Posts by Rebelo3

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • Vanity - Civil War Paper

    12/25/2002 8:41:54 PM PST · 12 of 19
    Rebelo3 to Gorjus
    You're right, it was about economics. That's the position taken by Charles Adams in "When in the course of Human Events". A goggle search should turn up something about Adams' book. The record is clear that Lincoln was for gradual emancipation and shipping the freed slaves to colonies in the jungles of Central American or to Africa.
    In our schools, we have yankee propaganda misrepresented as history.
  • The Eleven Days of Christmas: Vindication! For Soldier Of Fortune, and Capt. Dana Drenkowski

    12/15/2002 9:06:17 PM PST · 8 of 9
    Rebelo3 to new cruelty
    Well, I salute the AF captain for taking a stand for the truth, but he should have known the basic rules of military careerism; go along and get along, tell 'em what they want to hear and kiss ass. Some West Point members of my CE officer basic class explained it all to me, a ROTCer. After a short time I realized that I could not prostitute my integrity, so I didn't "play the game". I spoke out and burned my bridges and finally resigned. Vietnam was a big mess and this story is just one of many. In the Fall of 1965, MACV J2 looked at population numbers and concluded that: "The enemy will be able to replace his losses and continue a high level of guerilla and terrorist activities indefinitely". In other words, we could not win a war of attrition, Westmoreland's body count strategy. Later I read that the CIA had reached the same conclusion in 1964. We could still be over there running up body counts and winning battles but that would not win the war. All we were doing was keeping in power a corrupt unpopular Saigon government which was created by the CIA and fighting a war the Vietnamese would not fight..............and I'm still angry, and I blame the US Government and Military for all our KIAs, MIAs and WIAs.
  • Rerun of `Civil War' Renews Debate Among Historians

    09/18/2002 8:02:07 PM PDT · 30 of 41
    Rebelo3 to r9etb
    "Let's say that again: the South seceded to preserve slavery"

    Slavery was legal in the US until December, 1865 when the 13th Amendment was passed, more than six months after the war was over. Lincoln made it clear that he would not interfer with slavery. Burns doesn't talk about the five UNION SLAVE STATES; Missouri, Kentucky, Maryland, Delaware, and New Jersey, and they aren't mentioned in the EP. Ok, NJ had only a few older retired slaves. If the North fought the war to free the slaves, why didn't they free 'em in the North? Delaware had slavery til the end, even voted against the 13th Amendment, said it was a States' Rithts issue.
  • Remembrance of Veteran HARRY H. SPENCER 11-20-67 and other Viet Nam Veterans.

    09/05/2002 6:41:36 PM PDT · 15 of 15
    Rebelo3 to dcwusmc
    I understand, and I salute our warriors; but it was never our war to win or lose. We could still be over there winning battles and running up body counts, but the other side was not going to run out of bodies and they were not going to give up. That was MACVJ2's conclusion in the Fall of '65, and later I read the the CIA had reached the same conclusion a year earlier. I went on some search and destroy operations with ARVN and I saw why those operations were later called search and AVOID.
  • Remembrance of Veteran HARRY H. SPENCER 11-20-67 and other Viet Nam Veterans.

    09/02/2002 6:26:39 PM PDT · 10 of 15
    Rebelo3 to Liberty Tree Surgeon
    "This is just a rembrance of a soldier who gave his life so that we could all be free."

    And a remberance of all the American boys who were killed or maimed as a result of the US Government sending them half way around the world to defend a corrupt Saigon Government which was created by the CIA, and to fight a war the Vietnamese would not fight.

    I love my country but I have nothing but contempt for the US Government........The Government is NOT the country.

    MACVJ2/ARVN CMD G2 Advisor '65-'66

    I've been hearing this BS about fighting for OUR freedom for more than 35 years. Give me break!
  • REPARATIONS: ENDING THE GUILT TRIP

    08/22/2002 7:10:29 PM PDT · 19 of 21
    Rebelo3 to Illbay
    "But conspicuously absent from this list is the ORIGINATORS of the African slave trade: The Muslim Arabs."

    National Geographic had an article a few years back that said 80% of the slaves were prisoners captured in tribal wars. Criminals and the mentally impaired were also sold into slavery. It was the Black African tribal leaders who did the selling. The tribal war are still going on, but now they slaughter and maim their POWs.
  • See ya Barr (shoulda stayed in his old district)

    08/20/2002 7:25:51 PM PDT · 35 of 40
    Rebelo3 to Keith in Iowa
    Keith,

    Isn't Barr from Iowa?
  • SCANA update

    08/20/2002 7:12:32 PM PDT · 4 of 31
    Rebelo3 to southcarolina
    What's the source of your info?
  • Slave reparations not the answer

    08/20/2002 7:07:47 PM PDT · 53 of 70
    Rebelo3 to Non-Sequitur
    "You make it sound like a picnic."


