Suspect accused of vandalizing Confederate flag in Mizzou dorm

STL Today ^ | 11/21/2001 11:19 AM | ap

[shuckmaster]

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.

[stand watie]

thanks. you're good for something after all.

for dixie,sw

[Non-Sequitur]

It's called 'presenting evidence', AKA 'documenting your claims'. You should try it some time.

[stand watie]

i HAVE on many occasions. every time i have done so, even when directly quoting OFFICIAL damnyankee records,i was critized for being either wrong or lying. in one case, i was told by a forum member that the OR was a racist/ southren-biased source!

i no longer bother, unless i happen to have the document in front of me, as to paraphrase an old saying, there is no one blinder than a damnyankee who refuses to see the truth.

for dixie,sw

[Non-Sequitur]

I'm still waiting for the evidence I asked for in Reply 50. Start with that.

[stand watie]

that i may actually have at home- it was included in a lecture by a AU professor who spoke to the DC Civil War Roundtable-i usually keep the proceedings for a while.

the professor actually named the slaves, read a critical letter from a congresscritter about grant still being a slaveowner (he was NOT alone!)AND grant's response, that he had no intention of freeing HIS slaves, no matter what others did.

for dixie,sw

[Non-Sequitur]

Ah yes, the ever popular 'heard it somewhere at some time or other' source for evidence. You use that a lot.

[WhiskeyPapa]

the professor actually named the slaves, read a critical letter from a congresscritter about grant still being a slaveowner (he was NOT alone!)AND grant's response, that he had no intention of freeing HIS slaves, no matter what others did.

No the prof didn't name the slaves because none of this is even within shouting distance of being a true story.

Look, you may be all alone in a really strange place, or not get out much, or very elderly, or whatever, but it hardly excuses your fantasy based rant.

Give me the name of this congress person and even a first name of the slave and I will find the letter through Google.com in ten seconds.

Otherwise, let it go.

Walt

[stand watie]

BOTH of you damnyankee apologists are going to look REALLY IGNORANT/DUMB when i find and post the source (& i will, as i've got the proceedings of the CTW somewhere in this house.). AND both of you will come up with some LAME/IGNORANT/SILLY excuse why the source can't be believed.

both you you seem to believe that the damnyankees were pure as the driven snow, despite HUGE evidence to the contrary. imVho, NOTHING will make you believe otherwise.

BTW walt, why don't you get off the net, figure out that PhD level research cannot be done on GOOGLE or anywhere else except in a LIBRARY, and do REAL research! like all too any of my former students, you are seeming academically lazy and want to take shortcuts to obtain "knowledge", when ORIGIONAL sources require digging deep into "dusty tomes". all the secondary sources, archived on the world wide wierd are NOTHING compared with real research; also endless posting of drivel and long passages of damnyankee wartime propaganda is NOT research.

for TRUTH & dixie,sw

[WhiskeyPapa]

BTW walt, why don't you get off the net, figure out that PhD level research cannot be done on GOOGLE or anywhere else except in a LIBRARY, and do REAL research!

If a letter existed that said U.S. Grant held slaves in 1866, it would be all over the place; it would be a big story.

It obviously didn''t make much of an impression on you since you cannot recall any of the players.

In fact, you are either deluded or deliberately misrepresenting these events--you know, lying.

Walt

[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?

[Non-Sequitur]

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.

[Non-Sequitur]

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.

[stand watie]

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

[WhiskeyPapa]

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

[Non-Sequitur]

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.

[stand watie]

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.

[stand watie]

Missouri.

[WhiskeyPapa]

Missouri.

Show me.

Walt

[Non-Sequitur]

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.

[aimlow]

Hey, I thought this was about some butt head tearing up someones personal property?