 |
| Posted: Wed Apr 29th, 2009 03:40 pm |
|
81st Post |
ole
Member
|
-The VA in a reversal of previous policy now states that small confederate type flags cannot be placed in front of confederate graves in national cemeteries. Even for a few hours on Memorial day
That sucks. Can you expand on that? This is the first time I've heard of it.
-The Auburn incident of the destruction of private property at a cemetery.
That one I've heard of. Endlessly. And he sucks too.
-The hue and cry about the CBF being displayed over I65 south of MOntgomery and in Florida...even tho it is displayed on Private property.
It's north of Montgomery and it is magnificent.
-The practice of the NPS of granting hate groups such as the KKK the right to hold demonstrations on NPS property (Antietam Battlefield) on the basis of first ammendment rights, while the VA denies the SCV the right to fly a battleflag as part of a colorguard during the dedication of a monument to confederate POW's who died during captivity at a National Cemetery.
This one can also use some expansion. First time I've heard of it.
And countless other acts to change street names, school names etc because they are named after men like Lee, Davis, Forrest, Jackson and other Confederate figures.
PC BS by people with teeny minds.
Just some thoughts.
Ole
Last edited on Wed Apr 29th, 2009 03:42 pm by ole
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 29th, 2009 03:43 pm |
|
82nd Post |
susansweet3
Member
|
Bama and Ole , I agree all of these things are not good. I have ancestors on both sides and honor them both.
Seems we are really wandering on this topic. I had to look back and see what the orginal post was . Oh well .
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 29th, 2009 04:29 pm |
|
83rd Post |
borderuffian
Member
|
susansweet3 wrote: This is false.
There were many free blacks in the Confederate army. Even slaves had ample opportunity to exercise their "political loyalty" by simply walking away from camp or while on the march.
Source?
"...free blacks in the Confederate army..."
-National Archives Compiled Service Records
"Even slaves had ample opportunity to exercise their "political loyalty" by simply walking away from camp or while on the march."
-Confederate pension applications where they show servants (slaves) with the army for several years to the end of the war.
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 29th, 2009 05:40 pm |
|
84th Post |
| Posted: Wed Apr 29th, 2009 05:42 pm |
|
85th Post |
19bama46
Member
|
susansweet3 wrote: Bama and Ole , I agree all of these things are not good. I have ancestors on both sides and honor them both.
Seems we are really wandering on this topic. I had to look back and see what the orginal post was . Oh well .
M'lady Moderator,
Can I respond to the ole man here or should I go elsewhere?
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 29th, 2009 07:41 pm |
|
86th Post |
Proud Pa
Member
|
Johan Steele wrote:
Just 2 pence from a man who is quite jaded over the "Black Confederate soldier" issue... who still cannot understrand how someone can honestly believe anyone was ever willing to fight to keep themselve in bondage.
Did blacks fight for the Americans in the ARW? They probably fought for the Confederacy for the same reasons. By the same token, many fled the South for the same reasons they fled to the British.
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 29th, 2009 08:03 pm |
|
87th Post |
| Posted: Wed Apr 29th, 2009 08:09 pm |
|
88th Post |
ole
Member
|
Did blacks fight for the Americans in the ARW? They probably fought for the Confederacy for the same reasons. By the same token, many fled the South for the same reasons they fled to the British.
Of course there were some. To say there were none is foolish. To use those that did to prove that slavery was benevolent and flowery and lovely is equally foolish.
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 29th, 2009 08:24 pm |
|
89th Post |
19bama46
Member
|
ole wrote: Ummmmmm, bama; that's ol' man.
Ole
You sure?
Ya mean like ol' Ole tha' ol' man?
Or should it be Ole, tha'ol' man?
this is quite confusing....
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 29th, 2009 10:18 pm |
|
90th Post |
susansweet3
Member
|
You two crack me up. I think that is why I always enjoy reading what you write .
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 29th, 2009 10:20 pm |
|
91st Post |
Proud Pa
Member
|
ole wrote: Did blacks fight for the Americans in the ARW? They probably fought for the Confederacy for the same reasons. By the same token, many fled the South for the same reasons they fled to the British.
