Summit Treestands
Confederate Monuments
Community
Contributors to this thread:
Trax 22-May-17
HDE 22-May-17
bad karma 22-May-17
HDE 22-May-17
sleepyhunter 22-May-17
MikeV 22-May-17
Rocky 22-May-17
Bentstick81 22-May-17
MikeV 22-May-17
Glunt@work 22-May-17
Solo 22-May-17
Fulldraw1972 22-May-17
HDE 22-May-17
Bentstick81 22-May-17
bigeasygator 22-May-17
Whitey 22-May-17
bigeasygator 22-May-17
Trax 22-May-17
HDE 22-May-17
Rocky 22-May-17
HDE 22-May-17
Glunt@work 23-May-17
'Ike' (Phone) 23-May-17
Squash 23-May-17
Spike Bull 23-May-17
South Farm 24-May-17
Anony Mouse 24-May-17
Sage Buffalo 25-May-17
Shiloh 25-May-17
Salagi 28-May-17
HDE 28-May-17
Trax 28-May-17
freeglee 28-May-17
Mike in CT 28-May-17
orionsbrother 28-May-17
DL 28-May-17
itshot 28-May-17
Owl 28-May-17
Owl 28-May-17
Anony Mouse 28-May-17
sportoutfitter 29-May-17
Gray Ghost 29-May-17
Sixby 29-May-17
Bluetick 29-May-17
Bluetick 29-May-17
Spike Bull 29-May-17
Bluetick 30-May-17
Trax 30-May-17
sleepyhunter 30-May-17
Owl 30-May-17
MikeV 30-May-17
Mike in CT 30-May-17
itshot 30-May-17
Paul 30-May-17
HDE 31-May-17
Fivers 31-May-17
freeglee 31-May-17
Salagi 31-May-17
Trax 31-May-17
HDE 31-May-17
Owl 31-May-17
Gray Ghost 31-May-17
Owl 31-May-17
Owl 01-Jun-17
foxbo 01-Jun-17
From: Trax
22-May-17
The stinking America hating liberals will have us burning books yet. They simply want to erase all history and all mention of any ideals that do not support their tainted leftist and statist agenda.

From: HDE
22-May-17
Hail hillary...

From: bad karma
22-May-17
There was much honor and bravery in the confederate war. Good men died on both sides, fighting gallantly. That the left fails to recognize that is not surprising.

From: HDE
22-May-17
That's because the left makes everything a political issue to win favor.

There was more to the Civil War than just slavery...

From: sleepyhunter
22-May-17
Appeasement raises it's ugly again.

From: MikeV
22-May-17
So removing the signs of the confederacy is denying history? Then why are there no reminders of Nazi history in, Berlin they have many memorials of the deaths of Jews in the holocaust? Nether do the Japanese fly the rising sum flag any longer. Germany and Japan lost the war in which their respective flags were flown. They lost and put it behind them and moved on. Hint hint. Those who fought for the Confederacy, fought on the wrong side. They fought for white supremacy and the preservation of slavery. They were traitors for taking up arms against the lawful government of the United States. Deal with it, don't excuse it. The south lost, get over it. snowflakes.

From: Rocky
22-May-17
You fuqn ingrate. They were Americans who died unlike the left liberal socialists pigs like you who call themselves Americans. Your a CS...cker and you like it....and I like that you like it. ;-) Have a nice day.

The Rock

From: Bentstick81
22-May-17
mikev's turn to show stupid. The brothers never let us down. 8^)

From: MikeV
22-May-17
I've often wondered why the South glorifies the flag of the loser of the Civil War over 150 years later. You'd think the descendants of soldiers would want to forget the embarrassment of it by now. The Confederate States of America is the only nation in history whose only reason for being was to destroy The United States of America. There is no reason to have a single monument honoring it, or its leaders, anywhere in the country. Sorry it makes you mad, but for someone opposed to participation trophies, the monuments to the confederacy are just big versions of participation trophies. THE SOUTH LOST. GET OVER IT.

From: Glunt@work
22-May-17
Many folks know very little about the Civil war. They think it was all "South bad, North good". They don't know about the economic aspects. They don't know the State's rights aspects. They don't know Lincoln was a racist white separatist. The ones who automatically see the Union Army in the 1860's as the good guys in the Civil war also see them as the bad guys when on the frontier fighting Indians. They don't connect that it's the same army. They only see Lee as the man that served 4 years in the South and not as the man who served 30 years in the US Army.

Slavery was a big issue but even Lincoln said he would drop it if that would let the Union stay together. He knew it was on its way out regardless. The world was changing.

From: Solo
22-May-17
MikeV, that brand of hatred you're whining about is the heritage of the democrat party. Covering far more than just 'the heart of Dixie', home of the southern democrats, we got men like the assassin, John Wilkes Booth, who was a member of the angry "copperheads", a group that considered themselves to be "peace democrats". Yes, much like the murderous Muslim terrorists of today, they also thought of themselves as ministers of peace.

Southern democrat copperheads weren't just a fringe group either. They comprised a large percentage of the democrat party that spread across the geographic majority of our nation during that era.

And as it was back then, blinded by deception is still the rule among democrats of today.

From: Fulldraw1972
22-May-17
MikeV you should go back to kindergarten and start over. It's very clear you know nothing about the civil war. Slavery was a small piece of why we had a civil war. Like Glunt said. It was more about economics and states rights.

The civil war is part of our history. Taking down monuments etc because they are from the south is erasing our history. Maybe we should take down the Washington monument as well. After all he owned slaves.

I think by studying our history. We can look back and see how far we have come as a nation.

One last piece of history for you MikeV. The North wanted Lee to command there army in the worst way. He was the best General we had in this country. He was torn between serving the Union and the confederacy where he was from. Now after 8 years of Obama and our steps backwards in race relations his statue isn't good enough.

From: HDE
22-May-17
MikeV - ever heard of William Tecumseh Sherman? He wasn't necessarily against slavery but more against secession. So, you can't only blame the south for it's "love" of slavery. Yes, the Civil War is way beyond your grasp.

And hey - HILLARY LOST AND TRUMP GOT HIS PICK FOR SCOTUS - GET OVER IT!!!

From: Bentstick81
22-May-17
mikev, "Sorry if it makes you mad." You and your band of whine bag, idiots, are the ones whining about the flag and monuments. And you tell US "to get over it"? Typical dumb a$$.

From: bigeasygator
22-May-17

bigeasygator's Link
Anybody that thinks the primary reason for fighting the Civil War was anything but slavery is holding a fringe position. The vast majority of historians will tell you that. Yes there were other causes/reasons for the war, but slavery was clearly the biggest.

That said, the removal of the monuments is a travesty and it sends us down a slippery slope. I think not only does it send a terrible precedent, there are frankly bigger fish to fry in this town.

I'd love to see what happens when someone suggests they change the name of the LSU Tigers (named for a Confederate regiment)! Good luck with that!!

From: Whitey
22-May-17
The emancipation proclamation shoots a big hole in the revisionist history theory that the CW was primarily about Slavery. Read Lincolns letters and put down those government school books. It was about states rights and nothing else.

From: bigeasygator
22-May-17
It was slavery that brought the States rights issue to a head. Slavery was what brought out the impetus to secede and ultimately what brought out the fight. Without the threat to slavery there is no Civil War. It can be couched under the broader theme of States rights, but slavery was clearly the central issue over which the war was fought.

From: Trax
22-May-17
Every single southern Confederate state had reasoned that slavery was soon to be a thing of the past except for one. Slavery was NOT the primary reason there was a war between the states, it was part of the main reason. As others have noted. On top of that had Lincoln not stupidly marched 150,000 federal troops into Virginia before they had seceded and joined the Confederacy Robert Lee and others may have convinced the state to stay with the Union. Lee was offered the Army of the Potomac by Lincoln soon after, but he could not accept after that slap down. Virginia voted to leave the Union soon after.

Robert Lee and Thomas Jackson were great men, devout Christians, and more anti-slavery than many Union officers. They and others like them should be remembered and honored.

Many of these Confederates were far less racist than our self anointed king OBOZO. Hopefully this nation is rid of race pimps like him. Right Paul Zeidan?

From: HDE
22-May-17
Slavery was a piece of it in regards to cheap labor and economic output in a thriving agriculture industry. Southern states did not like the idea of a gov't dictating how they conducted business and taking money from their pockets, go figure.

Slavery was the scapegoat.

Edit: "In my opinion..."

From: Rocky
22-May-17
Those who fought and died on either side of the AMERICAN Civil War deserve equal justice and respect. This "black offended" time in history was a "time in history". Erase your a$$. Slaves have worked the world since the beginning of time. White people are all too happy to believe the blacks have this country cornered and held ransom for the South's transgression. The blacks were not the first slaves but were the first freed slaves to be treated with government advantage to advance. Every other nationality was on its own, a form of free slavery indeed, but too proud for a handout regardless. Am I a racist? I could care less what the facts call me.

The Rock

From: HDE
22-May-17
^^^ good post.

From: Glunt@work
23-May-17
Slavery is awful. Most Americans instantly relate it to race since that is a big part of slavery in our past once African slaves started replacing white and native american slaves. On a world wide basis slavery and race can be related but you can replace race with "tribe", "culture", "nationality", "religious belief", or simply "class" and find all the examples you want. Master and slave being the same race was the norm. Native Americans, Asians, Africans, Europeans, Polynesians, Persians, Inuit and everyone else have all been slaves and slave owners.

Native Americans enslaved each other and owned black slaves as well once that was established. The first owner to legally be awarded lifetime servitude of a slave in America was a former indentured servant from Angola that had won his freedom. There were thousands of black slave owners in America. None of this excuses any part of slavery but the big picture is that slavery is something that every race has been on both sides of. If we are going to tear down every flag or symbol of a group or country that has slavery as part of its history, we have our work cut out for us.

23-May-17
Can't fix stupid...Between MikeV, Freewhatever and a few others, I'm really missing the 'poof' button!

From: Squash
23-May-17
They are traitors for Rioting, smashing windows, burning cop cars, shutting down free speech on colleges campuses, shouting down those with diferent opinions, spraying pepper spray in women's faces, etc. ,and being against a lawfully elected president of the United States, "deal with it , don't excuse it." Hillary lost , "get over it snowflakes."

23-May-17
Great points all!

It is not a given that the Civil War was good for the US because as some have alluded to, it was a significant departure from the Constitution and the agreement that the many states made together in order to form a federal entity.

Hence the references to the loss of states rights. The actions undertaken by Lincoln go against the Tenth Amendment and directly refute the idea that the government can only exist by consent of the governed and that each state entered this agreement as a free and individual entity, a country all it's own if you will, and retained that status.

Of course, as so many have already shown, PZ, Freeanus, and almost all leftists have NO idea how this country was formed, what it stands for, or the vile history of their own phylosophies.

Also, you can bet they will not return to this thread because they dont wanty to learn how WRONG and vile they really are. They spur just enough to get us all up to a gallup and then they sit back in their plaid flannel jammies sipping their hot coco with tiny marshmallows floating on top and laugh!

STUPID rarely knows how truly stupid it truly is, they are not exceptions to this rule. However, their ignorance and stupididity is willfull, therefore shameful.

From: South Farm
24-May-17
If the Confederate flag offends you, if you are so thin-skinned that you simply can't look away, then would it be too much to ask for you to also remove any and all rainbow flags. I hate what they stand for..

From: Anony Mouse
24-May-17

From: Sage Buffalo
25-May-17
I have lived all around the world and many years in the south.

There's no denying the Civil War was a terrible war pitting brother against brother. Most fought for a cause they truly didn't understand.

Unfortunately, like the Swastika before the Nazi's adopted it, the Confederate Flag has been used by fringe groups to represent their cause which usually were evil and pathetic groups. Since southern culture didn't stand up and fight these groups it destroyed any chance for these symbols to be taken for anything else but evil.

Branding is everything and certain Civil War symbols are seen as evil.

As far as the Civil War is concerned - it was ALL about slavery. Since slavery powered the southern economy and the north was less reliant on producing goods - it was about fiscal and social issues that slavery brought. There were owners on all sides but one side decided that it needed to end.

I've been to almost every major civil war site and many of the smaller ones. I wish the symbols caused less controversies and could be remembered.

These symbols belong at the historic sites but the Confederate flag should never be flown outside these venues.

From: Shiloh
25-May-17
The saddest thing of all to me is that the blacks and now a lot of whites in the south are still slaves, but now they are slaves to the gov't. Much more dangerous place to be...................

From: Salagi
28-May-17
If you look back at history written closer to the time of the Civil War, you will find that slavery was considered a much smaller role in the conflict than it is today. Especially in the south where it was often times considered the War of Northern Aggression. State's rights was thought of to be a much more important topic in the South. Slavery was used in the North to fire up the radicals and get their support. There were black soldiers that fought on both sides in the war. The ones that fought with the Union were no less discriminated against than the ones that fought for the Confederacy.

In an interesting side note, on the 1860 census, my g-g-great grandfather was listed as one of the largest slave owners in Marshall County Mississippi while he himself was listed on the "non-white" roll in that census.

From: HDE
28-May-17
Power of the federal gov't...?

Power only given by a state to be governed to gain certain federal benefits (protections), as in defense of borders from foreign invaders.

And just how was the confederacy any different than the colonial Patriots?

From: Trax
28-May-17
The north did not call it the "civil war" either at the time. I was the war between the states according to them. Of course, it was the war of northern aggression no doubt. This had been brewing for a very long time. President Jackson twice averted a similar war, Lincoln may have also avoided it or at least lessened the impact if he had not stupidly sent 150,000 federal troops into Virginia before they had seceded. That clinched it. Lincoln could have easily stood trial for treason for what he did with both habeus corpus and the way he enacted martial law.

Anyone who thinks slavery was the main driver for the war between the states is simply ignorant. Every southern state save South Carolina admitted slavery was soon done. The stinking federal government seizing their revenue and implanting rule without representation is what that war was about. The Confederates were simply following the lead of our forefathers. There were many great men on both sides, and millions of good ones. Robert E Lee and Thomas Jackson two of the finest human being God every graced this earth with. It is honorable and historically correct to honor those like them on either side. Paula Zedian using multiple names to give herself a cheering section changes nothing.

From: freeglee
28-May-17
Whats that sound??!! Patriot GOING Off!!

Gotta Love It!!!!

From: Mike in CT
28-May-17
No, here's Patriot Miss Fire going off......

28-May-17
And yet, these arguments, opinions and facts seem to fall short in my mind.

I believe that the desire to remove these statues is rooted in emotion. Not facts. Not actual history. Instead, a censored, revisionist history that's simpler and more comfortable. Similar to the omission of uncomfortable facts in the research of Ben Affleck's family tree.

I think the statues should remain. They should be visited by students who can study and reflect on the bad and good, the complexities of individuals, "states" and motivations, human suffering, commitment to causes, sacrifices, subjugation and whether the end justifies the means.

But that would require effort and be uncomfortable for all and people would be forced to think. It's much simpler and easier to remove complex issues from view and polish a sanitized narrative.

From: DL
28-May-17
Confederate troops are American War Vetrans. They deserve the same respect as any other veteran. That goes for monuments too. I had two of my relatives that we've identified that fought on the union side. It is still part of this countries history north or south. People got together and decided this is a way to piss off people they didn't like. Removing the statues changes nothing. If anything it caused more hard feelings. In Richmond Va there is monument ave with Confederate Generals as well as a statue of Arthur Ashe. I have an Aunt there that took us in a tour years back and I rember her pointing out Lee's statue. She said that this is our beloved General Robert E Lee.

From: itshot
28-May-17

itshot's embedded Photo
itshot's embedded Photo

itshot's Link
it all makes sense....out with the old, in with the knew

link is to little ones for home worship

From: Owl
28-May-17
To paraphrase Shelby Foote, cause is a complex issue but, on the battlefield, no man was fighting for slavery. He quotes a butternut regular answering a Yankee query on the subject as replying, " I'm fighting because your down here." That perspective is resoundingly codified by the demographics of slave holding, namely, that the vast majority of southerners did not hold them.

This was not a war to end slavery. Logic makes this case quite plainly. Were it so, the emancipation measures of late '62 and '63 would have been implemented in the winter of 1861. Even then, the language was written to limit emancipation to states in rebellion against the union. Frankly, Lincoln leveraged the continuation of slavery in favor of maintaining the union. And ultimately, Lincoln did not save the union, he, under the weight of incalculable misery, transfigured it to Hamilton's vision of centrally controlled government.

From: Owl
28-May-17
I also want anti-monument folks to know that guys like Lee believed slavery would come to a peaceful end via the pressure from the pulpit and pews. That social movement was inevitable enough to be recognized even then. Stonewall Jackson broke the law to teach blacks to read. U.S. Grant owned more slaves (1) than entire divisions of rebels, per capita.

The notion of country was not the same as it is understood this day. When explaining why, after agonizing over his decision, Lee resolved to fight for the South, he said he could not live with himself if he drew his sword against his country, Virginia.

Jubal Early, the progenitor of the Lost Cause movement, was a staunch unionist. He held that view and actually cast votes in VA's secession convention to remain in the union. Only when Lincoln called for raising 70,000 troops did he change his mind.

No, I believe the revisionism belongs to the victor, the body and its progeny, who wishes to contrive a higher purpose for its bloody hands than to preserve geography.

From: Anony Mouse
28-May-17
A bit of history regarding slavery in the US, koranderthalic roots, and just a good review:

SLAVERY: FORBIDDEN BY SCRIPTURE, A CONCESSION TO SHARIA LAW

Bryan Fisher

It is incumbent upon our president that he be a man who uses the resources at his disposal to resist, reject and prevent the implementation of Sharia law anywhere, at any time, under any circumstances in the United States.

Sharia law is already making encroachments in American culture in large ways and small, whether it’s Target cashiers getting a pass for refusing to serve customers who want to buy bacon, or Christians being arrested for handing out free copies of the gospel of John to Muslims on a public sidewalk.

But making concessions to Sharia law over against the moral code of the Judeo-Christian tradition is not something brand new for America. We started doing it in 1619 when we began to tolerate the slave trade, as the first shipment of 30 African slaves arrived on the shores of Virginia.

By the way, the first legally recognized slave in America, John Casor, was actually the property of a black man, a colonist by the name of Anthony Johnson. A Northampton County court ruled in 1654 that Casor was “owned” by Johnson, and was his property for life. There were many black slaveholders in the South at the outbreak of the Civil War, and many of them took up arms against the North.

Here’s how Thomas Sowell puts it: “[T]here were thousands of … blacks in the antebellum south who were commercial slave owners, just like their white counterparts. An estimated one-third of the ‘free persons of color’ in New Orleans were slaveowners and thousands of these slave owners volunteered to fight for the Confederacy…”

The slaves who were brought here in chains in 1619 were Africans who had been kidnapped by other Africans and sold to slave traders who in turn brought them to America. The kidnappers, the ones who went into the interior of Africa to capture their fellow Africans to sell them into bondage, were predominantly Muslims.

In fact, according to Thomas Sowell, a million or more Europeans were enslaved by Muslim pirates from North Africa from 1500-1800, and whites were sold at slave auctions in Egypt until at least the year 1885. Muslims still openly practice slavery today in places like Mauritania, Saudi Arabia and Sudan.

Muhammad himself practiced slavery, and directed his followers to do the same. Since Muhammad is the ultimate role model for Muslims, and Muslims believe that everything he did will be worthy of imitation until the end of time, slavery will always have moral approval in Islam.

Estimates are that over 17 million slaves were transported out of Africa by Islamic slave traders, and a staggering 85 million are believed to have died en route. About 645,000 of those wound up in what became the United States.

Quoting Sowell: “…the region of West Africa…was one of the great slave-trading regions of the continent – before, during, and after the white man arrived. It was Africans who enslaved their fellow Africans, selling some of these slaves to Europeans or to Arabs and keeping others for themselves. Even at the peak of the Atlantic slave trade, Africans retained more slaves for themselves than they sent to the Western Hemisphere…Arabs were the leading slave raiders in East Africa, ranging over an area larger than all of Europe.” (Emphasis mine.)

Now, in contrast to Islam and Sharia, the Judeo-Christian tradition from day one has been adamantly opposed to the slave trade.

The civil code of ancient Israel did provide, as America did, for indentured servitude, which was voluntary and had statutory limits after which emancipation was required. As many as two-thirds of the English settlers who came to America in the 17th century came as indentured servants.

Ancient Israel also allowed prisoners of war to be held as slaves, just as the United States did with German POWs in WWII. Planeloads of German POWs were brought to the South and worked in the fields until the end of the war. We couldn’t send them home during the war, where they would take up arms again and kill us, and we didn’t want to execute them. Servitude was the only compassionate alternative. And it was the same in ancient Israel.

But Moses flatly prohibited the slave trade under penalty of death. “Whoever steals a man and sells him, and anyone found in possession of him, shall be put to death” (Exodus 21:16). In other words, if a strictly biblical code had been followed in 1619, the slave trader who brought that ship to Virginia would have been arrested the moment he landed, prosecuted and hung by the neck until dead. The slaves on board would have been returned to their families and their homelands, and slavery would never have gained a foothold in the United States.

But sadly, we made our first concession to Sharia law in 1619 instead of being guided by the wisdom of Scripture, and we have paid a terrible price for it. Slavery became our first national sin, as abortion is today.

The slave trade is flatly prohibited in the New Testament as well. Paul speaks in 1 Timothy of the proper role of the law, and indicates that the law “is not laid down for the just,” who will not need the external coercion of the law to make responsible social choices. Their internal value system will guide their conduct in culture-affirming directions.

So the law is “for the lawless and disobedient…for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, (and) perjurers…” (1 Timothy 1:9-10, ESV).

The word translated “enslavers” (andropodistes) literally means a “man who brings others to his feet.” The lexicons define the word this way: “a slave dealer, kidnapper, man-stealer, one who unjustly reduces free men to slavery, or steals slaves of others and sells them.”

So if the early colonists had followed either the Old or New Testaments, the slave trade would have been treated as criminal behavior from the very beginning, and America never would have been plagued with all the myriad evils that slavery and racism have brought to our land.

As Sowell has pointed out, the real question is not what created slavery but what ended it. And it was evangelical, Tea Party-types who brought this horrific and barbaric practice to an end.

Sowell: “While slavery was common to all civilizations, as well as to peoples considered uncivilized, only one civilization developed a moral revulsion against it, very late in its history…not even the leading moralists in other civilizations rejected slavery at all….Moreover, within Western civilization, the principal impetus for the abolition of slavery came first from very conservative religious activists – people who would today be called ‘the religious right.’…this story is not ‘politically correct’ in today’s terms. Hence it is ignored, as if it never happened.” (Emphasis mine.)

Bottom line: If the Scriptures had been followed instead of Sharia law, there would have been no slavery in America, no Civil War, and no racial unrest. As always, the Bible was the solution, not the problem. Let’s stop Sharia in its tracks everywhere before we make another disastrous concession to this dark and dangerous religion.

29-May-17
Good post Mouse!

From: Gray Ghost
29-May-17
I think Lincoln understood the reasons for the Civil War, when he said:

"We are in civil war. In such cases there always is a main question; but in this case that question is a perplexing compound -- Union and Slavery. It thus becomes a question not of two sides merely, but of at least four sides, even among those who are for the Union, saying nothing of those who are against it."

Matt

From: Sixby
29-May-17
The argument of the Confederacy was states rights/ Its the same argument being played out right now by California, Oregon , Washington and Colorado and by all who want to overturn the duly elected President of the USA and his election. No different at all. Many Northern people owned slaves , many Southerners that fought for the South did not own slaves. Men fought who were brothers, Many were trained at West Point and fought for the South against Generals that were former friends. We are in a place of division that is so deeply opposed that it cannot be healed. We have patriots and then we have one world order people. We have Nationalist opposed to people that want no nation and no borders. We have people that love the flag that defend those that burn it. What a mess. We are so opposed that our government is broken and cannot be fixed by lawful means. God bless you all and God help America.

From: Bluetick
29-May-17

Bluetick's Link
Tearing down statues of white people is a popular trend in South Africa these days. I'm wondering though, why don't the libtards shriek about tearing down the the Pyramids as well, seeing as how they were most definitely built with slavery.

From: Bluetick
29-May-17
Let me pose that question directly to MikeyV. Do you think the Pyramids should be torn down?

29-May-17
HE doesn't know or care, Bluetick. He is only capable of repeating the heavily slanted commie versions of "reality".

Great thread all!

I learned some things here and though I have spoken before about most of this, even right thinking people are ignorant of much of it.

For instance, I was laughed at here several months ago when I stated that our early forefathers referred to their home colonies as "countries" before they were states!

I so love learning about this era in our history and wish it were truthfully and completely taught starting in grammar school grades.

From: Bluetick
30-May-17
As Mark Twain said, 'never let school get in the way of your education'.

From: Trax
30-May-17
I think Lincoln understood propaganda. He imprisoned (illegally) those in the press who did not propagandize as he thought necessary. Lincoln also understood the limits of martial law and the importance of habeas corpus. He chose to ignore both. He did much good and was the leader during the most trying of times. But he made mucho mistakes and was far from being a saint.

From: sleepyhunter
30-May-17

sleepyhunter's embedded Photo
sleepyhunter's embedded Photo
"You'd think the descendants of soldiers would want to forget the embarrassment of it by now. The Confederate States of America is the only nation in history whose only reason for being was to destroy The United States of America. There is no reason to have a single monument honoring it, or its leaders, anywhere in the country."

MikeV you're a dumbass. It really shows with your statement. What's next? You want to plow under all the Confederate grave markers? You'll have to go thru me first to do it. Confederate Monuments are part of America's history. Believe it. GET OVER IT.

From: Owl
30-May-17
The destruction of chattel slavery was a God send. However, all Lincoln and his armies did was pre-empt the inevitable by murdering over 650,000 men, maiming countless others, destroying their families and institutionalizing regional animosity that, obviously, continues to this day.

From: MikeV
30-May-17
What was the alternative Owl? letting the South continue w slavery? Allowing incoming new states to allow slavery? So the Civil War wasnt about slavery? Check out this that I found in a booklet from 1864. Written by the VP of the Confederate States of America,

From: Mike in CT
30-May-17

Mike in CT's embedded Photo
Mike in CT's embedded Photo
"Check out this that I found in a booklet from 1864. Written by the VP of the Confederate States of America, "

Good grief.......someone call the grammar police......

Oh, thank God!!!!

From: itshot
30-May-17
"Those civil war monuments were put up by men celebrating the confederacy. The treasonous group of traitors hellbent on destroying the nation I hold dear." almost as loopy as a glutenfreeglee comment....congrats

From: Paul
30-May-17

From: HDE
31-May-17
American Revolutionists, Sons of Liberty, and any and all other Patriots were traitors in the eyes of the British Crown...

From: Fivers
31-May-17
Another bit of history that is starting to become false, I saw something a while ago that mentioned that the pyramids were not built on slave labor. There were people that volunteered to work on them because of the nobility of the pyramids and people wanted to be a part of that, in hopes of the opportunity to be buried in one. That way others could look at the family as one of higher status. Some of the pyramids were built by slaves, but not as many as or all, as they have thought in the past.

From: freeglee
31-May-17
Super Glad we have a Few here with a fine sensibility!!

Why celebrate Racist Hicks??!! The South lost, MoveOn!!

From: Salagi
31-May-17
Bless your heart.

From: Trax
31-May-17
Freegay and the other handles Paul Zedian made up are the only ones here who celebrate racist hicks. Parasite OBOZO is the race pimp they continue to worship!

From: HDE
31-May-17
freeglee - you exhibit all of the same hateful qualities that any bigot possesses. And then ,you try to pass it off as inclusive and open minded.

Sit Down And Shut Up!!!

From: Owl
31-May-17
"The South lost, MoveOn!!"

-No, in my view and the view of many, we all lost that war. What you fail to realize is that "The Lost Cause" observance is less about nostalgia and much more about a philosophy of governance, namely, a much more localized and personally sovereign construct.

I love to study the Civil War because the hand of God is all over it and the conflict revealed men of amazing character. Most curious, however, the war is a study in profound irony. The most poignant example of stated irony is that martial force from Washington freed a singular race of man at the cost of enslaving an entire nation.

From: Gray Ghost
31-May-17
So, God loves irony, too? ;-)

Matt

From: Owl
31-May-17
God instructs with irony, GG.

01-Jun-17
"The most poignant example of stated irony is that martial force from Washington freed a singular race of man at the cost of enslaving an entire nation."

I would submit that freeing a singular race is worth any cost. I'm pretty sure you would agree if you were one of the singular slaves.

Having said that....I'm against removing the monuments. They are history...it doesn't matter whether you like the history.

From: Owl
01-Jun-17
You miss the point SA. Irony is irony beyond the value one observes or finds implicit in the subject.

From: foxbo
01-Jun-17
"Whats that sound??!! Patriot GOING Off!! "

No, that sound is patriot "stump breaking freeglee" !

  • Sitka Gear