Protesters clash over Confederate flag at Phoenix Walmart
Source: Associated Press
Protesters clash over Confederate flag at Phoenix Walmart
| July 6, 2015 | Updated: July 6, 2015 2:51pm
PHOENIX (AP) Things got noisy outside a west Phoenix Walmart after the company's decision to remove Confederate flag merchandise attracted scores of protesters and counter-protesters.
The Arizona Republic reports (http://bit.ly/1JQp3vC ) that Jon Ritzheimer organized the Sunday afternoon protest of Walmart's decision. Ritzheimer is a former Marine who staged a contentious rally outside a Phoenix mosque in May.
His group of self-proclaimed "patriots," some of them armed, waved the rebel flag alongside the American one while chanting "U-S-A."
Counter-protesters clashed with Ritzheimer's group. They called the flag racist and lauded Walmart's decision to remove it from shelves.
Read more: http://www.chron.com/news/us/article/Protesters-clash-over-Confederate-flag-at-Phoenix-6368848.php
BlueJazz
(25,348 posts)USA? Does anybody else find that rather weird?
arcane1
(38,613 posts)Which is to say, non sense at all
cstanleytech
(26,361 posts)their government and if we dont rebel then we are not patriots.
BTW I have a lovely little bridge overlooking the bay in San Fransisco for sale if you are interested, just a truly stellar view.
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)PersonNumber503602
(1,134 posts)At most they could say it's about freedom and the right to fly whatever flag they want. Which may be a valid point if the government was outright banning the flags from being flown. But these are private companies making decisions to not sell them for whatever reasons they may have. I'm betting most of these people will say it's a freedom thing if asked. However, if Walmart began selling ISIS flags, they'd likely be the first ones to protest for them to be removed.
arcane1
(38,613 posts)Figures. He's loving the attention
jaysunb
(11,856 posts)Such an ass.
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)I'm betting he has made grifting his career choice.
iamthebandfanman
(8,127 posts)pointed out to them that Arizona didn't exist and had nothing to do with the civil war ?
mahatmakanejeeves
(57,756 posts)....
At the outbreak of the Civil War, sentiment in the territory was in favor of the Confederacy. Territorial secession conventions were called at Mesilla and Tucson in March 1861 that adopted an ordinance of secession, established a Provisional Confederate Territory of Arizona with Owings as its governor, and petitioned the Confederate Congress for admission.
The Confederacy regarded the territory as a valuable route for possible access to the Pacific Ocean, with the specific intention of capturing California. In July 1861, a small Confederate force of Texans under the command of Lieutenant Colonel John R. Baylor assaulted Fort Fillmore at Mesilla in the eastern part of the territory. After the fort was abandoned by the Union garrison, Baylor's force cut off the fleeing Union troops and forced them to surrender. On August 1, Baylor issued a "Proclamation to the People of the Territory of Arizona", taking possession of the territory for the Confederacy, with Mesilla as the capital and himself as the governor. Baylor's subsequent dismantling of the existing Union forts in the territory left the white settlers at the mercy of the Apache, who quickly gained control of the area and forced many of the white settlers to seek refuge in Tucson.
On August 28, a convention met again in Tucson and declared that the territory formed the previous year was part of the Confederacy. Granville H. Oury was elected as delegate to the Confederate Congress. Oury drafted legislation authorizing the organization of the Confederate Territory of Arizona. The legislation passed on January 13, 1862, and the territory was officially created by proclamation of President Jefferson Davis on February 14.
iamthebandfanman
(8,127 posts)southern heritage :p
as far as I can tell, the people that did 'succeed' if you want to call what they did a legally binding succession ... none of their grievances with the united states had to do with slavery ... they had felt neglected for a long time by the federal government.
I know there were 'battles' and skirmishes in the territories and in Texas.. but did those troops actually come from the state they were fighting in ?
id kinda doubt it .. given they were being attacked by native Americans (apache) regularly
btw, heres a picture of the 'separated' area :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confederate_Arizona#/media/File:Wpdms_arizona_new_mexico_territories_1863_idx.png
also, didn't know this myself but... turns out the union troops sent to fight in the territories mostly came from California volunteers
LonePirate
(13,446 posts)Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)
Culver Shuttle This message was self-deleted by its author.
