See other Editorial Articles
Title: The Fall of the South: A Sesquicentennial Wake By Bill Buppert
Source:
ZeroGov
URL Source: http://zerogov.com/?p=3964
Published: Apr 10, 2015
Author: Bill Buppert
Post Date: 2015-04-10 12:45:59 by X-15
Keywords: None
Views: 4551
Comments: 204
“So far from engaging in a war to perpetuate slavery, I am rejoiced that slavery is abolished. I believe it will be greatly for the interests of the South. So fully am I satisfied of this, as regards Virginia especially, that I would cheerfully have lost all I have lost by the war, and have suffered all I have suffered, to have this object attained.” -Statement to John Leyburn (1 May 1870), as quoted in R. E. Lee: A Biography (1934) by Douglas Southall Freeman. On this day, 9 April in 1865, the Lincolnian project to enslave the entire nation under the yoke of Union supremacy, central planning and a country administered by national political fiat and the naked fist of government aggression prevailed. The South and the Confederacy for all it flaws died at Appomattox. Lee is often erroneously quoted as saying the following: “Governor, if I had foreseen the use those people designed to make of their victory, there would have been no surrender at Appomattox Courthouse; no sir, not by me. Had I foreseen these results of subjugation, I would have preferred to die at Appomattox with my brave men, my sword in my right hand. Supposed made to Governor Fletcher S. Stockdale (September 1870), as quoted in The Life and Letters of Robert Lewis Dabney, pp. 497-500.” No lesser literary luminaries and historians have said this is false than Douglas Southall Freeman, Shelby Dade Foote, Jr. and Bruce Catton. This appears to be historical myth-making by Mr. Dabney. My casual research and interest in Lee find this simply does not fit in his character; now there were certainly Confederate worthies who professed such sympathies. Lee is certainly one of the greatest captains of arms in the history of the West. A far more competent and talented warrior than the base incompetency and abject martial malpractice of George Washington; he joins the ranks of Douglas Haig (WWI) and Pompey (Rome) for an exaggerated sense of warrior skills untethered to reality. Lee was at the forefront of a Confederate high tide that was destroyed by the Gettysburg debacle and worsening political travails in the South as Davis tried to emulate the Sovietized system of the Union to salvage a victory. At least the South fought to fight a just war in defending their own soil from invasion. I am amused at Union apologists who claim that the South fired the first shot at Fort Sumter. Let me employ a tortured analogy; you buy a house and the owners refuse to vacate and bring friends with guns to ensure you can’t possession of your rightful property. Such was the case in Sumter where the Fort commanded the entry and exit to richest transportation hub in the south employing constant threats against the indigenous community it sat in the middle of. The War Between the States was a Second American Revolution, the last gasp of trying to unshackle the nation from the Constitutional straitjacket that extinguished liberty at every turn. Alexander Stephens, the Vice president of the Confederacy had other ideas. He is no hero of abolition nor a moral man in regards the disposition of humans in chains: “Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth.” Lincoln claimed this was his only disagreement with Stephens but the curious ability of Lincoln to free all slaves outside his legal jurisdiction and maintain it within his control regime. Historian Clarence Carson has astutely commented: “It should be noted, however, that as of the moment it was issued and to the best of Lincoln’s knowledge, the proclamation did not free a single slave. It did not free a slave in Maryland, Delaware, Kentucky, Missouri, West Virginia, nor in any state or portions of a state within the Confederacy occupied by Union troops…In short, Lincoln freed only those slaves over which he had no control. No doubt that was by design.” As Al Benson Jr. notes: “What it amounted to was, that, as an effective propaganda tool, the proclamation freed only those slaves that the North had no jurisdiction over and it didn’t free any slaves over which the North had some jurisdiction.” Author Webb Garrison, a former dean of Emory University noted that: “…the Emancipation Proclamation was a war measure – not an edict issued in a dramatic move to better the lives of blacks. No one knew this better than the author of the proclamation. Nine months after it was issued, he told Salmon P. Chase ‘The original proclamation has no constitutional or legal justification except as a military measure’.” There was no major politician except Charles Sumner on either side interested in the least in emancipation much less abolition of black chattel slavery. Sumner would famously ask Lincoln: “Do you know who is at this moment the largest slaveholder in the United States?” Sumner informed Lincoln that he was the largest slaveholder because the President “holds all the slaves of the District of Columbia.” This ended on paper in 1862. This war was about slavery but not in the commonly held beliefs that permeate the nonsense about the conflict in the government school systems. This war was about the Union grasp at codifying a new kind of slavery just as awful as chattel or indentured servitude. The object was to chain tax cattle to a regime that could rob them at will and ultimately using every power at its disposal to drain a person’s resources and at worst cage and murder them when it saw fit. The essential result of the horrific conflict was to out everyone on the plantation under any Constitutionally protected” territory or state. Go guerrilla indeed, what would the future have wrought? Poster Comment: "The birth of Empire. Not a damned living soul has lived under the Constitution as it was intended in 1787-1791 – or at least as it was said to be intended."
