Black Americans Imprisoned Disproportionately:
Re-"Enslavement" to Obstruct Their Right to Vote:
DWB—What Type Laws Would Prevent It
How the 2000 Election Was Stolen
How They Did It Again:
Stole the 2004 Election
(Includes Discussion of Relationship
of DWB Practices to Disproportionately
Denying Blacks The Right to Vote:
1.4 Million in Year 2000)
Don't Be Distracted by The Minors:
(Getting Every Vote Counted).
Focus on the Majors, The Big Picture:
The Preventing of Voting Eligibility
In The First Place:
(You Can't Count A Vote
Not Allowed to Be Cast!)

Table of Contents
For This Site Dealing With
The Big Picture
Introduction
Legal History References
Ulterior-Motives-Based
Law Manipulations Background
Post-Civil-War Systemic Abuses Begin
The Development of
Post-Civil-War-Law Abuses
Blacks' Pre-1960's Near
Drug-Free Record
What the Neo-Confederates
Knew About Crime Rates Per 100,000
(Profile of Who Does 90% of Crimes)
Corrupting Lawmaking and Courts
And More
Systemic Racism, 1970's Example
Lessons Confederates Learned
From The 1868 Election
The 1876 Presidential Election
Florida The Most Discriminatory
Kansas 1850's
Election 1860
Ouster Plot 1933
Texas Election 1941
Alabama Attitude - 1964
Election 2000
Election 2002
Election 2003
Election 2004
Election 2006
Election 2008
How Election Fraud Is Done
Details on Banning Disenfranchment
DWB Prevention Laws

DWB ("driving while black"), "racial profiling," these terms refer to a certain portion of racism. Those with "white privilege," are not subjected to it. It's more than a matter of discrimination in terms of selective enforcement. (Other forms of racism occur on the job, for example, but this site focuses on a different aspect, "Voting While Black," VWB, or attempted VWB (aka "Voting While Black or Brown").

This site covers a major result of "racial profiling," a result of disproportionate arresting, convicting, jailing blacks: widespread disenfranchisement of would-be black voters so as to be not allowed to vote at all. (Details on how this is done are below.)

In 1883, “Thomas Fortune, a young black editor of the New York Globe testified before a Senate committee in 1883 about the situation of the Negro in the United States. He spoke of 'widespread poverty,' of government betrayal, of desperate Negro efforts to educate themselves. . . . Fortune spoke of 'the penitentiary system of the South, with its infamous chain-gang. . . . the object being to terrorize the blacks and furnish victims for contractors, who purchase the labor of these wretches from the state for a song. . . . the white man who shoots a negro always goes free, while the negro who steals a hog is sent to the chain-gang for ten years.'”—Prof. Howard Zinn, A People's History of the United States (New York: Harper and Row, 1980, reprinted, HarperPerennial, 1990), p 204.

The South went so far as to regularly fabricate false charges and caricatures. Not only arresting and convicting blacks, but even going outside the law, e.g., by lynching and torturing, were norms in the South. See background by, e.g., Prof. David Pilgrim, "The Brute Caricature" (Ferris State Univ, Nov 2000).

“The North, it must be recalled, did not have to undergo a revolution in its thinking to accept the subordination of the Negro. When the Civil War ended [1865], nineteen of the twenty-four northern states did not allow blacks to vote. By 1900, all the southern states, in new constitutions and new statutes, had written into law the disenfranchisement and segregation of Negroes, and a New York Times editorial said: 'Northern men . . . no longer denounce the suppression of the Negro vote. . . .'”—Zinn, History, supra, p 203.

Let us transition into the current situation, by this simple example: In the 1960's-1970's, there was an unpopular-to-police black group, the Black Panther Party (BPB). The BPB alleged that police disproportionately issued their members traffic tickets. The police denied it. Prof. Frances K. Heussenstamm did an experiment. Twenty university students with excellent driving records, and cars with no defects, were assigned to make one change only: attach "Black Panther Party" stickers to the bumpers! The reaction: 33 traffic tickets in 17 days!! See Frances K. Heussenstamm, "Bumper Stickers and Cops," 8 Trans-action: Social Science and Modern Society (#4) pp 32-33 (February 1971).

In other words, contrary to the myth that the arresting official does NOT know who he is about to deal with, the real truth is, the decision is first made as to whom to target, then 'look for something.' Not at all the impartial scenario: first the violation, then the discovery of who did it!

DWB: A Perversion of
Police Tailgating
When police tailgate a motorist for a short period, then another, and another, what are they doing? Here is one part of the answer:
“The police officer is reading plate numbers into the radio/computer and waiting for a 'history' on the probable operator, the owner. If the report lists a litany of previous violations, DWI convictions, or outstanding warrant, the officer will concoct a reason to pull the vehicle over.”—Editor, 12 National Motorists Association Foundation News (#1) 13 (Jan/Feb 2001).
Another part of the answer is, especially at night, rushing up close behind you tail-gating. This can provoke you (from fear of unknown vehicle suddenly close behind you, in the dark, with potential for car-jacking or other assault) into 'flight' mode. You may then commit an action (e.g., quick-stopping at a 'stop' sign) leading to an excuse (police claim you didn't stop!) to stop you, ticket you.
“Pretextual traffic stops undermine the legitimacy of the entire criminal justice system,” says John Holevoet, “Racial Profiling and Pretextual Traffic Stops,” 15 National Motorists Association Foundation News (#2) 7 (March/April 2004). Holevoet points out that “the Supreme Court ruled in Whren v. U.S. [517 US 806; 116 S Ct 1769; 135 L Ed 2d 89 (1996)] that traffic stops are constitutional regardless of the officer's motivations . . . even when the traffic stop is consciously being used as a means to an unjustifiable end [result].”
The centuries of law and police abuses show that this system cannot be “reformed.” It must be struck down and banned as unconstitutional, with the appointment of honest judges who will so rule.

Police can indeed know who they are following—BEFORE the stop.

But even that is the tip of the iceberg of the DWB process. This site covers that underlying aspect. The data here contains information likely new to most readers.

"Americans are in far greater danger from their own police forces than they are from foreign terrorists," says Paul Craig Roberts, Ph.D., "America's police brutality pandemic" (27 September 2007). "The only terrorist most Americans will ever encounter is a policeman with a badge, nightstick, mace and Taser. . . . Police brutality has crossed the line from using excessive force against a resisting Rodney King to unprovoked gratuitous violence against persons offering no resistance, such as the elderly, women, students, and elected officials. Americans are not safe anywhere from police. Police attack Americans in university libraries, in public meetings, and in their own homes. . . . Another disturbing aspect is that no one tells the police to stop the brutality."

The webmaster has been opposing the underlying aspect for two decades. Examples include:

Exposé of the Budzyn-Nevers Situation
Testimony Against Building More Prisons
Testimony Opposing Billboards' Racial Targeting
Testimony Against the Gateway Drug
Genuine Crime Prevention—Known Since the 1830's
Victim Bashing, Blaming the Victims

DWB, the making of and judicial upholding of corrupt arrests, is only one element of many racist aspects in the criminal justice system. See, e.g.,

  • John Campbell, Richard Hildreth, and Passmore Williamson, Defendant, Atrocious Judges: Lives of Judges Infamous as Tools of Tyrants and Instruments of Oppression (New York: Auburn, Miller, Orton & Mulligan, 1856) (book on legal status of slaves in free states, in habeas corpus context)

  • The infamous Dred Scott v Sandford, 60 US 393, 407; 15 L Ed 691, 701 (1857) case which, contrary to the common law and Constitution, claimed that blacks "at the time of the Declaration of Independence, and . . . Constitution . . . had for more than a century before had no rights which the white man was bound to respect; and . . . might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit . . . ."

    • Example Refutations In That Era
    Chase | Cheever | Douglass | Fee | Garrison | Green
    Lay | Lincoln | Mansfield | Mellen | Patton | Sandiford
    Shaw | Stewart | Spooner | Stowe | Tiffany | Weld
    Please read at least ten of these following references:

  • Frederick Douglass, "The Convict Lease System" (1893)

  • Grimké, Archibald Henry, B.A., LL.B., M.A., "Why Disfranchisement Is Bad" (Philadelphia: E.A. Wright, 1904; and in Occasional Papers of the American Negro Academy, reprinted, 1969) (showing harmful effect of disfranchisement on African Americans, the South, and the nation)

  • Grimké, Archibald Henry, The Negro and the Elective Franchise: A Series of Papers and a Sermon (Washington, D.C.: The American Negro Academy, 1905)

  • Grimké, Archibald Henry, B.A., LL.B., M.A., "The Ballotless Victim of One Party Governments" (1913; and in Occasional Papers of the American Negro Academy, reprinted, 1969) (attacking disfranchisement)

  • Alton F. McIver, Negro Suffrage: A Study of the Constitutionality of Restrictions in the South (M.A. Thesis, Univ of North Carolina, Chapel Hill: 1950)

  • Joseph L. Bernd, Recent Restrictions upon Negro Suffrage: the Case of Georgia (1959, repr. from The Journal of Politics, vol. 21)

  • Derrick A. Bell, Jr., "Racism in American Courts: Cause for Black Disruption or Despair?" 61 California Law Rev (#1) 165-203 (Jan 1973)

  • Charles V. Hamilton, The Bench and the Ballot: Southern Federal Judges and Black Voters (New York: Oxford Univ Press, 1973)

  • Steven F. Lawson, Black Ballots: Voting Rights in the South, 1944-1969 (New York: Columbia Univ Press, 1976)

  • Edward Ayers, Vengeance and Justice: Crime and Punishment in the Nineteenth-Century South (New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1984)

  • Abigail M. Thernstrom, Whose Votes Count?: Affirmative Action and Minority Voting Rights (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ Press, 1987)

  • "The Disenfranchisement of Ex-Felons: Citizenship, Criminality, and 'the Purity of the Ballot Box,'" 102 Harvard Law Review (#6) pp 1300-1317 (1989)

  • A. Leon Higginbotham, Jr., and Greer C. Bosworth, "'Rather Than the Free': Free Blacks In Colonial and Antebellum Virginia," 26 Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review (#1) 17-66 (Winter 1991)

  • Akhil Reed Amar, "The Bill of Rights and The Fourteenth Amendment," 101 Yale Law Journal (#6) 1193-1284 (April 1992)

  • A. Leon Higginbotham, Jr., et al., "The Law Only As An Enemy," 70 North Carolina Law Review (#4) 969-1070 (April 1992)

  • Edward Ayers, The Promise of the New South (New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992)

  • Paul Finkelman, "The Crime of Color," 67 Tulane Law Review (#6) 2063-2112 (June 1993) (for example, at 2068-9, discussing presumption of guilt that allowed white citizens to demand from black persons papers demonstrating their freedom)

  • Andrew L. Shapiro, "Challenging Criminal Disenfranchisement Under the Voting Rights Act: A New Strategy," 103 Yale Law Journal (#2) 537-566 (Nov 1993) (This is a most significant article, giving a glimpse of Confederates' manipulation of law-making after the Civil War so as to arrange disproportionate arresting and jailing of blacks (re-enslavement under a new label—prison), and thus take away their right to vote. It is this type of manipulation that abolitionist Michigan tried to head off in 1909 by the law discussed herein and at our many related websites.)

