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

Skip to comments.

Suspect accused of vandalizing Confederate flag in Mizzou dorm
STL Today ^ | 11/21/2001 11:19 AM | ap

Posted on 11/21/2001 11:54:19 AM PST by shuckmaster

Edited on 05/11/2004 5:33:22 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

COLUMBIA, Mo. (AP) -- Police at the University of Missouri have arrested a student suspected of destroying a Confederate flag in a dorm room.

Dave Sierpina, 18, of Aurora, Ill., was arrested on suspicion of second-degree burglary and property damage.


(Excerpt) Read more at stltoday.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: dixielist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 201-250251-300301-350351 next last
To: stand watie
BOTH of you damnyankee apologists are going to look REALLY IGNORANT/DUMB when i find and post the source...

I'm prepared to take my chances.

251 posted on 12/13/2001 10:10:19 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 248 | View Replies]

To: stand watie
Oh, I have long acknowleged the fact that Grant owned a slave in 1858-59 and that his wife had use of some of her father's slaves as late as 1862, possibly January 1863. But the idea that Grant owned a slave himself in 1866 is ridiculous.
252 posted on 12/13/2001 10:14:03 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 250 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyPapa
BTW, grant was a slave overseer (and was reputed to be "a good man with the whip") on a plantation, after he left the US army the first time. didn't know THAT either did you, Walt?

see Walt, TRUTH is often inconvienient for those of you who are apologists for the HATEFILLED damnyankee extremists/racebaiters/liars of northeastern academia. filth WHITEWASHED is still FILTH.

for TRUTH & dixie,sw

253 posted on 12/13/2001 10:15:53 AM PST by stand watie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 249 | View Replies]

To: stand watie
grant having/holding slaves is WELL KNOWN in the academic community.

why didn't you know it? or did you know it and choose to discount the TRUTH?

But like the rest of the neo-confederate crazies, you can't provide a shred of proof for your position.

Walt

254 posted on 12/13/2001 10:16:39 AM PST by WhiskeyPapa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 250 | View Replies]

To: stand watie
And where was this plantation located at, if I may be so bold as to ask? I already know better than to ask for actual evidence.
255 posted on 12/13/2001 10:21:11 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 253 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
don't you WISH it were ridiculous? his owning slaves throughout the war AND afterwards makes the so-called "crusade against human bondage" by the damnyankees look STUPID and HYPOCRYTICAL.

but then the damnyankee elites were always self-righteous "do as we say, not as we do" types. nothing has changed after all these years;northeastern academics are STILL trying to cover up the LIES and WAR CRIMES of the damnyankee army. thankfully there's not that much dirt on earth.

256 posted on 12/13/2001 10:22:35 AM PST by stand watie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 252 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
Missouri.
257 posted on 12/13/2001 10:23:30 AM PST by stand watie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 255 | View Replies]

To: stand watie
Missouri.

Show me.

Walt

258 posted on 12/13/2001 10:49:57 AM PST by WhiskeyPapa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 257 | View Replies]

To: stand watie
I'm enclosing a link about how Robert E. Lee whipped and mistreated his slaves. I'm not inclined to give it much credence myself, since I haven't found anything else to support it, but by your standards of evidence it must be true. The man wrote about it in a book. So I was just wondering what your thoughts are on Lee and Grant both being 'good men with a whip'? Just one of the many things they had in common, I guess.
259 posted on 12/13/2001 2:01:59 PM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 256 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
Hey, I thought this was about some butt head tearing up someones personal property?
260 posted on 12/13/2001 2:10:55 PM PST by aimlow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 259 | View Replies]

To: aimlow
You're new to these forums, aren't you? We never miss a chance to refight the Civil War. stande waite is one of the most rabid Yankees on this forum.
261 posted on 12/13/2001 2:15:25 PM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 260 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
since Lee had no slaves ever, (he was too poor to own any-so poor in fact that his wife's parents had to send them food packages regularly,while Lee was in the US Army. the receipts for large sacks of flour, salt pork,dried peas & beans, salt, corn meal and other similar staples still exist and are available for inspection at the married quarters office at Fortress Monroe. the USA paid officers almost nothing in those days.)this is hogwash. HER parents DID own numerous slaves.