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-7) not displayed.
.
.
.
#8. To: Katniss (#6)
The A bomb was intended for Germany, not Japan. Jew operation from day one. They wanted to eradicate as many Germans as possible. Fire bombing was the next best.
And your point is?
Restate the obvious... World Jewry built the A bomb for Germany. They were dismayed that the war was ending before the A bomb was ready, thus the fire bombing.
The Jew-beast planned to devastate German civilians to an even greater degree than General Sherman pillaged the South. The American Jews had the imprimatur of FDR to have their way over Germany, only the end of hostilities on the continent saved the German civilians from the hell we visited upon Japan. I say this with the difference that the two A-bombs dropped on Japan were done to end the conflict, NOT to exact any revenge upon the Jews declared enemy (they had no axe to grind with Japan).
#9. To: Cynicom (#8)
#10. To: Katniss (#9)
And your point is?
#11. To: Cynicom, Katniss (#10)
-Alex Kurtagic
#12. To: Cynicom (#10)
What's your evidence for this? Why not firebomb Berlin, Hanover, Frankfurt, Stuttgart, etc. too then?
#13. To: X-15 (#0)
Staying on topic, had Stonewall Jackson not been killed, Gettysburg probably would have had a different outcome and so would have the war.
#14. To: X-15 (#11)
That concept seems not to be understood by some people. Japan was never the "enemy", Germany was the "enemy". That is why we went to war. Tween you and me. If you ever read the book by General Harris there is this.... He ordered bombing of Dresden because it had not been bombed prior and thousands of Germans had taken refuge there. This included the military running communications in their fight against the Russians....To aid our Russian allies, the Brits and Americans fire bombed Dresden to destroy the military network... Those are the words of Bomber Harris in his book, written after the war. He was in charge of both Brit and American bombers, it was his call. The Jew-beast planned to devastate German civilians to an even greater degree than General Sherman pillaged the South.
#15. To: Katniss (#12)
This is not a trial. Thank heavens, I would be shot for having a brain. General Harris gave his reasons in his book. He ordered it, I was not there. What's your evidence for this?
#16. To: Jethro Tull (#13)
Amen, and thanks for St. Joan. ... had Stonewall Jackson not been killed, Gettysburg probably would have had a different outcome and so would have the war.
“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.” ~ H. L. Mencken
#17. To: Lod (#16)
Lincoln offered command of the Yankee forces to General Lee, he declined. Interesting to think about what would have been the outcome, had Lee accepted.