  • David Oshinsky, Worse Than Slavery: Parchman Farm and the Ordeal of Jim Crow Justice (New York: The Free Press, 1996)

  • Alex Lichtenstein, Twice the Work of Free Labor: The Political Economy of Convict Labor in the New South (London: Verso, 1996)

  • Paul Finkelman, Slavery and The Law (Madison, Wis: Madison House Publishers, 1996) (Overview | Table of Contents | Introduction)

  • Paul Street, "Race, Prison, and Poverty: The Race To Incarcerate In The Age Of Correctional Keynesianism" (c. 1996)

  • Stephen Hartnett, "Prison Labor, Slavery & Capitalism In Historical Perspective" (c. 1997)

  • Randall Kennedy, Race, Crime, and the Law (New York: Pantheon Books, 1997)

  • Karin A. Shapiro, A New South Rebellion: The Battle Against Convict Labor in the Tennessee Coalfields, 1871-1896 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1998)

  • Rosalyn Terborg-Penn, African American Women in the Struggle for the Vote, 1850-1920 (Bloomington: Indiana Univ Press, 1998)

  • Virginia Hench, "The Death of Voting Rights: The Legal Disenfranchisement of Minority Voters," 48 Case Western Reserve Law Rev (#4) 727-798 (Summer 1998)

  • Patrica Allard and Marc Mauer, Regaining the Vote: An Assessment of Activity Relating to Felon Disenfranchisement Law (The Sentencing Project, January 2000)

  • National Council on Crime and Delinquency, Youth Law Center, “And Justice for Some”   (Washington, DC, 25 April 2000) (Of youths imprisoned with adults, 75% are minority youth. Black youths are overall 600% more likely to be jailed than comparable white youths with identical records.)

  • "The Awful Truth" (2000) ("According to the Sentencing Project, African-American males are incarcerated at . . . more than four times the rate of Black males in South Africa.")

  • Kim Gilmore, Slavery and Prison - Understanding the Connections" (May 2000)

  • Alexander Keyssars, The Right to Vote: The Contested History of Democracy in the United States (New York: Basic Books, 2000)

  • Mary Ellen Curtin, Black Prisoners and Their World, Alabama, 1865-1900: Carter G. Woodson Series in Black Studies (Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 2000)

  • Prof. Angela Y. Davis, "Masked Racism: Reflections on the Prison Industrial Complex" (c. 2000)

  • Penny Hess and Omali Yeshitela, Overturning the Culture of Violence (St. Petersburg: BSU Pub, 2000)

  • New Jersey Racial Profiling Archive (27 November 2000)

  • Prof. Anthony M. Platt, "Social Insecurity: The Transformation of American Criminal Justice, 1965-2000 " (December 2000)

  • Tim Wise, "Shot by Cops? Not If You're White" (22 May 2001)

  • “From Alabama's Past, Capitalism Teamed with Racism to Create Cruel Partnership,” Wall Street Journal (16 July 2001)

  • Sasha Abramsky, "Prison Nation: Driven by fear, the US has surrendered to 'Carceral Keynsianism'" (2001)

  • Bernstein, David E., Only One Place of Redress: African Americans, Labor Regulations and the Courts from Reconstruction to the New Deal (Durham, N.C.: Duke Univ Press, 2001)

  • Paul Street, "Empire Abroad, Prisons At Home: Dark Connections" (c. 2002)

  • Hayden, Joseph, “Echoes of Juneteenth haunt us today,” San Francisco Chronicle (19 June 2003); reprinted at demos-usa.org

  • NCADP, "Racial Bias on Death Row" (2003) (“The system has proved itself to be wildly inaccurate, unjust, unable to separate the innocent men from the guilty and, at times, a very racist system,” says former Illinois Governor George Ryan)

  • Street, Paul, “Starve the Racist Prison Beast” (8 November 2003).

  • Hallett, Prof. Michael, “Commerce with Criminals: The New Colonialism in Criminal Justice,” 21 Rev Policy Research (#1) 49-62 (January 2004)

  • Bruce Dixon, "Ten Worst Places to be Black," Black Commentator (Issue # 146) 14 July 2005

  • Bruce Dixon, "Mass Incarceration is an Abomination," Black Commentator (Issue # 147) 21 July 2005

  • Margaret Colgate Love, Relief from the Collateral Consequences of a Criminal Conviction: A State-by- State Resource Guide (William S. Hein & Co., July 2005) (has "Executive Summary")

  • Glen Ford, “Mass Incarceration and the Black Elite,” Black Commentator (Radio, 5 August 2005)

  • Maya Rockeymoore, Ph.D., “Vote or Die: The Lessons of Katrina,” Black Commentator (22 September 2005)

  • Jeff Manza and Christopher Uggen, Locked Out (Oxford Univ Press, 2006)

  • Elizabeth Hull, The Disenfranchisement of Ex-felons (Temple Univ Press, 2006)

  • Sasha Abramsky, Conned: How Millions Went to Prison, Lost the Vote, and Helped Send George W. Bush to the White House (The New Press, 2006).

  • American Blackout (25 Jan 2006) (movie that “chronicles the recurring patterns of disenfranchisement witnessed from 2000 to 2004”). This video documentary directed by Ian Inaba, begins "with the detailed argument that black voters in Florida were systematically disenfranchised in the 2000 presidential election." The "film then pulls double duty: It's a fine-tooth examination of both the continued, unconstitutional marginalization of black voters in America and the attempts by various political and media machines to crush McKinney in retaliation for her outspokenness on that subject and on the illegality of the war in Iraq."

  • Deborah Davies, “Torture Inc.: Americas Brutal Prisons” (2 March 2006)

  • Stephen Lendman, “The U.S. Gulag Prison System ” (16 March 2006)

  • Tim Wise, "The Oprah Effect: Black Success, White Denial and the Reality of Racism" (28 July 2006) (cites continuing racism, and incompetent denials of same, whereby bigots deem "anecdote" as "not only proof [but] even better proof than social science research and quantitative data [e.g., "statistical evidence," contrary to] the most basic strictures of research design and accepted scholarly interpretation [analysis]”

  • Sasha Abramsky, “Block the Vote: The 10 Worst Places to Cast a Ballot” (Mother Jones, 13 September 2006).

  • Ariel J. Feldman, J. Alex Halderman, and Edward W. Felten, “How to Steal an Election: Princeton: Security Analysis of the Diebold AccuVote-TS Voting Machine” (Princeton University, 15 September 2006)

  • “Debt to Society" (September 2007) (“There are more people behind bars in the United States today than ever before. Since 1980, the inmate population has more than quadrupled to two million—an unprecedented explosion that is incurring unprecedented costs to all Americans.”)

  • Paul Craig Roberts, Ph.D., "Criminals With Badges" (2 January 2008) ("The American police have never prevented crimes. In olden days, the police solved crimes by finding the guilty party. No more. In our time, the police create crimes. And that is why the US prison population is twice the size of China’s, an authoritarian country with a population four to five times larger than America’s. . . . There you have it. The American Police – "support your local Gestapo" – spend their time engineering false crimes and not investigating real crimes. Americans are more at risk from the police than they are from criminals. . . . Never make the mistake of calling the police, and never get stopped by a traffic cop. You run the risk that he will drop a bag of drugs into you car and arrest you on a drug offense. If you encounter a police officer, be sure you have thousands of dollars with which to buy him off from making false charges. Most police charges are false charges. Americans need to wake up to this fact or the American prison population will outstrip the rest of the world combined."

  • William Poundstone, Gaming the Vote: Why Elections Aren't Fair (and What Can Be Done About It) (Hill & Wang, February 2008) (Interview: "ours may be the worst of all the voting systems in common use"; Review, overemphasizes "spoilers" but does note certain voting system flaws)

  • Douglas A. Blackmon, Slavery by Another Name: The Re-Enslavement of Black Americans from the Civil War to World War II (Doubleday, 25 March 2008) (Review 1,   2)

  • Charles Lane, The Day Freedom Died: The Colfax Massacre, the Supreme Court, and the Betrayal of Reconstruction (Henry Holt & Company, 2008) (Review 1,   2,   3) (The Supreme Court upheld massacre of blacks in United States v Cruikshank (1876).)

  • Adam Liptak, "Inmate Count in US Dwarfs Other Nations’" (The New York Times, 23 April 2008) ("The United States has less than 5 percent of the world’s population. But it has almost a quarter of the world’s prisoners. . . . The United States . . . has 751 people in prison or jail for every 100,000 in population. . . . The only other major industrialized nation that even comes close is Russia, with 627 prisoners for every 100,000 people. The others have much lower rates. England’s rate is 151; Germany’s is 88; and Japan’s is 63. The median among all nations is about 125, roughly a sixth of the American rate.")

    • Some people mention “reconciliation.” Step one is of course, ending the attack in process.
    Reconciliation does NOT mean, for example, bankers' reconciliation with robbers while the robbery is in process!
    Genuine reconciliation means, first and foremost, stopping the in-process attack(s). Agreed?!! That's step one?
    Be assured, if someone professes to advocate "reconciliation," "friendship," WITHOUT mentioning ending the attack(s) in process, he is himself an attacker—aiding and abetting, accessory to same.

              DWB, Driving While Black or Brown. This site examines the situation in a way different than you likely have seen. This site is based on medical and historical legal research data, an area of knowledge generally overlooked, except among specialists.

    This more-detailed explanation is contrary to the lay myths you have heard all your life, so bear with us, keep reading, though every sentence may offend some long-cherished myth.

    "Partem aliquam recte intelligere nemo potest, antequam totum, iterum atque iterum, periegerit."
    No one can rightly understand any part until he has read the whole again and again.
    Meaning: Re-read this site, and the references, "again and again" until you understand them in full.



    Voting While Black (or Brown)


    Ulterior-Motives-Based Law
    Manipulations Background

    First, we start with background on law manipulation for ulterior purposes. Such manipulation of law is not new. For example, the U.S. colonies in the pre-1776 American Revolution era, had been part of the British colonial system.

    There was data on law manipulations occurring in that system. What were those manipulations?

    Answer: The creation, defining of, "new crimes."

    How far back can this 'crime-defining' process be traced?

    Answer: Back to at least 1066 and King William I of England.

    This was the "William the Conqueror" you've heard of!

    Who was he?

    Answer: King William I was the illegitimate (i.e., bastard) son of Robert the Devil.

    Who was "Robert the Devil"?

    Robert was the 'conqueror' of William's mother.

    Who was Robert's father?

    Robert was son of a Viking, Rollo the Pirate.

    How did Robert get his wife?

    His father Rollo had been raiding, invading France. Little Robert took his share of the loot, he seized a French peasant girl. She became the mother of William. William was illegitimate, hence, a 'bastard.'

    Robert the Devil was son of Rollo the Pirate.

    Who was Rollo the Pirate?

    Answer: He was a Viking, a Norseman, from Norway.

    How did he end up in Normandy, France?

    Rollo had a gang of toughs, pirates. By pillaging, looting, killing, and 'conquering' throughout Western France, Rollo extorted by conquest, the exalted title of "Duke of Normandy!"

    Now this pirate Rollo is in the French nobility, the French government!

    This pirate's son was Robert. When Rollo died, Robert became "Duke of Normandy."

    His grandson was William, living in Normandy. On the death of Robert, little William became the "Duke" of Normandy.

    Normandy was next door to England!—just across the channel. The Norse Viking pirate Rollo did not pass on to his son Robert, respect for rights. Hence Robert the Devil 'conquered' the French girl (Herleva of Falasia) who became William's mother.