    ??????? So what is it that you have a problem with?
    Sherman saw slavery first-hand while serving in South Carolina when he was a young soldier, and he said that the abolitionist view was "a delusion of the brain". The public's perception of slavery is based on that propaganda and various works of fiction including "Roots". I just think that we should try to see it as truthfully as possible; and we should judge those people in the context of the times. I find it sad that so many Americans' world view and understanding of history is based on propaganda sound bites.

  • Slave reparations not the answer

    08/20/2002 5:34:31 PM PDT · 47 of 70
    Rebelo3 to poppytpee
    "Please pay reparations only if one were born in 1863 and was a slave".

    1863? Slavery was legal until Dec, 1865, more than six months after the war was over. We don't hear a lot about the UNION SLAVE STATES. Delaware kept slavery to the end; even voted against the 13th Admedment; they said it was a states' rights issue.

    The demand for reparations is based on the belief that slave labor was free, but it was not. The planters owed the slaves "a living" from the cradle to the grave. In his Nobel Prize winning study of slavery, "Time on the Cross", Fogel reports that 90% of the value created by a slave was returned over a life time. That's why the planters were proud of their system. Everyone was proved for, the sick, the disabled and the aged. I hope the Congress does address this issue. Maybe we'll get some facts rather than propaganda.
  • Scana bans Confederate flag from company property

    08/15/2002 9:41:11 AM PDT · 33 of 67
    Rebelo3 to xrp
    " white people were held in slavery by Africans (Egyptians) and the opppression continues to hold me down today."

    Yes, the Egyptians were Africans, but the were NOT Negroes. I've pointed out that fact to some black teachers. Blacks, Negroes, Colored People or whatever are from Central Africa. Black people were NOT "creating civilization while white were hiding in caves in Europe"
  • The case against Jane Fonda, her actions during Vietnam War

    08/12/2002 9:14:51 PM PDT · 14 of 17
    Rebelo3 to PhilDragoo
    I'm not a fan of miss jane and her dirty dope smokin' buddies, but I too was against the war. I was at MACV Intelligence and was an advisor with ARVN, and I saw first-hand that we were supporting an unpopular, corrupt Saigon govenment which was created by the CIA; and we were fighting a war the Vietnamese would not fight. Sure we won all the battles, including Tet, and we could still be over there winning battles and running up bodies counts, but that would win the war. If the public had been told the truth during the early '60s, we would never have gotten envolved. I salute all the GIs who served, butI have nothing but contempt for the political and military leaders who sent us half way around the world to impose a govenment on the Vietnamese people.
  • Durham NAACP President Arrested at School Board Meeting (after white woman gets job)

    08/11/2002 2:40:08 PM PDT · 31 of 44
    Rebelo3 to mhking
    Mind you, if someone dares challenge their position on this kind of idiocy, they/we become nothing short of "Uncle Toms" who have "forgotten who we are."


    You're right. I've seen that happen so many times. Good Blacks speak up and they get shouted down by the Black bigots. The NAACP continues to expand the White backlash which they created. Without their attacks on the Confederate Flag, there would be no Southern Movement. ..........HEY!, I hope they keep it up 'cause we're gettin' organized
    DEO VINDICE!
  • Facts and Myths - an examination of McPherson's "Causes of the Civil War" essay

    08/09/2002 7:55:37 PM PDT · 76 of 543
    Rebelo3 to Frumious Bandersnatch
    "According to Article I of the constitution, the feds are required to put down rebellions"

    There was no rebellion. The Southern States seceded from the Union, and Lincoln had no authority to rule that they could not. Slavery was safe in the Union as evidenced by the fact that there were UNION SLAVE STATES, including Delaware which kept slavery to the end. They voted against the 13th Admenment, saying that slavery was a States' Rights issue.
  • Facts and Myths - an examination of McPherson's "Causes of the Civil War" essay