BTW, the reason that there are so many buildings in northern VA that claim to be the boyhood home of REL is that he and his mother lived with whichever relative could afford to feed, clothe & find them a bed to sleep in. after Lighthorse Harry Lee died, the Lees were "gentille poor".

for TRUTH & dixie,sw

262 posted on 12/14/2001 10:23:56 AM PST by stand watie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 259 | View Replies]

To: stand watie
Here is a link to a Library of Congress website. It talks of some slaves that Lee freed in the 1850's and whose passage to Liberia he paid for. Obviously he got some money from somewhere if he could not only own slaves but afford to manumit them and pay their way back to Africa.
263 posted on 12/14/2001 10:29:52 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 262 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
Why should Stande Watie believe you and me? Let the words of Alexander Stephens, vice president of the confederacy speak for themselves:

Now, you can't go quoting documents or persons from the time of the Civil War, that's revisionism in SW's eyes don't you know. :^)

264 posted on 12/16/2001 12:38:48 PM PST by #3Fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 235 | View Replies]

To: stand watie
if it is a "made up story" the the damnyankees lied about it-it's right there in the official report of the investigating officer and has been quoted in MANY books. sorry, you LOSE!

Even if it's true, it's because those Southern hospitalitists didn't allow education to most of their slaves. Amazing what you can pull over the people's eyes when you don't allow them to learn.

265 posted on 12/16/2001 12:41:04 PM PST by #3Fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 236 | View Replies]

To: stand watie
frankly, i doubt that any of the aristocracy would have been elected, had the CSA won her war for independence. even Jeff Davis was popular in HIS OLD AGE- not during the WBTS.

Bill Clinton's popular too. That doesn't mean crap.

266 posted on 12/16/2001 12:42:25 PM PST by #3Fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 237 | View Replies]

To: Illbay
I hate to say this but more crimes have been committed under the Stars & Stripes than ever under the Confederate Flag. Also people in this country can be fired,and made a criminal for using the N word but going into these fellows rooms and trashing it because a TV offended him is very much for one to take. God Bless all TVs.
267 posted on 12/16/2001 12:53:53 PM PST by gunnedah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyPapa
Here in deep yankee land ( Albany, New York ) there are pockets of Northerners still fighting the Civil War. They did not take too kindly to my pointing out Walter William's archive material on slaves fighting for the South and that that the "great Gen. Grant" did not free his own slaves ( he referred to them as servants ) until the effective date of the amendment. See http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/williams012600.asp I have no proof that Walter William's research is true but as a black intelectual I trust him to avoid making false statements regarding race. The media of his day may be just as culpable with Grant as our present day media was with Clinton.
268 posted on 12/16/2001 1:26:10 PM PST by rector seal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 254 | View Replies]

To: rector seal
I have no proof that Walter William's research is true but as a black intelectual I trust him to avoid making false statements regarding race.

Well, what does he say?

Presumably he says that there were no more than a handful of black CSA soldiers, because the record is pretty conclusive that that is what happened.

"As early as 1863, a few voices in the Confederacy had called for the enlistment of black slaves into the Confederate armed forces, but most remained opposed to such a policy, which would have violated the predominant assumption that blacks were racially inferior. However, as the military situation worsened for the Confederacy in the fall of 1864, the controversial idea resurfaced with greater force. That September, Union newspapers published a letter confiscated from Governor Henry W. Allen of Louisiana in which he urged the Confederacy to arm “every able-bodied Negro.” A few weeks later, the influential Richmond Enquirer expanded the suggestion to endorse emancipation and equal treatment of black soldiers in return for military service to the Confederacy.

The federal Congress had approved the use of blacks in the Union military in July 1862, and their recruitment began in earnest after the Emancipation Proclamation of January 1, 1863. Almost 200,000 black men served as soldiers, sailors, or laborers for the Union armed forces during the Civil War.

The first major proposal for arming slaves and free blacks in the Confederacy was the “Cleburne Memorial” presented by General Patrick Cleburne, an Army of Tennessee division commander, to an officers’ meeting on January 2, 1864. By that time, there was a serious need to replace the dwindling number of servicemen in the Confederate military, which was about a third of the size of the Union forces. Cleburne told the assembled officers that the Confederacy was losing because of the lack of soldiers and that slavery, which had been a source of strength at the beginning of the war, was now a detriment to survival. In order for the Confederacy to defend its independence, it would have to give up slavery and arm black men.

