Monthly Archives: November 2012

Argue and Fight against making “Bullying” a Crime—talk about a new “Wiley Ulysses'” Trojan Horse into our Privacy, our Children’s Privacy, and all of our First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendment rights….

I propose to you: Bullying could never be made a crime without destroying the last remnants of the rights to privacy, the protections for Freedom of Expression and Assembly under the First Amendment, and the right of the people to be free from unlawful searches and seizure under the Fourth Amendment.

There’s a petition circulating IN CANADA to make school-bullying a CRIME—this is EXACTLY what I expected the petitions circulated by young good-looking, redshirted SPLC signature collectors earlier this year (2012) would ultimately lead to—and it’s a disaster, or it would be!   I wish I thought this sort of thing could never happen south of the 49th Parallel—but I see the writing on the wall—for all of us: mene meme tekel upharsin….

Can you imagine what the search warrants would look like to investigate allegations sufficient to raise “probable cause” that the crime of bullying was encouraged or tolerated in a school-age child’s parents’ home?  What are people thinking when they endorse such invasions of the sanctity of our private life?  As if there were not enough unconstitutional excuses based on “terrorism” and the “war on drugs” to breach the Fourth Amendment right of the people to be secure in their persons, homes, and personal effects.  If you make “bullying” a crime, then the schools will be constantly swearing out search warrants for parents homes, parents will lose their parental rights because they allowed their children to “bully” someone at school—or GOD FORBID, that parents even ENCOURAGED their children to think that some ways of behaving are better than others….. GOD FORBID that a parent would inculcate ANY values into his or her child that were not pre-screened and pre-approved by a judge or “diversity counselor” or “sensitivity counselor”—such things exist, and they must be stopped.

“Bullying” is a form of immature expressive activity which can be cruel or injurious—but value-judgments are necessary to civilized society and are bound to hurt SOMEBODY.  Speech which doesn’t hurt anyone is unlikely to be powerful.  Advocating the truth of the Bible or of the Constitution will become categorized as Bullying—MARK MY WORDS!

Don’t you see that to make “bullying” and/or “cyber-bullying” a crime would be to open our children and their conduct growing up to even more intrusive state and federal scrutiny and control over their every day lives than they already are made to suffer? Every time I see these red-shirted agents of the Southern Poverty Law Center passing out anti-bullying material I go up to them and ask them how you can define bullying as anything other than a crime of expression, a crime totally dependent on ONE person’s subjective judgment of the meaning and effect of ANOTHER person’s speech. The very word itself “bullying” suggests an overbroad and extremely vague concept. Defining “Bullying” as a crime would be PERFECT for the Brave New World and New World Order types who want the STATE to substitute GOVERNMENTAL judgment for individual values and opinions. Defining “Bullying” as a crime would lead to daily governmental surveillance of our children’s behavior—and, of course, “OUR” conduct and values as well for having taught our children to be bullies. GOD PROTECT US ALL from such an insane, statist program as to make bullying a crime—any such definition of “bullying” as a crime would be simultaneously overbroad and void for vagueness.

I ask you all, if you consider yourself a supporter of the First Amendment or of Constitutional rights at all, to reflect whether you support for the United States Constitution is really consistent with your endorsement of making “bullying” a crime—I personally cannot think of anything worse in the world that could happen to our children or our schools. It would be another GIANT step towards to TOTAL ABOLITION OF FREEDOM and of Parental control over the education and inculcation of values into their children.

Reporting in from a hillside in Maui, Hawaii—looking at an ocean, beautiful and still…..

One especially interesting aspect of Modern Hawaiian secessionism is that it did not just surge to the forefront because of 4150 some odd signatures on the Whitehouse Petition site.

The Hawaiian secessionist movement is in fact taken terribly seriously, as a political, racial, economic, and socio-cultural issue, even if it is not talked about too much.  Hawaiian Secessionism has been receiving attention for the past 20 years, since the Clinton administration issued an official “apology” for the wrongful annexation of Hawaii.   See also:

This attention has been expressed in both Washington and Honolulu and even in New York City, or at least on the “conservative” (i.e. pro-corporate) pages of the Wall Street Journal:

In the Wall Street Journal, and on other sites, it is apparent that Hawaii’s multi-racial paradise in the tropics, which gave us the multi-racial/mixed race Presidency of Barack Obama, suffers from festering racial wounds.  Whether he was born in Mombasa, Kenya, as Lucas D. Smith has shown is most likely, or in Honolulu, as the so-called 44th President claims (even after his supposedly legitimate re-election would seem to moot the question forever except as a historical exercise), Barack Obama supposedly represents simultaneously the retreat of colonialism and the end of racism—at least of white racism.  But anti-white racism seems to be allowed and actually encouraged.