#18. To: Katniss (#7) (Edited)
Lincoln worship in this country is akin to Churchill worship in England. Both men were personally responsible for doing tremendous damage to the moral basis of their very nations, in one case terminally for an empire, in the other the forerunner of the nation that we've become and on the cusp of the destruction of a similar empire. Very astute. I'd say there's no point even dialoguing with war anymore -- in some thread I asked him doggedly whether it's true he's an Obongo-loving "progressive" who was banned from here once, and he doggedly didn't say one word in response -- so even if he should do so henceforth, he's already admitted it in my book. EVERYBODY LISTEN TO YOUR FRIEND NN -- don't waste any more time debating war! What do you say we just stonewall the gliberals who come around here? Churchill worship.... anybody looked at Imprimis lately? It seems to be one big fossilized Churchill and Reagan worship cult. ewwww, GROSS! BTW, I have to agree with Cynicom's and X-15's answers to you here. "Why not firebomb Berlin, Hanover, Frankfurt, Stuttgart, etc. too then?" The Jew world order makes sense sometimes but not others. Could be the world was so shocked by Dresden they didn't want to repeat it. Remember, Nagasaki and Hiroshima happened to have unusually large Christian presence for Japan. I got into a typical war-like debate with war on this very topic not long ago here. It was of course laden with the typical reading comprehension issues and challenges in logic that war seems to be perpetually faced with. Debating with him is like watching a dog chase its tail in circles but never catching it.
#19. To: Cynicom (#17)
Yes, who knows the outcome? Since it was a war of attrition, prolly no difference in the ending.
“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.” ~ H. L. Mencken
#20. To: NeoconsNailed (#18)
May war soon join up with dumplin', wherever he went.
“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.” ~ H. L. Mencken
#21. To: Lod (#20) (Edited)
Mebbe he went to enlist in the 100-year "war against terrorism". ;-) Joan does seem to have gotten the Southern truth. Here's a great Baez rarity with an unusual message and arrangement: JOAN BAEZ ~ Lincoln Freed Me Today ~ https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=PGrW-PgY39Q
#22. To: Cynicom (#15)
Thank heavens, I would be shot for having a brain. General Harris gave his reasons in his book. He ordered it, I was not there. No, it's not a trial, so what does that mean, that we need to simply believe what you say? Why would anyone here have read that book? Try not to be so pretentious and condescending as if anyone who's anyone has read some obscure book. Try recommending it instead. Otherwise, you're so far off on your takes of Churchill and the root causes from WWII based on our conversation in another thread that if I were to defer to simply what you say I'd be considered a fool. Frankly, that's exactly why I was asking. This is not a trial.
#23. To: NeoconsNailed (#18)
That's interesting, I didn't know that. Remember, Nagasaki and Hiroshima happened to have unusually large Christian presence for Japan.
#24. To: NeoconsNailed (#18)
Was there ever? I'd say there's no point even dialoguing with war anymore
#25. To: Katniss (#22)
I would say take his word for it, Katniss -- because Bomber Harris is known in the truth movement as one of the big, shocking genocidal maniacs, a sort of Churchill Junior. Britons are as stupid as amerikans on average, but when a Harris statue (with pillar?) was ceremoniously unveiled a few yeas back there was considerable public denunciation of it on this above basis. For many, "Bomber" is not meant as praise for the fiend. Think of that -- even in Britain where many people still worship the Holy Jew War, there's some understanding that Britain's obliteration of Dresden was one of the darkest days in moral history. When the statue was done up our pundits too the occasion to bring out the hideous truth on this forgotten World War Jew monster. But Cynicom, please explain something -- " the Brits and Americans fire bombed Dresden to destroy the military network..." One of the main points about Dresden was that it had no military significance and was indeed an art city full of civilian refugees. No?
#26. To: Katniss (#24)
Ha! you tell me -- you seem to have been here long than I (most or all of you do).
#27. To: NeoconsNailed (#25)
Ya think? I don't see that understanding here anyway. there's some understanding that Britain's obliteration of Dresden was one of the darkest days in moral history.
#28. To: Katniss (#27)
To me, the destruction of Dresden was just as gratuitous as was that of Japan.