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)U.S.
Seems like it might be fun to get a swastika on a flag, maybe an ISIS flag, big, big signs that say FUCK THE USA!
and join them - say" I thought this was for people who fought against this country".
=
Probably ought to make sure there are tv cameras around.
Uncle Joe
(58,562 posts)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_display_of_the_Confederate_flag
During the first half of the 20th century, the Confederate flag enjoyed renewed popularity. During World War II some U.S. military units with Southern nicknames, or made up largely of Southerners, made the flag their unofficial emblem. The USS Columbia flew a Confederate Navy Ensign as a battle flag throughout combat in the South Pacific in World War II. This was done in honor of Columbia, the ship's namesake and the capital city of South Carolina, the first state to secede from the Union. Some soldiers carried Confederate flags into battle. After the Battle of Okinawa a Confederate flag was raised over Shuri Castle by a Marine from the self-styled "Rebel Company" (Company A of the 1st Battalion, 5th Marines). It was visible for miles and was taken down after three days on the orders of General Simon B. Buckner, Jr. (son of Confederate general Simon Buckner, Sr.), who stated that it was inappropriate as "Americans from all over are involved in this battle". It was replaced with the regulation, 48-star flag of the United States.[4] By the end of World War II, the use of the Confederate flag in the military was rare.[5]
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)Might note that there were many units which didn't allow black folk - that wasn't exactly a post-racial military.
Wonder if they allowed any black folk in that unit? They were still advocating for slavery and a whites-only military back then. Seems like a slimy way to live.
Whenever it was done it was still despicable. If a big brave marine isn't big enough to own that, maybe they ought to retire their insignia, since they really don't mean what any marine says, under the traitor's flag.
Uncle Joe
(58,562 posts)While some extremist groups such as the Ku Klux Klan and Aryan Nations have embraced the Confederate flag in the past, the KKK has also adopted the U.S. flag and Christian crosses as symbols. However, many Southerners do not consider the flag an expression of racism or indicator of membership in extremist groups. They regard the Confederate flag as a symbol of state sovereignty and an honorable tribute to the men who fought and died to protect their homeland from invasion by the federalist North.
Asked whether an exception might be made for a Marine recruit who could provide a full explanation on the meaning of his tattoo as an expression of Southern pride, the recruiter explained, At this point in time, no. If it can be construed by anyone as being racially biased, then right now its a flat-out denial.
He acknowledged that the tattoo is quite popular in the South and that recruitment has been impacted by the ban on Confederate-flag tattoos, but he explained that the policy has been set by Headquarters Marine Corps.
Headquarters Marine Corps has not responded to WNDs requests for clarification of the policy.
(snip)
I informed the young sergeant that my family had defended the state of Tennessee (also his home state) against a sadistic invasion under that flag and to call our sacred flag of honor a hate symbol was an insult to all southerners, but especially to those southerners who had risked or even given their lives in service to the Marine Corps. Southerners had served at Belleau Woods, at Tarawa and Iwo Jima, at Inchon and the Chosin Reservoir, and at Khe Sanh and Hue City, but now we are no longer wanted in the politically correct, dont-offend-any-minorities military?
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2010/05/149729/#66XZVXVjfMBSPlIv.99
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)Uncle Joe
(58,562 posts)1. Your pics illustrate a point that I've been trying to make for a couple of weeks now, symbols mean different things to different people depending on the prism from which the viewer is seeing the object and symbols are mutable, The haters in your pic view the Star and Stripes as being consistent with the Nazi Swastika.
2. As a side note but not a definitive statement in regards to the scourge of racism, in neither article that you link to is the Confederate Flag mentioned or shown.
3. According to this Wikipedia Article on the Southern Poverty Law Center, total KKK membership was estimated at only 2000, now as far as I'm concerned that's 2000 too many but in all honesty, I thought it was higher considering we're a nation of over 300 million, of course the KKK is not the only group out there.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Poverty_Law_Center
The SPLC has been criticized for using hyperbole and overstating the prevalence of hate groups to raise large amounts of money. In a 2000 Harper's Magazine article, Ken Silverstein said that Dees has kept the SPLC focused on fighting anti-minority groups like the KKK, whose membership has declined to just 2,000, instead of on issues like homelessness, mostly because the former issue makes for more lucrative fundraising. The article claimed the SPLC "spends twice as much on fund-raising -- $5.76 million last year -- as it does on legal services for victims of civil rights abuses." Harper's pointed out that more than 95% of hate crimes are committed by lone wolves without any connection to militia groups the SPLC speaks of.