Part of the purpose of my visit to Hawaii now in the late Autumn of 2012 is to educate myself about the tropical polyglot multi-racial society in Hawaii.   I am told the Courts on this island are “conservative”, but by that I understand to mean that the children of Plantation workers favor the Corporate life and Corporate ownership of property against the individual…. i.e. “Conservatism” may mean something more like “Communism” here…. We shall see.  But Hawaii is definitely the only place with more ostensible “racial diversity” than even Los Angeles, and the most governmental control over land use and distribution of any state in the Union….. We all do need to understand this….. what is the correlation between multi-racial society, corporate ownership, and communistic tendencies in government…..    But in any case:

How terribly ironic that Hawaii, the only state of the United States ever to have had an established presence within the community of nations besides Texas, much more durable than the “Republic of West Florida” or even the easily remembered (because of the State Flag) “Bear Flag Republic of California”, has only garnered 4,150 signatures as of 11:27PM after my arrival at Kahului airport on Monday, November 26, 2012.  Not only does Hawaii have a more active secessionist movement than any other state including Texas, but this movement was only just recently received attention, if not exactly “celebrated” in the popular media by a “not so favorable” mention in Dinesh D’Souza’s Obama 2016).   Yet still, Hawaiians are not signing on at the White House Petition site:

One problem appears to be that secessionism may not be wildly popular in the 50th state.  See, e.g.:

While secessionist fever has gathered over 117,000 signatures in my native Texas and over 37,000 in my grandmother’s native Louisiana, Hawaii has gathered separationist signatures on the level of Maine, Maryland, and Massachusetts—New Mexico with 5,155 and Nebraska with 7,284 have outbid Hawaii all together.


Peacefully grant the State of Hawaii to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government.

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for a people to dissolve political bands which have connected them, the separate and equal station to which Laws of Nature and God entitle them, respect requires they should declare the causes which impel them to separate.

Governments instituted derive their just powers from consent of the governed. Whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to abolish and institute new Government.

Whereas, people of Hawaii recognize America guilty of unlawful occupation and request peaceful solution being of sound resonance to secede from said union of America, to build a government that better suits inhabitants of Hawaii with alliance to the United States of America.

Created: Nov 12, 2012





You’ve already signed this petition

South Carolina only needs another 800 signatures on ONE of its petitions for secession—Please help the Palmetto State, homeland of secession in 1860, Petition the Whitehouse for its Independence (again)—in Memory of Strom Thurmond and Frances Marion, the Swamp Fox—SIGN FOR THE BONNIE BLUE FLAG THAT BEARS A SINGLE STAR!


Peacefully grant the State of S.C. to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government.

As the founding fathers of the United States of America made clear in the Declaration of Independence in 1776:

“When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”

“…Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and institute new Government…”

Created: Nov 10, 2012




24,200 as of 12:56 am Pacific, November 24, 2012

You’ve already signed this petition

As the Texas Secession Petition to the Whitehouse reaches (and passes the palindromic/mirror image figure of) 116,611 signatures, more thoughts on Living in the City (and State) of Dreams—underneath the Concrete, the Dream is Still Alive…..Louisiana comes in Second Place at 36,859, Florida Third at 34,612, Georgia Fourth at 31,937—Why not Hawaii? (The only other State Ever to be internationally recognized as a Sovereign State and Republic before Annexation—also, like Texas in 1865, at gunpoint) How about California? “The Bear Flag Republic” (only State to Call itself a Republic on its State Flag….) How about your State?

CEL Petitions to the Whitehouse as of 11-24-2012 12-36AM | We the People: Your Voice in Our Government


Peacefully grant the State of Texas to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government.

The US continues to suffer economic difficulties stemming from the federal government’s neglect to reform domestic and foreign spending. The citizens of the US suffer from blatant abuses of their rights such as the NDAA, the TSA, etc. Given that the state of Texas maintains a balanced budget and is the 15th largest economy in the world, it is practically feasible for Texas to withdraw from the union, and to do so would protect it’s citizens’ standard of living and re-secure their rights and liberties in accordance with the original ideas and beliefs of our founding fathers which are no longer being reflected by the federal government.

Created: Nov 09, 2012



(a palindromic or mirror image figure) as of 1:00 AM Pacific Daylight Time on Saturday, November 24, 2012

You’ve already signed this petition

Thank you for participating. Find other petitions you’re interested in or start your own.

Texas Secession Facts
Printer-Friendly PDF Version
• Doesn’t the Texas Constitution reserve the right of Texas to secede?
• Didn’t the outcome of the “Civil War” prove secession is not an option for any State?
• Didn’t the U.S. Supreme Court in Texas v. White prove secession is unconstitutional?
• Is Texas really ripe for a secession movement?
• How would Texas—and Texans—benefit from secession?
• Are there any organized efforts to promote a Texas secession?
• Why exactly are y’all selling bumper stickers?
Q: Doesn’t the Texas Constitution reserve the right of Texas to secede? [BACK TO TOP]
A: This heavily popularized bit of Texas folklore finds no corroboration where it counts: No such provision is found in the current Texas Constitution[1](adopted in 1876) or the terms of annexation.[2]  However, it does state (in Article 1, Section 1) that “Texas is a free and independent State, subject only to the Constitution of the United States…” (note that it does not state“…subject to the President of the United States…” or “…subject to the Congress of the United States…” or “…subject to the collective will of one or more of the other States…”)

Neither the Texas Constitution, nor the Constitution of the united States, explicitly or implicitly disallows the secession of Texas (or any other “free and independent State”) from the United States.  Joining the “Union” was ever and always voluntary, rendering voluntary withdrawal an equally lawful and viable option (regardless of what any self-appointed academic, media, or government “experts”—including Abraham Lincoln himself—may have ever said).