    Little William the Bastard followed daddy Robert's bad example.

    He got his wife about the same way as daddy Robert the devil had done!

    William also 'conquered' his wife. She was a neighboring French noble's daughter (Mathilda, daughter of Count Baldwin of Flanders).

    Little William eyed her, wanted her. Mathilda wanted nothing to do with 'that bastard.'

    William had a reputation of cutting off the hands of people who teased him about his being a bastard, leaving them to bleed to death!

    Criticism, or the word "No," those were definitely NOT words to use on William.

    So the girl means 'No.' So he came to her parent's castle anyway! For her. Like a rough first date! Seized her on the 'first date.'

    Actually, she saw him, ran to her room, slammed the door.

    He ran after her, chased her, broke down the door, broke into her room, lifted her up by the hair, and proceeded to kick her, and kick her, until she agreed to marry him!

    Now William the Bastard, now married to Mathilda, is in the legitimate French nobility.

    Is that enough for William?

    No.

    Next thing he wants, he wants to conquer the neighboring country. He wants to conquer England, just across the channel. He wants to kick out the English king, Harold II. William succeeds, becomes known as "William the Conqueror."

    See also our site with data on the Norman Conquest of England.

    So we see that a Viking pirate by violence set up the process by which his grandson William attacked England! killed the incumbent Harold II! and himself becomes King of England!

    For background, see references including
  • (1) Hendrik Van Loon, The Story of Mankind (New York: Garden City Pub Co, Inc, 1921), p 154;
  • Kenneth M. Setton, "900 Years Ago: The Norman Conquest," 130 National Geographic (#2) 206-251 (August 1966).

    • William thereby set in motion the dynastic process leading to the current Queen Elizabeth II. This is not the stuff of which people's rights are much respected.

    The above summarizes an early aspect of the corrupt process in English history, whereunder colonial and U.S. laws came to have their origin. Here is a brief pertinent summary:

    Note the example of the ancient world, "the Germanic tribes of the north" and "the two . . . Germanic tribes, the Angles and the Saxons, [who] settled in England." "By and large, imprisonment was not used as a punishment," say Phyllis Elperin Clark, M.A., and Robert Lehrman, M.F.A., Doing Time: A Look at Crime and Prisons (New York: Hastings House, 1980), p 24. Restitution was made "to their victims," p 25.

    So, "we should ask how the idea of prison took root in our culture. . . . for most of Western history, the prison sentence was practically unknown," p 18.

    What changed? "When the Normans conquered England in 1066, two different forms of [so-called] justice met. The [power-mad] Norman kings were not 25used to the Anglo-Saxon idea of leaving justice in private hands, but they were quick to see the advantage of fines as a form of punishment. They made one change . . . instead of paying the fines [restitution] to their victims, offenders were now ordered to pay the money to the king," pp 24-25.

    One “important factor [in the British monarchy having decided to begin defining crimes] was . . . to build up a strong central government. Acts [previously legal] became crimes.

    “As the king [government] became more powerful, legislation against private crime increased and after the Norman conquest [of England by William the Conqueror, 1066] a distinct body of criminal law evolved for the first time. . . ."

    “As part of his policy of strengthening the central government, Henry II (1154-89) established the system [leading to modern] judges.

    “[In the] reign of Henry VII [1485-1509] . . . a strong central government [did] emerge . . . reflected by a great increase in the types of crimes against which legislation was passed. . . .

    “Under the Stuarts [1603-1689; King James I, Charles I, Charles II, James II], the need to raise money for the crown led to [yet more] new crimes being defined.”—“Crime,” Encyclopædia Britannica, Vol 6, pp 754-758 (this quote, pp 756-757) (1963).

    One “device of Edward [IV] [1461-1483] for filling his exchequer was a very stringent [law] enforcement [policy]; small infractions of the laws being made the excuse for exorbitant fines. This was a trick which Henry VII. [1485-1509] was to turn to still greater effect.”—“English History,” Encyclopædia Britannica, 11th ed., Vol 9, pp 466-587 (this quote, p 520) (1910).
    See also the history of corrupt English judges, by Baron John Campbell, Atrocious Judges: Lives of Judges Infamous as Tools of Tyrants and Instruments of Oppression, edited by Richard Hildreth (New York and Auburn: Orton & Mulligan, 1856), and, for example, the abuses concerning the Trial of Anne Boleyn, pp 85-86 (when King Henry VIII was disposing of his unwanted second wife! When a queen can't get a fair trial, due to the perjury and rigged jury, who can?!)
    See also background on
  • the “lawyerization” of criminal trials into an “adversary procedure” abolishing the old citizen equality concept, distorting and suppressing truth, bestowing an enormous advantage on the wealthier party, a “wrong turn” in legal history, cited by John H. Langbein, The Origins of Adversary Criminal Trial: Oxford Studies in Modern Legal History Series (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 2003)
  • the Royal Stuart's “toryism” attitude (in essence, that the king/government can do no wrong) infecting the South, via pro-monarchy immigrants from England to America, by abolitionist Edward C. Rogers, Slavery Illegality (Boston: B. Marsh, 1855), pp 59-60
  • the invention of police departments, by Kristian Williams, “The Demand for Order and the Birth of Modern Policing” 55 Monthly Review (#7) 16-23 (December 2003).
  • the long-term pattern of manipulation passed on generation after generation by pre-Confederates, “Willie Lynch Manipulation Speech” ( 1712).
    "It's a problem that's faced by police departments in every major city in our country, that criminals infilitrate and sign up to join the police force," says Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, CXLVI Newsweek, p 23 (10 October 2005).

    • Bottom line: Criminal laws were invented not to protect people, but rather as a bullying manipulation to increase government power and revenue! for a pirate's dynasty and government!

    This is not to overlook the ego trip, adrenalin rush, and psychopathic elements prevalent among polticians. Note
  • World Health Organization data, “Wide research needed to solve the problems of mental illness,” World Mental Health, Vol 12, pages 138-141 (WHO Press Release, October 1960) (“people with psychopathic make-up often become leaders”); and

  • James C. Coleman, Ph.D., Abnormal Psychology and Modern Life, 5th ed (Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman & Co, 1976), p 10 (on the long-verified prevalence of psychopaths as high officials; “individuals with psychopathic personality makeup, who tend to exploit power for selfish purposes and have little concern for ethical values or social progress, often become leaders”).
    • Observe especially neo-Confederate politicians. “It is difficult today to comprehend the psychosis of the southern mind. . . .,” says Prof. Clement Eaton, The Freedom-of-Thought Struggle in the Old South (Duke Univ Press, 1940, and New York: Harper & Row, 1964), p 384. P 140 cites them as described as “a set of drunkards, gamblers, and whoremongers,” by abolitionist Daniel Worth. Wherefore due to such factors as that corrosive influence, the U.S.A. is the highest, the worst, in terms of sheer numbers of prosecutions and incarcerations.
    Note the Election Fraud committed by the South and upheld by the President in Kansas in 1850's. The government fought for the election stealing. Southerners saw they could continue this type abuse.
    For an example of the criminal prosecution system targeting blacks vs whites for same activity, see “Sex Across the Color Line: Marcus Dixon, Emmett Till and the New/Old South,” by Tim Wise, Black Commentator, Issue 71 (1 Jan 2004).
    See also Bruce Dixon, "Mass Incarceration is an Abomination," Black Commentator, Issue # 147 (21 July 2005).
    For data on the invention of police departments for social control purposes, and on the process of massively increasing arrests by not following the "Good Neighbor" policy (informal actions such as warnings vs outright arrests), see "The Demand for Order and the Birth of Modern Policing," by Kristian Williams, 55 Monthly Review (#7) 16-23 (December 2003).

    These reasons (crime-defining for power and revenue) continue to be true. Now, after nine centuries of law-manipulations-practice, the crime-defining process is intentionally used by politicians for deliberate malicious legislative purposes.

    Why are we saying this? in DWB context? Answer: Such 'crime-defining' purposes include disenfranchisements of black voters.

    Post-Civil-War
    Systemic Abuses Begin

    Unreconstructed Confederates saw that they could do that! They could define, create, invent, new crimes!

    Next, they could establish a vastly enlarged prison system!

    They did so with great malice. They had wanted slavery to continue. They had lost the Civil War (1861-1865).

    Slavery was not ended properly. America never repented of slavery. (Slavery was ended by war, not by repentance.) As soon as the slaves were free, they were abandoned by the North, and brutalized and lynched by the “Religious Right” “Bible-Belt” South. The Bible precedent that one might suppose the "Bible Belt" would appreciate on ending slavery, ahd not been followed:
  • providing to the freed slaves payment for their labor, in the form of valuables such as jewels, gold, clothing, and supplies. Exodus 12:35-36.

  • killing 10% of the pro-slavery people, i.e., the first-born, about 10% of the 20 million people, i.e., about two million.

  • additionally, killing 100% of the entire slaver army (the Egyptians at the Red Sea, Exodus 14:28); only 25% of Confederate troops were killed.

  • providing land to the freed slaves Joshua 13-22

  • with the bottom-line resulting in wealth so great that silver was spurned (like stones! or in modern terms, small bills), as gold (large bills) was had in such significant abundance (1 Kings 10:21 and 27 and 2 Chronicles 1:15)!
    • Instead of such combination of penalty and "reparations" occurred, the unrepentant slavers were left alive in full possession of their stolen wealth, the product of the unpaid labor of the slaves. These people in the South brutalized the 'freed' slaves, murdered many, and continued revenge via tobacco poisonings and mass criminalization.

    Slavers were left alive, but they were unappreciative and resentful. See, for example, this quote:
    “We [of the South] have been confronted by the condition of a large, ignorant, debased vote, thrust upon us by the fourteenth and fifteenth amendments. That vote stands as a menace to the freedom, to the purity of the ballot box, to the purity and honest of elections, to sthe decency of government, and it is there forever until there is a constitutional provision made here which will relieve us from it.”—South Carolina Senator Benjamin Tillman (1847-1918), Congressional Record, 56th Cong., 1st Sess., pp 2245, 3224 (1899).

    Tillman bragged in 1900, "We have done our level best [to prevent blacks from voting] . . . we have scratched our heads to find out how we could eliminate the last one of them. We stuffed ballot boxes. We shot them. We are not ashamed of it." (Quoted by Rayford Logan, The Betrayal of the Negro from Rutherford B. Hayes to Woodrow Wilson [New York: Da Capo Press, 1997], p. 91).

    See also his 23 March 1900 Senate speech advocating disenfranchisement of blacks and lynching of those who protested, saying, e.g., "I want to ask the Senator this proposition in arithmetic: In my State there were 135,000 negro voters, or negroes of voting age, and some 90,000 or 95,000 white voters. . . . Now, I want to ask you, with a free vote and a fair count, how are you going to beat 135,000 by 95,000?"

    Slavers had lost political power. Slavers had controlled the Electoral College, as noted by Lewis Tappan, Social and Political Evils of Slavery (1843), pp 50-51. They wanted that Slavery Era control of the Electoral College back. How to get it?

    Here is a part of the answer, an example. Slavers developed a prison system, comprising a re-enslavement system. That is bad enough. But worse was to come. That system

    "led to wholesale corruption, extensive trafficking in drugs . . . physical abuse of inmates . . . and an abdication of official responsibility and proper supervision . . . rampant homosexual rape of the younger and weaker inmates . . . unrestrained brutality . . . commonplace . . . medical care was virtually unavailable. . . ."

