The Houston 'Negro' MASSACRE (1917)

  >>>   Reminder:  All the unprovoked black violence against white people, the long long history of it,  is not random. Their violence is calculated to create terror and fear in the hearts and minds of white people.  Violence begets fear...and fear makes one submit to another.    (pre 1964 LINK ... post 1964 LINK )

------------------------------

First, let's dispel a few misconceptions about what has become known as the 'Houston Massacre' (AKA Camp Logan Riot). Despite what you'll read on almost all websites regarding this incident, it had …

--NOTHING to do with American (White) racism
--NOTHING to do with the color line mandate (AKA Jim Crow)
--NOTHING to do with Negroes hearing the word "nigger" from a few Americans (as if that could justify the slaughter of innocent people)

--------------------

If there was one event prior to the Civil Rights Act (1964) that should have raised the proverbial RED flag regarding the radical new concept of racial integration (a concept invented by the NAACP in 1910) , it was the racially motivated massacre of innocent Americans in the city of Houston in 1917.

On the evening of August 23, 1917, 156 Negro males, employed by the US military for non-combat assignments, mutinied at Camp Logan (situated a few miles north of Houston) over what they believed was the unfair incarceration of a fellow Negro soldier being held in the Houston city jail.  The Negroes first broke into the weapons depot and stole weapons.  They then marched out of camp toward Houston's [White] police department. However, the undisciplined men never made it to their intended destination. Instead, they broke off into groups. Most went back to camp.  Other groups, or more specifically members within these other groups, believed, for they now had the cover of night,  it was a golden opportunity to kill Americans (all the shots fired that night came from the Negro soldiers, and their shots were fired at non-Negroes).  The total death count from the Negro mutiny stunned, terrified and horrified the nation : 16 innocent Americans dead – all but two unarmed – plus one innocent Mexican.

 
Note: Only Negro "soldiers" in American history, unprovoked, opened fire on unarmed American citizens for the sole purpose of attempting to murder them.


The American military brass, not surprisingly, dealt harshly with the mutinous Negroes.  For the mutiny, and principally because of the senseless and racially motivated slaughter of innocent civilians, a total of 19 Negro soldiers were hung.

One curious observation here (which wouldn't have prevented the Houston massacre, but still it's curious)::  Why did the US military brass - all of whom were Americans - allow Negro males to wear the same military uniforms as the American soldiers?  This decision, in effect, told both groups they were one and the same.  This was hardly the case.  Negro soldiers were, generally, not allowed to see combat duty,  carry weapons, or mingle with American soldiers.  Nor were Negro officers allowed to give orders to American soldiers.   While integration of the races sounds acceptable today (after decades of TV/ Hollywood visual image indoctrination), back in 1917 the United States was operating under Plessy vs. Ferguson, which legally allowed for the establishment of a color line between the two demonstratively different male-groups. The American population at that time believed (for they had never known anything different) that the moral course with the Negro race was - and Booker T. Washington's goal - to create self-reliance for the Negro people i.e. not allow the Negro race to become reliant on white people to employ them, provide housing for them and schools for children, etc.  (remember, there were no laws denying the Negro race their right to build their own towns, their own cities, their own industries, and to create their own political environments; or even colonizing a place in America -- they were a FREE PEOPLE).  Regarding the uniforms issue, what was a very obvious solution to the hypocrisy above was to have the Negro and American soldiers wear different uniforms. This likely would have alleviated most of the tension as well as confusion between the two groups. A good example of this would be the different uniforms wore by the English and Scottish troops during World War I.

So why did the U.S. gov’t allow the military brass to violate the legally established color line and allow negro males to wear the same uniforms as Americans?  (In 1917 there were no Negro males in the US Congress, nor any on the federal judiciary i.e. the Negro race was entirely separate from the American population)). 

One finale note:  No one should allow politically correct revisionists today to influence them regarding this senseless and racially motivated massacre of innocent people,  and attempt to make the Negro soldiers the victims. It was such a craven attack - actually ambushing unarmed people.  The Negro soldiers, obviously,  were in no way the victims here.