Both the original (1836) and the current (1876) Texas Constitutions also state that “All political power is inherent in the people … they have at all times the inalienable right to alter their government in such manner as they might think proper.”

Likewise, each of the united States is “united” with the others explicitly on the principle that “governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed” and “whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends [i.e., protecting life, liberty, and property]it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government and “when a long train of abuses and usurpations…evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.” [3]

Q: Didn’t the outcome of the “Civil War” prove that secession is not an option for any State? [BACK TO TOP]

No.  It only proved that, when allowed to act outside his lawfully limited authority, a U.S. president is capable of unleashing horrendous violence against the lives, liberty, and property of those whom he pretends to serve.  The Confederate States (including Texas) withdrew from the Union lawfully, civilly, and peacefully, after enduring several years of excessive and inequitable federal tariffs (taxes) heavily prejudiced against Southern commerce.[4]  Refusing to recognize the Confederate secession, Lincoln called it a “rebellion” and a “threat” to “the government” (without ever explaining exactly how “the government” was “threatened” by a lawful, civil, and peaceful secession) and acted outside the lawfully defined scope of either the office of president or the U.S. government in general, to coerce the South back into subjugation to Northern control.[5]

The South’s rejoining the Union at the point of a bayonet in the late 1860s didn’t prove secession is “not an option” or unlawful.  It only affirmed that violent coercion can be used—even by governments (if unrestrained)—to rob men of their very lives, liberty, and property.[6]

It bears repeating that the united States are “united” explicitly on the principle that “governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed” and “whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends [i.e., protecting life, liberty, and property]it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government and “when a long train of abuses and usurpations…evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.” [7]

Q: Didn’t the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Texas v. White prove that secession is unconstitutional? [BACK TO TOP]
A: No.  For space considerations, here are the relevant portions of the Supreme Court’s decision in Texas v. White:

“When Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States.

“…The obligations of the State, as a member of the Union …remained perfect and unimpaired. …the State did not cease to be a State, nor her citizens to be citizens of the Union.

“…Our conclusion therefore is, that Texas continued to be a State, and a State of the Union.”
— Texas v. White, 74 U.S. 700, 703 (1868)

It is noteworthy that documented support for the alleged “perpetual and indissoluble relation” or any requirement of “the consent of the States” for revocation (secession) weren’t produced by the court at that time, nor have they since been produced.

It is also noteworthy that two years after that decision, President Grant signed an act entitling Texas to U.S. Congressional representation, readmitting Texas to the Union.

What’s wrong with this picture?  Either the Supreme Court was wrong in claiming Texas never actually left the Union (they were — see below), or the Executive (President Grant) was wrong in “readmitting” a state that, according to the Supreme Court, had never left.  Both can’t be logically or legally true.

To be clear:  Within a two year period, two branches of the same government took action with regard to Texas on the basis of two mutually exclusive positions — one, a judicially contrived “interpretation” of the US Constitution, argued essentially from silence, and the other a practical attempt to remedy the historical fact that Texas had indeed left the Union, the very evidence for which was that Texas had recently met the demands imposed by the same federal government as prerequisite conditions for readmission.  If the Supreme Court was right, then the very notion of prerequisites for readmission would have been moot — a state cannot logically be readmitted if it never left in the first place.

This gross logical and legal inconsistency remains unanswered and unresolved to this day.

Now to the Supreme Court decision in itself…

The Court, led by Chief Justice Salmon Chase (a Lincoln cabinet member and leading Union figure during the war against the South) pretended to be analyzing the case through the lens of the Constitution, yet not a single element of their logic or line of reasoning came directly from the Constitution — precisely because the Constitution is wholly silent on whether the voluntary association of a plurality of states into a union may be altered by the similarly voluntary withdrawal of one or more states.

It’s no secret that more than once there had been previous rumblings about secession among many U.S. states (and not just in the South), long before the South seceded.  These rumblings met with no preemptive quashing of the notion from a “constitutional” argument, precisely because there was (and is) no constitutional basis for either allowing or prohibiting secession.

An objective reading of the relevant portions of the White decision reveals that it is largely arbitrary, contrived, and crafted to suit the agenda which it served:  presumably (but unconstitutionally) to award to the U.S. federal government, under color of law, sovereignty over the states, essentially nullifying their right to self-determination and self-rule, as recognized in the Declaration of Independence, as well as the current Texas Constitution (which stands unchallenged by the federal government).

Where the Constitution does speak to the issue of powers, they resolve in favor of the states unless expressly granted to the federal government or denied to the states.  No power to prevent or reverse secession is granted to the federal government, and the power to secede is not specifically denied to the states; therefore that power is retained by the states, as guaranteed by the 10th Amendment.

The Texas v. White case is often trotted out to silence secessionist sentiment, but on close and contextual examination, it actually exposes the unconstitutional, despotic, and tyrannical agenda that presumes to award the federal government, under color of law, sovereignty over the people and the states.

Q: Is Texas really ripe for a secession movement? [BACK TO TOP]

Probably not (yet).  Texans generally aren’t the rugged, independent, liberty-conscious folks they once were.  Like most Americans, they happily acquiesce to the U.S. government’s steady theft of their rights and property via unlawful statutes, programs, and activities.