The Cleburne Memorial was notable because it was made by a well-respected military leader, not a politician or journalist, and it went beyond any previous proposal to urge complete emancipation, rather than conscription without emancipation or emancipation only for servicemen. Cleburne’s commanding officer, General Joseph E. Johnston, refused to forward the memorandum to the Confederate government in Richmond, Virginia, but an angry fellow general, W. H. T. Walker of Georgia, did, along with his vehement protest. President Jefferson Davis ordered the suppression of the proposal and any discussion of it, although it continued to be debated acrimoniously among Confederate officers. Cleburne stayed out of the fray, but was passed over for promotion three times during the following eight months.

In February 1864, the Confederate Congress did authorize, at Davis’s request, the use of 20,000 free blacks and slaves (who remained the legal property of their owners) in noncombatant roles, such as cooks, laborers, nurses, and teamsters. In September 1864, Atlanta fell to the Union, General William T. Sherman began his March to the Sea, and the Confederacy suffered other military setbacks. At that point, some Southerners became more vocal about the need to consider the use of black troops. Besides Governor Allen, a group of six other governors endorsed a “change of policy” concerning the use of slave in the “public service.” The Richmond Enquirer’s approval of arming the slaves was echoed by the Mobile Register and other journals. On November 7, 1864, President Davis unveiled a surprise in his otherwise predictable address to the Confederate Congress. He argued that the use of slaves in noncombatant roles for limited periods had not worked as well as expected, so he asked the Confederate Congress to purchase 40,000 slaves to be used for extended tours of noncombatant duty. The “due compensation” for the increased hazards and commitment should be emancipation at the end of their loyal service. Davis did not request authorization to use the slaves as soldiers, but he held out that possibility if the only alternative was “subjugation” of the Confederacy. The Confederate Congress did not act on the plan, but the issue of arming the slaves was thereafter debated vigorously until the end of the war.

Opposition to arming the slaves remained strong, led in the press by the Richmond Examiner and the Charleston Mercury, and in the political arena by Congressman R. M. T. Hunter of Virginia, speaker pro tem of the Confederate Senate, and Governors Zebulon Vance of North Carolina and Joe Brown of Georgia. Howell Cobb warned, “If slaves will make good soldiers[, then] our whole theory of slavery is wrong.” On the other hand, most of Davis’s cabinet supported the policy, although Secretary of War James Seddon was unenthusiastic.

As the Confederate military situation went from bad to worse in the winter of 1864-1865, President Davis sent Confederate Congressman Duncan Kenner of Louisiana, a long-time advocate of arming slaves, on a secret diplomatic mission in late January 1865. In a last ditch effort to convince Britain and France to issue formal recognition of Confederate independence, Davis was willing to offer emancipation of the slaves. Through indirect channels, Napoleon III of France deferred to Britain, whose prime minister, Lord Palmerston, resolutely refused. Although disappointed by the outcome of the Kenner mission (which had become publicly known), it was the failure of the Hampton Roads Peace Conference in early February—a final attempt to secure Confederate independence and a negotiated end to the war—that amplified the call for arming the slaves. Mass meeting were held across the Confederacy at which, among a general show of Southern patriotism, the radical policy was supported.

On February 10, 1865, Ethelbert Barksdale of Mississippi introduced a bill on the floor of the Confederate Congress to arm the slaves. Within days, General Robert E. Lee, commander of the Confederate armed forces, endorsed the measure and the Davis administration put its authority behind the bill. Former foes in the press, like the Richmond Examiner, now switched their editorial position to favor arming the slaves. The bill passed on March 13, but with opposition still substantial (winning by just a vote in the Senate) and without rewarding the armed slaves with emancipation. However, on March 23, the Davis administration’s executive order to implement the act added the stipulations that a slave must agree to enlistment and that his master must consent in writing to grant him, “as far as he may, the rights of a freedman.” The executive order also required that the black soldiers receive equal treatment with their white comrades.

The recruitment of black Confederate soldiers began, with the first black company formed in Richmond on March 25. The Confederate capital fell just over one week later, and General Lee surrendered to the Union commander, General Ulysses S. Grant, on April 9, 1865. To most white Confederates, the arming and emancipation of black slaves was a desperate measure taken out of military necessary in the final days of the Civil War. It did not emancipate all of the slaves, nor did it abolish slavery as an institution. The latter was accomplished by the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution in December 1865, with much reluctance on the part of white politicians in the South."

-- Robert C. Kennedy

Of course the reason for the recruitment of black soldiers was because the white soldiers were deserting in droves.

