The Final Word from "The Right Reverend Jacob Bogle"

*This is rather lengthy so I have color coded it, my words are red his are blue*


Usually I take personal attacks as they come and tend to ignore them however a very persistant individual has made that difficult. As you know there was an attempt to use me in attacking Dr. Ron Paul by lumping me with racists and neo-Nazis thus making the accusation that Dr. Paul is a racist, as well as myself.

My first reaction was to ignore it then after finding the article on multiple sites I became rather enraged at the absurdity of it all so, I reacted. I posted a reply to the sites I could as well as on this blog and the SL site. I then sent an e-mail to the guy demanding that he remove my name and the name of my organizations. Heres the e-mail:

"Your blog entitled Ron Paul Campaign Runs a Neo-Confederate Leader's Endorsement, leds people to believe that I am a racist and involved with neo-Nazi groups.
Nothing can be further from the truth. Your post is filled with factual errors and presuppositions. I demand you remove the article and post a retraction. Such defamatory claims violate the law and lack personal integrity."

Instead of a reply I found my e-mail with his response on another of this nameless authors blogs:

"Honorary Paultard and Southern Party Leader the Reverend Jacob Bogle (actually a 24 year old med student who founds lots of Southern pride organizations) got a little hot under the collar and harnessing the mighty power of his email, threatened to sue me.To put this into context, Ron Paul supporters have spent a week screaming that Jamie Kirchik would be sued. Those same folks screamed when I exposed Jim Perry as a fraud that they would sue me. Because those great lovers of the constitutions are not fans of free speech, when it criticizes their messiah slash candidate.Now my post on Jacob Bogle, FAS demonstrated that the Ron Paul campaign had run an endorsement from a neo-confederate party leader.

--As usual detractors begin with childish name-calling and hot air. I was a little hot under the collar, being from the South I am used to a general amount of respect that is so common amongst Southern people. You will note that I did not threaten to sue him but stated that libelous claims violate law. Being that I am for free speech I have not asked, nor have any inclination to, ask him to change his statements regarding Dr. Paul. --

Now Jacob Bogle writes
From: "Jacob Bogle" Subject: Re: Neo-Confederate endoresment, retractionYour blog entitled Ron Paul Campaign Runs a Neo-Confederate Leader's Endorsement, leds people to believe that I am a racist and involved with neo-Nazi groups.Nothing can be further from the truth. Your post is filled with factual errors and presuppositions. I demand you remove the article and post a retraction. Such defamatory claims violate the law and lack personal integrity.
Rev. Jacob Bogle, FAS

My Dear Southern Party Leader,Dear Jacob,please list these specific factual errors in my post.I stated that you celebrate the idea of the confederacy, had an essay on natural segregation and a poem that called for the restoration of the confederacyI did not state anywhere that you were a neo-nazi, as to whether you are a racist, that is your business. Maybe you can somehow argue that you love a system that perpetuated the enslavement of black men and women and run poems calling for its return not be a racist, but those kind of mental convolutions are your problem.My post pointed out the racist and neo-confederate links in the Ron Paul campaign and their determination to clumsily hide them. You were a subset of that as you are a neo-confederate. Your law of natural segregation page, which you took down once I linked to it, doesn't exactly make you the champion of civil rights either.Now in his defense on Liberty Post, Jacob Bogle states that
Lew Rockwell, Thomas DiLorenzo and others are among this nations intellectual elite, it is beyond explanation why someone would try to suggest they are anything but outstanding individuals. Now the funny thing is that Ron Paul's former staffer Eric Dondero and Reason Magazine as well as others have pinned some of Ron Paul's racist newsletters on Lew Rockwell, including his "95 percent of black males are criminals" tirade. It seems that Bogle has no problem with Rockwell."

What offends me such and what has no real accuracy is the assumption that the Confederacy was a negative part of our past. I could write hundreds of pages in defense of the Confederacy but I will not. I included in my original reply some of the lesser known defense of the South. The article gives the reader the presupposition that being pro-South means being racist. This is also a complete lie. I am not ashamed of my Confederate Heritage nor do I hide from my Southern Pride. I do however strongly object to being lumped in with racists, neo-Nazis and others who would snuff the flame of liberty.
Lew Rockwell is a great intellectual and has many provocative ideas. I never said that I was in total support of anyones personal views, even Dr. Paul and I have some disagreements. As for Thomas DiLorenzo I almost want to laugh when a person says that he is not part of academia.

Although it may be unpopular to state facts such as DiLorenzo has, they are never the less fact. As a person who cherishes knowledge nearly more than anything else I find it beyond ignorant to trade political correctness for truth and science.