Unfamiliar with historical or legal details, being largely products of public (i.e., government) “education,” today’s Texans easily adopt the “politically correct” myths that litter the landscape of American popular opinion.  Many don’t even know what the word secede means, and believe that the United States is a “democracy” (hint: it’s not)[8].

But public opinion and ignorance won’t stop us from suggesting that secession is still a good idea for people who value their rights and personal liberty more highly than the temporal affluence, comfort, and false security provided by the U.S. welfare/warfare state.  By raising public awareness of even the concept of secession, we hope they might plant seeds that will some day yield a new resolve among Texans for liberty and self-government.

Q: How would Texas—and Texans—benefit from secession? [BACK TO TOP]

In many ways.  Over the past century-and-a-half the United States government has awarded itself ever more power (but not the lawful authority) to meddle with the lives, liberty, and property of the People of Texas (as well as those of the other States).

Sapping Texans’ wealth into a myriad of bureaucratic, socialist schemes both in the U.S. and abroad, the bipartisan despots in Washington persist in expanding the federal debt and budget deficits every year.  Texans would indeed gain much by reclaiming control of their State, their property, their liberty, and their very lives, by refusing to participate further in the fraud perpetrated by the Washington politicians and bureaucrats.

By restoring Texas to an independent republic, Texans would truly reclaim a treasure for themselves and their progeny.

Q: Are any organizations promoting a Texas secession? [BACK TO TOP]

Yes.  The following organized efforts exist for informing and unifying Texans around the causes of independence and liberty:

  • Texas Nationalist ( (formerly Republic of Texas), (President, Daniel Miller), functional as of 2007
  • TexasSecession ( 817-453-5744
  • United Republic of Texas ( Yahoo Group: UtdRepTex, established 2005, functional as of 2007 (Combining the New Republic of Texas and Historical Republic of Texas) active as of 2008
  • Texas Constitution 2000 calls on Texans to ratify a new constitution liberating Texas from the economic and statutory slavery of the U.S. government.  Their website is
  • Republic of Texas ( documents the annexation of Texas as a U.S. state as a having been a fraud in the first place, and reclaims the republic’s sovereignty.
  • Free Texas Constitution ( aims to provide an outline for concepts to be incorporated in the new Constitution for the independent Republic of Texas.
Q: Why exactly are y’all selling bumper stickers? [BACK TO TOP]

Texas has a rich history of independent character.  She was the first of only two US States ever recognized internationally as sovereign, independent republics (the other was Hawai’i), having won her independence from a heavy-handed despotic government (Mexico) that refused to honor its own constitution (sound familiar?).

We’d like to see Texans showing more public pride in Texas by displaying symbols of Texas’ history and spirit of liberty.   That’s the motivation behind, as well as our offering quality Texas Secede decals, as a means of encouraging the public display of support for an independent Texas.

Notes[1]  See The Texas Constitution Online  [RETURN TO TEXT]

[2]  See the Terms of Annexation Online  [RETURN TO TEXT]

[3]  See the Declaration of Independence Online  [RETURN TO TEXT]

[4], [5], [6]  See Battle Cry of Freedom: The Civil War Era by James M. McPherson; The Real Lincoln by Thomas J. DiLorenzo; A Consitutional History of Secession by John R. Graham; Emancipating Slaves, Enslaving Free Men by Jeffrey R. Hummel; When in the Course of Human Events by Charles Adams; Union And Liberty by John C. Calhoun;States’ Rights and the Union by Forrest McDonald  [RETURN TO TEXT]

[7]  See the Declaration of Independence Online  [RETURN TO TEXT]

[8]  See for details.  [RETURN TO TEXT]

 © Copyright 2012    Contact Us    TexasSecede! Blog

Uncle Sam and Thanksgiving 1869, by Cartoonist Thomas Nast

Who Is Uncle Sam?

he IS the Symbol of the “Second Republic”, the nation born in 1865 after the spilling of the blood of more than half a million americans.

Dixie (originally posted here at Tierra Limpia on November 26, 2011 at 3:35)

Who is this patriotic figure commonly known as Uncle Sam and what does he have to do with the Real America?

“Our popular image of Uncle Sam (As seen in the image on the top of this page) was defined in large part by Thomas Nast, who was one of the most popular artists of the 1800′s. Nast was also responsible for our popular images of Santa Claus, the Republican Elephant, and the Democratic Donkey. Nast’s first illustration of Uncle Sam appeared in the November 20, 1869 edition of Harper’s Weekly.

“While Uncle Sam does not show the top hat and striped pants that we have come to associate with him, he shows something much more important in this image. In this image, Uncle Sam is a symbol of unity and equality. The image shows many people welcomed at Uncle Sam’s Thanksgiving table . . . Black, White, Chinese, and Indian, as wall as many others are seen sitting around the table. The image is captioned, “Uncle Sam’s Thanksgiving Dinner; Come One, Come All, Free and Equal.” The image clearly shows that Uncle Sam was originally a symbol of freedom, and equality. Uncle Sam was a unifying symbol.

By 1876, Nast’s Image of Uncle Sam had evolved into one that we would recognize today. The image to the left is the cover of the November 24, 1876 Harper’s Weekly. The image features Uncle Sam with striped pants, a long overcoat, and a top hat. In this image, the top hat also has feathers. This image deals with Reform of the Civil Service System.