I will end with this, hate is like a nuclear weapon, if you start letting it loose, no matter from which direction it comes, a lot of innocent people will be damaged in the process. Hate feeds hate.
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Martin Luther King, Jr.
Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/m/martinluth101472.html#qtS5DQTCUedM7Q8S.99
Those who enjoy their own emotionally bad health and who habitually fill their own minds with the rank poisons of suspicion, jealousy and hatred, as a rule take umbrage at those who refuse to do likewise, and they find a perverted relief in trying to denigrate them.
Johannes Brahms
Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/search_results.html#2LUXH2zqDQTcAUKm.99
Anger is the most impotent of passions. It effects nothing it goes about, and hurts the one who is possessed by it more than the one against whom it is directed.
Carl Sandburg
Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/c/carlsandbu119183.html#iKTGByoL4tqKaA4X.99
History, despite its wrenching pain, cannot be unlived, but if faced with courage, need not be lived again.
Maya Angelou
Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/search_results.html#DSoDQxzR4oUM09VG.99
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)The product of a lynching would be much more honest than the rag they wave.
It's a flag of a racist nation that was willing to kill to keep slavery alive. Their heritage is murder and terror.
I too wonder if they have read any Maya Angelou or MLK Jr writings. I doubt it.Those are for them, right? 'Cause I'm not an active terrorist or murderer, or a supporter of them, like people who fly that flag
Fuck anyone who stands under it or apologizes for the murderers and terrorists who fly or have flow it.
I don't hate them. That doesn't alter the fact that people who are associated with the flag are likely traitors, may well be active terrorists.
There is no difference between them and vermin, and no need to differentiate between disposal methods.
.
Uncle Joe
(58,562 posts)making statements like this,
"No difference between waving that flag or a black corpse on the end of a rope."
"There is no difference between them and vermin, and no need to differentiate between disposal methods."
then I would respectfully suggest that racists; whether they fly the Confederate Flag or the Star and Stripes as exhibited in your previous post aren't the only ones that need to read and absorb the writings of Maya Angelou and MLK, not to mention a host of other peace makers.
.
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)just gets people killed. Surely there are better people to hang around with, but each to his own.
It's a simple fact, the racist flag of a racists nation. They were and are terrorists and murderers. There is no redeeming factor. Anyone who flies it is sympathizing with terrorists and murderers, no different from people siding with ISIS and beheading people.
I know what you would like me to see, but I see no reason to make excuses for some of the weakest and worst specimens of humans, ones we have to stretch the definition to cover.
i have no doubt you think that is some kind of moral superiority, but I will take preventing someone swinging at the end of a rope over wishing things were different any day of the week.
Uncle Joe
(58,562 posts)The less than one percent would love to keep the people operating from a mindset of fear/hatred to maintain a divisive advantage over reason and faith, divide, distract and conquers is their modus operandi whether they're based in the North or South.
The flag isn't the danger, it's the sword.
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)The sword is no more dangerous than the flag unless it is used as a weapon.
Uncle Joe
(58,562 posts)will be used as a weapon.
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)a pizza slicer.
Divisiveness, yes. But one is tasty.
It's the decisions, not the tools.
Uncle Joe
(58,562 posts)Citizens United will only work to make that more true than ever before.
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)who are the arms and eyes and ears for them. La Boetie pointed that out in 1550 that the tyrant only has the wealth we gave them, and only two arms, legs, eyes - without all that assistance they could not do what they do.
He said that someone coming from a foreign land and hearing this would not believe that the people would thus consent and make possible their own servitude.
And here we are today.
Boetie said the solution is to stop giving it to them and they will fall of their own weight. We almost broke free for a few Progressive years early in the last century, but then began sliding backwards again.
Part of that is getting too comfortable with things that can't be mis-interpreted. Like the flag of racists, thugs, and murderers wanting to remember their good times.