So now we are on to the 2nd e-mail I sent:

"It is nice to know you'd rather not reply to me personally. I did not threaten to sue you I simply said, "libelous statements violate law". I will have a nice reply to your entire new blog post within the next few days. Until then I just want to remind you and let everyone else know about the Law of Natural Segregation.

"When a group of people are left alone, free of outside interference, they will separate themselves according to similar aspects. Such as race, sex, religion, age, education, socio-economic status, nation of origin, similar experiences and other similar and defining characteristics." A prime example of this is inside either a class room or large meeting, look around and you will find people in groups regardless of the amount of diversity. Natural segregation is a totally natural process and is the way in which a society and culture form.

There is nothing sinister about that and you would be hard pressed to find an educated person who disagrees. You allow the assumption that the "Law of Natural Segregation" and myself are in some way radical, involved with racists and so on by not giving the text in your blog and by lumping me with radical groups such as the Council of Conservative Citizens.

As for removing it, I did so because it did have misspellings and to allow people to read my reply. The full essay will be back up in the next few days. You can however find a copy via Google cache, un-altered.

It amazes me how detractors will attempt to smear things and individuals, which are totally benign, by selective wording and childish name calling. Just for the record what is your actual name, or do you not stand by what you say.
I look forward to seeing this in your next post."

And his reply was again via the blog. I have never seen anyone so determind to not write me directly.

Because you can't keep a good leader down. No siree, he'll send you more angry emails upset because you replied in a blog instead of hand delivering an email to him sealed with a kiss.

--Again with the nonsense.--

From: "Jacob Bogle" <________________@yahoo.com>It is nice to know you'd rather not reply to me personally.But I am replying to you personally, the only reason why you would want a personal email from me would be because you would rather not conduct this exchange out in the open.
I did not threaten to sue you I simply said, "libelous statements violate law"

Uh huh. And the Kaiser wears a green tutu. Writing "I demand you remove the article and post a retraction. Such defamatory claims violate the law" is an obvious lawsuit threat.

--Once more I never threatened to sue him. In general I tend to frown on law suites on both religious grounds and for personal reasons. It amazes me at the seeming lack of an end to these petty remarks "green tutu" please! I look much better in Confederate Grey!--

I will have a nice reply to your entire new blog post within the next few days.
Great, but you've failed to point out those defamatory statements, for the second time around. I'm sure that me and your three followers will be really looking forward to your blog post on the topic.

--The enitre article is defamatory as it attempts to place me in the same group of people as racists and Nazis. Although if I had to pick one I would say this "Of course that message is so wonderfully camouflaged and politically correct you might never think to ask what those "once glorious days" involved. If your guess involved plantations, well let's just say you're getting warmer" I find it hard to NOT see the obvious presupposition that I am in favor of slavery. Which in case you missed it, I am not.

Until then I just want to remind you and let everyone else know about the Law of Natural Segregation."When a group of people are left alone, free of outside interference, they will separate themselves according to similar aspects. Such as race, sex, religion, age, education, socio-economic status, nation of origin, similar experiences and other similar and defining characteristics." A prime example of this is inside either a class room or large meeting, look around and you will find people in groups regardless of the amount of diversity. Natural segregation is a totally natural process and is the way in which a society and culture form.There is nothing sinister about that and you would be hard pressed to find an educated person who disagrees.
Press harder, I'm an educated person and I disagree. When such an essay is written up by a neo-confederate group, it sounds rather disturbingly like the opening for an apologetic for enforced segregation. In the same way that a NAMBLA article on child brides in aboriginal culture isn't going to read like some innocuous anthropological overview.

-- I can't believe the number of times he associates the Southern Movement or neo-Confederate as he calls it, with radical ideas. I find it equally disturbing that he would link a paper on psycho-social norms with NAMBLA. How hard does one have to try to fabricate any way to find something bad out of something totally benign and accepted?--

You allow the assumption that the "Law of Natural Segregation" and myself are in some way radical, involved with racists and so on by not giving the text in your blog and by lumping me with radical groups such as the Council of Conservative Citizens.
I shouldn't have needed to give the text since I linked to it on your page, which you took down and replaced with something about Ron Paul. Attacking me for not saving a copy of your segregation piece when you were the one who took it down is laughably dishonest.

--I understand why you would exclude the text as it would show to the casual reader that you haven't a leg to stand on. It's also no wonder why you completly ignored what Dr. Paul actually said about the Civil War and made it sound like he was a loon. As with me Dr. Paul stated facts about the lack of blood shed for the abolishment of slavery accross the industrialized world.--

As for removing it, I did so because it did have misspellings and to allow people to read my reply. The full essay will be back up in the next few days. You can however find a copy via Google cache, un-altered.It doesn't take weeks to correct misspellings in in a several paragraph essay. Microsoft Word can do it in 5 minutes. Taking the page down for several weeks suggests you didn't want people to see it.