While the exact image of Uncle Sam has evolved over the years, one thing remains constant. He is a symbol of the best ideals of the United States. From the earliest days until today, he has stood for Freedom, Equality, and Justice.While as a Nation, we do not always perfectly achieve these ideals, Uncle Sam remains a poignant symbol and reminder of the goal and objective . . . One Nation, Under God, Indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for All.”

Uncle Sam is a super patriotic Yankee who practices social equality. He is a symbol of the Second Republic that was defined in the Reconstruction era by the German immigrant cartoonist Thomas Nast.

Thomas Nast’s Father was one of several hundred thousands of liberal-to-revolutionary Germans who emigrated to the United States in the Middle 19th Century, many heavily influenced by Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, and most of whom supported the Republican President Abraham Lincoln and his war on the American South.

Today Let us Give thanks: (1) for People with Bad Manners who Insult us for No Reason (closely related to 1A: for our own ability to insult them right back JUST because they insulted us first), (2) People who Do NOT Respect Authority of ANY kind, (3) Hate Speech and Subversive Speech, the most Valuable Kinds of Speech of All

Thanksgiving is not REALLY my favorite Holiday—more than anything else it celebrates the victory of Massachusetts Puritans over Virginia Cavaliers as the mythically historical “founders” of America.  Virginia was the first and greatest of all the British Colonies, but its formative role in the American Union was symbolically forfeited by its joining and ultimate leadership in “the Second American Revolution” of 1861….. which led to the imposition of Marxist Ideology from Illinois and Massachusetts…. and I myself joined in the ritual reification of those places through my own education (at Harvard GSAS and the University of Chicago Law School).  

Today, more than anything else, I want to give general thanks and honor for and to Politically Incorrect Hate Speech, and to give private thanks and honor to my sister-in-law Alexandra Kourembana whose gracious invitation to Thanksgiving Dinner in Austin I was unable to accept because I’m on my way to Hawaii…. 

I have often written on this blog about the importance of Hate Speech and of “Compassing the Death of the King” (which was a crime of subversion and sedition bordering on treason in Jolly Old England).    In essence, I have ONLY this to say: HATE SPEECH, SUBVERSIVE SPEECH, SEDITIOUS SPEECH AGAINST OUR FELLOW AMERICANS AND FELLOW HUMAN BEINGS AND ESPECIALLY AGAINST THE POWERS THAT BE—these are the most important kinds of speech, and the kinds of speech most needing in First Amendment Protection.   If a speech or written text doesn’t upset someone, it is not in need of any protection.  And any set of thoughts or images that doesn’t upset someone isn’t going to lead to any change in human behavior: social, cultural, political, religious or economic.

One of the lesser known Citizens of L. Frank Baum’s “Land of Oz” was a character, “The Patchwork Girl of Oz,” introduced long after the Wizard and Dorothy in a later book composed after 1900.  Her key line was “I HATE Dignity.”  She was a rebel and a model for all of us: she had no manners, and she NEVER would have respected the norms of Political Correctness.

In 1990 in Greece, I married a young lady for the second time, one Elena Kourembana, in Athens, Greece.  The whole summer was a bit of an ongoing wedding party and celebration, coordinate with a tour through only recently post-Communist Eastern Europe and a fellowship I held, and a related conference on Northern Maya (Yucatec) archaeology and history, at the University of Bonn in West Germany, all sponsored by Volkswagenwerk A.G., just after finishing my Ph.D. at Harvard.

One of the members of this ongoing wedding party was my wife’s beautiful sister-in-law Alexandra, then still a teenager, who was in her own way a bit of a “patchwork girl” and quite a rebel, really, with absolutely no respect for anybody at all.  

One of our expeditions that summer was to visit some cousins of my wife’s family in Greece, one of whom was the Mother Superior of the (Eastern [Greek] Orthodox] Convent of Saint Irene, which had been commissioned to burn some gigantic candles, of varying heights matched with my height and Elena’s, and to keep these candles burning throughout our lives (I have no idea what may have happened to these candles over the past 10 years since Elena and I effectively parted company for the last time).  

That experience, visiting the Greek Orthodox Convent of Saint Irene, was one of those memories for which I am not exactly “thankful”, although I will carry it to my grave, or actually, a series of memories I will carry to my grave.   For one thing, my wife’s cousin the mother superior was a rather unusual shape and size, in that her vows including abstaining from the consumption of meat, and she had been (I presume involuntarily) pledged to these vows from her childhood as a VERY little girl, and so she had spent her life eating sweets, which were all over the priory.   Needless to say, she was under 4 feet tall and exactly the same in circumference as height, but as the Mother Superior no one in her presence could ever have his or her head higher than the Mother Superior’s head.  This led to a series of thrones and daises, and a lot of bowing, genuflecting, and scraping.

So far as I could tell, no woman who ever entered the priory ever got out.  The sisters prided themselves that all the sisters stayed with the living throughout eternity, and they had a phenomenal collection of thousands of deceased sisters’ skulls pilled up or shelved row-on-row in various sacred precincts of the priory as proof of that point.   When we talk mortification of the flesh, we’re talking MORTIFICATION here with an emphasis on MORT (i.e. death….)

Clearly the mortification of the flesh was an important aspect and element of the “life” of the Sisters of the Convent of Saint Irene, and man was I mortified….. especially when my delightful sister-in-law was denied admission at the gate….

It seems that the high spirited Sister-in-Law Alex, an American born although bilingual Greek-American teenager who rather normally prided herself on her exceptional beauty and extraordinarily sexy appearance, could only be admitted if she covered herself up, more or less consistent with Sharia law….. and as it happened Alex was simply NOT in the mood to cover up her summer sundress-wearing self, (loose sundress with plunging neckline and exceeding short, i.e., high hem-lines), in any way that would have made her acceptable to the nuns of the Orthodox Convent of Saint Irene, never mind to her own blood cousin the Mother Superior.

Now, historically, Saint Irene was a rather dull gal, not one of the more heroic or inspiring of “All the Saints”, at least not in my opinion.  Irene was the sister of Pope Saint Damasus I (c. 304-384). She and her devout mother Laurentia are said to have often spent whole nights in the catacombs of Rome, keeping vigil in prayer beside the tombs of the martyrs. At the age of twenty, Irene consecrated her virginity by vow to Christ. When in 366 her brother was elected to the pontificate, one faction of the Roman clergy refused to recognize him, schismatically electing their own rival candidate and violently seizing the papal throne for their antipope, Ursinus. Irene ardently prayed for an end to the schism. A year later, the imposter Ursinus was expelled from Rome by the emperor Valentinian I. Pope Damasus wrote for his sister a book on consecrated virginity.  Following Irene’s death in 379, he buried her in a small church where he had interred their mother, and where he was later to be buried. The pope composed a loving epitaph for his sister, in which he testifies to her holiness and purity.

For some reason, perhaps because I just didn’t think much of the holiness of purity of Saint Irene as a reason for as much repression and suffering as I saw in this convent, I felt moved to spontaneously erupt in the middle of all this ghoulishly archaic pageantry and mortification of the flesh to advocate for Alex’s Freedom of Expression through Teenage Style.  I claimed a level of seniority and status in American law and society to which I was essentially not entitled, and lectured them about the freedom of the body and exposure of the flesh as the essence of our national heritage…..  

I have been told that arguing with me is not one of the most pleasant experiences in life, especially when it all has to be translated into Archaic Church Greek by the living who speak modern Greek….. but the Sisters ultimately gave up and I won the argument…. but as of today November 22, 2012, I give thanks that I dared to defy the traditions and authority of one of the creepiest places I have ever been to in the planet, and I praise all who defy tradition and engage in bad manners in similar situations to maintain their “Freedom of Choice” as to lifestyle and general choices of “style.”

In all my days as an archaeologist I have never seen more preserved skulls than were displayed at that convent….  My argument on that hot day in the summer (July of 1990) was entirely ad hoc and disrespectful in the extreme, I’m sure, but I neither regret it nor apologize for it, any more than I expected my sister-in-law Alex to apologize for or cover up her perfectly reasonable choice of dresses for touring through the Greek Countryside.

The choice of dress style is an expressive aspect of speech, philosophy, and thought which is fundamental to Western European and American Society.

The confrontation between the Western European and Islamic traditions is fundamentally a confrontation between individual freedom of expression and suppression, uniformity.  Sharia law is antithetical to the American Way, to the culture of Western Europe, and although its adherents may be entitled to freedom of Religion, as are the Sisters of Saint Irene entitled to behave and think in exactly the same way as the sisters did in the days of the Emperor Justinian.  Mediaeval women covered their bodies in this way even in Western Europe, as can be seen in tapestries, paintings, and illuminated manuscripts of the period, but time and styles change.

Time to Abolish FDR’s “New Deal” Thanksgiving? (Only Hallmark Cards and Turkey Farmers would really object)

Originally Published on: Nov 25, 2011 @ 0:59

In the August 1942 Paramount movie, “Holiday Inn”, Bing Crosby’s character Jim is at his absolute low point of the year at Thanksgiving.  I completely concur.  Not even Irving Berlin could write a memorable song about this holiday, and now that I think about it, I know of no Thanksgiving songs at all—I suppose no one can really sing when stuffed to the gills with Turkey.  Eucharistic hymns of Thanksgiving in Church, to be sure, are songs of Thanksgiving, but not AMERICAN (United States Holiday) Thanksgiving.

As it happens, in 1942, Thanksgiving had just been set by Franklin D. Roosevelt on its modern date by proclamation signed on November 26, 1941, a little over a week before Pearl Harbor (the attack on which Roosevelt may well have been planning and of whose imminent occurrence evidence now shows, at the very least, Roosevelt to have been perfectly well informed and aware).

So THIS YEAR 2o12 is the 71st Anniversary of the “New Deal” Thanksgiving, and I think it’s high time to wipe this wretched artificial off the Calendar entirely.  The general concept of Thanksgiving may go back to George Washington, the Continental Congress, and the Pilgrims in 1621 some historically esoteric and metaphysical senses, but the Pilgrim association itself is one of English treachery.  How few Americans on Thanksgiving Day recall King Philip’s (the Wampanoag Grand Sachem Metacom’s) War of 1675-1676) and the resulting Genocide of the Wampanoag Tribe celebrated in that First Fabled William Bradford Thanksgiving in 1621. The Wampanoag was the Nation of Squanto and Massasoit who did so much to facilitate English Colonization “New England.”  All other subsequent associations, and the very timing of the holiday, are an insult to deeper values, including not just 500 years of Native American subjugation and genocide but the subjugation and (near) genocide of the American South, and the progressive secularization of the United States from a Christian into a purely materialist and grotesquely indulgent and commercial nation, culture, and society.

It had been not until 1863, four days after the Gettysburg Address, when President Abraham Lincoln declared Thanksgiving to fall on the last Thursday of November, that the modern holiday was celebrated “nationally” (meaning, of course, in the Northern States).  With a few deviations, Lincoln’s precedent was followed annually by every subsequent president–until 1939. In 1939, Franklin D. Roosevelt departed from tradition by declaring November 23, the next to last Thursday that year, as Thanksgiving Day. Considerable controversy surrounded this deviation, and some Americans refused to honor Roosevelt’s declaration. For the next two years, Roosevelt repeated the unpopular proclamation, but on November 26, 1941, he admitted his mistake and signed a bill into law officially making the fourth Thursday in November the national holiday of Thanksgiving Day.  Supposedly, Roosevelt had considered making Thanksgiving earlier in November but this was “booed down.”

Once it’s all over, and the sales of Alka-Selzer and Gaviscon at the all-night pharmacies have gone sky high, and are guaranteed to remain there during the consumption of leftovers for the next week: someone else needs to second the motion and go on record as saying that of all our American Holidays, Thanksgiving is the absolute worst. Thanksgiving not only epitomizes but stands as a worldwide symbol of corruption, oppression, gluttonous commercialism, materialist secularism, arrogant conquest, and a general depravity of state of mind.  “Thanksgiving” as celebrated in this Country obscures our heritage and confuses our history, celebrates the absolute worst in the human soul, and was created in relationship and in lock-step with two key wars leading to the abolition of freedom and the constitution, and the coincidental economic centralization and falsification which took place during those wars, namely the War Between the States and World War II.  

Thanksgiving isn’t so bad for me.  I have a wonderful dinner with a wonderfully energetic young blonde overlooking the Pacific planned in Santa Monica, and next week I go to Hawaii.  

But I wonder what Thanksgiving is like this year for those several million Americans who were either  recently or earlier this year, or even last year, evicted from their homes.  I wonder how Thanksgiving is like this year for the millions more among those who are facing foreclosure and eviction who have no hope, no certainty that they will still be in their homes next year.  

It is time to get back to that “Old Time Religion” of Truth and Honesty and Virtue—and the Fourth Thursday of November Thanksgiving we have celebrated since 1941, or 1863, depending on which starting date you want to call “the beginning” is nothing but an accursed day of the Calendar.

Proclaimed and first set as a National Holiday by President Abraham Lincoln only fours days after the elegant but totally fraudulent, duplicitous rhetoric of the “Gettysburg Address”, meant to disguise his true Marxist purposes in going to war with the “better half” of the nation for the primary benefit of a few industrial oligarchs up north, and for the ultimate purpose of subverting the original American Constitution, Thanksgiving has become a source of degradation to three sets of “Native Americans”: those descended from the First Inhabitants of these Western Hemisphere Continents we call North and South America (aka “The Indians”) and those who fought to preserve the Constitution of 1787 against usurpation in 1861-65, and to all Traditional Christians who would celebrate Adventide as a proper time of fasting.  

I wonder how many people (black or white) in Richmond, Charleston, Columbia, Atlanta, Memphis, Natchez, Vicksburg, or Savannah were stuffed to the gills after great feasts on the final Thursday in November 1865-1875?  I wonder how many Americans (northern or southern) felt Thankful to live in America in November of 1876, when the sitting President, Ulysses S. Grant, had announced that the man who received the majority of the popular and electoral vote, Governor Samuel J. Tilden of New York, would never be allowed to enter the White House without a renewal of open warfare between the States.  

That same year, 1876, I wonder how many Sioux Lakota, Northern Cheyenne, and Arapaho warriors knew by late November 1876 that their victory over Presidential Aspirant George Armstrong Custer at Little Bighorn, June 24-25, 1876, had been turned into a rallying cry for the Republicans who needed a major distraction from the misery of post-“Civil War” Reconstruction America, and turned Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse into the scapegoats or major distraction for their own tyranny and failures back east.   Never did any victory have more devastating consequences for any race of people than the Battle of the Little Bighorn had for the Native Americans.  The remnant of that same coalition that defeated Custer was effectively wiped out within 15 years.  And what did November 1891, the first Thanksgiving after the Massacre at Wounded Knee, feel like in the Sioux Reservation in South Dakota, where the relatives of the murdered Sitting Bull and the descendants of Crazy horse were being either forcibly educated or trained for Buffalo Bill’s Wild West Show?  

To my grandparents growing up in Louisiana and Texas, there was no “Thanksgiving” in the early 20th Century because it was the enemy’s holiday.   The current setting of the Federal Holiday of Thanksgiving was not set until 1941—just as certain “insiders” in the government may have been planning for the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor to force the United States into World War II.  