I see no reason to grant them that comfort.
Uncle Joe
(58,562 posts)testifies to, not to mention your rise of "Military Hatred" post all flying Old Glory and nary a mention of the Confederate Flag.
What remains from the battle to remove one symbol which means different things to different people depending on the prism from which they view said object, whether you agree with them or not is the increased dynamics of hatred and regionalism which is most evident here at D.U. on many OPs or posts.
Regionalism is racism's kissing cousin if not sibling and the former only serves to magnify the latter which is also evident on many OPs and posts here at D.U. including this OP.
The world is not black and white, filled with simple answers to complex problems, there are multitudes of gray involved with history.
One interesting piece of trivia regarding the end of the 18th century regarding the institution of Jim Crow is that the only dissenting Justice on the high court to decide against the abhorrent law; Plessy v Ferguson came from a Kentucky slave owning family.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plessy_v._Ferguson
Justice John Marshall Harlan, who decried the excesses of the Ku Klux Klan, wrote a scathing dissent in which he predicted the court's decision would become as infamous as that of Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857). Following is part of Justice Harlan's dissent, asserting, "The law regards man as man":
n view of the constitution, in the eye of the law, there is in this country no superior, dominant, ruling class of citizens. There is no caste here. Our constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens. In respect of civil rights, all citizens are equal before the law. The humblest is the peer of the most powerful. The law regards man as man, and takes no account of his surroundings or of his color when his civil rights as guaranteed by the supreme law of the land are involved.[16]
The rest of the court dominated by Justices appointed by Republican Presidents many of whom were former Union Soldiers and confirmed by a Republican (Northern) dominated Senate supported this decision which was the start of Jim Crow.
Some people argue that even John Marshall Harlan had is own racist tendencies which was evidenced by the other writings in his dissent, but this is the way it was back then.
Racists filled the ranks of both armies North and South from the private to the General.
William Tecumseh Sherman being one example, he supported slavery and even sympathized with the South up until the Civil War started.
He viewed the South seceding as being tragic folly and of course sided with the Union, but it doesn't take a great leap of logic to understand men fought on both sides for a multitude of reasons, slavery being the primary issue of the day but not the only one.
The South thought according to the Constitution that a state could legally leave the Union if they voted to, of course the North didn't believe that and in the beginning Lincoln fought to "preserve the Union," even the great Lincoln (and I do believe he was great) was racist by today's standards.
I believe many if not most Southerners view the Confederate Battle Flag as a symbol of the Confederate Soldiers' sacrifice; well over 300,000 killed.
Many if not most of them fought because they thought they were defending their homes, family, friends, towns, cities, states and region from "Northern Aggression."
The world was a much different place then, the telegraph was the Internet of the day, most people got their news from newspapers and for the ones that couldn't read from their family or friends.
I believe even in that war the less than 1% dominated whether it was Northern or Southern spheres of influence, the "few Progressive Years" that you speak of is just more evidence of my point regarding the Civil War and its long aftermath.
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)genocide from the American flag either, but at least it has the promise of better.
The confederate rag only promises hate, horror, tragedy, and eventually death. People who fly it deserve nothing.
Uncle Joe
(58,562 posts)whether it be the U.S. Flag or the Confederate Flag.
Flags are inanimate objects, colored pieces of cloth and nothing more.
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)I really don't, not theirs or ours. Not a flag waver, more of an actual doer.
To say it doesn't represent something is just being silly and disingenuous. We are only dust, eh? But dust doesn't type on a computer. So there's more to the story.
I'm not the traitor that keeps waving and planting the confederate piece of crap, however. If little ass clowns want to keep dragging that piece of cloth into it, which was representative of terror, murder, and sedition, I will continue associating their worthless asses with terror, murder, and sedition. Perhaps you should ask them why it means so much. I really don't care.
They should just wipe with it and be done.
Oh yeah:
Beauty is in the heart of the beholder.
H. G. Wells
OrwellwasRight
(5,170 posts)"I believe many if not most Southerners view the Confederate Battle Flag as a symbol of the Confederate Soldiers' sacrifice; well over 300,000 killed."
Many Nazi soldiers "sacrificed" themselves as well. According to Der Spiegel, 3 million German soldiers lost their lives during WWII on the Easter Front alone.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/germany-tracing-its-war-dead-from-world-war-ii-a-832063.html
That doesn't mean Germans go around flying the Nazi flag to "honor" the "sacrifice" of the war dead. In fact, it is illegal to fly a Nazi flag in Germany.
http://www.minnpost.com/global-post/2010/02/despite-banning-nazi-symbols-germanys-constitution-and-legal-tradition-complicat
Who cares that some Southerners at the time thought the North had started the war? At the time of WWII, some Nazi soldiers thought Jews were sub-human. Ignorance is no excuse in either case.
The whole Civil War was tragic. People died. But the Civil War was 150+ years ago now. No one is "mourning' any "war dead" anymore because there is no one alive today who was alive in 1865. The fact is: The South lost. Wars have consequences. One of the consequences of the Civil War is that the SOUTH LOST. Get over it and put the flag away.
Uncle Joe
(58,562 posts)"That doesn't mean Germans go around flying the Nazi flag to "honor" the "sacrifice" of the war dead. In fact, it is illegal to fly a Nazi flag in Germany. "
Unless you're willing to sacrifice the 1st Amendment, let Germany deal with their demons in their way and the U.S. can deal with ours in our way.
You are correct about one thing, "wars do have consequences," we lost the Vietnam War, so should the Vietnam Memorial be scrapped in 100 years because no one alive will be connected to that war?
OrwellwasRight
(5,170 posts)is not 'dealing with demons'. It is in fact the opposite. It says,
"We want to go back to the days when this wasn't the losing flag. Oh, and by the way, white people OWNED black people in those days, but please don't take offense. Slavery has nothing to do with it. . . "
To answer your analogy:
1) If the U.S. had created a special flag that represented domination over the Vietnamese people, then yes, that flag should be scrapped. But instead, the US used the US flag, and the US was not conquered by the Vietnamese, so there's no place for our normal national flag to go.
2) But more to the point: If the U.S. had actually been at war with Vietnam instead of playing proxy war with "global communism" and trying to prop up the South Vietnamese regime, and we had lost that theoretical war, we would today be living under the victorious Vietnamese regime, the US flag would have been scrapped and we'd be living under the flag of Vietnam. People who flew the American flag in secret would not be honoring the "war dead," they would be pining for the days of the past, which is exactly what those who fly the confederate flag are saying: I want to go back to the days of slavery. The "I fly the confederate flag to honor the war dead" myth is just that: a myth. That was the point of my post, which you don't even get.
And I never said anything about the 1st Amendment. A made an analogy by referring to another country. I assume by your presence on DU that you are capable of comprehending abstract thought and that I do not have to explain to you that one can use a comparison to make a point without making any definitive statement on one's beliefs or endorsements of the political systems connected with that particular comparison. If you do not in fact understand that, this conversation is going nowhere.
Uncle Joe
(58,562 posts)and colored by the prism in which you view that object, which in turn translates to your opinion of the content of their character and motivation for doing so, that's the point.
You referred to Nazi Germany and equated it to the Confederacy, you stated that Germans don't go around flying the Nazi Flag to honor the sacrifice of their war dead, as it's illegal per your own post, they have no choice, why then make such a statement unless you're advocating scrapping the 1st Amendment? Otherwise it's irrelevant to the discussion, apples and beach balls.
Many Nazi soldiers "sacrificed" themselves as well. According to Der Spiegel, 3 million German soldiers lost their lives during WWII on the Easter Front alone.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/germany-tracing-its-war-dead-from-world-war-ii-a-832063.html
That doesn't mean Germans go around flying the Nazi flag to "honor" the "sacrifice" of the war dead. In fact, it is illegal to fly a Nazi flag in Germany.
http://www.minnpost.com/global-post/2010/02/despite-banning-nazi-symbols-germanys-constitution-and-legal-tradition-complicat
Who cares that some Southerners at the time thought the North had started the war? At the time of WWII, some Nazi soldiers thought Jews were sub-human. Ignorance is no excuse in either case.