    The superintendent (Thomas Murton) of one prison who objected to this type systemic abuse (including use of "the Tucker telephone, a torture device used to send an electrical shock to an inmate's testicles" and requiring inmates "to produce enough . . . income to meet the entire costs of running the facility and . . . whipped for not doing their share") was "rebuked by the governor . . . threatened with arrest . . . fired for offending and embarrassing his political superior . . . subsequently became a criminal justice professor at the University of Minnesota."

    For references, here is a list:

    • Holt v Sarver, 309 F Supp 362 (ED Ark, 1970) aff'd 442 F2d 304 (CA 8, 1971)

    • Prof. Thomas Murton, Accomplices to the Crime: The Arkansas Prison Scandal (London: M. Joseph, Pub, 1970)

    • Hutto v Finney, 437 US 678 (US Supreme Court, 1978)

    • Prof. Gerald D. Robin (Univ of New Haven), Introduction to the Criminal Justice System, 3rd ed (New York: Harper & Row, 1987), pp 359-360.

    • Hallett, Prof. Michael Hallett (Univ of N Florida), “Commerce with Criminals: The New Colonialism in Criminal Justice,” 21 Rev Policy Research (#1) 49-62 (January 2004) (cites links between slavery and modern day private prisons)

    • Connie Cass, “Report: 1 of Every 75 U.S. Men in Prison” (Associated Press, Friday, 28 May 2004) (The U.S. is No. 1 in incarcerations in the world. The U.S. has more people per capita incarcerated than any other nation in the world. “In 2003, 68 percent of prison and jail inmates were members of racial or ethnic minorities, the government said. An estimated 12 percent of all black men in their 20s were in jails or prisons, as were 3.7 percent of Hispanic men and 1.6 percent of white men in that age group.”)

    • Bob Herbert, "America's Abu Ghraibs" (New York Times, Monday, 31 May 2004) ("Not only are inmates at prisons in the U.S. frequently subjected to similarly grotesque treatment, but Congress passed a law in 1996 to ensure that in most cases they were barred from receiving any financial compensation for the abuse. We routinely treat prisoners in the United States like animals. We brutalize and degrade them, both men and women. And we have a lousy record when it comes to protecting well-behaved, weak and mentally ill prisoners from the predators surrounding them.")

    • William March, "Delays, Purge Hit Voter Rolls" (7 June 2004)

    • Michael Moore, "Fahrenheit 9/11" (Movie, 13 June 2004) (has sections on the stealing of the Florida 2000 Election)

    • PFAW, "The Long Shadow of Jim Crow: Voter Intimidation and Suppression in America Today" (August 2004)

    Other examples include this one, from

    "a colored prisoner farm . . . three miles out of Clarksdale, Mississippi.

    "[The author] was the cook's helper, and saw some of what went on. Every time a prisoner came they whipped him, called it 'nitiating' him, to let him know where his whipping post was; and they whipped him again before he went out to work. . . . They'd give him an extra gift for his work. . . . They would make him lay on his stomach crost a barrel, and some would hold his head and the others his feet. And the whipping boss, a white man, would whip him with a strap of leather with round holes cut in it, to make blisters on the skin.

    "I saw them whip one man to death . . . morning and night until he . . . just lay in his cage. . . . He couldn't even get [up] to get his food. The feeder wasn't allowed [to help, just] leave the sick man's [food out-of-reach]. I'd [instead] take the bread and roll it up in a piece of paper and throw it to his bunk, like a puppy. They told me I'd get prison for life if they found that out. He died and they buried him in the farm cemetary, just like he was; didn't wash or change him. 'Cause the hole was too short they stomped on him, mashed, tramped, bent him down in there, and threw dirt on him."

    —From "The Prison Farm," by Mary Richardson, Item 158 in Richard M. Dorson, PhD (Prof, History and Folklore, Indiana University), American Negro Folktales (Greenwich, Conn: Fawcett Pubs, Inc, 1956, 1958, 1967), p 288.

    For an overview of modern prison abuses, see
  • "Prisoner Abuse and The Drug War -- What You Can Do," by Richard Lake (14 May 2004)

  • "The Dark Side of America: A system to monitor conditions in our prisons, which have grown tenfold over the last 30 years, is long overdue," New York Times (17 May 2004)

  • Prison Lifer Ratio Study," by "The Sentencing Project" (May 2004) (1 in 11 US prisoners is serving a life sentence)

    • Torture Examples from Slavery Era
  • Axe-Murder
  • Eye-Gouging
  • Racking and Salting
  • Skinning
  • Torture-Murder
  • Whip-to-Death

    • Torture had been a way of life before the Civil War. Nothing changed thereafter in neo-Confederates' attitudes.

    In fact, the neo-Confederates, soon after the Civil War,

    "developed a new form of slavery known as convict leasing. Renting prisoners from the states' overcrowded prison systems provided the contractors with cheap labor and the states with welcome revenue.

    "As the demand for convict labor increased, blacks were arrested on ever more petty charges such as vagrancy, fistfighting or carrying a weapon, and shipped off to chain gangs. There they were ill-fed, poorly clothed and brutally treated; the death rate among them ran as high as 50 percent in South Carolina."—Richard W. Murphy, et al., ed., The Nation Reunited: War's Aftermath (Alexandria, VA: Time-Life Books, 1987), p 124.

    "Meanwhile the vicious system generated enormous fortunes for some. A planter named Edmund Richardson got control of almost all the convicts in Missiissippi and became for a time the biggest cotton producer in the South; by dealing shrewdly in convicts, Alabama state warden John H. Bankhead grew wealthy on a salary of $2,000 a year; Georgia's . . . political boss Joseph Brown made his postwar fortune with convicts leased from the state for seven cents a day.

    "In fact, so many powerful people profited from the system that it took reformers decades to end it." Murphy, supra, p 124.

    But reformers ended only one tiny portion of the abuses. Let's see what was not ended.

    Reformers failed to end the money motivation in the "criminal justice" system. "Crime is down, but the prison biz is booming—it creates jobs and corporate profits." "[E]very one of them . . . becomes another lasting monument . . . to the fear and greed and political cowardice that now pervade American society."—Eric Schlosser, "The Prison-Industrial Complex," 282 Atlantic Monthly (#6) 51-77 (Dec 1998).

    Note, secondly, this example: "Study: More blacks in prison than college" (Macomb Daily, p 6A, Thursday, 29 Aug 2002): "more blacks were in Michigan prisons from 1985 to 2000 than were in its higher education system. For 2000, there were 24,300 blacks in Michigan prisons and 21,454 in its colleges and universities, according to the study, titled 'Cellblocks or Classrooms? The Funding of Higher Education and Corrections and Its Impact on African-American Men.'" The study was by Laura Jones and Jason Ziedenberg of the Justice Policy Institute. "Michigan increased spending on higher education $430 million, or 27 percent and corrections spending [see example] grew almost $1.11 billion, or 227 percent during the 15-year period examined, according to the report."

    In reading the next section, bear in mind this fact: Southerners already knew how to manipulate their state constitutions to violate basic moral and legal principles, such as those in the Declaration of Independence.—Rev. John Rankin, Letters on American Slavery (Ohio: 1823), p 68.

    This crucial crimininalization-related fact was known as long as the 17th century: "Tobacco, with its mind-dulling narcotic capacities, was ideally suited to [convey] character ranges from naive, earthy simpleton to diligent worker to aggressive brute. Not unlike the breakfast beer soup that predated coffee as a morning drink, tobacco was, in a sense, a way of keeping the lower classes in their place–a class in a perpetual state of drunkenness poses little threat. Along the same lines, the peasant [or black] represented a means to criticize tobacco use as a dirty and unsophisticated custom, but at the same time to justify further commerce in tobacco and its related products," says "The Culture of Smoke: Low-Life" (New York Public Library, 1997-1998, citing 17th century attitutde, already well-aware of tobacco's brain damaging and debilitating qualities.

    "The 18th-century smoking club [used] the devilish herb. In this milieu, its [tobacco's] narcotic effects are plainly, blatantly sought and achieved," says "The Culture of Smoke: High-Life" (New York Public Library, 1997-1998, citing 18th century awareness of tobacco as narcotic, a fact then easily known the Confederates.

    The Development of
    Post-Civil-War-Law Abuses

    “When you head South, you're talking about two things—tobacco farmers and evangelicals,” said Ralph Reed.

    Their own records show knowledge of the fact that tobacco effects include "disturbances . . . on the bronchial surface of the lung" and the fact that "no smoker can ever be said . . . to be well."—"Effects of Tobacco," The Confederate States Medical & Surgical Journal (November 1864).

    The roots of the modern DWB-VWB process began shortly after the Civil War. Here's how it came about. We start with unknown-to-laymen medical data on the drug-sequence useage process:

    Cigarettes are the starter drug, the one typically first-used. Minority youth are disproportionately targeted to do this. Tobacco pushers sell illegal cigarettes to minority children in particular, as shown by Elizabeth A. Klonoff, et al., "An Experimental Analysis of Sociocultural Variables in Sales of Cigarettes to Minors," 87 Am J Pub Health (#5) 823-826 (May 1997). Illegal sales are MORE to minority youth, than to white youth. See also details by Meg Gallogly, "Tobacco Company Marketing to African-Americans" (5 January 2006).

    Cigarettes cause "the worst of all drug habits, the smoking of tobacco"—Herbert H. Tidswell, M.D., The Tobacco Habit: Its History and Pathology (London: J. & A. Churchill, 1912), p 69.

    Slavery was disproportionately by tobacco farmers. They began the major use of slaves in the U.S. See Glenn Porter, ed., Encyclopedia of American Economic History, Vol II (NY: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1980), "Slavery," pp 552-561. It says "of the American slave population . . . most worked in tobacco," p 552. This occurred early, "by the end of the [seventeenth] century [1700] plantation gangs were almost wholly composed of Negroes."—Jerome E. Brooks, The Mighty Leaf: Tobacco Through the Centuries (Boston: Little, Brown and Co, 1952), p 99.

    Cigarettes are a Confederate product which abolitionists boycotted (like modern boycotts of apartheid South Africa). For this website, we confine our analysis to the fact that cigarettes are the starter drug delivery mechanism, foreseeably leading to subsequent additional drug abuse. (Our other websites (see overview)   provide more details).

              And, the methodology of how to do legitimate genuine crime prevention has been known since the 1830's, continuously in research, through to the present day era. DWB involves taking actions contrary to that methodology.

               Quick background: Slavery had been illegal and unconstitutional, yet slavers, originally mostly tobacco farmers, did it anyway.

    ABOLITIONISTS EXPOSING
    SLAVERY UNCONSTITUTIONALITY
    Salmon P. Chase (1837) Frederick Douglass (1860) William Goodell (1852)
    Abraham Lincoln (1854) Horace Mann (1849) Samuel J. May (1836)
    George Mellen (1841) Edward Rogers (1855) Benjamin Shaw (1846)
    Alvan Stewart (1845) Lysander Spooner (1845) Joel Tiffany (1849)

    A significant factor in slavery was rape, mass rape. In the post-Civil War era, these same people, now called "ex"-Confederates, resented Yankees having "stolen" their slaves. Among many reprisals, they resisted blacks' right to vote.