“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.” ~ H. L. Mencken
#29. To: Lod, Jethro Tull (#28)
Plans for Operation Downfall are available in great detail on the internet. Most estimates of American dead as a result of an invasion of Japan were for at least 500,000, and up to 1,000,000 wounded. The estimated time for wars end was variable, most military people thought it would be at least two more years. Japanese dead estimates were for more than 2,000,000. Our "ally" Russia was preparing their own invasion of Northern Japan, even though they had a peace treaty with Japan, one that promised they would NOT invade Japan. Many factors involved in A bombing Japan. Morality had no part in it. It was numbers, some of them die, or millions of both sides die in the carnage. Cold blooded numbers.
#30. To: Katniss (#27)
I mean in the UK, like I said. Amurricans wouldn't know where or what Dresden is if their banal little lives depended on it. What are the chances that even half of the Amurrican troops in active duty could find the country they're molesting on a map? If this is 2013, it must be Pakistan.
#31. To: Cynicom (#29) (Edited)
Cold blooded numbers. It sounds like you're agreeing that it was amoral and indefensible. Hope so. Gratuitous -- that's the word for both Japan and Dresden, yeah! Isn't it alleged Dresden was partly a test of the latest killing methods? You know, like the Nazis are accused of testing medical techniques on poor pitiful Jew campgoers. Morality had no part in it. It was numbers, some of them die, or millions of both sides die in the carnage.
#32. To: NeoconsNailed (#31)
wrong, wrong and wrong. Check the numbers again. You have a DECISION TO MAKE. Do you go with several millions dead or half a million????? It sounds like you're agreeing that it was amoral and indefensible.
#33. To: Lod (#28)
Even more so because the entire intent, and for the first time in history therefore breaking an unwritten rule of warfare, a civilian populace was deliberately targeted for no military or strategic reason whatsoever. It was purely to demoralize the populace. In Japan the intent was to end the war, which of course it did. It's debatable, given the unknown death tallies, whether it saved lives or did not. Insofar as Dresden goes, there's no debate about much of anything there except for how big a psychos the allies are, particularly given that it breached a barrier that today has seen the few remaining barriers of decency and civility eradicated entirely. To me, the destruction of Dresden was just as gratuitous as was that of Japan.
#34. To: Cynicom (#29)
more here -
“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.” ~ H. L. Mencken
#35. To: NeoconsNailed (#30)
Gotcha. I don't think that most people in this country can even name the three major allied nations or the two primary axis nations during WWII, any relevant facts about the civil war much less the truth about the reason for it, or be able to identify at least 25% of the states on a US map. Among other things like being able to state the three branches of government.
#36. To: Cynicom (#32) (Edited)
Don't tell me you're trotting out this old saw that we had to bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki. If not for President Rosenfeld's warmongering they never would have bombed us -- it's that simple. As it is, we go down as one of the most barbarous entities that ever lived on earth. Countries are like people. Those that see properly to their own affairs and don't invite trouble have far less of it on average. There was never any valid reason for us to fire a single shot in Asia or Europe -- never. And some things never change, including that. What the world needed most from us from the beginning was a message by example that war is not the answer. What they get instead is a country that simply can't stop bombing, invading, raping, looting, killing. Bravo for Colorado, Lod. More fuel for the flames!
#37. To: Katniss, NeoconsNailed (#23)
Katniss: That's interesting, I didn't know that. The Bombing of Nagasaki August 9, 1945: The Un-Censored Version the massive Cathedral was one of two Nagasaki landmarks that the Bock’s Car bombardier had been briefed on, and looking through his bomb site 31,000 feet overhead, he identified the cathedral through a break in the clouds and ordered the drop. At 11:02 am, during morning mass, Since the Cathedral was the epicenter of the blast, most Nagasaki Christians did not survive. The Bombing of Nagasaki August 9, 1945. Unwelcome Truths for Church and State The Bock’s Car crew had instructions to drop the bomb only with visual sighting. But [the city of] Kokura was clouded over. So after making three failed bomb runs [...], the plane headed for its secondary target, Nagasaki. here is one of the important points of this article: What the Japanese Imperial government could not do in over 200 years of persecution (destroy Japanese Christianity) American[s] did in 9 seconds.NeoconsNailed: Remember, Nagasaki and Hiroshima happened to have unusually large Christian presence for Japan.