Of course there were some. To say there were none is foolish. To use those that did to prove that slavery was benevolent and flowery and lovely is equally foolish.
I agree entirely, but I think that idealizing the North and demonizing the South is equally as foolish. The fact that some blacks did fight for the South, how many I don't suppose we'll ever know, does well to show how incredibly diverse the reasons that men went to war were.
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 29th, 2009 10:35 pm |
|
92nd Post |
borderuffian
Member
|
Here is a pension application of a black Confederate (a servant). He was with the army from February 1862 to April 1865. Attachment: SCpension.jpg (Downloaded 49 times)
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 29th, 2009 10:53 pm |
|
93rd Post |
| Posted: Wed Apr 29th, 2009 11:01 pm |
|
94th Post |
ole
Member
|
Bama. And you know this. Ole is a name, ol' is an adjective. Yeah. It's kind of fun to play with it, but my handle is Ole. That's "olee" for those who know no Norwegians. For those who do know one or two, you do know that a big axe is involved. No prisoners.
Ole
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 29th, 2009 11:22 pm |
|
95th Post |
ole
Member
|
agree entirely, but I think that idealizing the North and demonizing the South is equally as foolish. The fact that some blacks did fight for the South, how many I don't suppose we'll ever know, does well to show how incredibly diverse the reasons that men went to war were.
Subscribe to your POV. It is quite stupid to claim this or that just based on "me too." But it is also quite wrong to claim that a slave or two who "volunteered" prove that they loved their massa so much, that they gave it over,
But let's talk about that black guy with a musket. Why is he there? Is he there because massa is there? Is he there because he feels his home is in danger? Gimme a reason. Just one. If you have two, chuff them out.
Backing off. Just one question: why is he there?
Ole
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 29th, 2009 11:35 pm |
|
96th Post |
| Posted: Wed Apr 29th, 2009 11:45 pm |
|
97th Post |
19bama46
Member
|
ole wrote: Bama. And you know this. Ole is a name, ol' is an adjective. Yeah. It's kind of fun to play with it, but my handle is Ole. That's "olee" for those who know no Norwegians. For those who do know one or two, you do know that a big axe is involved. No prisoners.
Ole
jus twistin your tail 'ol Ole
isn't there a big blue ox in that tale somewhere?
Yea i know...they call me Mr Ed...
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 30th, 2009 12:22 am |
|
98th Post |
Proud Pa
Member
|
ole wrote: agree entirely, but I think that idealizing the North and demonizing the South is equally as foolish. The fact that some blacks did fight for the South, how many I don't suppose we'll ever know, does well to show how incredibly diverse the reasons that men went to war were.
Subscribe to your POV. It is quite stupid to claim this or that just based on "me too." But it is also quite wrong to claim that a slave or two who "volunteered" prove that they loved their massa so much, that they gave it over,
But let's talk about that black guy with a musket. Why is he there? Is he there because massa is there? Is he there because he feels his home is in danger? Gimme a reason. Just one. If you have two, chuff them out.
Backing off. Just one question: why is he there?
Ole
Like their white counterparts, freed men may have been protecting their homes or "property rights" (there were black slave owners). A number of slaves were undoubtedly forced to serve while others may have fought because their master promised them their freedom in exchange for service. My guess is there were probably even a few who fought because of their bond with their master, though if there was it was likely a small minority perhaps at best only comparable to women who fought in the war.
Last edited on Thu Apr 30th, 2009 12:25 am by Proud Pa
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 30th, 2009 04:04 am |
|
99th Post |
javal1
Grumpy Geezer
|
If all we can do is call each other "clowns" or their views"stupid", then it's time to let this thread die.
|
|
Back To Top
|
ole
Member
|
My guess is there were probably even a few who fought because of their bond with their master, though if there was it was likely a small minority perhaps at best only comparable to women who fought in the war.
Agreed. There were some. And you might agree that it does get a bit tiresome when the black confederate is trotted out as an example? Now I expect we'd better shut up before Javal tears out the remaining hairs.
How about them Cubs, ProudPa?
Ole
|
|
Back To Top
|
Current time is 11:49 am | Page:   1 2 3 4 5 6   |
|
|
|