    “The right of voting for representatives is the primary right by which all other rights are protected. To take away this right is to reduce a man to slavery.”
    —Thomas Paine, Founding Father

    Election - 1860

    The "red states" - "blue states" issue was evident then. Recall that many "red states," called "grey" then, did not accept the results of the election. They resented that Abraham Lincoln had been duly elected. So they organized massive violence to try to overthrow the election results! For more background on the subject, see our excerpt from the pertinent book by Henry Wilson, The History of the Rise and Fall of Slavepower in America by Henry Wilson (Boston, 1877).

    The seceding "red states" resented that the 1860 election was barely won by the anti-slavery-expansion party of Abraham Lincoln. The pro-slavery side running John Breckinridge for President had nearly won. Lincoln had not won a majority of the popular vote, only about 39.8%. Lincoln had barely won a majority in the slavery-dominated Electoral College.
    The pro-slavery "red states" side was so dominant, that if just one state, say, New York, had switched sides, Lincoln would not have had an Electoral College majority; and the Presidency under the Constitution would have been decided by the House of Representatives.
    “Breckinridge was pledged to take” “pro-slavery actions. He certainly would have appointed pro-slavery justices to . . . the Supreme Court. . . . Breckinridge also favored the admission of New Mexico and other national territories . . . as slave states, so the balance between free and slave states would have been permanently destroyed. [Also a factor] was the determination of Breckinridge [advocates] to extend the empire of slavery by purchasing, or conquering, Cuba. . . . a Breckinridge victory would have assured that the United States remained a slaveholding nation.” Reference: History Prof. David Herbert Donald, “1860: The Road Not Taken,” 35 Smithsonian (#7) 54-56 (October 2004).
    The South could easily see that if it could control just one more such state, it could retain control of the nation.

    Coming so close to having won, the seceding "red states" vowed to in essence overturn the election results. Remember, that same anti-election results continues.

    "When the registration of voters in the 10 unreconstructed Southern states was completed in September of 1867, there were an estimated 735,000 blacks and 635,000 whites on the rolls." Murphy, supra, p 67.

    1867 Registered Voters Data: Examples
    StateBlackWhite
    Alabama104,00061,000
    Florida16,00011,000
    Georgia95,00096,000
    Louisiana84,00045,000
    Mississippi60,00046,000
    North Carolina72,000106,000
    South Carolina80,00046,000
    Virginia105,000120,000

               The unreconstructed Confederates saw that in a number of locations, they could be outvoted. But they also saw that they could re-dominate, if they would ruthlessly obstruct and prevent black voting.

    Do that, obstruct black voting, they could re-dominate America and the Presidency, as before the Civil War. (For background, see abolitionist Henry Wilson's analysis.)

    And remember, before the Civil War, blacks generally could not vote.

    The 'ex-'Confederates saw, plainly, in the close 1868 election, that they could re-dominate America and the Presidency only if blacks were once again, rendered unable to vote.

    You may recall that Andrew Johnson was then President having been elected with Lincoln in 1864. Why did his party not re-nominate him, and instead chose Grant? Because Johnson had "sold out," sold out to the South. He sabotaged Reconstruction efforts, ignored the mass violence and lynchings of blacks, ignored the anti-black laws being passed in Southern states, generally took a wicked anti-freedom, pro-South position on every point.
    His party saw that he was abandoning its policies, and positioning himself to get Southern votes to be re-elected. He pretended to be trying to unify the country after the War, but in reality, had no such interest.
    He had been a long-time illiterate who couldn't read until his wife taught him. He hated blacks. He had had slaves and had typical slaver morals (the webmaster personally knows one of his black descendants!)
    Johnson did not care about blacks' rights, so had no moral qualms about selling out America, about taking the immoral point of view. His emphasis was promoting his personal vanity, covetousness, and greed.
    As having lived in the "Slave Power," in Tennessee, he well knew the South's long-time lockhold on the federal government and its obsessive pro-slavery policies in defiance of the Constitution.
    “The policy of the federal government down through the years, despite several conspicuous exceptions, had been predominantly supportive of slavery. . . . That was the impression given in the national capital . . . . That was the image presented in diplomacy to the rest of the world.”—Don E. Fehrenbacher, Ph.D. (1920-1998), The Slaveholding Republic: An Account of the United States Government's Relation to Slavery, ed. Ward M. McAfee (New York; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001).
    Johnson was willing to go along, so abandoned his party, so it naturally did not nominate him, but chose war hero General Grant instead.

      The unreconstructed Confederates clearly saw that the black vote was sufficient to swing elections against them, including at the Presidency. For example, in 1868, Presidential candidate General Ulysses S. Grant LOST the election among the nation's total 5,000,000 white voters (North and South combined), 2,300,000 vs 2,700,00 for the opponent. So Grant's opponent would have won by 400,000 votes, and restored Southern control immediately, the first election after Lincoln!

    How did Grant win in 1868 (meaning the Grant-Henry Wilson ticket: Wilson was an abolitionist and anti-slavery activist exposing Southern political machinations)?

    Answer: The Grant-ticket received almost 700,000 black votes (almost all the 735,000 black voters!). Those newly enfranchised black voters' crucial swing votes thus made Grant-Wilson the winner 3,000,000 to 2,700,000. Unreconstructed Confederates could see that this was barely 300,000 votes ahead.—Prof. Oscar Sherwin (English, City College NY), Prophet of Liberty: Wendell Phillips (New York: Bookman Associates, 1958), p 565.

    Unreconstructed Southerners (e.g., KKK founder Nathan Bedford Forrest) saw that if they could eliminate the black vote (or just significantly reduce it), they could once again dominate America and the Presidency. So how to do that?

    The U.S. Constitution, seemingly, forbad the South from directly stopping blacks from voting. But the ex-Confederates found a loop-hole.

    Referring to this loophole does not mean that intimidation and mass murders were not also used. But this site focuses on what is continuing to present. Examples of mass murders in the post-Civil-War South are too numerous to list. But here are examples.

  • "A favorite . . . terror tactic was the incited riot: Whenever [pro-black-voting-rights activists] gathered, armed whites would provoke an incident and open fire. . . . In rural areas, blacks suspected of [pro-voting] sympathies were routinely murdered. . . . stalking and shooting fleeing blacks . . . . 'just the same as birds' . . . ." Murphy, supra, pp 145-147.

  • One "election day, armed whites turned blacks away from the polls while voting repeatedly themselves [with] a cannon loaded with chains and slugs trained on the voting place . . . Any blacks brave enough to approach the ballot boxes were surrounded and beaten . . . [example] where there had been a racial massacre, seven [anti-neo-Confederate] votes were recorded in this election, compared to 2,500 in the previous one." Murphy, supra, pp 147-148.

  • In Mississippi, the neo-Confederates "obliterated the [opposing] majority of 30,000 votes of two years earlier and replaced it with a [neo-Confederate] majority of 30,000." Murphy, supra, pp 148.

  • Conclusion from the 1868 example of a 300,000 vote margin: It takes changing merely 60,000 votes in just five Southern states for national election results to be reversed. And there had been eleven states in the Confederacy! This was far more than enough for the South to once again dominate the federal government. The motive to destroy the black vote was clearly there, raising the topic at hand, the continuing assault on the black vote to change election results.
    Post-war Confederate guerillas went so far in one area as to post a murder notice of killings to "continue until the Radical Party is exterminated . . .," say Prof. James M. Smallwood, Barry A. Crouch, and Larry Peacock, Murder and Mayhem: The War of Reconstruction in Texas (College Station: Texas A&M Univ Press, 2003), p 82 (Review 1,   2,   3). Confederate guerillas "understood the political situation . . . continued to drape themselves in the Lost Cause and posture as Confderate heroes trying to save . . . the old pro-slavery party," p 82. Confederate guerillas "ordered all freedpeople in the area to leave the state altogether . . . disobedience would mean 'immediate, instant death,'" p 82. Unionists realized "that one of the principal objects to be attained by 'the notice and threats to Union men, white and black[,] was to discourage them and tender them powerless at the anticipated Election.'" The Confderate guerillas succeeded, their violent actions "'to compel the Unionists through fraud to leave the country, this having to a great extent been accomplished,'" p 82. Confederate guerillas "searched for any means, fair or foul, to discourage white Unionists and freedmen from voting," p 82.
    See also David W. Padrusch, Aftershock: Beyond the Civil War (A & E, 2006), for more on the Confederate violence pattern. For example, Confederates in 1866 New Orleans wounded, shot, and dispersed the delegates to the Lousiana constitutional convention, and their supporters, lest they vote to allow blacks to vote.
    "Much more mayhem developed before [one] chapter of the Second Civil War ran its course. Writing . . . in July of 1869, Lt. William Hoffman may have given the best analysis of the turmoil, an analysis that is still thought provoking for those who study the Reconstruction era today. Hoffman said that the Southern rebels' hatred for the white loyalists and for the freedmen was such that it could never be overcome. The freedmen's situation was deplorable, he said, as he echoed the sentiments of all those who had seen blacks robbed or beaten, raped or murdered. White Union civilians were similarly persecuted, with some of their number also being killed. Even worse, Lieutenant Hoffman surmised that the [Confederate] hatred would be passed from one generation to the next: 'The coming generation, children and children's children[,] are zealously reared to the one great tenet: implacable hatred to the [Union] government.' The subsequent history of the South suggests that young Hoffman knew of what he spoke," say Prof. Smallwood, et al, Murder and Mayhem, supra, p 116.
    In Congress, a number of black congressmen, newly elected after the Civil War, sought to prevent this type assault on rights. Laws such as the Civil Rights Act of 1875 and the Ku Klux Klan Act were passed. Click here for excerpts of speeches on same. But the grey vs blue continues even yet, renamed as red states vs blue states.

    • Presidential Election Background 1860-1884
    The Presidential Elections 1860-1884 Site features cartoons from Harper's Weekly, especially by Thomas Nast, and from Vanity Fair, Frank Leslie's Illustrated Weekly, Puck, and the Library of Congress Collection of American Political Prints, 1766-1876. In addition to explanations of each cartoon, the site has biographies, explanations of issues, campaign overviews, and other relevant information.

    The 1876 Presidential Election

    For information on the corruption of the 1876 election, in which Southern states such as Florida, Louisiana, and South Carolina, played a significant role, see sites such as

  • rbhayes.org/disputeFAQ.htm

  • spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAelection1876.htm

  • historical-museum.org/history/election/election.htm

  • tbwt.com/views/manning/manning_01-09-01.asp

  • infoplease.com/ipa/A0101175.html

  • And see details below.
    The 1876 Presidential election result was not finally known until two days before Inauguration Day, 4 March 1877. This precedent contrasts with the Supreme Court 12 December 2000, rushing a halt to the vote counting process, weeks before the scheduled Inauguration Day, 20 January 2001.
    The 1876 election theft was so notorious as to have resulted in a classic novel, Gore Vidal's 1876: A Novel (New York: Random House, 1976; and London: Heinemann, 1976).

    • Unreconstructed Southerners hated America for the Civil War casualties: "roughly a quarter [25%] of the South's able-bodied men—lay dead," Source: Steven A. Channing, et al., eds. The Civil War: Confederate Ordeal: The Southern Home Front (Alexandria, VA: Time-Life Books, 1989), p 3.