Nagasaki was the most Christian city in Japan and ground zero was the largest cathedral in the Orient. [St. Mary’s, Urakami River district]
The first and only field test of an atomic bomb had been blasphemously code-named “Trinity” (a distinctly Christian term).
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
#38. To: GreyLmist (#37)
Grey! Fantastic. Thanks -- didn't have any of that. Further proof that (among other ghastly things) government is really this country's God, and one of our favorite pursuits is smashing the real God in the face with a sledgehammer. THANK YOU, President Rosenfeld, even 70 years afterward, for this further evidence that your kind are vile beyond belief. You too, Prexy Wilson/Wolfsohn -- Rosie's doppelganger of two decades previous. We rake the muck here and it's ugly and malodorous, but ahh the beauty of truth. What a privilege -- what an adventure!
#39. To: GreyLmist (#37)
Thanks Grey, that's highly interesting. Those two reads will be my readings for the day!
#40. To: NeoconsNailed (#38)
LOL President Rosenfeld
#41. To: X-15 (#0) (Edited)
Every little screech like this one fails to note the obvious...the southern states were in rebellion...the militia had been legally called forth to suppress the rebellion and such states would be subject to martial law which includes dictates of a supreme commander. Lincoln, as Commander in Chief, most certainly had it within his power to dictate legal terms to those states in rebellion.
--Fuck your breath.
#42. To: Katniss, NeoconsNailed (#40) (Edited)
Katniss: LOL ~ROOSEVELT’S REAL JEWISH FAMILY NAME WAS ROSENFELD/ROSENVELT~THE RABBIT HOLE IS DEEP~ A "triumvirate" of Kamenev, Grigory Zinoviev, and Josef Stalin assumed tacit control of the [Communist] Party and state in 1923 Lev Kamenev - Wikipedia served briefly as the first head of state of Soviet Russia in 1917, and from 1923-24 the acting Premier in the last year of Vladimir Lenin's life. Kamenev was the brother-in-law of Leon Trotsky. During Lenin's illness, Kamenev was the acting Council of People's Commissars and Politburo chairman. Together with Zinoviev and Joseph Stalin, he formed a ruling 'triumvirate' (or 'troika') in the Communist Party Edited formatting. NeoconsNailed: President Rosenfeld
KAMENEV, LEV BORISOVICH - encyclopedia.com Born July 18, 1883, in Moscow and raised in Tbilisi, Lev Borisovich Rosenfeld entered the revolutionary movement while studying law at Moscow University. In 1901 he joined the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party (RSDLP) and adopted the pseudonym Kamenev ("man of stone").
born Rozenfeld
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
#43. To: war (#41) (Edited)
The militia? Lincoln called forth Major Anderson [of the Federal Army] and company to be expectedly sacrificed in South Carolina/at Fort Sumter for his war agenda. Edit sentence 2 + to cross-reference discussion info on Lincoln's War at Title: Judge Napolitano: Lincoln Set About On The Most Murderous War In American Historythe militia had been legally called forth to suppress the rebellion
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
#44. To: Cynicom (#29) (Edited)
The Naval blockade of Japan was working and Japan was moving to surrender because of that. Dropping the bombs robbed our Navy of their victory, imo, for expansion marketing of "The Manhattan Project" -- so that nuclear development would continue to be funded and supported by the "spectacular" effects observed: Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki - Wikipedia Edited spelling. some of them die, or millions of both sides die in the carnage.
The Target Committee stated that "It was agreed that psychological factors in the target selection were of great importance. Two aspects of this are (1) obtaining the greatest psychological effect against Japan and (2) making the initial use sufficiently spectacular for the importance of the weapon to be internationally recognized when publicity on it is released.