Walt

269 posted on 12/16/2001 1:56:56 PM PST by WhiskeyPapa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 268 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
wrong answer. REL never owned at single slave-even the Sons of Union Veterans of the Civil War agrees with that AND they are NO FAN of Lee.
270 posted on 12/17/2001 9:11:47 AM PST by stand watie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 263 | View Replies]

To: stand watie
Then why is the Library of Congress lying? Why does the Museum of the Confederacy have the original copy of the manumission papers that Lee signed in December 1862 freeing the slaves inherited from his father-in-law? Is this a plot to besmirch Lee's memory?
271 posted on 12/17/2001 9:14:56 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 270 | View Replies]

To: #3Fan
did you bother to read what i wrote before responding OR do you just not understand what i write? it has to be one or the other.

i don't think i said that popularity of Davis had any thing to do with who would have been elected if the southland had won her war for independence.

BTW, the klintoonista of the 19th century was the warcriminal/tyrant/arch-liar/despot lincoln. he and clinton could be brothers, except they are separated in time by a century. neither cared for ANYTHING but $$$$$$$$ and personal power.

for dixie,sw

272 posted on 12/17/2001 9:17:54 AM PST by stand watie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 266 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyPapa
sorry, walt. according to the esteemed but late professor H.R. Blackerby of the Tuskeegee Univ. history dept. there were between 100,000 and 300,000 black soldiers in the CSA military. he states in his book, "BLACKS IN BLUE AND GRAY" that by 1862 the CSA military forces were completely racially intergrated.

you really should read something by BLACK southron intellectuals to balance the revisionist,southron-hating, arrogant,hatefilled,ignorant, damnyankee propaganda that you spout. for example at Morehouse College in Atlanta there are over 300 graves of BLACK rebel soldiers, who died bravely in the battle for atlanta, buried under Graves Hall. it is now a men's dormitory AND the SCV is preparing to endow a history chair in their memory AND place a memorial plaque on the dorm wall. FYI, unless it's been removed recently, check out the college web-site for further info. you lose again.

as an example of the LIES told by the damnyankee academics, they KNOW that there were FEW SLAVES in the PACSA, BUT that there were MANY THOUSANDS of FREE MEN, who were black that bravely served the TRUE CAUSE. for TRUTH and dixie,sw

273 posted on 12/17/2001 9:31:05 AM PST by stand watie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 269 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
there is much in the LOC that is false. Lee NEVER owned a slave, end of story. his wife (a "femme sole" under VA commonwealth law) received some elderly slaves in her late father's will and manumitted them-REL never owned a single slave, according to the Arlington County Tax Accessors records (& trust me if he had owned/inherited any slaves, the taxman would have gotten his pound of flesh!)- sorry you sources are wrong.

the Museum of the Confederacy is NOT esteemed by southrons, as it is and has been in damnyankee-apologist LIBERAL hands for >25 years.

274 posted on 12/17/2001 9:37:44 AM PST by stand watie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 271 | View Replies]

To: stand watie
did you bother to read what i wrote before responding OR do you just not understand what i write? it has to be one or the other.

Look who's talking. You keep saying I said that the North fought for slavery. The North fought to preserve the union.

i don't think i said that popularity of Davis had any thing to do with who would have been elected if the southland had won her war for independence.

It doesn't matter. You lost. Get over it.

BTW, the klintoonista of the 19th century was the warcriminal/tyrant/arch-liar/despot lincoln. he and clinton could be brothers, except they are separated in time by a century. neither cared for ANYTHING but $$$$$$$$ and personal power.

The only ones in the 1860's that cared about money and power were the slaveowners. Filthy lucre and tyranny dictated their life.

275 posted on 12/17/2001 9:40:53 AM PST by #3Fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 272 | View Replies]

To: stand watie
Maybe Lee did own the slaves and he used them to haul the sacks of food and other CARE packages that you claim his family sent him? After all, the MOC says that they have the original document signed in Lee's own hand. Was it a forgery? Is the Library of Congress lying?
276 posted on 12/17/2001 9:41:50 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 274 | View Replies]

To: #3Fan
Regardless of whether or not the confederacy had won; regardless of how popular Davis was at the end of the war (and he was about as popular as the cholera) he could not have been elected president again. The confederate constitution mandated a single 6 year term. sw should have known that.
277 posted on 12/17/2001 9:44:02 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 275 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
if they have a copy it IS a forgery. the TAXMAN, i say again would have TAXED such a transaction. didn't get taxed = never happened.
278 posted on 12/17/2001 9:45:29 AM PST by stand watie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 276 | View Replies]

