Tempers-flare-over-removal-of-confederate-statues-in-New-Orleans

1234568

Replies

  • AntonioAntonio Senior Member Posts: 2,327 Senior Member
    What an interesting thread!

    Unless you're an open-minded history buff, the almost solid idea you get outside the U.S. from almost all sources is that the North went after the South to free the slaves....and don't you dare questioning that!

    Recently read an article by a local historian that explained the causes for the 1879 war against Chile that was (And still is) as traumatic to us as the Secession War was for the U.S. (We lost id and ended up as an occupied country for some years; finally that resulted in us giving up a huge chunk of land and Bolivia becoming landlocked) and guess what? The causes exposed in the article were due to....taxes!
    Needing more income, the Bolivian government raised the revenue they got from our state for managing their imports through our ports, and since we denied to the 100% increase, they turned to the Chilean mining companies with concessions inside their territory north on their border and raised the taxes to them; when they refused to pay the unilateral increase, they were impounded, detonating a Chilean military intervention to protect their commercial interest, and since we had a mutual defensive pact with Bolivia, we ended up being tossed into the fire and loosing most out of the conflict since the actual troublemakers retreated after loosing some battles to fend off internal political strife.
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 25,771 Senior Member
    Varmintmist, you left this out.


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Fort_Sumter
    Ships from Fox's relief expedition began to arrive on April 12. Although Fox himself arrived at 3 a.m. on his steamer Baltic, most of the rest of his fleet was delayed until 6 p.m., and one of the two warships, USS Powhatan, never did arrive. Unbeknownst to Fox, it had been ordered to the relief of Fort Pickens in Florida. As landing craft were sent toward the fort with supplies, the artillery fire deterred them and they pulled back. Fox decided to wait until after dark and for the arrival of his warships. The next day, heavy seas made it difficult to load the small boats with men and supplies and Fox was left with the hope that Anderson and his men could hold out until dark on April 13.

    Also left out is that the Confederate government, that Lincoln refused to recognize, tried in vain for months to pay the Union government for the forts and installations that were in Southern states. Like the one at Pensacola, FL.
    Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.


  • shushshush Senior Member Posts: 6,259 Senior Member
    Looks like I may have to change my house name, £****** Has Don Carin', to something a bit more sensitive.


    I have just checked my family name (£******) on my father's side, for slave ownership.

    Here;
    http://www.ucl.ac.uk/lbs/


    4 Individuals [7 Records] → 0 to 7

    Name ...James £******,

    Not a claimant
    Antigua 95 (Bendals) £2854 16S 6D [225 Enslaved]


    Name ...Mashod £******,

    Awardee
    Jamaica St Andrew 304 £113 8S 1D [4 Enslaved]
    Awardee
    Jamaica St Andrew 478 £229 17S 8D [16 Enslaved]


    Name ...Samson £******,

    Awardee
    Barbados 1918 £19 8S 4D [1 Enslaved]
    Awardee
    Barbados 1919 £7 15S 4D [1 Enslaved]
    Awardee
    Barbados 1920 £85 8S 11D [3 Enslaved]


    Name ...Thomas £******,

    Awardee
    Jamaica Kingston 663 £39 1S 8D [2 Enslaved]



    The £****** family is distraught with swivel-eyed panic.

    What of the £****** effigy, is it doomed?

    cjp wrote: »..... Oh dear God, I've admitted to liking something Limey.I'll never hear the end of this.

    Jayhawker wrote: »...But seriously Shush....

    Big Chief wrote: ».........walking around with a greasy butt ain't no fun, though!

     


     

  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 25,771 Senior Member
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    Yes, and I'm sure they will produce a fair and balanced representation of the concept, completely different from all current programing that passes as "documentaries" and "news" on HBO... :roll:

    And you can bet that there will be people that will watch it and think it's an actual documentary, too.
    Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.


  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 21,803 Senior Member
    Fisheadgib wrote: »
    This is another part of history that never gets brought up and few if any African Americans would ever acknowledge this. The public is supposed to believe that fat pasty white guys with money went traipsing through the jungles and captured the locals to be brought to the US and sold as slaves. Nothing could be further from the truth.

    You got that right! That's just plain crazy!!! The white guy do that in certain parts of the dark continent and he may end up on the menu.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • VarmintmistVarmintmist Senior Member Posts: 6,461 Senior Member
    tennmike wrote: »
    Varmintmist, you left this out.


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Fort_Sumter
    Ships from Fox's relief expedition began to arrive on April 12. Although Fox himself arrived at 3 a.m. on his steamer Baltic, most of the rest of his fleet was delayed until 6 p.m., and one of the two warships, USS Powhatan, never did arrive. Unbeknownst to Fox, it had been ordered to the relief of Fort Pickens in Florida. As landing craft were sent toward the fort with supplies, the artillery fire deterred them and they pulled back. Fox decided to wait until after dark and for the arrival of his warships. The next day, heavy seas made it difficult to load the small boats with men and supplies and Fox was left with the hope that Anderson and his men could hold out until dark on April 13.

    Also left out is that the Confederate government, that Lincoln refused to recognize, tried in vain for months to pay the Union government for the forts and installations that were in Southern states. Like the one at Pensacola, FL.

    So they were resupplied? They were not reinforced with the 20K men needed to hold the fort? Was there even a attempt to reinforce the fort with the needed 20K men? The relief ships were fired upon while they were trying to enter federal land?
    I fail to see where this bolsters your point.

    Lincoln was inaugurated 4 Mar, FYI the federals manages to muster every person under arms for the ceremony because of a threat to blow up the dias by the peace loving Confederates, 640 men including W-Point cadets, the sum total of available men. There is no way that between 4 Mar and 15 Apr Lincoln was responsible for not taking payment for the stolen property. At the time of the firing on Ft Sumpter, the Confederate govt was still a theory. VA had voted against succession, as did Arkansas, North Carolina, and Tennessee.
    It's boring, and your lack of creativity knows no bounds.
  • sgtrock21sgtrock21 Senior Member Posts: 1,569 Senior Member
    tennmike: Strange days on the forum. I wanted to comment on your snowball that turned into an avalanche post. It seems to have disappeared. While searching I discovered that one of my posts had my text replaced with Xxx. There was also an apology that my post was deleted for bypassing auto censure. I as usual used ** so as not to post a vulgar word. I have no idea why your post was completely deleted. Anyway. My comment concerned the anti Confederate symbols movement being virtually ignored for decades then being ignited by idiots like Dylann Roof wrapped in a Virginia battle flag which escalated the flag fiasco and now James Fields in Charlottesville, VA accomplishing the same for Confederate statues.
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 15,053 Senior Member
    That means you are posting enough.
  • sgtrock21sgtrock21 Senior Member Posts: 1,569 Senior Member
    Teach wrote: »
    Jerm, if your hometown had been invaded and pillaged by people from Alabama, Tennessee, Georgia and Mississippi, and then the citizens were subjected to military and civilian rule by people who moved there for years afterward, how long would it take for those memories to fade? It's sort of like people who have never served in the military belittling the life experiences of those of us who have put our lives on the line to assure the freedom of those very same people.
    Jerry
    I wonder how my Great Great Grandmother with her husband dead and buried on his farm near Murfreesboro, TN. faired post war. At least she had her 15 year old Son my Great Grandfather William Jasper who helped recover his Fathers body from Franklin to work the farm if it still existed during reconstruction. "Jasper" obviously survived as I am here. More recent atrocities. Thousands of Polish officers murdered by Stalin Russians in 1940 which they tried to blame on the Germans. Decades of Soviet oppression in Eastern Europe. The couple of rebellions Hungary 1956 and Czech 1968 were quickly crushed. To kick it up a few notches the murder of 6 million Jews by the NAZIS. Are they supposed to forget?
  • sgtrock21sgtrock21 Senior Member Posts: 1,569 Senior Member
    Jermanator wrote: »
    That means you are posting enough.
    I am not familiar with that forum rule. Please explain.
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 15,053 Senior Member
    The late Dan Johnson used to be in charge here before he passed away. His signature line said something like, "If you don't get moderated, you aren't posting enough. "

    You got moderated. You are posting enough.:tooth:
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 25,771 Senior Member
    So they were resupplied? They were not reinforced with the 20K men needed to hold the fort? Was there even a attempt to reinforce the fort with the needed 20K men? The relief ships were fired upon while they were trying to enter federal land?
    I fail to see where this bolsters your point.

    Lincoln was inaugurated 4 Mar, FYI the federals manages to muster every person under arms for the ceremony because of a threat to blow up the dias by the peace loving Confederates, 640 men including W-Point cadets, the sum total of available men. There is no way that between 4 Mar and 15 Apr Lincoln was responsible for not taking payment for the stolen property. At the time of the firing on Ft Sumpter, the Confederate govt was still a theory. VA had voted against succession, as did Arkansas, North Carolina, and Tennessee.

    President Buchanan was still POTUS when the first Southern states seceded. He was the one that could have, but did not, deal in a timely manner about forts and other installations of the Union in the seceded Southern states. He left Lincoln with that mess. And if you think those relief ships Lincoln had only food supplies for Ft. Sumter, then I have some info on Gulf of Mexico beach front property in Montana in which you might like to invest.

    As to Lincoln, here's a bit of what he could have done, proposed, and then reneged on what he said he would do. Read the whole thing; it's some interesting information.

    http://civilwarhome.com/southernseccession.htm
    On March 5, Lincoln learned from Maj. Robert Anderson, the commander at Fort Sumter, that dwindling food supplies would force an evacuation of the fort within four to six weeks. Lincoln decided against any immediate attempt to save the fort. On March 12, however, he issued orders for the reinforcement of Fort Pickens. More accessible to the Federal navy because of its location outside Pensacola Harbor beyond the range of Confederate artillery, Fort Pickens had the additional advantage of being overshadowed in the public consciousness by Fort Sumter, a highly charged symbol of Federal resolve in the state that had started secession. Presumably, it could be reinforced with less risk of precipitating a war than could Fort Sumter.
    Lincolns initial decision not to act on Fort Sumter was also a concession to William H. Seward, his secretary of state. Seward was the chief spokesman for what was called the policy of "masterly inactivity." He believed that Unionists in the upper South were on the verge of leading a process of voluntary reunion. If the upper South were not stampeded into joining the Confederacy by a coercive act by the Republicans, Seward argued, an isolated Confederacy would soon have no choice but to bargain to rejoin the Union. Everything depended, of course, on a conciliatory Republican policy.
    In pursuing this strategy, Lincoln temporarily considered a withdrawal from Fort Sumter in exchange for a binding commitment from the upper South not to leave the Union. Seward then made the mistake of assuming that evacuation was a foregone conclusion. He was conducting informal negotiations with three Confederate commissioners who were in Washington seeking a transfer of Fort Pickens and Fort Sumter. On March 15 he informed them through an intermediary to expect a speedy evacuation of Fort Sumter. When no such evacuation was forthcoming, Confederate leaders felt betrayed, and they vowed never again to trust the word of the Lincoln administration.
    Mounting demands in the North to take a stand at Fort Sumter, combined with Lincolns growing disillusionment over Southern Unionism, convinced the president that he would have to challenge the Confederacy over the issue of Fort Sumter. On March 29 he told his cabinet that he was preparing a relief expedition. He delayed informing Major Anderson of that decision until after a meeting on April 4 with John Baldwin, a Virginia Unionist. Although no firsthand account of this meeting exists, the discussion apparently confirmed Lincolns belief that the upper South could not broker a voluntary reunion on terms acceptable to the Republican party. The final orders for the relief expedition were issued on April 6, the day that Lincoln learned that Fort Pickens had not yet been reinforced because of a mix-up in the chain of command.
    News of Lincolns decision to reinforce Fort Sumter "with provisions only" reached Montgomery, the Confederate capital, on April 8. The next day Davis ordered Gen. P G. T. Beauregard, the Confederate commander at Charleston, to demand an immediate surrender of the fort. If Major Anderson refused, Beauregard was to attack the fort. Davis always felt that war was inevitable, and for months the most radical of the secessionists had been insisting that a military confrontation would be necessary to force the upper South into secession. Davis was convinced that he had no alternative but to counter Lincolns move with a show of force.
    Confederate batteries opened fire on Fort Sumter on April 12, and the fort surrendered two days later On April 15 Lincoln issued a call for seventy-five thousand stare militia to put down what he described as an insurrection against lawful authority. It was this call for troops, and not just the armed clash at Fort Sumter, that specifically triggered secession in the upper South. The Unionist majorities there suddenly dissolved once the choice shifted from supporting the Union or the Confederacy to fighting for or against fellow Southerners.
    The Virginia convention, which had remained in session after rejecting immediate secession on April 4, passed a secession ordinance on April 17. Its decision was overwhelmingly ratified on May 23 in a popular referendum. Three other states quickly followed. A reconvened Arkansas convention voted to go out on May 6. The Tennessee legislature, in a move later ratified in a popular referendum, also approved secession on May 6. A hastily called North Carolina convention, elected on May 13, took the Tarheel State out on May 20.


    And this link has some information that is not easily found in history books, and is annotated as to sources. It's worth reading unless the truth is scary. :tooth:

    http://www.southernheritage411.com/truehistory.php?th=052
    Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.


  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 25,771 Senior Member
    Jermanator wrote: »
    I don't even think you can blame it on ancestry-- The American experience varies widely if only by geography/climate, which leads to huge differences in cultural experiences. Then there is that whole urban/rural thing happening. It is one of our greatest strengths because with the diversity in people/geography/culture also comes with that wonderful diversity in ideas. Unfortunately, it also is a huge source of conflict.

    Another thing to be looked at, and you suggested it, is geography. The NE U.S. is poorly suited to farming for the most part. That being the case, the NE states went into manufacturing in a big way. And shipbuilding and ocean trade were a big thing.
    The South was ideally suited to farming and agriculture, and that was the way the South went. The South did have some light industry and a few iron foundries and manufacturing facilities, but nothing to compare to the Northern U.S. I would guess that few outside of Northern middle TN or SW Kentucky know of the iron ore mining and smelting that went on in the area known now as Land Between the Lakes, and back then as The Land Between the Rivers. I first found out about it while hunting in the area. The place is just slopping over with history, especially during the Civil War; the Union occupied it, but didn't control it by a long shot!
    Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.


  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 25,771 Senior Member
    Linefinder wrote: »
    Hmmm....hadn't thought about it that way.

    We're fighting (peacefully, I hope) a cultural war between the Dutch and the Irish?

    I'd have never guessed.

    Mike

    The Irish will take over the world when beer and spirits are made totally unavailable. This is a known fact.
    The Scots only have 2 DEFCON levels.
    Defcon 2 is: Lets go to the pub for a bitter
    Defcon1 is: Bloody Hell! ATTACK!
    This is why the Brits let the Scots lead in all attacks! :tooth:
    The Southern Brits don't exactly get along with their brothers to the North. Must be that 'changes in latitudes changes in attitudes' thing.
    Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.


  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 25,771 Senior Member
    sgtrock21 wrote: »
    tennmike: Strange days on the forum. I wanted to comment on your snowball that turned into an avalanche post. It seems to have disappeared. While searching I discovered that one of my posts had my text replaced with Xxx. There was also an apology that my post was deleted for bypassing auto censure. I as usual used ** so as not to post a vulgar word. I have no idea why your post was completely deleted. Anyway. My comment concerned the anti Confederate symbols movement being virtually ignored for decades then being ignited by idiots like Dylann Roof wrapped in a Virginia battle flag which escalated the flag fiasco and now James Fields in Charlottesville, VA accomplishing the same for Confederate statues.

    That thread I said that in is here:

    http://forums.gunsandammo.com/showthread.php?33992-And-now-it-s-moving-to-Birmingham-AL-AG-sues-city

    I had to look for it, and I'm the one what wrote it! :roll2:
    Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.


  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 21,803 Senior Member
    Fisheadgib wrote: »
    There's no real irony, I prefer living in the South and have no desire to make it like the North. In my 58 years, I've lived 37 of them in the south.

    You're a Southerner at heart Bro, now you need to work on that accent, LOL!!!
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 21,803 Senior Member
    tennmike wrote: »
    The Irish will take over the world when beer and spirits are made totally unavailable. This is a known fact.
    The Scots only have 2 DEFCON levels.
    Defcon 2 is: Lets go to the pub for a bitter
    Defcon1 is: Bloody Hell! ATTACK!
    This is why the Brits let the Scots lead in all attacks! :tooth:
    The Southern Brits don't exactly get along with their brothers to the North. Must be that 'changes in latitudes changes in attitudes' thing.

    The ones that dont get along are the welsh and any of the others>
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,552 Senior Member
    Another thing to consider about the pulling down of the RE Lee statue. Lee was a very proud and patriotic American, with strong roots going back to the American Revolution (against the King). He served with distinction in the Mexican war, and along the frontier, in Texas. He was very much against the secession of Virginia. He did not resign his commission until after Fort Sumter, when it became evident that the Army of the Potomac was going to cross the Potomac and attack his home state of Virginia. Abraham Lincoln wanted him to command that army and formally offered him the job. Lee's family, like most wealthy and prominent southern families, had owned slaves since before the revolution, yet he freed his without being forced, either by law or by force. This is what he wrote, in 1856, about slavery:

    Robert E. Lee letter dated December 27, 1856:
    I was much pleased the with President's message. His views of the systematic and progressive efforts of certain people at the North to interfere with and change the domestic institutions of the South are truthfully and faithfully expressed. The consequences of their plans and purposes are also clearly set forth. These people must be aware that their object is both unlawful and foreign to them and to their duty, and that this institution, for which they are irresponsible and non-accountable, can only be changed by them through the agency of a civil and servile war. There are few, I believe, in this enlightened age, who will not acknowledge that slavery as an institution is a moral and political evil. It is idle to expatiate on its disadvantages. I think it is a greater evil to the white than to the colored race. While my feelings are strongly enlisted in behalf of the latter, my sympathies are more deeply engaged for the former. The blacks are immeasurably better off here than in Africa, morally, physically, and socially. The painful discipline they are undergoing is necessary for their further instruction as a race, and will prepare them, I hope, for better things. How long their servitude may be necessary is known and ordered by a merciful Providence. Their emancipation will sooner result from the mild and melting influences of Christianity than from the storm and tempest of fiery controversy. This influence, though slow, is sure. The doctrines and miracles of our Saviour have required nearly two thousand years to convert but a small portion of the human race, and even among Christian nations what gross errors still exist! While we see the course of the final abolition of human slavery is still onward, and give it the aid of our prayers, let us leave the progress as well as the results in the hands of Him who, chooses to work by slow influences, and with whom a thousand years are but as a single day. Although the abolitionist must know this, must know that he has neither the right not the power of operating, except by moral means; that to benefit the slave he must not excite angry feelings in the master; that, although he may not approve the mode by which Providence accomplishes its purpose, the results will be the same; and that the reason he gives for interference in matters he has no concern with, holds good for every kind of interference with our neighbor, -still, I fear he will persevere in his evil course. . . . Is it not strange that the descendants of those Pilgrim Fathers who crossed the Atlantic to preserve their own freedom have always proved the most intolerant of the spiritual liberty of others?
    Granted that Lee would still be considered a racist, by modern standards, but in his own time, he held approximately the same view as many of our 'founding fathers' had, and not all that far from those of Abraham Lincoln. Basically, he was quite willing to give up slavery, but as he stated, not by illegal means (war). Had a constitutional amendment been proposed to end slavery by peaceful methods, there is every reason to believe he would have supported it, or at the very least, not resisted it.
    The leftist groups would have found much less wide-spread resistance had they destroyed a statue of Nathan Bedford Forrest (if there is one), who, though a great general, was a very pro-active racist and made no apologies about it.


  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 8,587 Senior Member
    I find this current trend towards the erasure of history disturbing. Much of it stems from the application of current social/moral norms to historical figures who lived in times with different norms. I don't think that is at all productive or useful. And strikes my as downright reckless and dangerous. It needs to stop.
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,261 Senior Member
    There are current social/moral norms these days? We're living in the most amoral society the world has ever known!
    :vomit:
    Jerry
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
  • sgtrock21sgtrock21 Senior Member Posts: 1,569 Senior Member
    Jermanator wrote: »
    The late Dan Johnson used to be in charge here before he passed away. His signature line said something like, "If you don't get moderated, you aren't posting enough. "

    You got moderated. You are posting enough.:tooth:
    Thank you. LOL.
  • CHIRO1989CHIRO1989 Senior Member Posts: 10,726 Senior Member
    Teach wrote: »
    There are current social/moral norms these days? We're living in the most amoral society the world has ever known!
    :vomit:
    Jerry

    Nah, the Italians and Western Mediterranean's beat us on this topic by a long shot back in the day.
    I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn away from their ways and live. Eze 33:11
  • sgtrock21sgtrock21 Senior Member Posts: 1,569 Senior Member
    tennmike wrote: »
    That thread I said that in is here:

    http://forums.gunsandammo.com/showthread.php?33992-And-now-it-s-moving-to-Birmingham-AL-AG-sues-city

    I had to look for it, and I'm the one what wrote it! :roll2:
    Thanks. I can't really recall what I posted that was censured. Old timer's disease strikes again.
  • sgtrock21sgtrock21 Senior Member Posts: 1,569 Senior Member
    I find this current trend towards the erasure of history disturbing. Much of it stems from the application of current social/moral norms to historical figures who lived in times with different norms. I don't think that is at all productive or useful. And strikes my as downright reckless and dangerous. It needs to stop.
    It is what happens when people's politics are driven by emotion rather than logic.
  • john9001john9001 Senior Member Posts: 668 Senior Member
    I keep saying all the present day events have nothing to do with the civil war, that is just the peg the alt left hangs their hat on, but the present day events have everything to do with the attempted destruction of this country.
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,261 Senior Member
    CHIRO1989 wrote: »
    Nah, the Italians and Western Mediterranean's beat us on this topic by a long shot back in the day.

    They got their jollies doing unspeakable things with their pet gerbil and insisting it's "normal"? Somehow I doubt it!
    Jerry
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,552 Senior Member
    john9001 wrote: »
    I keep saying all the present day events have nothing to do with the civil war, that is just the peg the alt left hangs their hat on, but the present day events have everything to do with the attempted destruction of this country.

    That is probably true, but since the schools have been 'phoning in' their Cliff Notes history lessons for the last 4 or 5 decades, too many folks don't realize that the statue destruction should be an outrage. It is behavior I would expect from Muslims, Nazis, or Communists, but no one else I can think of.
  • CHIRO1989CHIRO1989 Senior Member Posts: 10,726 Senior Member
    Teach wrote: »
    They got their jollies doing unspeakable things with their pet gerbil and insisting it's "normal"? Somehow I doubt it!
    Jerry

    I am thinking Sodom and Gomorrah, Caligula, Nero, etc. actions back in the day make the pet gerbil thing look like a church picnic.
    I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn away from their ways and live. Eze 33:11
  • LinefinderLinefinder Moderator Posts: 4,431 Senior Member
    sgtrock21 wrote: »
    Thanks. I can't really recall what I posted that was censured. Old timer's disease strikes again.

    Time out from the current thread.

    You, along with some others in other threads, got their post deleted for bypassing the auto censor.

    If you type it, and the auto censor lets it by, all is good. If you type motherers and it doesn't, don't type meffers.

    Pretty simple.

    No name calling. Even snowflake. No bypassing the autocensor.

    As a grown man with better things to do, I shouldn't have to waste my time enforcing these two simple rules. At one point in this boards history, that would have been unthinkable.

    So......there you have it.

    No name calling, no bypassing the autocensor. Pretty simple.

    The political side of the 2A forum is back. Don't blow it.

    And, Sgtrock, this wasn't all directed at you.

    PSA over. You can return to your regularly scheduled conflicts.
    Decisions have consequences, not everything in life gets an automatic mulligan.
    KSU Firefighter
  • JayhawkerJayhawker Moderator Posts: 14,835 Senior Member
    bisley wrote: »
    Another thing to consider about the pulling down of the RE Lee statue. Lee was a very proud and patriotic American, with strong roots going back to the American Revolution (against the King). He served with distinction in the Mexican war, and along the frontier, in Texas. He was very much against the secession of Virginia. He did not resign his commission until after Fort Sumter, when it became evident that the Army of the Potomac was going to cross the Potomac and attack his home state of Virginia. Abraham Lincoln wanted him to command that army and formally offered him the job. Lee's family, like most wealthy and prominent southern families, had owned slaves since before the revolution, yet he freed his without being forced, either by law or by force. This is what he wrote, in 1856, about slavery:

    Granted that Lee would still be considered a racist, by modern standards, but in his own time, he held approximately the same view as many of our 'founding fathers' had, and not all that far from those of Abraham Lincoln. Basically, he was quite willing to give up slavery, but as he stated, not by illegal means (war). Had a constitutional amendment been proposed to end slavery by peaceful methods, there is every reason to believe he would have supported it, or at the very least, not resisted it.
    The leftist groups would have found much less wide-spread resistance had they destroyed a statue of Nathan Bedford Forrest (if there is one), who, though a great general, was a very pro-active racist and made no apologies about it.



    interesting factoid...Leftist groups are taking a single paragraph out of that letter and using it to point out that Lee was a slave master and a racist...and the uneducated morons on social media are swallowing it hook line and sinker. I have been posting the letter, in it's entirety and it seems to take the wind right out of their sails...
    Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.