    Southerners had already shown ability to carry on evil for centuries, passing it on to descendants for generations, says George Mellen, Unconstitutionality of Slavery (Boston: Saxton & Pierce, 1841), p 29.

    Unreconstructed Southerners hated America for winning the Civil War; "loathing of the North was widespread and unrelenting. A Savannah woman taught her children never to utter the word ‘Yankee' without adding the epithets ‘hateful' and ‘thieving.' A North Carolina innkeeper told a Northern journalist that the Yankees had killed his sons, burned his house and stolen his slaves, leaving him only with the privilege of venting his spleen: ‘I get up at half-past four in the morning, and sit up till twelve at night, to hate ‘em.'" Source: Richard W. Murphy, ed. The Civil War: The Nation Reunited: War's Aftermath (Alexandria, VA: Time-Life Books, 1987), p 28.

    Naturally the South was filled with hate of the North. The North had stopped their "fun."
  • Slavers had committed rape; the 1860 census had shown 588,000 mulatto women. Source: Barbara Goldsmith, Other Powers (NY: Alfred A. Knopf, 1998), p 154. Quadroons are offspring of a mulatto and a white; octoroons, of a quadroon and a white. Slavers could make 20 times annual pay, by raping the slave woman. Pretty quadroons and octoroons sold for $2,500, 20 times normal white worker pay. Rape = wealth for tobacco farmer rapists.

  • "A few traders had [had] special rooms for displaying 'choice stock'—pretty quadroons and octoroons who fetched up to $2,500 or more from New Orleans brothel owners."—Davis, The Civil War: Brother: The War Begins, supra, p 51. Est. 15 prostitution clients per slave-girl per day, @ $0.50 each, for 300 days, is $2,225 in one year, a large (89%) return on investment.

  • This "fancy girls" issue, "choice stock," had related to "'that which is ever a curse to a slave girl'—personal beauty," says Lerone Bennett, Jr., Before the Mayflower: A History of the Negro in America 1619-1964, rev. ed. (Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1964), chap. 4, p 86.

  • These issues had long been cited by Rev. John Rankin, Letters (1823), pp 34-35 (chastity), and p 33 (nudity).

  • Slavers, tobacco farmers, had invented modern public live pornography, strip-shows. "The slaves . . . were paraded in front of the white shoppers . . . women were often stripped. . . 'The customers would feel our bodies,' recalled a former slave."—Davis, The Civil War: Brother: The War Begins, supra, p 50. The lazy, stupid, ignorant scum known as slavers thus could become wealthy.

  • "Miscegenation, most typically between white men and black women, and the consequent mixed offspring of such unions, was one of the most bizarre aspects of American slavery. The sexual exploitation by white masters of their female slaves was a conspicuous part of Southern life."—Page Smith, Ph.D., A People's History of the Young Republic, Vol 3, The Shaping of America (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co, 1980), p 447. See also William I. Bowditch, "White Slavery In The United States" (New York, N.Y.: American Anti-Slavery Society, 1855)

  • Southern slavers had been immersed in "vice . . . immorality . . . corrupt inclinations . . . lascivious conversation . . . almost everything wicked and obscene . . . lewdness."—Rev. John Rankin, Letters, supra, p 62.

  • "'There is not a likely-looking black girl in the state,' a planter had told Frederick Law Olstead, 'that is not the concubine of a white man. There is not an old plantation in which the grandchildren of the owner are not whipped in the field by the overseers.'"—Lerone Bennett, Jr., Before the Mayflower: supra, chap. 10, p 251.

    • Wherefore abolitionists had correctly said that "The Slave States are Sodoms, and almost every village family is a brothel," citing "a million and a half of slave women, some of them without even the tinge of African blood . . . prey to the unbridled lusts of their masters."

    Naturally, the South hated the "damn Yankees" for spoiling and ending their "fun."

    One planter lamented about the change, "I never did a day's work in my life, and don't know how to begin." Source: Richard W. Murphy, ed. The Civil War: The Nation Reunited: War's Aftermath (Alexandria, VA: Time-Life Books, 1987), p 33. (Details)

    The Ku Klux Klan was created with a goal to "kill or drive away leading Negroes and only let the humble and submissive remain." Theirs was a "moderate voice" in comparison to the fact that Southern OFFICIALS early decided upon genocide (100% extermination) as policy. The Memphis "chief of police told his men to ‘kill the last damned one of the nigger race, and burn up the cradle." Source: Richard W. Murphy, ed. The Civil War: The Nation Reunited: War's Aftermath (Alexandria, VA: Time-Life Books, 1987), p 34.

    Admittedly, there were some Federal troops, but demobilization was the Union goal (only 50,000 remaining after 800,000 were "mustered out" before 1865 ended), understandably trying to return to normal life after the catastrophe caused by the South's genocidal activity. This southern terrorist goal of genocide continued, as one Southerner admitted, "If you take away the military from Tennessee, the buzzards can't eat up the naggers as fast as we'll kill ‘em." Source: Richard W. Murphy, ed. The Civil War: The Nation Reunited: War's Aftermath (Alexandria, VA: Time-Life Books, 1987), pp 25 and 36.

    Unreconstructed Southerners, tobacco farmers, murderers, rapists, terrorists, were enraged that we moral Yankees had "stolen their slaves." They had enjoyed raping women, now we moral Yankees stopped their fun. They were mad. The revenge process, killing Yankees and blacks, was soon evident. For example, see the book by Sidney Andrews, The South Since The War (Boston: Ticknor and Fields, 1866), especially pp 1-11 and 21-28. Such southerners deemed murder a right!

    "A crime storm of devastating [terrorist] fury swept over the South. Negro school houses and churches were burned. Ears were cropped and throats cut. Men and women were stabbed, maimed, outraged, shot and hanged. Others were hunted and killed by dogs. In North and South Carolina alone, within a period of eighteen months, General Canby reported 197 murders and 548 cases of aggravated assault. In Alabama corpses dangled for months from trees to poison the air and make the traveler sick with horror. . . .'there is not one man or woman in all the South who believes they [blacks] are free, but we consider them as stolen property—stolen by the bayonets of the damnable United states government.'"—Prof. Oscar Sherwin, Prophet of Liberty: The Life and Times of Wendell Phillips (New York: Bookman Associates, 1958), pp 529-530.

    Union General Carl Schurz (assigned in the South) wrote a Report on his findings: "Wherever I go, the street, the shop, the house, the hotel, or the steamboat, I hear the people talk in such a way as to indicate that they are yet unable to conceive of the Negro as possessing any [human] rights at all. Men who are honorable in their dealings with their white neighbors will cheat a Negro without a single twinge of their honor. To kill a Negro they do not deem murder; to debauch a Negro woman, they do not think fornication; to take the property away from a Negro, they do not consider robbery."—Senate Executive Document No. 2, Report of Carl Schurz, Condition of the South, 39th Congress, 1st Session, p 81.

    Lying to slaves, cheating them, taking their money and not delivering as promised, had been acceptable in the debauched immorality of the pre-War South, and upheld in Southern courts! See cases such as Norris v Patton's Admin'r, 15 B. Mon. 575; 54 Ky 575; 1855 WL 4178 (Summer Term 1855), and prior precedents cited by the slaver therein, e.g, Rankin v Lydia, 2 Mon. 476; Cook v Cook, 3 Lit. 239; Graham v Strader, 5 B. Mon. 179; 44 Ky 179 (1844) aff'd 51 U.S. 82 (10 How.) 13 L. Ed. 337 (1850); Willis v Bruce & Warfield, 8 B. Mon. 550; Collins v America, 9 B. Mon. 572; Maria v Kirby, 12 B. Mon. 545 and Major v Winn, 13 B. Mon. 251.

    Union General Philip H. Sheridan saw this Southern killing-mentality against blacks, "over the killing of many freedmen in the settlements, nothing is done." Asked what he thought of Texas, he said scathingly commenting on their low morals and genocidal mentality, "If I owned hell and Texas, I would rent Texas out and live in hell." See Phil Sheridan and His Army (Lincoln: Univ of Nebraska Press, 1985; and Norman: Univ of Oklahoma Press, 1999), by Univ. of New Mexico History Prof. Paul Andrew Hutton (1949-). See also Prof. James M. Smallwood, Barry A. Crouch, and Larry Peacock, Murder and Mayhem: The War of Reconstruction in Texas (College Station: Texas A&M Univ Press, 2003), p 16 (Review 1,   2,   3).

    Ed. Note: Texas' moral depravity is well-depicted in the movie “The Last Picture Show” (1971), one episode of debauchery after another.

    "The plan: reduce blacks to political impotence. How? By the boldest and most ruthless political operation in American history. By stealth and murder, by economic intimidation and political assassinations, by whippings and maimings, cuttings and shootings, by the knife, by the rope, by the whip. By the political use of terror, by the braining of the baby in its mother's arms, the slaying of the husband at his wife's feet, the raping of the wife before her husband's eyes. By Fear."—Lerone Bennett, Jr., Before the Mayflower: A History of the Negro in America 1619-1964, rev. ed. (Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1964), chap. 8, p 197.

    "The [Southern] white population organized for war. The Negro population, at the same time, was [unconstitutionally] systematically disarmed. By hook and crook, on any and every pretext, the homes of Negroes were searched and arms were systematically appropriated [confiscated]" (Bennett, p 216).

    Re a disarmed people, oppressors' violence as per their motivation, follows.

    To prevent the election as President of General Ulysses S. Grant, unreconstructed Southerners used mass violence. “In the South, white supremacists launched a campaign of terror designed to prevent blacks and their supporters from voting. ‘I intend to kill Radicals [pro-voting rights activists],’ vowed the Ku Klux Klan’s General Nathan Bedford Forrest; subsequently, more than 200 political murders were reported in Arkansas alone.” Source: Richard W. Murphy, ed. The Civil War: The Nation Reunited: War’s Aftermath (Alexandria, VA: Time-Life Books, 1987), p 76.

    Southerners had prevented both blacks and mulattoes from voting before, says Virginia author S. G. Tucker, Dissertation on Slavery (1796), pp 17-18, footnote f. Southerners, having not repented of their immoralities, determined to continue that approach.

    Neo-Confederate Southerners' immediate "issue" was their opposition to "Reconstruction." They were being forced to allow public education, allow blacks (for whom reading and writing had formerly been illegal) to learn to read and write, allow blacks to vote. (Southerners also supported a concerted attack on education to 'dumb it down,' e.g., to delete teaching of the American culture and rights awareness that had led to anti-slavery activism.)

    The unreconstructed South adopted the manipulation tactics herein described so fast as to be able, in a mere eight years, to alter the 1876 election results. Yes, in a mere eight (8) years, the South established sufficent disenfranchisement tactics to obstruct the 1876 election, a mere 8 years after Grant had won, wom by virtue of the black vote.

    The South did "defeat" the ex-Civil War Union general candidate for President, Rutherford B. Hayes. How? by fraud, violence against, and intimidation of, would-be black voters.

    Rutherford B. Hayes himself said so, in his diary. Note from five days after election day 7 Nov 1876, his November 12 entry:

    "We shall, the fair-minded men of the country will, history will, hold that the [Yankee candidates himself and intended Vice-President] were by fraud, violence, and intimidation, by a nullification of the Fifteenth Amendment, deprived of the victory which [we] fairly won."

    Note Rutherford's November 27 diary entry: "A fair election would have given us about forty electoral votes in the South. . . . [The racist South has won, has defeated us] by violence, intimidation, and fraud . . . ."

