Melissa, the Twitter account leaving the Derek Black link, but she is clearly someone who has given a good deal of thought to this subject. I wish I had time to find out more about her but at the moment these notes are my mission.
The Washington Post link is long, illustrating how a young man reared to be a radical extremist eventually discovers how deluded his thinking has been, along with that of his father and the peer group in which he grew up. This is how it ends...
Don [Derek's dad] asked Derek about the theories that had emerged on the Stormfront message thread. Was he just faking a change to have an easier career? Was this his way of rebelling?
When Derek denied those things, Don mentioned the theory he himself had come to believe — the one David Duke had posited in the first hours after Derek’s letter went public: Stockholm syndrome. Derek had become a hostage to liberal academia and then experienced empathy for his captors.
“That’s so patronizing,” Derek remembered saying. “How can I prove this is what I really believe?”
He tried to convince Don for a few hours at the restaurant. He told him about white privilege and repeated the scientific studies about institutionalized racism. He mentioned the great Islamic societies that had developed algebra and predicted a lunar eclipse. He said that now, as he recognized strains of white nationalism spreading into mainstream politics, he felt accountable. “It’s not just that I was wrong. It’s that it caused real damage,” he remembered saying.
“I can’t believe I’m arguing with you, of all people, about racial realities,” Don remembered telling him.
The restaurant was closing, and they were no closer to an understanding. Derek went to sleep at his grandmother’s house. Then he woke up early and started driving across the country alone.
Every day since then, Derek had been working to put distance between himself and his past. He was still living across the country after finishing his master’s degree, and he was starting to learn Arabic to be able to study the history of early Islam. He hadn’t spoken to anyone in white nationalism since his defection, aside from occasional calls home to his parents. Instead, he’d spent his time catching up on aspects of pop culture he’d once been taught to discredit: liberal newspaper columns, rap music and Hollywood movies. He’d come to admire President Obama. He decided to trust the U.S. government. He started drinking tap water. He had taken budget trips to Barcelona, Paris, Dublin, Nicaragua and Morocco, immersing himself in as many cultures as he could.
He joined a new online message group, this one for couch surfers, and he opened up his one-bedroom apartment to strangers looking for a temporary place to stay. It felt increasingly good to trust people — to try to interact without prejudice or judgment — and after a while, Derek began to feel detached from the person he had been.
But then came the election campaign of 2016, and suddenly the white nationalism Derek had been trying to unlearn was the unavoidable subtext to national debates over refugees, immigration, Black Lives Matter and the election itself. Late in August, Derek watched in his apartment as Hillary Clinton gave a major speech about the rise of racism. She explained how white supremacists had rebranded themselves as white nationalists. She referenced Duke and mentioned the concept of a “white genocide,” which Derek had once helped popularize. She talked about how Trump had hired a campaign manager with ties to the alt-right. She said: “A fringe movement has essentially taken over the Republican Party.”
It was the very same point Derek had spent so much of his life believing in, but now it made him feel both fearful for the country and implicated. “It’s scary to know that I helped spread this stuff, and now it’s out there,” he told one of his Shabbat friends.
He also wondered whether he would ever be able to completely detach himself from his past, when so much about it remained public. He was still occasionally recognized as a former racist in graduate school; still written into the will of a man he had befriended through white nationalism; still the godson of Duke; still the son of Chloe and Don.
Late this summer, for the first time in years, he traveled to Florida to see them. At a time of increasingly contentious rhetoric, he wanted to hear what his father had to say. They sat in the house and talked about graduate school and Don’s new German shepherd. But after a while, their conversation turned back to ideology, the topic they had always preferred.
Don, who usually didn’t vote, said he was going to support Trump.
Derek said he had taken an online political quiz, and his views aligned 97 percent with Hillary Clinton’s.
Don said immigration restrictions sounded like a good start.
Derek said he actually believed in more immigration, because he had been studying the social and economic benefits of diversity.
Don thought that would result in a white genocide.
Derek thought race was a false concept anyway.
They sat across from each other, searching for ways to bridge the divide. The bay was one block away. Just across from there was Mar-a-Lago, where Trump had lived and vacationed for so many years, once installing an 80-foot pole for a gigantic American flag.
“Who would have thought he’d be the one to take it mainstream?” Don said, and in a moment of so much division, it was the one point on which they agreed.
The Terry Gross interview is self-explanatory and straightforward. It was in 2008 and the link remains active so I don't feel the need to drop quotes here.