The whole Civil War was tragic. People died. But the Civil War was 150+ years ago now. No one is "mourning' any "war dead" anymore because there is no one alive today who was alive in 1865. The fact is: The South lost. Wars have consequences. One of the consequences of the Civil War is that the SOUTH LOST. Get over it and put the flag away.
Regarding Point 1 of your U.S. Flag Vietnam analogy.
The Confederate Battle Flag or Southern Cross; the one most often flown today was the flag flown by the Confederate Soldiers and Navy, and it was their flag, the Confederate Government never adopted it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flags_of_the_Confederate_States_of_America
Designed by William Porcher Miles, the chairman of the Flag and Seal committee, a now-popular variant of the Confederate flag was rejected as the national flag in 1861. It was instead adopted as a battle flag by the Army of Northern Virginia under General Robert E. Lee.[31] Despite never having historically represented the CSA as a country nor officially recognized as one of the national flags, it is commonly referred to as "the Confederate Flag" and has become a widely recognized symbol of the American south.[32] It is also known as the rebel flag, Dixie flag, and Southern cross and is often incorrectly referred to as the "Stars and Bars".[33] (The actual "Stars and Bars" is the first national flag, which used an entirely different design.) The self-declared Confederate exclave of Town Line, New York, lacking a genuine Confederate flag, flew a version of this flag prior to its 1946 vote to ceremonially rejoin the Union.
Regarding point 2 of your Vietnam Flag analogy
The United States is one nation, North, South, East and West, we're family. We remain a national family due in large part to the (faith) power of the 1st Amendment, the vast majority of people flying or supporting the Confederate Flag know this and they fly it for many reasons, some are racists, of this there is no doubt but the same can be said for flyers of the Stars and Stripes as anyone can see just up thread, however most flyers or supporters do so to honor the horrific sacrifice from the Civil War, they're lovers of history, or just identifying themselves with a region of the nation from which they're proud to live in, whether you agree with them or not.
Of course my question to you wasn't about the U.S. Flag it was about the Vietnam Memorial.
OrwellwasRight
(5,170 posts)The South has more of those than I have ever seen anywhere else on the planet. Southerners who purport to "honor war dead" can go visit any of hundreds of Civil War Battle sites, statues, plaques, Civil War Museums, Robert E. Lee highways, Jefferson Davis homes, and on and on and on. They do not need to fly slave flags in front of their homes or on on their state capitols. People in other countries get that flags glorifying those who fought for abhorrent values is wrong. It is too bad you don't.
Uncle Joe
(58,562 posts)Whether you're referring to the Confederate Flag or the U.S. Flag, they're symbols and in and of themselves are open to interpretation to the viewer, flyer or supporter.
For the record, I don't own and never have owned a Confederate Flag.
Just because some people do fly or support the Confederate Flag doesn't mean they support slavery, racism or secession, it's too bad you can't see that.
24601
(3,967 posts)military.
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)As a result, her name became part of a perjorative term that white servicemen used to refer to black servicemen.
24601
(3,967 posts)adopt her position.
A President could do it with an Executive order and FDR, for whatever reason, did not.
When Eisenhower was faced with states resisting school integration, he could have punted and let it drag on in the courts. Instead, he federalized Arkansas National Guard Troops that had blocked integration and the next day, they instead enforced it along side US Marshals. He also sent the 82nd Airborne.
In our country, when senior military officers oppose the President's, he can relieved and replace them immediately. It has occurred and blaming the military for Presidential action or inaction is not reality.
CanonRay
(14,146 posts)but I cannot for the life of me remember Arizona seceding from the Union. Must have skipped class that day.
Dr. Forrester
(47 posts)It existed for less than a year but for a time there was a Confederate Territory of Arizona.
[link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confederate_Arizona|
copy/paste if link doesn't work.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confederate_Arizona
It's okay if you've never heard of it. Many haven't. It's rarely mentioned, and in history classes taught at HS level and below it isn't mentioned at all.
valerief
(53,235 posts)lonestarnot
(77,097 posts)underthematrix
(5,811 posts)It is a flag of sedition aganust the United States of America. You cannot be an American patriot while wacing the flag of sedition.
SwankyXomb
(2,030 posts)At least according to some of the neo-Confederates here at DixieKKKrat Underground.