    08/09/2002 11:36:02 AM PDT · 39 of 543
    Rebelo3 to marron
    Concerns about slavery was a cause for SECCESSION, but Linclon's unlawful effort to hold property which was clearly the Southern States share of the federal pie, and his unlawful, unconstitutional, and immoral invasion of the Southern States to "save the union", mostly for economic reasons, was the cause of THE WAR.
    But simple minds want simple answers so we get "the war was about freeing the slaves" BS.
    DEO VINDICE!
  • White-on-Black Attack Transforms Soft-on-Crime Libs Into Law-and-Order Types! (Ithaca Barf Alert)

    07/19/2002 11:11:56 AM PDT · 27 of 38
    Rebelo3 to Taxman
    << I am white. I was born (1941) and raised in the South. "American by birth, Southern by the Grace of God!" >>

    Them people up there in Yankeeland sure seem to have a lot race problems. The left coast is the same way. Hope they learn how to get along like we did.
  • Book Seeks Answers to 1967 Israeli Attack On U.S. Spy Ship

    07/16/2002 10:53:44 AM PDT · 62 of 84
    Rebelo3 to rmlew
    Well, I've read a lot of conflicting material and it's difficult to know what the truth is. I read Bamford's book to learn about the Gulf of Tonkin incident. He presented what I consider the government's cover story. I read a report on the incident at MACV-J2 in the Fall of '65. It was short and simple. For background; the USS Maddox was collecting signal intelligence along the coast of North Vietnam at the same time the CIA was conducting secret raids on cosatal targets. In his book, McNamara says there was no connection between the raids and the Maddox. HAH! There's no way the CIA would opperate without NSA support. The intell folks on the Maddox intercepted a msg from three NVN PT boats which was interpreted as "prepare for attack", or something like that. The PT boats headed for the Maddox, and when they within range, the Maddox opened fire and called in navy air. Someone at a higher level read the msg and said it meant to be prepard in case of attack. Maybe it something like battle stations or general quarters. It appears that they were simply investigating the Maddox. And of course as we all know, the second attack which was the basis of the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution which got us into the war, never happened. At that point in the war, it hard to believe that the North Vietnamese would attack US ships. My point here is that we are lied to so much it's hard to know what to believe. The philosophy at work is the idea that truth is subjective, it's all in your head. The late CIA Director William Colby put it this way: "...truth is in the mind of the beholder; If you affect what he thinks, that's the truth." So, "they" fill our head with false perceptions, and thus we live in a fog of lies.
  • Book Seeks Answers to 1967 Israeli Attack On U.S. Spy Ship

    07/15/2002 3:29:33 PM PDT · 27 of 84
    Rebelo3 to gdani
    The Liberty attack is addressed in Chapter Seven of James Bamford's book about the NSA: "Body of Secrets". He says the attack was deliberate and he says the motive was to stop the Liberty from interceping commo about: "...near the mineret at El Arish, Isreali forces were engaged in a criminal slaughter....Egyptian casualties there(in the Sinai)ranged from 7,000 to 10,000 compared with 275 (Israeli)troops....Few were spared as the Iraelis pushed forward." And:"As the Liberty sat within eyeshot of El Arish, evesdropping on the surrounding communications, Israeli soldiers turned the town into a slaughterhouse, systematically butchering their prisoners". And there's more along the same line. I'm not lookin' for a fight, I'm just relating what Bamford says. The Isrealis, along with a lot of help from LBJ and the US government, did a good job of PRin' the incident.
  • NAACP Takes On New Confederate Flag Battle

    07/14/2002 10:12:27 AM PDT · 40 of 44
    Rebelo3 to pittsburgh gop guy
    So the war was about slavery? So why didn't Lincoln free the slaves in the UNION SLAVE STATES at the beginning of the war? And why did he appeal to the South to return to "the Union as it was ", with slavery? Alexander Stephens wanted to stay in the Union because he knew that slavery was safe with Lincoln. Lincoln was for gradual emancipation and deporting Black to colonies in the jungles of South America. Your "sound bite" view of history is consistent with the public's "sound bite" view of the world today.
    DEO VINDICE!!!!and HURRAH FOR DIXIE!!!
  • NAACP Takes On New Confederate Flag Battle

    07/13/2002 9:39:07 PM PDT · 37 of 44
    Rebelo3 to pittsburgh gop guy
    Geez, are you saying that the Confederate Flag is the same as the Nazi Flag?........ Are you aware that there were Union slave states: Missouri, Kentucky, Marylang, Delaware and New Jersey? This whole county has been brainwashed by Yankee lies........HURRAH FOR DIXIE!!!
  • Confederate flag waves on license plates

    07/13/2002 9:03:22 PM PDT · 17 of 25
    Rebelo3 to snopercod
    9th Ga Inf Regt, 50th Ga Inf Regt and 7th Ga Cav Regt
  • Confederate flag issue sparks controversy

    07/13/2002 8:27:46 PM PDT · 51 of 51
    Rebelo3 to morjon
    thanks for the comments.
    For me this like fishin' with a trot line; you bait your hook and throw it in. Later you come back and see if you got a bite. Like to see what anti-South bigots have to say.
  • Group protests flag's return on Miss. beach

    07/12/2002 7:19:43 PM PDT · 7 of 18
    Rebelo3 to Rebelo3
    Uh......that's SOUTHERN MOVEMENT.
  • Group protests flag's return on Miss. beach

    07/12/2002 7:17:53 PM PDT · 6 of 18
    Rebelo3 to stainlessbanner
    Well, I want to thank those 20 people and all the other NAACP members for taking a stand against the Rebel Flag.....................without those dumbies there be no South Movement, and Southern folks would not be motivated to learn our Southern Heritage, and the TRUTH about the First War for Southern Independence. THE SOUTH IS RISING AGAIN!!!! HURRAH FOR DIXIE!!
  • Confederate flag issue sparks controversy

    07/10/2002 7:49:30 PM PDT · 42 of 51
    Rebelo3 to morjon
    "Because as a rule anyone that engages in such behavior usually just wants attention. Like you do. But it is your right to seek that attention."

    well...........golly.....I was hoping for a thoughtful response. I respect your right to make smart replies.
  • Confederate flag issue sparks controversy

    07/10/2002 7:43:44 PM PDT · 41 of 51
    Rebelo3 to WhiskeyPapa
    "Not many decades. The slave trade was outlawed in this country in 1808." Yes, in this country, but they continued the slave trade with South America.

    "The reason the slave holders decided to bolt was because of changing attitudes in the United States towards slavery."

    Read "Forced into Glory." by LaRone Bennett?, the editor of Ebony Magazine,
  • Lincoln on the Fourth of July, 1861 [Answer to Lincoln Bashers]

    07/08/2002 8:20:53 PM PDT · 54 of 74
    Rebelo3 to WhiskeyPapa
    "So slavery was good, not evil?" Well, Sherman didn't think it was as evil as the abolitionists said. He wrote: "As far as I can judge, niggers feel very lighty indeed the chains of their bondage we read of....I know that the idea of oppression and tyranny that some people consider the necessary accompaniment of slavery is a delusion of their own brain." For a better understanding of slavery, I suggest that you read Fogel's Nobel Prize winning study of slavery:"Time on the Cross." He says that 90% of the value created by a slave was returned over a life time. So slave labor was not free and it was not cheap. The planters were proud of their system because everyone was provided a living from the cradle to the grave. Anyway, the point of my post was that we should not accept propaganda as truth. And as I noted, I saw first-hand how US propaganda was in conflict with the truth in Vietnam. Over the years I've come to see that we live in propaganda and advertisment induced fog of lies. Like JC said, "Seek the truth."
  • Confederate flag issue sparks controversy

    07/08/2002 7:28:17 PM PDT · 31 of 51
    Rebelo3 to morjon
    So you're offended by the Reb flag. Why? The US flag flew over slave ships for decades. There were Union slave states; Missouri, Kentucky, Maryland, Delaware and New Jersey. The slaves in NJ were older "retirees". Those states were not mentioned in the EP. Slavery was legal in the US until December,1865, more than six months after the war was over. The US military was legally racially segregated until 1948. The US Flag has a much longer association with slavery and racism than the CS Flag. Maybe "Old Glory" is next on the NAACP's list.
  • Virginia Group Says Applications Up Since Confederate Plates Allowed

    07/08/2002 6:16:42 PM PDT · 22 of 28
    Rebelo3 to grlfrnd
    You can learn about Jewish Confedrates at this site:

    http://www.Jewish-history.com/civilwar.htm
  • Rebels, They were Not!

    07/08/2002 5:56:44 PM PDT · 8 of 9
    Rebelo3 to TexConfederate1861
    I'm with you Tex.....HURRAH FOR DIXIE!!!!
  • Lincoln on the Fourth of July, 1861 [Answer to Lincoln Bashers]

    07/07/2002 6:27:55 PM PDT · 45 of 74
    Rebelo3 to agrandis
    Thanks for your post 39, I needed that. A lot of folks here just don't understand. Sure the deep south states were concerned about their constitutional right to deal with slavery, and exercised their right to secede. But Lincoln, without any authority, called for 75,000 troops to invade the South, and that when the other states seceded. There is no evidence that Lincoln invaded the South to free the slaves. He didn't even free 'em in the Union slave states. He wanted to ship all the blacks to colonies in the jungles of Central America. The yankee use the slavery issue to justify what they did. Well, as Chump Sherman said , their views are "a delusion of the brain."
    As for the hippies, they helped keep the war goning because most people felt that if a bunch of dirty dope smokin' hippies are against the war, that's reason enough to be for it. Also, it was revealed in the early '70's that the CIA had run an unlawful operation against the anti-war movement, and I suspect that some of the "hippies" may have been government provocateurs.
  • Lincoln on the Fourth of July, 1861 [Answer to Lincoln Bashers]

    07/06/2002 8:30:02 PM PDT · 21 of 74
    Rebelo3 to mdittmar
    Well, I'm gonna jump into some deep water here. What we're dealing with is that unanswered question in the Bible: What is Truth? Much of what we believe is based on lies and propaganda. The infamous Chump Sherman served in South Carolina when he was a young soldier. At that time the Northern papers were filled with hateful attacks on the South and slavery. Chump read those papers and wrote that their view of slavery was "a delusion of the brain." Most of what is believed about the South and slavery is based on those "delusions of the brain". But our relativist friends would argue that perception is truth, it's all subjective, like morality, it's whatever you want to believe. The late CIA Director William Colby put it this way"...truth is in the mind of the beholder, if you affect what he believes, that's the truth." That is the philosophy of the government. the establishment, PC folks.......well, and others. But is truth a subjective perception that exist only in our minds, or is truth something that exist in objective reality out there in front of our faces? If we all just believe that the world is flat, would that make it flat? I believe that we should try to insure that our perceptions in our heads reflect what's out there in God's time-space creation. In Vietnam, I saw the conflict between propaganda induced percepitions about our defending freedom, etc, and the harsh objective reality that we were supporting a corrupt Saigon government which little popular support, a government created by the CIA; and we were fighting a war the Vietnamese would not fight. I came away with a clear understanding that our government is not our country. I believe in the Constitution, and I love my country, but since 1966, I haven't had any respect for the US Government. So, with all that said, I can not understand how anyone can read what Lincoln said and did, and believe that he was acting in accordance with the Constitution, the rule of law and the ideals on which this country was founded.
  • Lincoln on the Fourth of July, 1861 [Answer to Lincoln Bashers]

    07/06/2002 7:31:56 PM PDT · 16 of 74
    Rebelo3 to mdittmar
    Lincoln took an oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution; yet he threw the Constitution and the rule of law out the window and took powers delegated to the courts and to congress. He had no authority to rule that the South had no right to secede. Lincoln pulled off a coup and established the American Empire. So might makes right when it comes to "saving the Union"? HAH! That's like a man saving his marriage by beating his wife into submission. Well at least this guy didn't give us the old line that Lincoln invaded and subjugated to South in order to free the slaves. BTW, there were Union slave states, Missouri, Kentucky, Maryland, Delaware and New Jersey. NJ had a few older "retired" slaves. Slavery was legal in the US until Dec, 1865 when the 13th Amendment was passed; and the US military was legally racially segregated until 1948. But all we hear about is the racist South. A lot of Southerners, and a lot of other people in the world, are fed up with self-righteous, meddling, know-it-all Yankees and their policies based on the principle that "might makes right"...........durn, now I gotta go take a blood pressure pill.
  • H.L. Mencken on Abraham Lincoln

    06/21/2002 12:56:29 PM PDT · 99 of 201
    Rebelo3 to TheDon
    You said that Lincoln didn't free the slaves in the Union slave states because they would have joined the Confederates. Delaware and New Jersey were Union slave states and I don't think there's any evidence that they threatened to leave the Union. Ok, so NJ had only a few "retired" slaves, but slavery is slavery. Also, the EP excluded the slaves in areas of Southern states which were under Union control. Is it your position that Lincoln invaded the South in order to free the slaves? If so, show us some evidence. Of course Lincoln had no authority to free any slaves, just as he had no authority to rule that the South did not have a right to secede. Slavery was legal in the US until Dec, 1865; and the United States Military was legally racially segregated until 1948.
  • H.L. Mencken on Abraham Lincoln

    06/20/2002 8:58:49 PM PDT · 36 of 201
    Rebelo3 to TheDon
    <> Geez Don, Delaware and New Jersey join the Confederacy?