To: #3Fan
when did i EVER say the damnyankees fought for slavery OR to free the slaves? where is such a post?

the damnyankees fought to keep the southland poor,subserviant and under the damnyankee boot heel. no other reason is as important to damnyankee elitists as $$$$$$$$ AND personal power.

they certainly cared NOTHING for the plight of the slaves in dixie OR damnyankeeland.

once again, do you UNDERSTAND the difference in reasoned response and just posting un-thinking bunk?

for dixie,sw

279 posted on 12/17/2001 9:54:02 AM PST by stand watie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 275 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
i DID know about the 6-year single term of the CS, BUT that too has NOTHING to do with who would have been elected president if our southland had won the WBTS! i suspect that one of the southland's generals would have been the next president or perhaps a former cabinet officer.
280 posted on 12/17/2001 10:20:40 AM PST by stand watie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 277 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
Regardless of whether or not the confederacy had won; regardless of how popular Davis was at the end of the war (and he was about as popular as the cholera) he could not have been elected president again. The confederate constitution mandated a single 6 year term. sw should have known that.

SW has selective memory on a lot of things. LOL

281 posted on 12/18/2001 8:16:57 AM PST by #3Fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 277 | View Replies]

To: stand watie
if they have a copy it IS a forgery. the TAXMAN, i say again would have TAXED such a transaction. didn't get taxed = never happened.

Just like today and the servants of public officials?

282 posted on 12/18/2001 8:18:46 AM PST by #3Fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 278 | View Replies]

To: stand watie
when did i EVER say the damnyankees fought for slavery OR to free the slaves? where is such a post?

No, you keep saying we said the union fought to free the slaves. Post #256 is an example. Learn to read.

the damnyankees fought to keep the southland poor,subserviant and under the damnyankee boot heel. no other reason is as important to damnyankee elitists as $$$$$$$$ AND personal power.

The secessionists were the ultimate tyrannists, they seceded to keep people enslaved to them and to reap the filthy lucre from it.

they certainly cared NOTHING for the plight of the slaves in dixie OR damnyankeeland.

The Radical Republicans did. Remember John Brown?

once again, do you UNDERSTAND the difference in reasoned response and just posting un-thinking bunk?

Unthinking bunk is your specialty.

283 posted on 12/18/2001 8:27:09 AM PST by #3Fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 279 | View Replies]

To: stand watie
i DID know about the 6-year single term of the CS, BUT that too has NOTHING to do with who would have been elected president if our southland had won the WBTS! i suspect that one of the southland's generals would have been the next president or perhaps a former cabinet officer.

Get out of your fantasyland, you lost, get over it. LOL

284 posted on 12/18/2001 8:29:05 AM PST by #3Fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 280 | View Replies]

To: #3Fan
yes we lost. that however does NOT make the "what ifs" any less interesting NOR does it make southron liberty NOW any less a priority for old rebel families such as mine-and our numbers are growing!

i would think you south-haters would welcome our departure!

285 posted on 12/18/2001 10:02:05 AM PST by stand watie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 284 | View Replies]

To: stand watie
i would think you south-haters would welcome our departure!

Nope. We need somewhere to ship all our old people. All those Ensure sipping, grocery store griping, turn signal forgetting, doing-25-in-a-50-zone driving old folks are part of a grand plot to continue punishing you for the rebellion.

286 posted on 12/18/2001 10:10:04 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 285 | View Replies]

To: #3Fan
OBVIOUSLY you can't read OR you don't understand the difference between what the hatefilled,arrogant,money-hungry damnyankees SAID the reasons for fighting against southron independence were: freeing the slaves & perserving the union, VERSUS the truth about why the damnyankees fought us:to keep the south poor and subserviant to the north and $$$$$$$$$$.

the radical republicans in 1861 numbered in the few thousands. it was only after the damnyankees conquered the south that the mass of northerners became RRs.

one noted African American professor from Grambling University says that you couldn't have found 10,000 people in the whole nation who cared a damn about ending slavery and FEW who would have fought even a skirmish over slavery.

from the northern perspective, the WBTS was just about POWER & $$$$$$$$$. all the whitewash in the world will not cover up that TRUTH!