    But as candidate Hayes' party still controlled the Presidency (Grant), the Senate, the Supreme Court, and the 15 member Election Analysis Commission, the South did condescend to allow him to take office, but only by his surrendering on principle, agreeing to immediately
  • (1) end "Reconstruction," and

  • (2) drop all constitutional enforcement action that would enable blacks to vote thereafter, without being subjected to violence and intimidation.

    • The 1876 presidential election results were stalled until the morning of 2 March 1877, only HOURS before the inauguration 4 March! No corrupt Supreme Court, unlike in the 2000 election, intervened, forced a halt to voting-system analysis.

    Since the South forced President Hayes' (1877-1881) to cease protecting blacks' right to vote, the right of blacks to vote was thus practically ended by that stolen 1876 election. Not until almost a century later, with the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960's, was genuine effort made to begin anew "Reconstruction," enforcing the right of blacks to vote.

    As we see here, the neo-Confederate South has obstructed that modern "Reconstruction," via the criminalization process described herein.

    No more cannons aimed at would-be voters, instead, manufactured criminal records; and police road-blocks at approaches to election polling places.

    For more on the massive disenfrachisement process, see Joseph Hayden, "Echoes of Juneteenth haunt us today," San Francisco Chronicle (Thursday, 19 June 2003). Hayden is an activist at http://www.demos-usa.org/demos/, where this article is reprinted. "Demos is a non-partisan public policy organization working to improve our democracy and to foster greater economic opportunity and less disparity."

    Above, we said there was a loop-hole. That loop-hole was, and still is, this. The U.S. Constitution allowed slavery as a penalty for crime, i.e., allowed imprisonment. (In constitutional terms, imprisonment is a form of slavery; being imprisoned is tantamount to being a slave.)

    The U.S. Constitution allowed disenfranchisement of criminals.

    Mark that well; the Constitution allows slavery (jail) and disenfranchisement for crime!

    This is a loop-hole in the Thirteenth Amendment that the ex-Confederates ruthlessly exploited then and still exploit now.

    How? you ask. Answer: ex-Confederates in office manipulated state Constitutions' voter qualifications:
    • allowing voting despite crimes they felt they (whites) commit (e.g., murder),

    • while disenfranchising for crimes they felt blacks commit (e.g., burglary). Source: the above-cited Andrew L. Shapiro, "Challenging Criminal Disenfranchisement Under the Voting Rights Act: A New Strategy," 103 Yale Law J 537-566 (Nov 1993).

    • "For example, Mississippi's 1890 constitutional convention, which became a model for other states, replaced an 1869 constitutional provision disenfranchising citizens convicted of 'any crime' with a narrower section disenfranchising only those convicted of certain crimes, which blacks were supposedly more likely than whites to commit," says Shapiro at p 540, citing the poll tax case of Sheriff Ratliff v Beale, 74 Miss 247, 265-266; 20 So 865, 867; 34 LRA 472 (30 Nov 1896), saying blacks were more "convicted of bribery, burglary, theft, arson, obtaining money or goods under false pretenses, perjury, forgery, embezzlement or bigamy."

    • "Burglary, theft, arson, and obtaining money under false pretenses were declared to be disqualifications, while [white crimes such as] robbery and murder, and other [white] crimes in which violence was the principal ingredient, were not," Ratliff, p 267, and Shapiro, p 541.

    • "'Among the disqualifying crimes were those to which he [the would-be black voter] was [believed] esprcially prone: thievery, adultery, arson, wife-beating, housebreaking, and attempted rape. Such crimes as murder and fighting, to which the white man was as disposed as the Negro, were significantly omitted from the [voter disqualiification] list,'" says Shapiro, p 541 citing Francis B. Simpkins, Pitchfork Ben Tillman (1944), p 297.

    • Said the Mississippi Supreme Court in a decision analyzing the 1892 Mississippi Constitutional Convention: "[T]he convention swept the circle of [adopted all] expedients [tactics, devices, tricks of wording] to obstruct the exercise of the franchise by the negro race. By reason of its previous condition of servitude and dependence, this race had [the disenfranchisers felt] acquired or accentuated certain particularities of habit, of temperament and of character, which clearly distinguished it, as a race, from that of the whites—a patient, docile people, but careless, landless, and migratory within narrow limits, without forethought, and its criminal members given rather to furtive offenses than to the robust [violent] crimes of the whites. Restrained by the federal constitution from discriminating against the negro race [per se], the convention discriminated against its characteristics and the offenses to which its weaker members were [believed] prone. . . . Burglary, theft, arson, and obtaining money under false pretenses were declared to be disqualifications, while robbery and murder, and other crimes in which violence was the principal ingredient, were not."--Ratliff v Beale, 74 Miss 247, 265-266; 20 So 865 (1896), cited by Shapiro, p 541.

    • "At their [respective state constitutional] conventions, other states, including South Carolina (1895), Louisiana (1898), Alabama (1901), and Virginia (1901-02), also disenfranchised criminals selectively with the intent of disqualifying a disproportionate number of blacks. As in Mississippi, legislators in these states thought that blacks were more likely to commit "furtive offenses" such as petty theft than "robust crimes" such as murder." Shapiro, p 541.

    • "In 1985, the [U.S. Supreme] Court held in Hunter v. Underwood [471 US 222; 105 S Ct 1916; 85 L Ed 2d 222] that an Alabama law disenfranchising certain criminal offenders violated the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause because the [disenfranchisement] law had a disproportionate impact on blacks and was adopted with racially discriminatory intent." Shapiro, at 542.

    After disenfranchising for crimes, the disenfranchisers went about their Next Step.

    Ex-Confederates did not passively await black crime, but set out to cause it.

    Read that sentence again.

    The ex-slavers determined to CAUSE crime, for the purpose of then denying so-called "criminals" the right to vote.

    Remember, the disproportionate crime causation process and legitimate crime prevention methodology were known PRIOR to the Civil War. If you have not already done so, promptly read the crime analysis / criminal profile site (historically, most crime is by white male smokers, the original "profile" from 1836), and the site explaining the underlying medical analysis process.

    Crime "Profile":
    White-Male-Smokers
    Alcott, 1836 Auburn, 1854
    Hodgkin, 1857 Trask, 1860
    Mussey, 1862 Depierris, 1876
    Chase, 1878 Bremen, 1882
    Tolstoy, 1890 Torrence, 1899
    Ellis, 1901 Stubbs, 1904
    Crane, 1915 Macfadden, 1924
    Danis, 1925 Hopkins, 1948
    Doughty, 1989 McKinney, 1991

    Then think about it. The enemy knows the data (especially, the WMS criminal ratio of 1/322). You should too, in self-defense!

    And bear in mind this principle: When people know how to do something right, they also know how to manipulate, do it wrong. And enemies can, given the motive and the power, e.g., government position. Remember the Tuskegee experiment (details at, e.g., "The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment: The U.S. government's 40-year experiment on black men with syphilis," by Borgna Brunner). And Southerners' willingness to commit atrocities.

    Southern Atrocities re 1850's Kansas

    Southern atrocities before the Civil War had included use of violence to commit election fraud in Kansas. Slavers feared 1850's Kansas might develop a 'free' majority (voters who would vote against slavery). So large numbers of pro-slavery Missourians (called "border ruffians") crossed the border into Kansas, killing legitimate residents, supporting hanging the Governor, threatening election workers, and voting! in such large numbers as to alter election results!

    For background, see, e.g.,
  • Sen. Charles Sumner, "OnThe Crime Against Kansas (Senate, Congressional Globe, 34d Cong., 2d Sess., 19-20 May 1856)

  • George B. Cheever, D.D., Address On the Subject of the Iniquity of the Extension of Slavery (Cincinnati: American Reform Tract and Book Society, 1857)

  • Kansas History Online Site, re 16 July 1855, etc. (2006)

  • The Answers.Com Site (2006)

  • Historical Society Site, "Willing to Die for Freedom: A Look Back at Kansas Territory, 1854-1861" (2006)

  • Fort Scott Historic Site on "Bleeding Kansas" (2006)

  • "How Bloody Was Bleeding Kansas?" (2006)

    • Blacks' Pre-1960's Near Drug-Free Record

    Blacks in America had a near crime-free record, a mere 1/5000 crime rate, said Virginia Governor Giles (cited by Rev. John G. Fee, Anti-Slavery Manual [1851], pp 165-166). The crime profile was "white male smoker." Blacks' low crime rate is especially noteworthy in view of their being surrounded by bad examples, whites' rampant crimes, a near 1:1 ratio, as noted by Thomas Jefferson, cited in Rev. Theodore D. Weld, Bible Against Slavery (1837), p 65.

    And blacks had a near drug-free record until the 'civil rights' era. Slaves had not been allowed to smoke and drink. Too much of a bad effect (example, on the Zulus 1840's - 1880's), the slavers knew!

    During slavery, it was illegal to sell intoxicants to slaves. See, e.g., an 1840 Ordinance against grocers selling liquor, for this reason officially cited in a prosecution,

    "The object of these Ordinances is to prevent, if possible, the vending of spiritous liquor to slaves [as] it was found by experience that this [grocer sales] was an easy method of . . . selling spirits to slaves."—City Council v Ahrens, 35 SC (4 Strob) 241, 254, 257; 15 SC Annot Ed 126, 133-134 (Feb 1850).

    An overall case list is referenced in "Slaves," 58 Corpus Juris 745, 756, citing "Intoxicating Liquors, § 227," i.e., 33 Corpus Juris 480-802, pp 601-602, "Sales to Prohibited Persons." And slavers pointed to Northern white crime, and bragged that slaves didn't do crime! (Of course, because they didn't smoke! the 90% factor in crime. For slaves' near-zero crime rate, see George Fitzhugh, Sociology for the South; or, The Failure of Free Society (Richmond: A. Morris Pub, 1854).

    Blacks were nearly drug-free until the civil-rights era of the 1960's. Activists such as Martin Luther King, Jr., Stokely Carmichael, H. Rap Brown, Rosa Parks, Thurgood Marshall, and others were seeking civil rights. This was in public accommodations, travel, housing, education, contexts, and VOTING. Neo-Confederates' attitudes, as discussed herein, were hostile.

    How to halt the 1950's-60's Civil Rights movement, was a priority for bigots, racists, neo-Confederates. Answer: use post-gateway drugs! alcohol, marijuana, heroin, cocaine, etc. To do that, use the starter drug, hook children. They knew this: "The first step toward addiction may be as innocent as a boy's puff on a cigarette in an alleyway," said the U.S. Supreme Court in Robinson v California, 370 US 660, 670; 82 S Ct 1417; 8 L Ed 2d 758 (1962).

    Never mind, such bigots felt, that the case also stands for the proposition that starting a war on drugs is unconstitutional. How so? Because, says the Supreme Court, criminalizing a disease is unconstitutional. Drug addiction is a disease, as per the brain-altering, hyperexciteability aspects. Inherent characteristics of the disease include acts demonstrating impairment of impulse and ethical controls—abulia, in short. Such acts include needle-use, drug-carrying, drug-taking, etc. These are inherently part of the disease, just as coughing is inherently part of tobacco-caused lung cancer.

    A second constitutional point is this. Remember Prohibition? Re the 'war on alcohol,' why didn't Congress just ban it? Answer: Doing so was deemed unconstitutional.

    "Personal liberty, which is guaranteed to every citizen under our constitution and laws, consists of the right to locomotion,—to go where one pleases, and when, and to do that which may lead to one's business or pleasure, only so far restrained as the rights of others may make it necessary for the welfare of all other citizens. . . .

    "Any law which would place the keeping and safe conduct of another in the hands of even a conservator of the peace [police], unless for some breach of the peace committed in his presence, or upon suspicion of felony, would be most oppressive and unjust, and destroy all the rights which our Constitution guarantees." Pinkerton v Verberg, 78 Mich 573, 584; 44 NW 579, 582-583 (1889).

    Wherefore, an alcohol ban was unconstitutional, unless explicitly constitutionalized, as by the Eighteenth Amendment. The same is true for the other now-illegal drugs--made illegal by neo-Confederates in legislatures and Congress.

    The bigots creating the 'war on drugs' knew they couldn't sell the public on

  • criminalizing some tobacco effects such as coughing,
  • criminalizing tobacco (the "worst" drug),
  • criminalizing other tobacco results.

    The public "knew" tobacco too well, or thought it did (as per the tobacco taboo, media censorship, and the public's massive use), to be sold that type program.

    But the bigots creating the 'war on drugs' knew they could demonize the unknown drugs, accuse those drugs of causing horrors! (details below). They could "sell" a war on the newly demonized drugs! even tobacco "antidotes" like cocaine. Then, with specific anti-drug laws passed, they could target blacks: ". . . the war on drugs . . . started as a war against minorities," says Kenneth Michael White, CXLVI Newsweek, p 15 (10 October 2005).

    Here are examples:

    Some analysts report, though the CIA denies it, a CIA role in drug smuggling, including of crack cocaine, with blacks the targeted group.
  • University of Wisconsin Professor Alfred W. McCoy, The Politics of Heroin (NY: Harper and Row, 1972), reported government (e.g., CIA, Pentagon) role in drug smuggling.

  • Jonathan Kwitny, The Crimes of Patriots: A True Tale of Dope, Dirty Money, and the CIA (New York: W. W. Norton, 1987) cited, as a Wall Street Journal investigative reporter—and biographer of Pope John Paul II—examples of government officials (Pentagon military, etc.), smuggling drugs into the U.S. and taking action against those rare honest government agents who wanted to halt the drug smuggling. The U.S. Army would take investigators of drug trafficking who caught "seniors" in the military, off that duty, and put them on combat duty!

  • Michael Levine, a retired Drug Enforcement Agency agent, in The Big White Lie (NY: Thunder's Mouth Press, 1993), cited official undermining of the war on drugs, making it an "illusion."

  • The San Jose Mercury News (California) had a series of articles in August 1996, on CIA complicity in drug smuggling. For example, see the article by Gary Webb, "Shadowy origins of 'crack' epidemic: Role of CIA-linked agents a well-protected secret until now " (19 August 1996).

  • Rodney Stich, Defrauding America and Drugging America: A Trojan Horse (federal inspector-investigator data on CIA, DEA, Pentagon, etc., drug smuggling)

  • Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair, Whiteout: the CIA, Drugs and the Press (August 1998) (a chronicle of ties to drug runners, from World War II through the Contra Wars and the Taliban in Afghanistan)

    • Blacks being nearly drug-free, could not make the massive arrangements for drugs to be mass-grown (in foreign nations), loaded and transported, the infrastructure for this including airplanes, and imported into the U.S., priority, black dwelling areas. This required U.S. government, police, and Mafia (organized crime) cooperation. The Federal Bureau of Investigation was headed by J. Edgar Hoover, and his anti-black ideology. The government-FBI-police-crime alliance to do mass-drug-importing into black areas then came about. Goal: to obstruct the black civil rights era activism, including voting.

    There are known examples of government officials, i.e., among ranking U.S. military officers controlling airplanes, smuggling drugs into the U.S., and taking action against (transferring to other jobs!) those rare honest government agents who wanted to halt the smuggling. See Kwitny's book, The Crimes of Patriots: A True Tale of Dope, Dirty Money, and the CIA, supra.

    The government-crime alliance for importing drugs into black areas succeeded. Black civil rights activism markedly deteriorated. Now let's resume putting modern facts of this type, into historical context.

    Visualize a pre-Civil-War prison. . . . Think carefully. . . . What color are the inmates' faces?






    Answer: most are white faces. White male smoker faces.

    The neo-Confederates knew this WMS criminal 'profile,' they saw this. (Slavers had sent articles on Northern crime to anti-slavery congressmen such as Rep. Horace Mann, cited in Slavery and the Slave-Trade . . . . (Washington, D.C.: 1849), p 16.) You should know this type data too.

    What the Neo-Confederates Knew:
    Crime Rates Per 100,000 With
    Smokers (29% of Population)
    Committing 90% of The Crimes
    POPULATIONCRIMESRATIO
    Total
    100,000
    100
    1:1000
    Nonsmokers
    71,000
    10 
    1:7100
    Smokers
    29,000
    90
    1:322

    The neo-Confederates saw the enormous potential for criminalization of people en masse, via tobacco. The crime ratio dramatically alters, from a mere 1:7100 to a significant 1:322.

    Unreconconstructed Southerners were motivated to alter blacks near crime-free record (a 1/5000 rate).

    Neo-Confederates had access to the medical, historical, legal, research, and behavioral data on, e.g.,
  • tobacco's violent and behavior-altering effects on animals,

  • how nicotine had already been used to poison someone (the 1851 Bocarmé murder case),

  • tobacco's mind-altering, behavior-impairing effects on people,

  • tobacco's violence-producing effects in people,

  • and examples of this.
    • This type data had been published for decades, and was consolidated into one volume, by Dr. Hippolyte A. Depierris, Physiologie Sociale: Le Tabac, Qui Contient Le Plus Violent des Poisons (Paris: Dentu, 1876), p 129 (animals), pp 79ff (Bocarmé), pp 345-372 (behavior-altering effects), p 342 (violence effects in people), pp 326-344 (examples).

    The tobacco-alcoholism link was already long known, since at least 1798.

    Wherefore, abolitionists had urgently advised the newly freed slaves not to smoke and drink. Remember, the data linking smoking and crime was known PRIOR to the Civil War, and being repeatedly re-confirmed.

    Unreconstructed Southerners saw the same data, recalled their chemical warfare acts during the Civil War, and realized that they had a weapon to destroy the black vote, the criminalization process. (This is not to overlook the use of sheer terror tactics, murder, lynching, etc. This site focuses not on such illegal acts, but on the use of "legal" means to the wicked goal, just as Hitler would later use "legal" means to achieve his wicked goals).

    The unreconstructed Confederates' post-war goal was, and is, to undermine, obstruct and overwhelm abolitionist warnings to the newly freed smokes to not smoke or drink: Medical facts on the crime causation process were known since William Alcott, M.D. (1836) and the Auburn Report (1854) linked tobacco and crime. Tobacco is a narcotic, mind-altering, inhibition-reducing drug that leads to alcoholism, other drug abuse, and crime.

    Ex-Confederates perverted that medical knowledge (medical knowledge can be perverted, remember the Tuskegee syphilis experiment?) by using it to cause "black" crime, thus convictions and loss of the right to vote.

    Read that sentence again. The neo-Confederate goal is to reenslave blacks via the crime-causation process, thus constitutionally massively reduce blacks' right to vote. The original Constitution's 3/5 clause was read to mean that blacks should only be counted as 3/5 of a white person. Five blacks = three white persons. Depriving vast numbers of blacks of the right to vote, by criminalizing them, still accomplishes the same!

    The criminalizing process is straightforward:
    • (a) gateway drug,
    • (b) then post-gateway drugs,
    • (c) then jail,
    • (d) then loss of the right to vote.

    This corrupt practice continues:
  • (1) cigarette advertising and sales targeting blacks,

  • (2) manipulating legislators to criminalize previously legal but rare post-gateway drug activities, while

  • (3) sabotaging action (since the first Food and Drug Act to present) against the gateway drug that leads to "the worst of all drug habits, the smoking of tobacco" (as said by Dr. Herbert Tidswell, 1912), and

  • (4) manipulating research to "justify" the above.

    • “When you head South, you're talking about two things—tobacco farmers and evangelicals,” said Ralph Reed. Ex-Confederates (racists) see the goal in all its multi-facets:
  • to cause "black" crime via the tobacco - drugging process

  • to to re-enslave via prison,

  • then to disenfranchise them.

    • Racists' victims barely realize what this process is that is happening to them, and so are near-defenseless.
  • They are often unaware of white reformers' opposition to the use of tobacco as the starter drug leading into the cycle that leads to crime and disenfranchisement.

  • Too often, racists' tobacco-using victims are hooked into "wanting" (without "informed choice and consent") to do what 'massa' had been allowed to do (to smoke and drink), while forbidding slaves to do likewise. The use of tobacco, to racists' victims, seems to be an element of freedom, whereas it is in reality a left-over vestige of slavery, and a particularly vicious one. (See 1882 Example.)

    •           Cigarette ads target minorities. Compare big cities and suburbs; contrast them; notice the difference. It is conspicuous. It promotes chemical slavery, the term for "slavery to an addiction." And a major part of the neo-Confederate criminalization process is the "smoking is a right" myth, the modern version of their old "slavery is a right" myth.

    Nothing in any Constitution says ingesting poisonous substances is a right; ask Dr. Kevorkian's jailers!! In fact, under the Constitution, there is a common law right to freedom from air-borne poison, the common law "right to fresh and pure air."

    The Detroit, Michigan, African-American Museum (Detroit) has exhibits on slavery. If you have opportunity to go there, you will see the large collection of life-size statues of children, slaves. During slavery, slavers targeted children to be kidnaped, captured, and enslaved. Children are still not safe from slavery. Now there is chemical slavery. Children are still being targeted, especially minority children. See E. A. Klonoff, et al, Sales of Cigarettes to Minors, 87 Am J Pub Health (#5) 823-826 (May 1997), and the Surgeon General Report, Tobacco Use Among U.S. Racial/Ethnic Minority Groups (1998). There are more cigarette and alcohol billboards in minority areas, more liquor stores in higher percentages.

    Tobacco is typically the gateway (starter) drug, age 11-12, so 90% of criminals are smokers. Racists deem it a "white" drug; arresting its pushers a burden on the judicial system; subsequent drugs in the drug sequence (cocaine, etc.), "black" drugs; disproportionately arresting blacks, NOT a burden on the judicial system. This type racism is the real truth behind the notorious Budzyn-Nevers situation (the beating death of an alleged black post-gateway drug user). Talk privately to officers; you will verify the racist law enforcement policy, including honest officer fear of being labeled a "whistleblower" if they do not go along. The racists don't want to enforce the law properly; and the honest ones fear to.

    Now you know what the racists know: the secret in 'racial profiling.' The police know the century-old 90% profile factor, white male smokers doing 90% of the crime. This fact has been known since the 1830's, i.e., since before the Civil War! But modern 'racial profiling' carefully avoids mentioning this factor. Instead, disinformation is provided by the media. For an exposé of media disinformation, see, e.g., “Coloring Crime: Race, Violence and Media Manipulation” by Tim Wise (1 June 2003).

    The fact that media disinformation on who commits crime, and their color, can be gotten away with, arises from the media censorship of sensitive tobacco and racism news. The tobacco-aspects censorship is called the "tobacco taboo