After eight years of the New Deal, in 1941, the Country was being reshaped, and Thanksgiving was part of its reshaping.  Thanksgiving chronically conflicts with and distracts from the beginning of Advent (almost always the final Sunday of November) and from St. Andrew’s Day, November 30—Saint Andrew being not only one of the 12 Apostles but the Patron Saint of Scotland, Greece, (the ancient “Second Rome” known as) Constantinople, Russia, and Romania among other places—and the Cross of Saint Andrew being the central element of the flags of Alabama, Florida, and the Confederate States of America.  

What’s worse than anything about Thanksgiving is the day after, “Black Friday”, the Macy’s day parade and the gunshot “sooner” start of the race to maximize the secularization and commercialism of the pre-Christmas Season.  Thanksgiving has become part of the Federal Government’s conspiracy to abolish religion in America; the Federal Holiday is thoroughly despicable as an attack and infringement St. Andrew’s Day and Adventide and so on the Christmas Season, the Scottish and Greek Heritage of Western Civilization, and the real meaning of all of these things.

To traditional Christians all over the world, the Season of Advent is a “Little Lent” as my mother called it—the second longest “purple time” at Church in the entire year.  How many people remember to buy Advent Calendars or to keep the solemnity of Mary’s time before giving birth?  No, the grotesque overeating of Thanksgiving followed by the mad orgiastic commercial rush to shop for Christmas presents is a creature of the past 70 years only, fed by Television and contributing to the general secularization of America.  It is a very sad thing.   To my mind, Thanksgiving as celebrated in the United States of America is an insult and a curse to all that is holy, whether one is a Native American of “First American” origins… a Native American of “Southern Anglo” origins, or a Christian with origins anywhere in the world.  Luckily, the personality of “Scrooge” will forever be associated with Christmas, but I say “BAH HUMBUG!” to Thanksgiving.  It is time to do away with Thanksgiving as invented by the 16th and 32nd Presidents (did you ever notice that the 32nd President was Twice as bad as the 16th, but continued all the same basis processes and policies?)???  

Obama, if legitimately he belongs in the “King List” at all, is the 44th President, but maybe by the time of the 48th President *(3 x 16), there will be a recovery in America, a REAL and GENUINE “NEW BIRTH OF FREEDOM” which will truthfully realize the promise of the RHETORIC of the Gettysburg Address by wiping out the centralized banks, income tax, and other institutional baggage of the 16th and restoring the Constitution of 1787, and the Bill of Rights.

Much like the Gettysburg Address, the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments contain only noble sentiments, but have been misused and wrongly applied to destroy rather than guarantee Freedom and Equality.  I have often commented that the greatest irony of all is that the modern “Prison Planet” state of existence in America owes its origins to the 13th Amendment, wherein “slavery and involuntary servitude” are abolished “except as a punishment for crime.”  They started building prisons during the war of 1861-1865, and the “criminal justice industry” has been growing by leaps and bounds ever since.  I say to the American People: “let’s tear down the prison walls.”  

But even worse than the perversion of the 13th Amendment and most pernicious of all of these perversions is the use that has been made of the 14th Amendment: turn the quest for equality of a perpetual war of all against all in the United States, guaranteeing that equality will only ever be achieved once we are all perfectly enslaved……  

This is one of those points where I think the “right” meets the “left”—Thanksgiving is a testimonial to the corruption of all that is good.  I want to thank Dr. John Hoopes of the Department of Anthropology at the University of Kansas (“”) a co-author of papers on the Early Classic Period in the Maya Lowlands from our Harvard Graduate Seminar Days with Gordon R. Willey for pointing out to me how close my position is to that of the “AdBusters” group which sponsored “Occupy Wall-Street” (which I confess I have mostly just been ignoring).   They call it “Buy Nothing Day” and it’s been going on for 20 years (originally organized in Mexico City and Vancouver, two of my favorite places):

The Thanksgiving of 2009, after I had just lost my two primary residences, homes in Texas and California, within several months of each other, I spent in a seaside suite in San Clemente overlooking the Pacific with my son Charlie and my assistant Peyton.  But not everyone has that kind of luck in life.  I am Thankful to say this and every day that I have led something of a charmed life.  And for that reason, and because it is customary, I always wish everyone a Happy Thanksgiving.  But “enough is enough”.  This custom has got to stop.    Thanksgiving is like a gigantic perversion of the Calendar year, a gigantic dead skunk in the road of life every year in the same place—it is way too late in the year to be a Harvest Celebration except in places like Southern Florida and Southern Texas where winter crops can be planted and harvested.  

I personally live to fight for “corny old values” like Truth, Justice, and the American Way, for Family, Home, and Freedom, and to add one Senator for the Bill of Rights and against Indefinite Detention, against the PATRIOT ACT, and against the use of United States Troops in this Country against its own citizens.  

I give Thanks for the Beauty of the Earth, for the Splendor of the Skies, and for the Love which from our Birth, over and around us lies.  

But I do not give thanks for the election, re-election or even the existence of Barack Hussein Obama or the 93 Senators who voted for the NDAA this time last year—almost all of them (of those up for re-election) were reelected, including California’s own despicable hypocrite Dianne Feinstein, and there are some new Senators who would surely vote the same easy “pro-administration” way.

I do not give thanks that we live in a corporate-communist country where the boundary between corporate entities and the government is blurred beyond recognition in the unconstitutional “phony money” Federal Reserve Credit-Note economy.