for dixie liberty,sw

287 posted on 12/18/2001 10:15:56 AM PST by stand watie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 283 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
you could still deport the retirees to us. we like them as they are politically generally CONSERVATIVE, religious,family-oriented and usually "fit in" down here after a very few years; the ones that don't/can't adapt down here go back north.

those you're welcome to!

when southron liberty comes, let's make a deal. = we send you all the socialists/nere-do-wells/liberals/socialists/etc and we'll take all the "snowbirds"- then we'll all be happy!

for dixie liberty,sw

288 posted on 12/18/2001 10:24:24 AM PST by stand watie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 286 | View Replies]

To: stand watie
yes we lost. that however does NOT make the "what ifs" any less interesting NOR does it make southron liberty NOW any less a priority for old rebel families such as mine-and our numbers are growing! i would think you south-haters would welcome our departure!

I like the South. You Civil War whiners are a minority in the South and are sore losers and can't let go of your defeats. I enjoy proving your opinions silly.

289 posted on 12/18/2001 12:23:18 PM PST by #3Fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 285 | View Replies]

To: #3Fan
you're entitled to hold ANY opinion, no matter how un-informed.

frankly, most southrons i know would think you only semi-literate in the history of the WBTS,based on your obvious/simplistic/un-knowledgeable responses.

we aren't sore losers-any more than the nations still subject to russian domination are sore losers because they continue to desire freedom.

the LUST for LIBERTY is a positive and GOOD thing.

for TRUTH & dixie,sw

290 posted on 12/19/2001 9:54:20 AM PST by stand watie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 289 | View Replies]

To: stand watie
you're entitled to hold ANY opinion, no matter how un-informed. frankly, most southrons i know...

Oh boy, I bet you guys are a barrel of laughs when you get together.

...would think you only semi-literate in the history of the WBTS,based on your obvious/simplistic/un-knowledgeable responses.

You're posting a lot of words but not saying anything.

we aren't sore losers-any more than the nations still subject to russian domination are sore losers because they continue to desire freedom.

At least they're doing something about it. Instead of whining to me every day, why don't you do something about it?

the LUST for LIBERTY is a positive and GOOD thing.

Men of action change the world. Uneducated namecalling malcontents are just background noise.

291 posted on 12/19/2001 4:59:04 PM PST by #3Fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 290 | View Replies]

To: #3Fan
like i said before, you're welcome to your opinion;it's a free republic.

for dixie,sw

292 posted on 12/20/2001 9:40:21 AM PST by stand watie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 291 | View Replies]

To: stand watie
like i said before, you're welcome to your opinion;it's a free republic.

Make up your mind. First you call America tyrannical, then you say it's a free republic. Which is it?

293 posted on 12/20/2001 9:48:50 AM PST by #3Fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 292 | View Replies]

To: #3Fan
Good Lord, are you two still at it? Come on over to here or here . Lot's of fun yet to be had on those two.
294 posted on 12/20/2001 9:54:16 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 293 | View Replies]

To: #3Fan
America is, and always has been since the revolution,a free republic.

it's the hatefilled,racebaiting,anti-semitic,arrogant,anti-gun,pro abortion,ignorant,south-hating, extremist, mean-spirited, liberal damnyankees who are TYRANTS & DAMNFOOLS.

for dixie,sw

295 posted on 12/20/2001 9:57:41 AM PST by stand watie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 293 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
LOL
296 posted on 12/20/2001 10:07:46 AM PST by #3Fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 294 | View Replies]

To: stand watie
America is, and always has been since the revolution,a free republic.

Then you shouldn't have seceded.

it's the hatefilled,racebaiting,anti-semitic,arrogant,anti-gun,pro abortion,ignorant,south-hating, extremist, mean-spirited, liberal damnyankees who are TYRANTS & DAMNFOOLS.

Like Ted Turner and Bill Clinton? Two of the most influencial liberals in America, two southerners?

297 posted on 12/20/2001 10:10:48 AM PST by #3Fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 295 | View Replies]

To: #3Fan
#3F and and Stand Watie, are there any potential points of agreement between you two? First, SW seems to go to great lengths to disprove the assertion that Lee owned slaves. This implies acceptance of the proposition that slavery was wrong. I think that we can all agree on that. I also believe that we can agree that Grant did own at least one slave in Missouri whom Grant manumitted before he emigrated to Illinois. His wife maintained a few slaves, and at least one until December 1862. In Julia Grant's Memoires, Mrs. Grant says that her slave girl ran away from her near Cincinnati around Christmas, 1862. In a footnote to that work, John Y. Simon states that it is at least possible that the Dent/Grant slaves were emancipated by the XIII Amendment, although he cannot tell for sure. As for REL, I e-mailed Emory Thomas, University of Georgia and author of a sympathetic but not idolatrous Lee biography. He says that Lee owned slaves (left to him by his mother) at least as late as 1846 (REL, pg, 72) or 1852 (REL, pg. 173). On his emancipation of all his slaves in January, 1863, Lee hired two of his servants (Perry and George) and paid them $8.20 a month. (Lee in a letter to his wife, 8 FEB 63). Hope this helps dampen the acrimony. Respectfully, D J White
298 posted on 12/21/2001 4:58:10 AM PST by D J White
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 297 | View Replies]

To: D J White
#3F and and Stand Watie, are there any potential points of agreement between you two? First, SW seems to go to great lengths to disprove the assertion that Lee owned slaves.

I don't care who owned slaves and who didn't own slaves individually. I've never made claims of who owned slaves and who didn't own slaves individually, North or South. You can't judge the group by just looking at an individual just the same as you can't judge an individual by just looking at the actions of a group. The fact is that the Southern states plainly said they seceded because of the perceived hostility of Lincoln to slavery as stated in most if not all of their Declarations of Secession. The abolitionists hailed mainly in the North with the Radical Republicans being the main agent of change in this nation's stance on slavery. That's all that matters to me. These two facts make me glad that the North won the Civil War not to mention the extreme importance of preserving the union.

This implies acceptance of the proposition that slavery was wrong.

A person's knowledge of right versus wrong is worthless if that person isn't willing to admit facts to assess who is right and who is wrong.

I think that we can all agree on that. I also believe that we can agree that Grant did own at least one slave in Missouri whom Grant manumitted before he emigrated to Illinois.

I don't care if he did or not. Grant fought for duty and preservation of the union, as Lincoln said.

His wife maintained a few slaves, and at least one until December 1862.

I don't care who owned slaves and who didn't. The fact is the South seceded to preserve slavery as stated in most if not all of their Declarations ofd Secession.

In Julia Grant's Memoires, Mrs. Grant says that her slave girl ran away from her near Cincinnati around Christmas, 1862.

I don't care who owned slaves and who didn't. The fact is the South seceded to preserve slavery as stated in most if not all of their Declarations ofd Secession.

In a footnote to that work, John Y. Simon states that it is at least possible that the Dent/Grant slaves were emancipated by the XIII Amendment, although he cannot tell for sure.

I don't care. The fact is the South seceded to preserve slavery as stated in most if not all of their Declarations of Secession.

As for REL, I e-mailed Emory Thomas, University of Georgia and author of a sympathetic but not idolatrous Lee biography. He says that Lee owned slaves (left to him by his mother) at least as late as 1846 (REL, pg, 72) or 1852 (REL, pg. 173). On his emancipation of all his slaves in January, 1863, Lee hired two of his servants (Perry and George) and paid them $8.20 a month. (Lee in a letter to his wife, 8 FEB 63).

I don't care who owned slaves and who didn't. The fact is the South seceded to preserve slavery as stated in most if not all of their Declarations ofd Secession.

Hope this helps dampen the acrimony. Respectfully, D J White

Not a chance. LOL Men who are so hateful that they dig 140 years into the past, and then live in the past, to hate a group of people in the present are never going to be the type that you can lessen the acrimony with. Thanks for trying anyway, even with your bias. :^)

No offense, but nowhere on any thread have I ever argued about, or given a hoot about, who owned slaves and who didn't individually. We went to war as two groups The Northern group sought to preserve the union and then abolish slavery as a fringe benefit of war. The Southern group sought to dissolve America to preserve slavery as cleary stated in most if not all of their Declarations of Secession. The circumstances of individuals, who were products of their times, doesn't matter to me. Most Northern soldiers didn't fight to abolish slavery individually, most Southern soldiers didn't fight to preserve slavery individually. To assess right versus wrong between two groups, you have to look at the actions of the groups not the circumstances of individuals.

299 posted on 12/23/2001 1:55:06 PM PST by #3Fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 298 | View Replies]

To: #3Fan
both are scalawags AND come dixie liberty, they will NOT have a fun time here-neither will TRAITOR/WITCH jane fonda.
300 posted on 12/26/2001 6:44:02 AM PST by stand watie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 297 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 201-250251-300301-350351 next last

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