The piece had been on-line for at least 3 years, I hardly think I was hiding anything. I took it down so, when people clicked your link it took them to my defense and explination of the darn thing. As for taking it down for several weeks thats absured this entire thing has been going on for a relativly short time. At anyrate the page did not contain the whole thing and the complete paper was not online. The enitre bit on the "Law of Natural Segregation" will be up shortly. If anyone is that concerned about it look it up via Google cache in all its "bare-boned" glory.

I wonder why he didn't include my question about his name? Generally people who just want to either pick a fight or babble from the mouth rarely uses their real name. It also keeps them from accepting responsibility when they are found wrong. --

Next e-mail from myself:

"I must be doing well if I have a whole four followers, indeed.

To anyone reading this it must be rather obvious as to your real goal which is simply defamation by petty means. All a person has to do is read beyond your words and do a bit of research. Your statements are defamatory in the way you represent me and the Southern Movement to your readers. Which leads them to think, any of the aforementioned, are radical and racist.

I have provided all I'm going to say on the issues of the Confederacy, the "Law" and so on. Of course you didn't provide the full text of our little chat, I suppose you don't stand by your words.

I have requested you remove my name and organizations and you have not. Any further action will be between third parties. "

And his blog response:

"Jacob Bogle" Subject: Re:I must be doing well if I have a whole four followers, indeed.To anyone reading this it must be rather obvious as to your real goal which is simply defamation by petty means. All a person has to do is read beyond your words and do a bit of research. Your statements are defamatory in the way you represent me and the Southern Movement to your readers. Which leads them to think, any of the aforementioned, are radical and racist.I have provided all I'm going to say on the issues of the Confederacy, the "Law" and so on. Of course you didn't provide the full text of our little chat, I suppose you don't stand by your words.I have requested you remove my name and organizations and you have not. Any further action will be between third parties.Rev. Jacob Bogle, FAS"

Oh remember when the Rev was saying he hadn't threatened to sue me. Okay so now we're back to threatening to vaguely threatening to sue me, whatever 'between third parties' means.

--Try again, third parties means that I have the option of reporting you to the forums you have now made me apart of. --

Now you'll note I asked him several times to list any specific defamatory statements I've made, which he has failed to do, instead he's claimed that I 'represent' him and his movement in a defamatory way. A dead end claim legally. There is no such thing as a legal right to not be criticized on the internet, as any number of companies and individuals have discovered.

--Nor have you given any attempt at acting like a decent person. Depending on future events it is more than possible I could take legal action and have the right to do so. This is something that I did think about but in the end if I am being attack because I support a man who wishes to restore this nation, enforce the Constitution, create a peaceful foreign policy and rebuild our limping economy then I suppose I am actually doing rather well.--

The Rev. Bogle has not replied to any of the points I raised and doesn't seem to be able to defend his views. Which suggests that this whole email charade was an attempt to intimidate me into taking down a negative post, this is of course typical of the behavior of Ron Paul supporters who claim to want free speech but act as free speech terrorists when dealing with anyone whose views are critical of them.

I have replied to nearly every "point" you have made. And I think the number of sites I have either built, contributed to or have been quoted on does a great deal to defend my veiws. You may also like to read some books such as "The Real Lincoln" by Thomas DiLorenzo, "The South was Right" by James and Donnie Kennedy, and "From Union to Empire" by Clyde Wilson or "The Grey Book" by the LOS. Some articles you may be interested in are "Power, Legitamacy and the 14th Amendment" by Joseph Fallon or perhaps "A Response to Attacks on Confederate Symbols and History" by Michael T. Griffith.

In the end you have refused to give your name, insist on attacking with petty insults and continue to give the assumption that the Confederacy and Southern Heritage are bad.

This is the last reply on this subject. I have no desire for a person to not voice their disagreements. I am very much in favor of free speech but in general if you are wanting to levy a reasonable disagreement you try to use honorable tactics. I am saddened by the apparent lack of sight the "Sultan" has when it comes to things that are so easy to see. There is little doubt in my mind that soon enough I will find another post to his blog, perhaps this will garner him more readers and I wish him well.

If those who are against Dr. Paul and his platform of peace, prosperity and liberty work so hard to pull an obscure figure such as myself, in an attempt to discredit both, should simply give up. It's not working, Dr. Paul raised $20 million last quarter and over $3 million so far this quarter by over 100,000 donors, cheap tricks like this won't do anyting but provide you attention and make me hungry for fried chicken and sweet tea.

God Bless,

Rev. Jacob Bogle, FAS

BOD Omni Research Group