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
#45. To: All (#44) (Edited)
THE DECISION TO BOMB HIROSHIMA & NAGASAKI "It should be used on a military installation surrounded by houses or other buildings most susceptible to damage; "It should be used without explicit warning of the nature of the bomb." Those were the words of the "Interim Committee of the Manhattan Project" in May, 1945. This was the group in charge of building the first atomic bomb. The Target Committee of the Manhattan project believed it was desirable that the first use of the bomb be (according to notes, memos and documents formerly classified top secret for a generation) "sufficiently spectacular for the importance of the weapon to be internationally recognized when publicity on it was released." Already the Japanese were looking for terms of surrender, but these approaches for peace from Japan, not made public, even to members of the Manhattan Project, were ignored. The U.S. wanted no terms, no conditions; not even the safety of the Emperor could be guaranteed (although that request was granted, after the two atom bombs were dropped). Japan had to surrender immediately and unconditionally - the U.S. knowing full well that Japan could never go for that. (Add'l evidence, in square brackets, added 1999): [That there really were surrender overtures by the Japanese was confirmed by a man who ought to know, CIA chief Allen Dulles. In an interview with Clifford Evans (1/19/63 (NY) WOR-TV), Dulles said: "I had been in touch with certain Japanese.... They...were ready to surrender provided the Emperor could be saved so as to have unity in Japan. I took that word to Secretary (of State) Stimson at Potsdam July 20, 1945...." [Just weeks later, August 6 and August 9, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were bombed.] most of Japan's navy had been destroyed, all its Axis allies were defeated, and its hold on the Pacific had been broken. For Truman, the real issue was that only a show of actual destruction from the bomb's use would serve to warn the USSR of the new formidable military power of the U.S. No harmless academic "demonstration" far from life would do. The U.S. Congress (which is supposed to run the show) had been kept in total ignorance of the Manhattan Project, even though the War Department, by trying to disguise it in various budgets, spent $2 billion on it. As time wore on, Congress grew aggressive and suspicious. What's it all for? came the demands. On August 6th and 9th, as Einstein bitterly noted then, Truman showed Congress that it got its money's worth; At the expense of nearly a quarter-million lives (including U.S. prisoners of war in Japanese target areas), Truman's overkill took the Congressional heat off himself. On the list of possible targets were Kokura, Hiroshima, Niigata and Kyoto [My note: Nagasaki was substituted for Kyoto because Henry L. Stimson, the Secretary of War, objected to targeting the old capitol of Kyoto]. The documents read that Hiroshima "has the advantage of being such a size and with possible focusing from nearby mountains that a large fraction of the city may be destroyed." All targets on the list I were then "reserved," and no conventional bombing was to be permitted there. [My note: However, Nagasaki was a secondary target and had already been conventionally bombed about 5 times previously.] The desire was that there be little or no prior bomb damage. For example, the damage already done to Tokyo by regular bombing would detract from the "spectacular" effect and measurement of the bomb's true power. Tokyo was thus excluded from the target list.. Other targets were debated, without conscience, on how "flat" they were so as to show the full ability of the bomb's blast to spread through a city Edited formatting. The Naval blockade of Japan was working and Japan was moving to surrender because of that. Dropping the bombs robbed our Navy of their victory, imo, for expansion marketing of "The Manhattan Project" -- so that nuclear development would continue to be funded and supported by the "spectacular" effects observed:
"It should be used as soon as possible;
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
#46. To: GreyLmist (#43)
Quoting Napolitino as some sort of authority is a non-starter with me,
--Fuck your breath.
#47. To: war (#46) (Edited)
I wasn't quoting Napolitano. I linked a thread with his name in the title to reference discussion info there on the topic as needed and for continuity. Edited to expand statement. Quoting Napolitino as some sort of authority is a non-starter with me,
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
.
.
.
Comments (48 - 204) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest