Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Joseph Farah: Remember the Real Alamo
WND.com ^ | 04-08-03 | Farah, Joseph

Posted on 04/08/2004 6:11:38 AM PDT by Theodore R.

Remember the real Alamo

Posted: April 8, 2004 1:00 a.m. Eastern

© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com

"Remember the Alamo," was an American battle cry for generations.

Now Disney is trying to get Americans to forget the real history of heroic fight.

Disney's remake of "The Alamo" will be released tomorrow in theaters nationwide. Judging from a review of the script, the film will be a disgraceful deconstruction of Davy Crockett, Sam Houston, Jim Bowie and other American heroes who "died with their boots on."

"The movie reads more like a Disney fairy tale and promotes a politically correct revisionist agenda aimed at destroying a traditional American hero," said B. Forrest Clayton of Freedom Alliance, who reviewed the script.

Clayton says he found it to be "full of inaccuracies." He says Davy Crockett is portrayed as a "frightened wanderer" who wanted to escape "over the wall" in the dark of night during the historic battle, but felt paralyzed and trapped by his own underserved heroic reputation.

Clayton says the film has Crockett captured, bound and executed on his knees after the battle was over, "even though the historical evidence shows that he was killed fighting, in the thick of combat, during the battle."

The group cites several historical witnesses who backed up the story of a heroic Crockett.

A statement by Freedom Alliance said: "The movie makers ignored these witnesses that corroborated Crockett's heroic death in combat and based his capture and execution in the film on a suspect portion of Jose Enrique De La Pena's supposed diary-memoir which handwriting expert Charles Hamilton proved was a forgery by John Laflin, aka John Lafitte, a prominent American forger of papers on American pirates and frontier heroes."

Disney also is criticized for portraying Gen. Sam Houston as a "venereal-diseased drunkard" and Col. William Barret Travis, commander of Texan forces at the Alamo, as a "deadbeat dad and serial adulterer."

In addition, says the group, Col. James Bowie, the Alamo defender famous for his knife-fighting skills, is portrayed as a land-swindling slave trader. The film reportedly has Crockett participating in a My Lai-style massacre in the Creek Indian War.

Freedom Alliance says in contrast, Manuel Castrillon, a Mexican general who attacked the Alamo, is portrayed as a "flawless, noble and brave hero."

A recent Variety article confirmed the film's perspective.

"'Alamo' is expected to deal with many of the historical complexities – including the Mexican point of view – that were glossed over in John Wayne's 1960 film," Variety reported. "Alamo heroes William Barret Travis' serial marital infidelities, Jim Bowie's slave trading and Davy Crockett's overall political incorrectness will also be addressed."

Richard Bruce Winders, curator of the Alamo museum, said movie viewers who expect a close remake of the classic John Wayne film will be disappointed. He calls the 1960 movie "real bad history."

"It's hard to believe that Hollywood would do a movie where there was so much historical information in it," he told the Associated Press. "If you're expecting a remake of John Wayne's movie, you're going to be pretty much surprised by what you'll see."

When I first saw the trailers for the new Alamo film, I got excited momentarily. Here was a chance for a new generation of young Americans, I thought, to get a glimpse of a piece of American history – history that could make them proud of their heritage of freedom.

Then reality sunk in.

How likely would it be that 21st-century filmmakers would do justice to these all-American heroes? How likely would it be they could shake the grip of political correctness and play it straight? How likely would it be they could resist the temptations of deconstruction and revisionism?

But even with my strong background in covering Hollywood's moral and political abuses for years, I never expected "The Alamo" would go this far. I never expected Disney would lie. I never expected the filmmakers would just make it up as they went along.

That sounds like what Disney has done.

It's a shame.

And Disney needs to hear from Americans. This film needs to die a quick and unmerciful death at the box office. Don't go see this movie. Don't let your kids see it. Don't rent it. Don't buy the DVD or the video.


TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: alamo; bowie; crockett; davycrockett; disney; forrestclayton; freedomalliance; godsgravesglyphs; houston; johnwayne; liberalism; manuelcastrillon; pc; sanantonio; texas; travis
Disney needs to hear from Americans. This film needs to die a quick and unmerciful death at the box office. Don't go see this movie. Don't let your kids see it. Don't rent it. Don't buy the DVD or the video.

Still, I would like to see the film. The historical advisor to the film claims that it is mostly accurate.

1 posted on 04/08/2004 6:11:39 AM PDT by Theodore R.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All


Donate Here By Secure Server

Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794

or you can use

PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com

STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER



2 posted on 04/08/2004 6:12:41 AM PDT by Support Free Republic (Freepers post from sun to sun, but a fundraiser bot's work is never done.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
How likely would it be that 21st-century filmmakers would do justice to these all-American heroes?

I went through exactly the same chain of thoughts after I saw the trailer. No way we'll come out of a Disney treatment looking good.

3 posted on 04/08/2004 6:14:55 AM PDT by prion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: prion
I recall reading that the daring Walter E. Disney wore a Goldwater lapel pin to a ceremony in which President Johnson awarded him a Presidential Medal of Freedom!!!! His company is now the epitome of the PC mentality.
4 posted on 04/08/2004 6:16:39 AM PDT by Theodore R. (When will they ever learn?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
Random Thought: A lot of immigrants were at the Alamo. The largest group of them were Irish.
5 posted on 04/08/2004 6:16:42 AM PDT by 2banana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
Disney sickens me more & more every day. Their message to children today is NOT what I grew up with.
6 posted on 04/08/2004 6:17:14 AM PDT by m18436572
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
This is just one interpretation of history... and the story of Crockett being executed is supported (albeit weakly) by historic record.

It's not like they created a story out of thin air...
7 posted on 04/08/2004 6:20:21 AM PDT by Lunatic Fringe (John F-ing Kerry??? NO... F-ING... WAY!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
With satan boy billy bob in it...I wont see it anyway...

I'm surprised Disney's sodomite loving tendancies didnt turn 'The Alamo' into a Broadway musical...with Santa Anna as a drag queen hero-heroine

And the boys at the Alamo were really intolerant and homophobes as well as land grabbing
slave owners

No wonder Ron Howard walked out in the middle of production......Dennis Quaid ought to be ashamed of himself..

imo
8 posted on 04/08/2004 6:20:25 AM PDT by joesnuffy (Moderate Islam Is For Dilettantes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: joesnuffy
Explain this please: "satan boy billy boy."
9 posted on 04/08/2004 6:23:45 AM PDT by Theodore R. (When will they ever learn?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
Correction: "billy bob."
10 posted on 04/08/2004 6:24:15 AM PDT by Theodore R. (When will they ever learn?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: joesnuffy
It's Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna. We were supposed to call him "Lopez" (the father's name). But U.S. history remembers him as "Santa Anna" (the mother's name).
11 posted on 04/08/2004 6:25:25 AM PDT by Theodore R. (When will they ever learn?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
The group cites several historical witnesses who backed up the story of a heroic Crockett.

Like who? Anyone who knew Crockett in the fort was killed. There are no eyewitness accounts of how he died other than from the Mexicans, and those conflict.

12 posted on 04/08/2004 6:28:29 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur (Jefferson Davis - the first 'selected, not elected' president.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: m18436572
They've lost their way. Need to clean house.
13 posted on 04/08/2004 6:30:30 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Lunatic Fringe
"It's not like they created a story out of thin air..."
What planet have you been living on?! That is exactly
what Hollywood does best.....all the time!
14 posted on 04/08/2004 6:30:36 AM PDT by Winfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
There were a handful of Anglo women and children in the Alamo who were spared by Lopez de Santa Anna. The survivors told others of the atrocity and what would happen if Mexican rule were challenged. Of course, some seven weeks later, Lopez de Santa Anna was captured in a cornfield by Houston, who promptly released him. Lopez de Santa Anna agreed to recognize the Rio Grande border of an independent Texas and Mexico, but the Mexican Senate refused to acknowledge.

This notion that Crockett was cowardly is recent and unsubstantiated, as I understand it.
15 posted on 04/08/2004 6:31:44 AM PDT by Theodore R. (When will they ever learn?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
I hope they didn't put the "hump" on the Alamo in the new film version.

The parapet façade had not yet been built. It was added to the original building in the 1850s.


16 posted on 04/08/2004 6:33:39 AM PDT by syriacus (2001: The Daschle-Schumer Gang obstructed Bush's attempts to organize his administration -->9/11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
This notion that Crockett was cowardly is recent and unsubstantiated, as I understand it.

Which is my point. There are no substantiated accounts of Crockett's death from any source. All such stories of his death postdate the battle by weeks or months or even years. The John Wayne account of is death is just as possible as this movie's account.

17 posted on 04/08/2004 6:37:52 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur (Jefferson Davis - the first 'selected, not elected' president.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
While I have no doubt that Disney went for PC over accuracy, I'd be real leery of trusting Joe Farah's word about anything. He was a little too eager to denounce "South Park" without ever bothering to watch a single episode(he admitted that as he went on railing about how terrible it was) for me to take his word at face value.
18 posted on 04/08/2004 6:38:17 AM PDT by ABG(anybody but Gore) (Wolfgang Puck does not belong on Iron Chef America, no matter how funny his accent is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
"In addition, says the group, Col. James Bowie, the Alamo defender famous for his knife-fighting skills, is portrayed as a land-swindling slave trader. The film reportedly has Crockett participating in a My Lai-style massacre in the Creek Indian War."

Well, for at least a goodly portion of his life (in Louisiana--my home state), Jim Bowie WAS a "land-swindling slave trader" (or at best, a "land-dealing slave trader"). But, as I understand the record, when he made the move to Texas, he had pretty much reformed, had conformed to Texas law, and had married the daughter of a Texas dignitary.

19 posted on 04/08/2004 6:38:58 AM PDT by Wonder Warthog (The Hog of Steel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mgist; I_be_tc; paltz; SoKatt; fishbabe; LisaMalia; 4mycountry; shuvlhed; Loose_Cannon1; ...


You be the judge.

Please FReepmail me if you want on/off this ping list.
20 posted on 04/08/2004 6:46:19 AM PDT by WinOne4TheGipper (We said there was a double standard when the Lott thing blew up. Now we know.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
This movie was filmed just a few miles from here at a ranch in Dripping Springs (TX). Currently, the owner of the ranch is trying to raise money to perserve the set.
21 posted on 04/08/2004 6:49:34 AM PDT by WinOne4TheGipper (We said there was a double standard when the Lott thing blew up. Now we know.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
San Antonio Express-News

http://www.tcpalm.com/tcp/movies/article/0,1651,TCP_1162_2778614,00.html

Davy Crockett: U.S. congressman, legend in his own time, venerated hero of the Alamo who lost his life after Mexican troops overran the now fabled fort.

His final words?

"I'm a screamer."

That's according to Walt Disney Studios, whose new film, "The Alamo," premieres Friday.

22 posted on 04/08/2004 6:51:44 AM PDT by jimbo123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: joesnuffy
So what if the men at the Alamo were homophobes and land grabbing slave owners. Each and every one of them died a hero and that should never be forgotten!
23 posted on 04/08/2004 6:58:57 AM PDT by Sunshine Sister
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks
Yup. I can't stand the 'adultification' of my kids before they are ready for it.
Totally inapropriate.

...but convincing the wife is another story!

24 posted on 04/08/2004 7:05:59 AM PDT by m18436572
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
The absolute best book on Crockett, Travis, and Bowie is by a distinguinsehed and honest historian, Davis (John C., I think) who wrote a book called "Three Paths to the Alamo" or something like that.

It is true that Bowie was a land swindler in Louisiana. At one time, he nearly snuck through false claims that would have given him something like 10% of all the land in the state. It is also true that he was a slaveowner. It is also true that Sam Houston was a drunkard---and a remarkable man. He lived with the Indians (where his nickname was "big drunk") but like U.S. Grant, when he needed to be sober, he was a terrific leader.

Crockett constantly left his wife in search of adventure, as did Travis (who left his out of a need for money). But the evidence is under dispute as to whether Crockett was killed inside the walls or overwhelmed. He fought ferociously, and well. Whether he was captured is irrelevant. Most accounts suggest that Travis was killed in the opening minutes.

The Alamo was taken around 4-5 in the morning after CONTINUAL bombardment for days. The men were shell-shocked and most asleep when the attack started. All the pickets were overwhelmed. None of this in any way detracts from what these brave men did, or what they stood for. Crockett was a valiant congressman, fighting for the farmer and landowner. Bowie was a Mexican citizen who hated the iron hand of Mexico City. And Travis was equally courageous. I am sickened by BB Thornton playing Crockett.

25 posted on 04/08/2004 7:17:42 AM PDT by LS (CNN is the Amtrak of news.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: joesnuffy
Wasn't he wearing a dress when Houston's men captured him at San Jacinto? Or was that just a nightgown for his nappy-poo?

I'm surprised Disney's sodomite loving tendancies didnt turn 'The Alamo' into a Broadway musical...with Santa Anna as a drag queen hero-heroine.

26 posted on 04/08/2004 7:25:47 AM PDT by Ready4Freddy (Veni Vidi Velcro)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: WinOne4TheGipper
"to perserve the set."

Why? I understand that the set is cardboard, plywood and Kalerfornee stucco. Need's a good wind to blow it all down.

Bump for the set in Bracketville, Texas.

27 posted on 04/08/2004 7:33:47 AM PDT by Deguello
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Deguello
For schoolkids whose teachers are too lazy to make the 70 mile trip to the real Alamo.:-)
28 posted on 04/08/2004 7:38:35 AM PDT by WinOne4TheGipper (We said there was a double standard when the Lott thing blew up. Now we know.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: WinOne4TheGipper
"the real Alamo"

Quotes from Tourist:

"I can't believe that they had a battle right in the middle of town."

"Low on food? They have restaurants right down the street."

29 posted on 04/08/2004 7:59:27 AM PDT by Deguello
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna was indeed the full name. We Americans use the last name, typically the father's, to identify the person. Hence, the general is remembered by American historians as Santa Anna. As I understand the culture of the aristocracy of Spain and Mexico, the inclusion of the mother's family name, identified by "de", was to recognize the existence of a prominent family on the mother's side. Thus, a person's extraction from two families of the aristocracy could be readily shown.

This is rather like the use of the middle name to identify a wealthy family on the mother's side today, like "John Forbes Kerry"...I wonder if he wishes he could be politically correct and hyphenate it? John Forbes-Kerry?

Anyway, there is a great book out now on the Alamo, which is different from the novelization of the movie screenplay. "Gates of the Alamo" is in paperback now, and is well worth reading. A fictionalized account, but it deals with the death of Crockett in what I believe is a more historically correct manner...as well as with the aftermath of the battle.
30 posted on 04/08/2004 8:31:08 AM PDT by PrkChps (I wouldn't send my kid to Harvard for free...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
"This notion that Crockett was cowardly is recent and unsubstantiated, as I understand it."

They did the same thing with J. Edgar Hoover and allegations that he was a transvestite. No supporting evidence, just slander. Anti-communists and American heroes must be trashed.
31 posted on 04/08/2004 9:19:48 AM PDT by BadAndy (Unjustly banned from Lucianne)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur; Theodore R.
Which is my point. There are no substantiated accounts of Crockett's death from any source. All such stories of his death postdate the battle by weeks or months or even years. The John Wayne account of is death is just as possible as this movie's account.

Okham's razor dictates otherwise. A stronger probability automatically exists that Crockett went down swinging at mexicans as they stormed the walls simply because of the high frequency of this happening (it's how virtually everyone else in the fort died as well). The extreme complexity of the movie's version, by comparison, also diminishes its probability under the razor as it is contingent upon a succession of precise yet successively dubious events playing out in order, any one of which removed would alter that succession (1. Crockett survives the initial attack, 2. Crockett pulls back with a small group into the chapel, 3. Crockett survives the fighting in the chapel, 4. Crockett evades death at some location in the chapel for several hours until daylight, 5. Crockett is taken prisoner as the lone survivor, 6. Crockett is taken before Santa Anna where he is offered an unrecorded opportunity to have his life spared, 7. Crockett refuses that opportunity, 8. Crockett is ordered to be executed, 9. Crockett yells out an indisputably anachronistic late 20th century tagline, "I'm a screamer! Yeaaarggghhh!" as he is shot down).

Though the first two or three of these steps may have occurred, each successive one is more complex, more contingent upon the prior succession, and thus statistically less probable. By step 9 the statistical probability of it happening in light of the absence of any credible record that it did is virtually one in several million if even that, or otherwise negligible.

So no, non-seq, the new movie's account is NOT "just as possible" as the John Wayne/traditional account. It is only remotely possible, and as such substantially less possible, to the point of statistical negligence in the absence of credible and explicit records showing otherwise. It may be legitimately classified as (b) somewhere in between the other remotely "possible" though improbable death accounts of (a) succumbing to a sudden rapid case of Jim Bowie's illness in the final minutes of the battle and (c) being surrounded by invisible aliens on the verge of turning the battle's tide and getting bludgeoned to death by their light sabers.

32 posted on 04/13/2004 10:28:32 AM PDT by GOPcapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.












33 posted on 04/13/2004 10:47:09 AM PDT by shield (The Greatest Scientific Discoveries of the Century Reveal God!!!! by Dr. H. Ross, Astrophysicist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GOPcapitalist
It may be legitimately classified as (b) somewhere in between the other remotely "possible" though improbable death accounts of (a) succumbing to a sudden rapid case of Jim Bowie's illness in the final minutes of the battle and (c) being surrounded by invisible aliens on the verge of turning the battle's tide and getting bludgeoned to death by their light sabers.

The difference, of course, being that there are no written accounts of Crocket dying of typhoid, nor are there any written accounts of him being killed by invisible aliens. There are accounts of him being executed after the battle, and there are accounts of his dying during the battle. Since you weren't there then there is no way you can pronounce one version to be true and the other to be false. Unless, of course, the aliens told you.

34 posted on 04/13/2004 11:08:58 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur (Jefferson Davis - the first 'selected, not elected' president.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
Still, I would like to see the film. The historical advisor to the film claims that it is mostly accurate.

You ought to, as long as you understand it's Disney, it's PG-13, and it's target audience is probably not too familiar with the Alamo and Texas history. I would like to think the DVD/Director's Cut will wipe away the flaws I'm about to complain about, but I doubt it.

They are going to overwhelm you with character flaws (boozing, adultery, etc.) to build up characters as quickly as possible so they can get on with the battles. Yeah, we all know Houston drank, that Travis liked women and left his wife, that Bowie had a mean streak , that Crockett was at times uncomfortable at how big his legend had become, that Juan Seguin was perpetually pissed that he wasn't at the Alamo. We don't need it thrust in our faces though.

Don't get me wrong, I would never claim that every man at the Alamo was a saint, or that David Crockett wasn't brave.

That brings me to David Crockett. They mention Crockett and the Creek Indian War, and the Creeks they killed in the house, but they don't tell you exactly why they killed them (it wasn't because some squaw loosed an arrow into somebody either), or that the Creeks were going to fight to the last man. They mention Crockett got booted out of office and Texas was a second or third chance for him, but don't tell you why he was booted (and why he was booted made him somebody even more worthy of respect in my eyes).

They'll tell you Travis slept around, but not that he supplied the men he brought with him out of his own pocket (that doesn't excuse his adultery before anybody flames me, but it does show just what kind of man he was when it came to fighting for Texas' independence). They did give a glimpse that Travis saw the bigger picture for Texas (which he did indeed).

I think I was most surprised at how well they built the Alamo set, and I was surprised they mentioned Bowie's marriage to Ursula Veramendi and her death, and how important that was to Bowie hanging around San Antonio. I'm kind of a fan of Bowie, and figured something like that wouldn't make it into a movie about the Alamo. I thought him being hell-on-wheels with a knife and killing well over a dozen men with one would be mentioned before his marriage.

As far as Crockett's death...the only agenda was to give the crowd what they wanted. The target audience doesn't want to see Crockett die like Travis. They want Crockett to run out of ammo, start swinging his rifle, and then mock Santa Anna to his face.

Nevermind the fact that just about any Mexican wouldn't be able to tell David Crockett from David Cummings or David Wilson (both of whom died at the Alamo as well).

35 posted on 04/13/2004 1:15:28 PM PDT by af_vet_rr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lunatic Fringe
and the story of Crockett being executed is supported (albeit weakly) by historic record

I don't think it is all that well supported. While I don't believe Mrs. Dickinson's claims that he died outside the walls (probably destroying cover the Mexicans were going to use).., I don't buy most of the other claims.

As far as la Pena's diary, I think it's a clever fraud, and I don't think Pena would have known David Crockett from the other two or three Davids that died there. Most men died during the last assault, and odds are Crockett died with them, or in the build-up to the final assault.

Disney can romanticize his death and make it look like he mocked Santa Anna to his face, but it's pretty ludicrous.

36 posted on 04/13/2004 1:22:44 PM PDT by af_vet_rr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: joesnuffy
And the boys at the Alamo were really intolerant and homophobes as well as land grabbing slave owners

Putting aside Bowie (who deserved the land grabbing/slave owning, pirate associating reputation that he had), the PC crowd won't tell you that the boys at the Alamo were incredibly tolerant, that they had no problem living with and fighting beside Tejanos. (It's pretty hard to ignore the names of the dead at the Alamo).

Later on, intolerant Anglo settlers unjustly gave early Texans that reputation, and the PC crowd jumped all over that.

37 posted on 04/13/2004 1:25:50 PM PDT by af_vet_rr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
The difference, of course, being that there are no written accounts of Crocket dying of typhoid, nor are there any written accounts of him being killed by invisible aliens.

Fiction has been known to write stranger things and there certainly are plenty of historical fiction accounts out there. But considering that YOU rejected the one account suggesting his execution, along with any other, when asserting that they were equally possible, so it must also be for the others I wrote of.

There are accounts of him being executed after the battle

Correction: there is one account reportedly written by a Mexican officer after the battle. That alleged account has no credible history of its location or existence prior to circa 1965 and is believed by many with strong evidence to be a forgery (the pages are loose and unbound, of different paper composition, and appear to have been cut into a uniform size suggesting it was written in succession and at the same time on collected blank scraps of 1830's era paper gathered from different sources). It is only slightly more credible than a work of fiction if even that. But since you yourself previously rejected its credibility along with all other accounts, you cannot attempt to reinstate it now that it has been pointed out through statistical probability that what you declared, viz.: different means his death are equally possible, is in error.

Since you weren't there then there is no way you can pronounce one version to be true and the other to be false.

No, and neither you or eye can ever conclusively prove that invisible aliens didn't kill him for that matter since no explicit and credible record of his death exists. I can conclude statistically that some theories have a substantially greater liklihood than others, and that some possible ways he could have died - such as the aliens - are so far fetched as to render them statistically improbable to degrees of less than than one in multi-billions.

38 posted on 04/13/2004 1:59:42 PM PDT by GOPcapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: af_vet_rr
They'll tell you Travis slept around, but not that he supplied the men he brought with him out of his own pocket

Another who financed his troops out of his own funds was the Revolutionary War General George Rogers Clark in the Northwest Territory. It may be that "Mad" Anthony Wayne did so as well in the Indian Wars of the 1790s.
39 posted on 04/13/2004 2:36:55 PM PDT by Theodore R. (When will they ever learn?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
Nope, sorry, I just saw THE ALAMO and thought it was excellent. Farah is wrong, very wrong. It is extremely accurate. Credentials: I visited the Alamo often growing up and regard it as a shrine; I have a PhD in American history; and I own and have read dozens of books on the Alamo, which I "wargame" with miniature soldiers. The film is an accurate portrayal. There are many legends about the Alamo -- which is fine and good, but not to be confused with history. The real thing is heroic enough, it doesn't need mythologizing. Thornton's David Crockett is more heroic than John Wayne's, because he is not a natural hero. he's a politician and accidental folk hero/superstar who wonders whether he can live up to his reputation. And in the end he does.
40 posted on 04/15/2004 2:09:44 PM PDT by docmcb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


· GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother, and Ernest_at_the_Beach ·
· join list or digest · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post a topic · subscribe ·

 
 Antiquity Journal
 & archive
 Archaeologica
 Archaeology
 Archaeology Channel
 BAR
 Bronze Age Forum
 Discover
 Dogpile
 Eurekalert
 Google
 LiveScience
 Mirabilis.ca
 Nat Geographic
 PhysOrg
 Science Daily
 Science News
 Texas AM
 Yahoo
 Excerpt, or Link only?
 


Note: this topic is from 4/8/2004. Thanks Theodore R..

Blast from the Past.

Just adding to the catalog, not sending a general distribution.

To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list.
 

· History topic · history keyword · archaeology keyword · paleontology keyword ·
· Science topic · science keyword · Books/Literature topic · pages keyword ·


41 posted on 06/13/2011 7:41:17 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (Thanks Cincinna for this link -- http://www.friendsofitamar.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson