No Vern...just better than you.

WisconsinDad-2479817

Untutored genius...the most dangerous kind

Never let schooling stand in the way of a good education.

Civil war, such as you have just passed through naturally engenders feelings of animosity, hatred, and revenge. It is our duty to divest ourselves of all such feelings; and as far as it is in our power to do so, to cultivate friendly feelings towards those with whom we have so long contended, and heretofore so widely, but honestly, differed. Neighborhood feuds, personal animosities, and private differences should be blotted out; and, when you return home, a manly, straightforward course of conduct will secure the respect of your enemies. Whatever your responsibilities may be to Government, to society, or to individuals meet them like men.

The attempt made to establish a separate and independent Confederation has failed; but the consciousness of having done your duty faithfully, and to the end, will, in some measure, repay for the hardships you have undergone. In bidding you farewell, rest assured that you carry with you my best wishes for your future welfare and happiness. Without, in any way, referring to the merits of the Cause in which we have been engaged, your courage and determination, as exhibited on many hard-fought fields, has elicited the respect and admiration of friend and foe. And I now cheerfully and gratefully acknowledge my indebtedness to the officers and men of my command whose zeal, fidelity and unflinching bravery have been the great source of my past success in arms.

I have never, on the field of battle, sent you where I was unwilling to go myself; nor would I now advise you to a course which I felt myself unwilling to pursue. You have been good soldiers, you can be good citizens. Obey the laws, preserve your honor, and the Government to which you have surrendered can afford to be, and will be, magnanimous.

—N.B. Forrest, Lieut.-General
Headquarters, Forrest's Cavalry Corps
Gainesville, Alabama
May 9, 1865

Please expound on your baseless claim that this great general was a Treasonous criminal.....

Dave; You are incorrect. Lincoln was a racist who believe that white and black folk could not live together, refered to blacks as ni&%ers, and wanted to end slavery because it was a sin on the white mans soul, not because it harmed blacks. it was his official policy to send all blacks to Africa and that is how Liberia was founded. He would never be a democrat because he believed in God, self reliance, and would probably want to start a war to end abortion because he would believe it a sin before his Christian God.

In Kansas City there is a statue of John Brown on public land. if a statue to this murderous traitor and terrorist can be on public land, I do not see the problem with one to a murderous traitor and terrorist from the other side.

Forrest's speech during a meeting of the "Jubilee of Pole Bearers" is a story that needs to be told. Gen. Forrest was the first white man to be invited by this group which was a forerunner of today's Civil Right's group. A reporter of the Memphis Avalanche newspaper was sent to cover the event that included a Southern barbeque supper.

Miss Lou Lewis, daughter of a Pole Bearer member, was introduced to Forrest and she presented the former general a bouquet of flowers as a token of reconciliation, peace and good will. On July 5, 1875, Nathan Bedford Forrest delivered this speech:

"Ladies and Gentlemen, I accept the flowers as a memento of reconciliation between the white and colored races of the Southern states. I accept it more particularly as it comes from a colored lady, for if there is any one on God's earth who loves the ladies I believe it is myself. (Immense applause and laughter.) I came here with the jeers of some white people, who think that I am doing wrong. I believe I can exert some influence, and do much to assist the people in strengthening fraternal relations, and shall do all in my power to elevate every man, to depress none.

I want to elevate you to take positions in law offices, in stores, on farms, and wherever you are capable of going. I have not said anything about politics today. I don't propose to say anything about politics. You have a right to elect whom you please; vote for the man you think best, and I think, when that is done, you and I are freemen. Do as you consider right and honest in electing men for office. I did not come here to make you a long speech, although invited to do so by you. I am not much of a speaker, and my business prevented me from preparing myself. I came to meet you as friends, and welcome you to the white people. I want you to come nearer to us. When I can serve you I will do so. We have but one flag, one country; let us stand together. We may differ in color, but not in sentiment. Many things have been said about me which are wrong, and which white and black persons here, who stood by me through the war, can contradict. Go to work, be industrious, live honestly and act truly, and when you are oppressed I'll come to your relief. I thank you, ladies and gentlemen, for this opportunity you have afforded me to be with you, and to assure you that I am with you in heart and in hand."

Nathan Bedford Forrest again thanked Miss Lewis for the bouquet and then gave her a kiss on the cheek. Such a kiss was unheard of in the society of those days, in 1875, but it showed a token of respect and friendship between the general and the black community and did much to promote harmony among the citizens of Memphis.

Why would anyone oppose a simple statue in Honor of this great man??

If Abraham Lincoln had not been assassinated by John Wilkes Booth. And had Andrew Johnson not, as Vice President, become President of the United States, it is very likely that there would never have been a Ku Klux Klan in our country's history books.

It was Lincoln that put forth an intelligent and consistent message, that it would be better to not punish the South, but to leave it's people, pride, and economy intact. Johnson took an opposite, and Draconian, view. His will won over Lincoln's, of course. Lincoln died.

It was Johnson's post-war politics, and wholesale destruction of the Southern States, that led the men of the South to take up arms against their oppressors. The seeds of hate that Johnson sowed, still produce fruit, even today. Although todays KKK would be unrecognizable to the Post-War Southerner.

If only history had taken a different turn. If Lincoln hadn't been assassinated. What would be the world today? That's a good question. A question that, most unfortunately, we'll be left to ponder for many generations into the future.

To many Southerners, the old KKK's of the immediate post-war were heros. And let's leave that in the past, where it belongs.

Another reminder of the great 'heritage" of the South. Treason and human slavery. Whatever compassion that General Forrest may have had was vastly overpowered by his contemporaries. Jim Crow laws, poll taxes. lynchings and the murderous ways of the KKK were the handmaidens of reconstruction. The General failed, unfortunately in spreading his idea of reconciliation.

"Why would anyone oppose a simple statue in Honor of this great man??"

That is why kkk members wore white hoods to cover their faces. The kkk members even knew back then that there would be a public whiplash if their true identity were exposed. If the kkk were so proud, they wouldn't need any mask.

Wet Willy

This is a bust honoring a Confederate General, nothing more. The controverter is being generated by the left wing nut job ideologues simply because they think they can get some political mileage from it. This is why they claim that he ordered some 250 of the enemy were killed "in cold blood" even though there is no proof of that. But they will continue with the accusation because if fits better with their corrupt ideology.

You are right , back them KKK did not exist, there where thousans of deads in both sides, Black and Whites.

Well, how patriotic is it to honor a treasonous criminal?

Yakees kill Black Southern soldiers, rape southern woman's , lure their towns, destroy and burn many Confederates Cities. It was a terrible war and we have heroes in both sides.

"The man always led from the front. He did what he said he was going to do. He took care of his people, and his people included both races." Then the big BUT... “No one has ever proven conclusively that Forrest himself ordered it, BUT 'at the very least' this was the sort of thing he was letting his men do,” Pitcavage said.

Pitcavage is with the Anti-Defamation League. His job is to 'shovel dirt' all day long.

And what another perfect story for a news media that scours the country for what will feed a ready and eager response of indignance, insult, emotional injury and the big bad buzz word - racism. What doesn't irk some Americans these days? Not a thing. Everything is a trigger. Here, let the media hold that for you. They'll show you how to set that trigger. And if anything happens, like it goes off - they'll deny even being in the country at the time. Who? What? When? Where? How? "We just report the news"...and other spinning tales.

Indulge me - Where ARE the successive stories of white on white crimes, mexican on mexican, jew on jew, black on black, war time or otherwise? They're simply not divisive enough to make the news. But it's campaign time so everyone, just keep shooting.

Clarence24

@Odins Law:

All secessionist southerners were treasonous criminals to the the United States of America. This guy was a murderous treasonous criminal.

I was waiting for thepunisher-205479 to explain himself but he chose to take the ignorant route..As for you, whats your reasoning behind the fact that the Confederate President Jefferson Davis was found not guilty of Treason and Freed on May 13, 1867.. His release hinged on the fact that the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court found nothing in the Constitution that prohibited the Seccesion of states..Seccession was not Illegal, so neither Davis or any other Confederate leaders could be found guilt of Treason..States were soveriegn entities governed by themselves..The South voluntarily left the Union because the Union wasn't acting in their best interest. Since the south voluntarily left the union with no intention of war and no intent to interfere with the Northern government, the charge of Treason is completely unfounded. So before you make baseless claims or accusations, i suggest you relearn your History...

alim,

These stories you mentioned are part of the ones that the liberal media will not mention. My nephew was murdered on his front porch as two hooded, black robbers came at him from the darkness and demanded they be let in to his apartment where his young wife and week old son were. He was shot in the back and died as the young wife and mother watched. He lived and died one city block away from the University in Baton Rouge, but the story would never be read here.

He was a true hero in that he gave his life protecting his family, but because the murderers were black , it could not be a hate crime and you will NEVER see any black folks breaking any laws here lately as reported on this news venue.

If people want to get upset by Civil War atrocities, then simply look at Grant and Sherman, the two most powerful Union Generals that freely used Brutality to South into submission. Sherman was no fan of Blacks and once made the Statement that "Nits make Lice". He said this as he burnt the bridge to stop the Slaves that were following his army as they burned, raped, murdered and pillaged their way through Georgia towards South Carolina. The reason he burnt the bridge was to separate himself from the hundreds of slaves that followed him through Georgia as he burnt the homes of Whites.

Idiots make issues of the things like a small monument of a great General, when never bothering to actually learn any knowledge of what they speak of.

Congress investigated Forrest after the war and he was exonerated of any wrong doing at Ft. Pillow or any place else. You liberals begin slobbering and salivating at the mention of anything you have no knowledge of.

Once again this news venue is creating a sensational story to further divide the people and create a division between the races, much like the Trayvon Martin shooting. The only reason we are not seeing daily headlines about that story is that the evidence is proving him innocent as many of us realized in the beginning even as Al and Jessie and Barry were wanting riots in the streets.

Yes he created the KKK as a guerrliia war machine that its purpose was to combat the further aggression of the successors to Lincoln who were rabid haters of the South, Andrew Johnson, the VP was one. He was later Impeached as president after Lincoln was killed by a Democrat.

He later disbanded it and stepped down as its head as it began to change from a military organization to a Race hate organization.

General Forrest was arguably the greatest General of the War rivaling the Army of Virginia under Lee, and Jackson. But he was not a West Pointer and this starting as a "Civil" war, he was not recognized as a gentleman soldier. The North would never had won by the quality of its soldiers or generals until Grant can to power. He lost on average 20,000 men a day during the lsat monts of the war where the souty barely had that numbers in its ranks. Grant kept throwing the soldiers into the grinder until there were no more resources in the South in men or food to feed them. He and Sherman adopted the living off the land so the extended supply line was no longer an issue, but the civilians they were killing for their food rarely lived to complain to anyone.

This history is the truth but since the victors write the history, it is hard to find. I have read hundreds of books on history as a whole, but the history of our nation is dear to me and I take exception to people trying to rewrite it to suit the sniveling lagarts that persecuted a whole half of our people.

Should any of you want a history lesson on slavery, just ask and you will get a quick lesson.

Lazarus

When will Mexico be made to apologize for the AMERICAN IMMIGRANTS that Mexican soldiers murdered at the Alamo and Goliad in Texas of 1836?

alim - there are PLENTY of stories in the news DAILY about crimes committed by and to all races. You must not get out much. Or do only certain crimes 'count'?

Because you say so? Confederate leaders were not 'traitors'. You use erroneous language to promote erroneous beliefs. You can say whatever it is you want to say, but it doesn't make it true because you say it. There really are many truths regarding the Civil War based on factual information. It's up to you to determine whether you will do the work to know them or not. Your comment is erroneous. Piss and moan or leave it alone, it changes nothing. You're making a statement that is factually wrong and has no merit.

The American Immigrants at the Alamo, were living in the Mexican State of Tejas, and they had promised to become Mexican citizens and to obey the laws of Mexico, their adopted country.

Mexican Law prohibited the ownership of human beings, but the American settler/immigrants had disregarded the laws of their adopted nation,Mexico, and they brought in Black Slaves, and they created a rebellion against the legal Mexican authority.....therefore, the rebellious Americans were dishonest traitors, subject to arrest and imprisonment. Had they surrendered peacefully, they would have been jailed for a while, their slaves would have been granted freedom, and the traitorous Americans would most likely have been escorted back into the USA, after 4 or 5 years.

The Current State of Texass refuses to teach this unsavory truth to school children. There was also a virulent anti-Catholicism amongst the immigrant Americans, towards the Catholic Nation of Mexico. The contemporary education system in Texas is dishonest.

Andi - On MSNBC First Read?

lil L'EMP,

You calling the confederate leaders TRAITOR just shows your general lack of any knowledge of American history altogether. We were born in Revolution and the fact the FREE States choose to leave the Union was their Constitutional right as they saw it. General Lee was married to a granddaughter of George Washington. His Father was "Light horse Harry Lee who commanded the Cavalry of the Revolutionary Army. Read a book or ten and learn what we have lost as to the quality of the testosterone levels in our male future generations of which I am sure you are a fine example.

Lazarus

A monument like this is not something I'd want in my town or my state. And I can't claim to understand people who want today homage to a guy like this. But like it or not, art (and that's what a bust is classified as) is a form of speech. So if paid for with private funds, and on private land, it's a protected by our right of free speech. That's the sticky part about our freedoms - they don't apply only if you agree with how they're exercised.

Wish they'd take it down but think Selma is stuck with it. Kind of have to wonder though about the motivation of folks who would erect, in Selma Alabama, a memorial to a guy who lived and died in Tennessee. I'd be passing around a petition to remove them instead.

Lizzie and Liam,

You two are without a doubt have proven that it is not a prerequisite for stupidity to exist without the presence of Ignarance. Ignorance is the lack of information and knowledge, but stupidity is the deliberate refussal to accept knowledge.

General Forrest was the best all around General in the Civil War for either side. He was embodied with all of the qualities of a great General including personal courage and self sacrifice. The men who served under him were said to wear the affiliation to his ranks as a form of pride until the day they died. Any ignorant fools who would make such remarks are totally without any knowledge whatsoever.

The lady from Boston, did you know that Slavery was an institution that had been in existence since before Biblical Times. Who do you think built the great pyramids? The European Triangle Trade brought Slavery to the Americas and I am sure that Some Bostonians kept black slaves prior to the war.

Liam, you use the term Traitor very freely, but I see certain politicians today that would also fit that delineation. He was a soldier who fought in WAR. We are a nation of traitors to England called Patriots of American Freedom. We are a bunch of Revolutionaries that decided to live by our own free will. The slave trade was numbered in days in the south as a matter of political profit. In another 10 years prior to the war, the slavery would have gone away as a matter of Economic necessity in America. Have you ever heard of Liberia? Or the Industrial Age?

I wonder if you have ever served our country with your blood and breath? I doubt it very much.

Respectfully,

Lazarus

OdinsLaw and Larry - You both are way too intelligent for this thread. Kudos.

Let's just make sure that we all understand the standards of acceptable statues. Statues of a military leader are not acceptable if they have ever had an association with an organization of questionable intent. However statues of musicians who advocate killing "da man" are acceptable.

Many people are ignorant to three separate and distinct organizations - the first of which (Forrest led) was based on political motivations. The third is the organization that is focused on racial repression. But since people on NBCSnooze sites are too ignorant and lazy to understand the motivations of the media will accept the "news" as incontrovertible.

Let's not honour anyone who ever wore a white hood but by all means honour those who wear black hoodies.

Lazarus,
Since I made no claims about Forrest, I can only assume your beef with me is about any references to slavery that you believe I made. As an avid student of history, I'm well aware that slavery existed well before biblical times. And I am positive that some bostonians had slaves - not all northerners were "yankee abolitionists". But my questions would be, so what? Does longevity make it right? Does that mean that people who traffic in slaves today (yes, there are such people) are not criminals simply because slavery has a long history? And lastly, what the heck is the point you were trying to make by chastising me for a supposed ignorance of the history of slavery? Whether or not slavery has a long history is not an excuse for massacring surrendering soldiers or for trying to subvert laws via the KKK in the post-war period. Forrest, IMO, is an example of someone who could not accept that the south lost and slavery was abolished. Military genius does not negate his post-war behavior.

As far as whether slavery would have ended without the war, your belief that it would have gone away within ten years prior to the war is your assertion, not fact. There are some historians that agree with you, and there are others that believe it would have continued for decades, perhaps even unti the early 1900s. The fact that ending slavery in the south did not happen without a war indicates how vehemently southerners felt about it, considering that the practice ended peacefully in the north and in other countries in western civilization. So maybe those who think it would have continued well past the 1870s are correct.

Re my military service - women were not drafted during the Vietnam era which is when I would have been of military age. And unless one was a nurse or medical personnel, we weren't encouraged to enlist, either. But my brother recently retired as a Lt. Co!onel in the Army, and is also a civil war buff. His opinion of Forrest is that he was strategically strong but sucked as a true leader, particularly given the massacre at Ft. Pillow. Though southerners believed that there was no surrender by Union troops - as promoted by,southern media -- letters home by southern soldiers flatly contradict that belief and many talk about the slaughter of surrendering African American troops. Gen. Grant also indicates that Forrest left the massacre out of his official report. IMO, condoning, and perhaps even encouraging, massacre is not a leadership quality, no matter how many of an officer's like-minded men would follow him to hell and gone. I think Joshua Chamberlain is a better example of someone who, like Forrest, was not of a military background but rose to become a true military leader during the civil war.

So that's my response to your slap on the wrist. Oh, one last thing - although not always in combination, your comment shows me that stupidity is often accompanied by arrogance. And closing your comment with "Respectfully" when the tone is clearly otherwise is an indication.

Liz (aka the lady from Boston)

Nothing quite like the KKK to get the southern conservatives all warm, fuzzy and proud of their lowlife, disgusting heritage.

I would like to point out something that A LOT of people up here have forgotten, President Lincoln took away freedom of the press during the Civil War.

Also there was a very low percentage of people in the South that owned slaves and even free blacks in the South were known to own slaves all you have to do is look for this information outside of a history book. Remember, History is written by the vitors.

larry: You two are without a doubt have proven that it is not a prerequisite for stupidity to exist without the presence of Ignarance. (and) ...stupidity is the deliberate refussal to accept knowledge.

Hey larry. Nothing makes me laugh harder and louder, than seeing you call someone else "stupid" -- when you can't even spell IGNORANCE or REFUSAL properly. As well, your grammar is way off: You two are without a doubt have proven that it is not a prerequisite...

You wear your own "stupid" label proudly.

larry: the lady from Boston, did you know that Slavery was an institution that had been in existence since before Biblical Times.

Oh, well then...THAT excuses it! It's been around a while!! That makes it OK!! (eye roll....)

ckbry: I would like to point out something that A LOT of people up here have forgotten, President Lincoln took away freedom of the press during the Civil War. Also there was a very low percentage of people in the South that owned slaves and even free blacks in the South were known to own slaves all you have to do is look for this information outside of a history book. Remember, History is written by the vitors.

Some of you will talk out your Butt-end all night, to try and justify that lowlife, embarrassing heritage of the South. Good luck!

Why not try and tell everyone that Lincoln used to torture small animals... or, that the KKK was actually how the United Way got started...try to make the Klan into heroes (they are for most of the south already anyway...)

Frogmorton,

So you are saying that Lincoln didn't take away the freedom of the press?

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/302992-1

Learn some history please and educate yourself!

Your constitutional rights of speech shall remain unobstructed until you offend a gay or black person. That's what the constitution says right? Or is that just an obscure ideal that lots of people have adopted?

Somebody in this thread accused Lincoln of both being a Christian and a hate-filled racist.

Neither of those things are remotely true.

Lincoln didn't believe in Christ. He said so repeatedly in many private letters, and according to his friends, privately directly to those he trusted.

Any careful study of Lincoln's life will show that he was a believer in human equality and knew that if he openly said it, he'd lose all hope of winning presidential election.

He wasn't above lying to the constituents when he needed to, but when he did so, his motives were as honorable and noble as one could hope for.

He did invoke "god" when speaking publicly, but that was to add emotional weight to his messages in order to bring people around to doing the right thing even if for the wrong reasons.

He wasn't a perfect man, but in my opinion, he was one of the most noble and capable presidents in American history.

When will Mexico be made to apologize for the AMERICAN IMMIGRANTS that Mexican soldiers murdered at the Alamo and Goliad in Texas of 1836?...

Texans, weren't Americans. Texas was a country before it became a state. People purposely moved to Texas to get away from American law. They knew it was a distant, part of Mexico-but hoped to find a way to develop it into a self-sustain nation.

When the inevitable came - Mexico sent Santa Ana to bring Texas firmly back under control of Mexico city, the Americans depended on the US army to come to the rescue. The 1st illegals to cross the border into Texas (and California) were White Americans, the land was already settled under Mexican Laws when Lewis and Clark were inventorying our Western holdings - that was repeated in California and most of the other states which were formed after the Gadsden Purchase.

Mexico was too weak to manage or support those distant areas, so schemes, thoughts of Independence was easy to cultivate.

He would never be a democrat because he believed in God, self reliance, and would probably want to start a war to end abortion because he would believe it a sin before his Christian God.

Yeah, Milgram's- because Lincoln really didn't think much of black people, he probably would be a Republican if he were alive today.

Yankees (note not all Northerners) are still just as arrogant as they have always been. True bigotry against backs is and always has been stronger in the North. Someone said slavery ended peacefully up in Yankeeland. What a crock of... Free blacks were treated like garbage by Yankees before, during and after the War Between the States. In some Yankee cities, there remained for many years city ordinances which barred colored folk from even being in the town after sundown on the risk of being whipped in the town square if caught. Yeah... sounds peaceful enough to me.

Who were the traitors? Well, that would be Lincoln and his gang of Yankee thugs. U.S. Grant's strategy was to keep throwing dying Yankee bodies at the South until we ran out of resources. On the field... you Yankees got your hats handed to you more often than not. Your generals were the criminals. Your President was the greatest traitor to ever breathe. Yankee aggression did not free a single slave. Yankee aggression made slaves of ALL of us. Congratulations on your fine victory. I hope all of your children are born naked!

So some believe that it is OK to destroy a Statue of someone because they do not believe in the ideology he projected. So I guess it is OK for those who do not believe in Martin Luther King's ideology to spay paint his Memorial Statue. This is America -- we are entitled to different opinions !!

So some believe that it is OK to destroy a Statue of someone because they do not believe in the ideology he projected. So I guess it is OK for those who do not believe in Martin Luther King's ideology to spay paint his Memorial Statue. This is America -- we are entitled to different opinions !!

Was I dreaming... I thought I saw our military pulling down statues of Saddam Hussin on the evening news? Blowing up some of his Palaces, taking souvenirs and sending home trinket "rescued" from banks, museums and homes.

Some Officers were videoed - acting like LA looters, the rush to get a few of the finer things. You can tell when soldiers are out of control- they have lost all respect for discipline and no officers are stepping in to regain control.

No the Iraqis pulled down the statue. And who cares. This the US. You are coming forth with the usual Liberal argument that two wrongs make a right and, as bad as it is, it's not even applicable here

82AllAmericans Comment collapsed by the community

"7-foot-tall granite monument"... nothing that 10... 15lbs of dynamite can't fix...

#1.16 - Wed Aug 22, 2012 3:51 PM CDT

OK... This comment I made was "Collapsed by the community" seriously! Now, I make a comment about about dynamiting a statue dedicated to one this countries earliest and most notorious racists, it gets shut down, but there are actually posts that support and uphold what he did as "protecting their way of life", and other such BS...

If MSNBC is actually reading this, PLEASE, LET THE COMMUNITY COLLAPSE THIS TOO. So much for freedom of speech.

So I guess it is OK for those who do not believe in Martin Luther King's ideology to spay paint his Memorial Statue. This is America -- we are entitled to different opinions !!

... yet you see some equivalency between this Confederate Officer and Dr. Martin Luther King? So, in your world - MY logic is flawed? One commited to killing, in defence of slavery and breaking the covenant of soldiers surrendering in war time - the other, a recipient of Nobel peace Prize?

The film I saw was of a chain attached to back of a M1A1/2, Abrams, Main Battle Tank, pulling down a statue of Saddam. However - I'm fair enough to accept, in your defense -that it might not have been posted on FOX as they also neglected to post videos of the few of our troops who either participate in or stood by and allowed the looting to progress.

The leadership didn't account for what our troops would do, if/when lawlessness occured, once there was a power vacuum.

These are not Liberal observations - these are things which all military commanders prepare for when the shooting stops. Once you break something, especially a Country, then you are responsible for it until you fix it.

No the Iraqis pulled down the statue. And who cares. This the US. You are coming forth with the usual Liberal argument that two wrongs make a right and, as bad as it is, it's not even applicable here

You have a right to an opinion - but lets not discount the facts to support a negligent, fundamentally flawed stance.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/01/10/110110fa_fact_maass

Why would we glorify racism and hatred? Why would we build a monument to it?

Keep in mind folks, any one of you could be on the receiving end of such hatred at any time.

Then how would you feel about glorifying that type of behavior?

If anyone wants to learn some interesting history Google the 1850 & 1860 census it's online. I learned a few things I didn't know, that there were over 20,000 freemen in the south that owned slaves as well as Cherokee indians that owned slaves in GA. The actual percentage of southeners who owned slaves was 5.8%. The percentage of black people in the U.S. was higher back then 18%, I think it's around 13% now. There wwere a lot fewer people back then only around 28 mil. in 1850 & around 32 mil in 1860.

alim-2810059: Because you say so? Confederate leaders were not 'traitors'. You use erroneous language to promote erroneous beliefs

Wow -- if you had a soul, you'd actually sell it to continue defending this crap. The KKK is actually a VALUE in the South. You people really are wretched.

Frogmorton,

I am gladened when ignorant replies always grab for typing errors and Grammar in lieu of thoughtful discussion.

Lizzy from boston,

I was very glat to read your thoughtful response. I had no beef with you per se, The obvious problem is a difference of opinion. You being from Boston cannot but feel threatened by a lowly southern Historian since anyone from Boston is superior to everyone else. I had the same problem in college where my History professor was from Boston. He was so intimidated by me that he completely skipped the Civil War. You see, since I am passionate about my country and its history, I read many books to this day. It is a passion that has possessed me for over thirty years. By reading varying versions of the same history it is natural since people have the propensity to differ in reasoning abilities and backgrounds.

With all due respect your brother, if he feels Forrest was a poor leader, he is an Idiot and should reasearch farther than the highschool history book.You seem a bit indignant for me to imply that Bostonians kept slaves. The truth hurts sometimes.

Good luck and God Bless as you continue to carry that heavy burden of superiority around.

Lazarus

82ndalamerican

Read a book or ten and then decide what to blow up.

Lazarus,
First you call me out, then you say you have no beef with me. So, which is it? One generally does not call out someone by name and deliver verbal slaps when one has no issue with the person. Even a lowly southern historian can't have it both ways. BTW, the "lowly southern historian" bit was such a cute touch - I love people who use self-denigration to tone down their true self-opinion. But at least you admit that people from Boston are superior. However, we don't share either viewpoint - your opinion of yourself or that people from Boston are superior.

You've also managed to mischaracterize a few other things. You didn't imply that people in Boston kept slaves -- you made the statement flat out. I agreed with you. Why would I be indignant about something that is historical fact? As I said, not all northerners were Yankee abolitionists. To pretend otherwise is ignorant at best. And because I also read quite a lot, I am not ignorant of our country's history and the history of my little corner of it. Yet you chose to characterize my being positive that some Bostonians had slaves as my being indignant. Is it so hard for you to believe that someone from the north can be honest about the history of this region? Evidently it is. It's also obvious that your own little biases are coloring your other opinions - not a good trait in an historian. Your words and tone make it clear that you are not interested in discussion or exploring differing points of view with interest and openness. So I'm not going to waste my time. And it doesn't bother me at all that, given the sort of person you seem to be, you will view that as a capitulation and you'll feel like you've won. Go ahead, gloat away - another person from Boston who was so intimidated by you, they caved. Yeah for you!

Except for one thing - you can say what you want about me. But don't, not even by one syllable, slam my brother. "With all due respect," my a$$. Your snide, falsely self-denigrating little self isn't worthy of cleaning the combat boots he wore for 2 tours in Iraq. My brother has proven to better men than you that he is no idiot. If he was, the Army wouldn't have selected him for advanced education in strategy and tactics where, I'm quite sure, they used more than the high school history books. So don't mischaracterize what he said. Military genius in strategy is not the same as leadership, and thinking someone was not a true leader is not the same as thinking they were a poor leader. True leadership is comprised of many individual qualities, not the least of which is the ability to do the right thing even if unpopular. It is easier to lead men when they share your beliefs as Forrest's men did. It would have been harder for him to have them do the right thing against their misguided beliefs. For example, if he had stopped the massacre of surrendering African American and white Union soldiers and was able to make his men understand and accept that, as tempting as it was, it was wrong as a soldier and as a human being to massacre troops that are surrendering, that would have been true leadership. So, "with all due respect," you can take your snarky little comments about my brother - a man who under enemy fire won the respect of his troops and his superior officers, and who is probably smarter than you on your best day -- and stick em sideways where the sun don't shine.

I would follow your example and close with a something gracious, but I really have a hard time making myself do that phony act of being oh so civilized and respectful while snickering up my sleeve -- you know, the act you have raised to an art form, the one where you talk about "thoughtful discussion" while characterizing anyone who disagrees with you as an idiot. Yes, truth does hurt sometime, but I suspect you are very well armored against the pain.

I agree, I don't think we should celebrate racists, but it is on private property, a cemetery sounds like. If idiots want to waste their money and time to honor such a worthless person that's their right.

Maybe if the bust of another traitor to the US were to be put along side? Benedict Arnold would be fitting perhaps.

It is very hypocritical of all of you who say this monument is wrong,basing your opinion on the fact that he was a raciest and he ordered the killing of black Union soldiers. If he indeed did do that, then is was a very evil man, if he didn't order it than he is wrongly accused. So where does the hypocritical part come into play? I bet all of you think the statues of Abraham Lincoln and General Sherman, both which stand on government land today, is perfectly fine don't you? Well here is some facts on both of them, Abraham Lincoln gave Sherman the permission to march through the south , Killing, Raping and burning everything in his path,95% of which was purely Civilians and their homes and crops. He also gave Sherman permission to burn Atlanta to the ground, AFTER THEY SURRENDERED, afterward tens of thousands of civilians died from the elements. I guess he wasn't a raciestthough since almost all of the people who were raped and killed were poor white southerners,many who had nothing to do with the war and some who had family members fighting for the Union. I love the way history paints the pictures of the past always to portray the winners of wars as the good guys and the losers as villain's

Beth - agreed, peaceful public protest is a great place to start.

these people want the world to know what a great man this racist was...i think everyone else should get to let the world know it's undeniably not true.

Just a guess, but they're probably devout Christians too. Its a symbol of ignorance that they erected and not a symbol of respect that they think it is because no one with any decency will miss the hatred and racism it represents.

joe-904290: Is anyone on this blog supporting any of that kind of behavior or making statements that it was a good thing? That's not what this article was about but you seem to want to change the argument that somehow justifies another wrong. No war is ever right. EVER. But a portion of the USA decided that it was worth fighting to keep other humans as slaves.

If Sherman's army raped, rest assured (per Akin of Missouri) no woman ever became pregnant.

Joe's right. Sherman's strategy of raping and murdering as many southern civilians as his army could find was authorized by Lincoln. Sherman's march left the entire region, which was already beaten, starving and without shelter for women and children, many of them black. It was pure evil and savagery, followed by even further evil and savagery of Reconstruction, which also stripped voting rights from southerners and took from them what little had been left after the war. Hypocrisy still abounds as to that military campaign. And it is why there will always be a deep resentment in the south of the north, much more so than racism - as most blacks now live in the south.

What exactly does it Symbolize?....It Symbolizes Perhaps the most highly regarded cavalry and partisan leader in the war. The man is regarded by many military historians as that conflict's most innovative and successful general. His tactics of mobile warfare are still studied by modern soldiers. As for the baseless claims of an alleged massacre of unarmed black Union Troops, the accusation was rejected by an 1871 Congressional investigation. The same Congressional investigation concluded that Forrest did not found the Klan, was not its leader, did not participate in its activities and worked to have it disbanded.

If people would read up on what actually took place on "Shermans March to the Sea" he would not be held in such high reverence as he is today. In letters and diaries of union soldiers told of actual accounts ( though the soldiers were told not to keep accounts or tell of accounts in letters) of pillaging, burning of homes leaving women and children with no food or shelter, though never "proven" some accounts of rape and killing of women and old men, and yes the total burning of Atlanta after their surrender leaving Blacks and Whites homeless.

Well happytimesarehearagain, technically Arnold wasn't a traitor to the US. He was a traitor to England. There was no US yet, and he was an English citizen. And again, technically, all southerners that fought against the USofA, were traitors. It was illegal to bear arms against your own country.

Beth - Perhaps Congress can enact another 1800 page law. They love the high paid job security that comes from all that control stuff. But failing that, yes, of course you can protest someone elses right to think independent of you.

Arnold, in the early stages of the Revolutionary war was a hero with the Armies fighting for Independence. George Washington stated that if he could he would give Arnold's leg a hero's burial (where he was wounded) and the rest of him disposed of as a traitor.

Few things ...

@ Joe. If you were addressing me, where did you see I, in any way, approved of Sherman's March?

@ Oden. It symbolizes the KKK. While I agree about the man's military brilliance, unfortunately it was overshadowed by the KKK.

@ Alim. I really see no point in your comment. Of course I have the right to protest what I view as wrong.

In my opinion Lincoln was the war criminal as he vowed to preserve the union even though the southern states had the right to secede from the union.

The only person executed for war crimes after the civil war was Captain Henry Wirz the commander of Ft. Sumter POW camp near Andersonville GA it's still there today, now it is a museum & national cemetery still in use today.

stc1993: In my opinion Lincoln was the war criminal

Wow. great opinion. LOL!! Next time, we'll ask you for your opinion. Don't hold your breath...

Don't write like you don't know the answer. This war destroyed our country just like the GOP is trying to do now. Our country is falling apart over these silly issues. We have become a disgrace to the world fighting over abortion, gays and religion .

He was a DEMOCRAT, Linda.

Linda is a clueless sheep. The GOP is trying to destroy the country? And the dems are doing what???? making it better? Please put the pipe down, sunshine. Maybe if you were not a party hack you woudl realize that both parties are the problem.

Vern, another dumb statement that ignores history and facts. The Democrats of 70 or 100 years ago have nothing to do with the Democrats of today.

Good point Timothy:)

And Timothy I would like for you to meet my wife my wife my wife and my other wife.

Timothy, you forgot Young was also a murderer, and for that matter, a back stabber. He ordered the massacre of a hundred and forty something innocent settlers, and had the children of those victim,s GIVEN to Mormon families in the Salt Lake area to raise as their own!!!! When the US government finally came down on him, he signed a deal with our government stopping all legal action against him and the actual murderers, by turning over his #2 man as a sacrificial lamb for trial. The result of which was his execution, and the freedom of the truly guilty. Way to save your worthless hide Brigham!!!!!!!!!!!!

All heroes to today's big Republican Hero: Mittens and his Magic Underwear

Actually, have a read about a fellow named Custer and a place called Little Big Horn....

Then you know that Custer was an idiot.

Operation Market Garden in WWII.

Vietnam.

Jim:

Actually, I would recommend going to Little Big Horn National Monument in Montana. I went several years back and it was well worth it. The stories are not told from the US (Custer's) standpoint but that of descendants of the Native American tribes who resisted Custer's invasion (and attempted slaughter of what he thought were unarmed women and children - real "hero" we learned about in school, huh?)

The Jews: Masada, the Holocaust.

Remember the Alamo?

""Other than the descendants of the Confederates, how many groups of people can you think of who are proud of a humiliating defeat, and go out of their way to preserve its memory? ""

Vietnam, USS Arizona in Pearl Harbor, 9/11 memorial...

you are a moron

"how many groups of people can you think of who are proud of a humiliating defeat, and go out of their way to preserve its memory?"

Uh.....Christians, with their crosses.

The Jews aren't proud of the Holocaust. Masada, maybe.

The Alamo? Tough call, but Texas is no longer part of Mexico, so remembering the Alamo isn't really a case of basking in the glow of defeat.

Vietnam? Yes, I'm always looking for good "Happy Vietnam War Day" cards. Best celebration of the year.

USS Arizona? We won that war. It was in all the papers.

9/11 Memorial? Again, not a cause for celebration.

Custer? I can't decide whether he got what was coming to him because he was an idiot, or whether he got what was coming to him because he was carrying out a genocidal war. He's certainly not celebrated as some sort of great national hero, in any event.

You're all missing the point. The unreconstructed Confederates are proud of their generals. They celebrate treason. They think sedition was the high water mark of Southern culture, and they want to do it again.

A somber memorial is a very different thing from a monument that glorifies someone like Forrest.

Uh.....Christians, with their crosses.

Way off the mark. Without the crucifixion, there would be no Christianity. To the true believers, the crucifixion was a great victory - Jesus died for our sins, and then was resurrected. Yes, I know it's all nonsense, but that's the way they look at it. And ultimately, they weren't subjugated - they've become one of the dominant cults on the planet.

9/11 was an attack, not a defeat. Vietnam is hardly celebrated in America, if anything I'd say it's one of the few instances of actual shame in our countries history. The memorials for both are to remember, not to venerate.As with the Holocaust, we generally reflect on how NOT to repeat the same mistakes and horrors.

Meanwhile you got guys in the South talking secession again....oy.

To the true believers, the crucifixion was a great victory - Jesus died for our sins...

Rubbish. One day, they want to say he was Murdered. Crucified. A victim of a brutal, torturous homicide.

The next day, they say he sacrificed himself.

jesus -- the only person whose death was a Murder and a Suicide at the same time.

christians will twist even LOGIC itself to try and make their cult seem reasonable. even though it's complete and utter nonsense.

If Non-believers are so adamant about their portrayal of Christ and Christianity is a fairy tale, why do they feel the need to bring it up in any topic of conversation?

Makes me wonder what they are afraid of.

I'm a Northerner whose family has fought in every war since the Revolution. I feel nothing but disgust over the KKK and it's place in our country's history, but this memorial does not commemorate Forests' role in the klan but as one of the greatest generals of a horrible war. If we judged every person by their bad as well as their good points there would be no memorials to anyone in this country, much less the world

It's on private land folks. If it bothers you, TOUGH. It's like the people who whine about families who decorate their homes for Christmas.

Janine: If Non-believers are so adamant about their portrayal of Christ and Christianity is a fairy tale, why do they feel the need to bring it up in any topic of conversation? Makes me wonder what they are afraid of.

The only thing I fear is the fact that christian cultists have such low self-esteem, and fading confidence in their cult beliefs, they need to spend every waking hour and every spare dollar trying to legislate their cult beliefs. Personal choices and religious freedom for EVERYONE isn't enough. They have to try and force their cult beleifs upon everyone else whenever and wherever possible.

And, hon...just an FYI. Nobody is adamant about their portrayal of christianity as a fairy tale. The fact is, it IS a fairy tale. It is an unprovable, mythical cult belief. The BuyBull is an unprovable, many-times-edited, mythical cult book. Nothing more. There isn't a shred of evidence to prove or suggest otherwise.

Cheers!

Hide it or remove it. I like that solution. Plus, by treating it like any other zoning issue the free speech issues are moot.

Coloradan: Forgot about the Sand Creek Massacre? Coloradans murdered old men, women and children while they slept. Glad to see you're proud of this act by commenting on anothers.

cunical - I must've missed the part where Coloradans built a monument to John Chivington

cunical, I guess I don't see the parallel. I was just trying to present an alternative that would respect the right of a private property owner to display something on his own property, no matter how despicable the item and/or the meaning behind it may be, but at the same time disallow it from being "in your face" to the hundreds or thousands who might (and certainly should be) offended by it. I thought it was kind of a win-win solution. As james suggested, the sign at the Sand Creek Massacre does not glorify the murders, nor does it pay any kind of homage to Chivington.

Why don't we let the followers of Charles Manson erect a monument to him next door to Sharon Tate's relatives? Or a monument to dylan and kleblod in front of Columbine High School? I am sure the families of the people Ted Bundy or Jeffery Dahmer killed would love a statue of either one of them in their front yard. We should erect a monument to every mass murderer, I mean we all remember the names of the killers but rarely remember the names of those who were killed so why not immortalize the killers in stone. Hell George Bush has his own library and a portrait in our White House and he murdered thousands of American Service men and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi women and children. We glorify death and destruction and reward greed and mass murder.

Yep, and these people are the ones complaining about the mexicans waving their flags, which by the way is also dumb.

Linda,

We have monuments for other wars we have lost as well i.e. the Vietnam War memorial, so you recommend we get rid of those monuments as well? Celebrating the lose of a war is not what is happening here. The folks down thee simply want to REMEMBER their heritage and past. The same could be said for the Memorial we have for the Holocaust and the memorial we have for the African American Slaves around this Country. As for celebrating the fact that a group tried to destroy the US the same could be said about our founding fathers who went up against the UK because they did not believe they were being treated fairly. NOT all of us are Christians so why do you think that particular religion is Superior to any of the other religions????? What nation can you think of that could be a world leader???? What Country has a leadership which promotes peace, respects women and are not racists?????

Linda-1902513

Why do these people want to celebrate a group that tried to destroy the United States of America?

To answer your question, that's what Republicans do; create hate and fear in order to divide and conquer. The GOP is far from what used to be called patriotic. The vast majority of Americans respect women and are not racist, unfortunately the Republican/Tea Party has become a safe haven for those that don't.

If you want to solve this problem vote for Democrats in November.

You mean vote for the same Democrats who were for Slavery? If the vast majority of Americans dont hate women then why are the democrats so scared to repeal affirmative action???????

"usa is great" - comparing the vietnam war to the civil war is a little funny. the north was rounding up southerners and putting them in concentration camps like in germany. the south declared war on the north. and 620,000 americans died at the hands of their fellow americans. that's why it's messed up. it's americans killing other americans, brother killing brother, cousin killing cousin, and the south is "proud" of that? that's something to be ashamed of, not honored.

USA is great forgets that the Southern Democrats of that era are the Republicans of today. They switched. Lincoln would be considered a liberal Democrat today. Hell, for that matter Reagen would be a liberal today.

ravi123 - We now have U.S. Grant on the fifty dollar bill. We have the Lincoln memorial and the Sherman tank.

I live in the Tennessee Valley area of Alabama. The home of the only regiment of Southerners in the Union Army. The part that asked both sides to respdect their neutralityl and came within one vote of seceding from the Union. Yet Sherman burned and Plllaged his way through here on his march to Atlanta. He was followed by a contingent of recently freed slaves, criminals and malcontents whom you would have us believe only had our best interests at heart.. Witnesses of the time clamed this part of the South was ravaged. Yet, all northerners are stil proud of that.

I've heard different stories about the KKK and what kind of people they are but I have never known a KKK member or seen a cross-burning though I was born and raised in Alabama and I am now 63 years old. The real hypocrisy is that most of us did not agree with the KKK but we always get lumped together by ignorant democrat hypocrites like the below.

HotViagraGuy69

we ARE talking about alabama here folks. you know, the state where it hasn't reached the year 2012 yet. they're just a couple o' hundred years behind. that guy in the simpsons movie was right. all these people do is inbreed up to the 4th generation and then do the taking my thumb apart trick over and over again.

• 11

• !

#1 - Wed

"I've heard different stories about the KKK and what kind of people they are"

Well, duh, if you were white of course you would hear a different story. Now if you were black or a different color skin, I would bet my house that you would only hear the same story. But you are right, people are quick to put others in categories, it's what we here in the US do best.

Linda, you have to understand, the South really didn't lose the war. It was actually a moral victory for them. At least in the minds of people who have to celebrate the rebellion with annual reenactments of the battles that were won, and even a few that weren't. These are symbolic of far more than white power against all those who aren't white. They are symbols of the fight between local and centralized government that has been going on every since the Constitutional Convention.

Here's something to ponder, Linda:

If the control-freak, damnyankees had just let the Southern states leave the Union in peace-there would not have been a civil war.

U, if the Confederates hadn't fired on Fort Sumpter, there might not have been a Civil War. You bring up an interesting point, for certain, but the war WAS started by the Confederates, so it's somewhat moot.

@Rational,

Not really moot because the whole reason the Confederates fired on Fort Sumpter was because the control-freaks in the North would not allow the South to leave the Union.

I do believe there is a clause in the Constitution about it being our civic duty to leave the Union if the Union is wrong.

Excuse me while I look this up for ya.

Linda-1902513

Why do these people want to celebrate a group that tried to destroy the United States of America? Just something more to divide this nation and start violence.

Destroying this Great Nation is the main goal of the current pretender in chief. First Obamacare and now the Amensty for ILLEGAL ALIENS. Yes it is true that they must meet certain criteria, but that doesn't change the fact that they are here ILLEGALLY. I'm not saying either party is doing a great job right now, but fact is, the blame lies at the top.

We don't act like a Christian nation at all. This week we have definitely shown that we need to step down as a world leader. We don't honor peace, we don't respect women and we are racist.

I for one am not Christian or a racist. That being said, in this country, the same people crying race, religious persecution, rights abuse ARE the very people trying step on everyone else's rights and continueing the cycle of hate and racism because they think they are intitled in some way. FFS, slavery ended almost 200 years ago. Please show me ONE person still alive today, that was either owned, an owner or fought in the war. You can't cause they're all dead. Just as the argument of the story is.

Does the KKK of today promote equality? NO. But if you really look at it neither does the NAACP or the ACLU. Those groups can, right now today, give out a scholarship to someone based on race, ie you must be of African-American desent to be eligible, or you can have scholarships and/or healthcare that you are only eligible for if you have a certain percentage of Native heritage. You even see places of business that give preferential hiring to minorities. Now I don't see a single person complaining about these descrepencies and reverse racism. However, the second that ANYONE or any organization decided that they were going to give out a scholarship or job, and one of the requirements for it was you had to be white or a percentage of white, those same groups and businesses would be ther FIRST to cry foul. Where is the equality in that? How is that right?

The way this country is going right now, the divide will only continue to grow until EVERYONE leaves the BS of the past in the past. If you don't like a statue, don't visit it. If you don't like what a church teaches, don't go. If you don't like that the nation pledge has the word God in it, don't F@#$ing say it. However people need to stop trying to force thier views on the rest of us.

Rational Coloradan

If the Union had not placed troops in Fort Sumter to force the South Carolina farmers to pay the Tariff of 1832 or if the US government had evacuated them as order by the State of South Carolina then the troops would probably not have been fired on. Now it is back in your court.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tariff_of_1832

Ok, it's not in the Constitution it's in the Declaration of Independence.

(♪♫ and it goes like this: ♪♫)

"When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation."

Another interesting point:

Between the D of I & the Constitution was a little something called the Articles of Confederation.

Wouldn't that make all of us Confederates? Yes, until the Constitution came along.

Have a nice day! :-)

@HowStupidAreYou,

Excellent post, dawg! Excellent.

The Tarriff on exporting cotton, base of the south's economy was a major reason for the succession of the southern states.It crippled the economy of the south for the value of cotton as an export was higher than selling it to the textile industries of the North. Along with the southern states losing representation and Electoral Votes as the population of the North exploded because of immigration from Europe to a industrialized Economy whereas the Souths based on cotton/agriculture. There also was large differences in the ability and rights of individual States to self govern over the total governing of the Federal Government. The Southern States believed in States rights whereas Northern States pushed for Federal Control. Just prior to Civil war slavery was legal in Slave States. The issue of Slavery exploded when territories ie. Kansas, Missouri etc became states. The Federal Government at the time declared New States Free States Whereas the Southern States felt it was up to the individual States to Choose.

Rational,

The issue at Ft. Sumpter was actually instigated by Mr. Lincoln himself and set the Southern Democrats up with skillful political manupilating. He sent a supply ship to the Fort that started the shooting. Can you say how many deaths came from the shelling of the fort? I can and many here would be surprised with the answer. The reason the Fort was an issue is the continued resentment from South Carolina since the State tried to seceed from the Union way back in 1834(I believe). That is why the state is attributed to being the seat of rebellion and why Sherman burnt the city of Charleston.

Lazarus

DO WHAT

Secede....................what else? We are better equiped this time around................

gonna rise again! and get their butts kicked again!!

I guess to youkilling BLACKS and making him a hero is good OLD AMERICAN???

That remark could be said about ANY General in the Military both past and present. Just instead of blacks now we just like to kill all the brown middle east folks instead.

They should have let the South starve back then. The slaves would have escaped to the North - and not been returned as had been allowed. Would have left the planters with nothing, idiots. Although, in SC the poor whites could have returned - which the wealthy planters of the day did not want to deal with as workers.

usa is great,

I am not talking about any GENERAL just that one, you see being a retired soldier we do not kill unarmed men...

usa is great can't seem to get past the point of trying to defend a point of view about a nasty human being. you can't defend murder and hatred by pointing out all the other times its been done by others in the history of humanity. give it up.

Per Pitcavage

Men under his command killed “in cold blood” 250 black soldiers fighting for the Union who were captured at Fort Pillow in Tennessee. “No one has ever proven conclusively that Forrest himself ordered it, but at the very least this was the sort of thing he was letting his men do,” Pitcavage said. A federal congressional committee investigating the April 12, 1864, killings heard testimony that as many as 200 black soldiers were slain after they surrendered at Fort Pillow.

Now that is a lot like saying that because someone is black then we know he robbed that liquor store. You liberals would be having a @!$%# fit about a statement like that yet because it is politically correct you have no problem with someone making the same sort of statement about a Southerner.

Check out Pitcavage here: Click on Pitcavage

Rick - what exactly do you take exception to in that passage? How is that at all analogous to the example you provided? Was he not their General? Did this not happen on his watch?

clflan2-1

"Be proud lil' children cause the South's gonna do it again..........yes we will!"

What take dump? Yeah, I know it's a daily occurrence for you folks. or were you referring to some sick twisted pedophile event.

@ CLflan Funny how your group was kicked out of KCK before they even stepped foot in it.
If you think the KKK has any kind of smarts you wouldn't say that at all.

Just another stupid jackazz that don't think, just runs there mouths.

If any one was to rise again it would be one of the biggest under ground groups known NAZI party, but they are just about as stupid as the KKK is.

The hells angels stand a better chance at a take over than anyone of these groups. and that isn't going to happen ether.

The South is already rising again. The Mexicans want California and Texas back. And they grow in numbers. Good luck Johnny Reps... You gonna need it in times to come. WHAHAHAHAHA

Hey Dennis,

You mean to tell me that the History lessons I was taught in school were wrong? For Example I was taught that during the Vietnam war UNARMED women and children were KILLED because the Vietnamese used them to attack the soldiers and when that started to happen "we" US soldiers did in fact kill innocent folks. It happens with every Military "assistance" we partake in. You cannot make such a broad statement of "I am not talking about any GENERAL just that one, you see being a retired soldier we do not kill unarmed men..." NOT all members of the Military live by that code and that is what I was talking about. This General is NO different than any other General we have had in our Military and killing of innocent people will ALWAYS be a casualty to ANY war.

Dennis,

What century and diminsion did you serve in? Read a bible and see how many unarmed men, women and children were killed.

Lazarus

Well, he might have been gay, so yeah some people's butt might really be hurt.

Lost,

It is the curse of having uneducated people living in this nation that think they know what has really happened in history or worse still have created their own version to fit their backwoods understanding.

Probably.

Well, I'll bet a dollar this person would get an erection from a monument of hitler.

Crazy,

you do not get to be a Grand Wizard of the KKK by not subscribing and even approving of those set of ideals. The KKK is not like groups these days, they did not tolerate anyone that did not share their opinions and would never have allowed someone who did not share their vision into such a high seat of power with in such an organization.

There was no affirmative action, there were no participation trophies; you only got what you earned. He may not have been a true and blue KKK member but by accepting the position he was offered, if it was not posthumously, he made a statement that he had no problem with their mentality.

As the saying goes, all it takes for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing.

Geowil,

What about the politicians who were also a part of the KKK or their fathers who also were politicians were a part of the KKK? I guess those guys are ok because they got out of the KKK.

That's just crazyhorse talk.............................................The best geneal in the war.......never lost a battle..........If that was true, we would have 1 more country in North America. Besides what is "not as big a racist as you think" mean anyways? What he wasn't as fat as we thought? There's no level of racism. or is there? Would it be like, well I only hate blacks but love mexicans, then you're not as big of a racist......................ok.......I think somebody forgot to lock the front door to the crazy house.

It is the curse of having uneducated people living in this nation that think they know what has really happened in history or worse still have created their own version to fit their backwoods understanding.

#15.1

Geowil

Crazy,

you do not get to be a Grand Wizard of the KKK by not subscribing and even approving of those set of ideals. The KKK is not like groups these days, they did not tolerate anyone that did not share their opinions and would never have allowed someone who did not share their vision into such a high seat of power with in such an organization.

There was no affirmative action, there were no participation trophies; you only got what you earned. He may not have been a true and blue KKK member but by accepting the position he was offered, if it was not posthumously, he made a statement that he had no problem with their mentality.

As the saying goes, all it takes for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing.

#17.1

Alabama, where time does not matter........

Disgusting.

USA,

Anyone that was or still is affiliated with the KKK at one point entertained those view points. The KKK was such a niche group that you would only join them if you had similar ideals. On that front I do not care if they were Repub or Democrat, they cannot claim that they disposed of that extremist view so easily.

If they had relatives of parents in the KKK but were not in the KKK themselves then that is different, most of the time children do not accept the entirety of the morality of their parents once they can make their own decisions and form their own thoughts on the subject. In addition to that the kids are not responsible for the sins or goings on of their parents either. In fact each generation is openly more accepting than the previous one; it is a documented phenomena.

would you like a statue of the 11 terrorist of 9/11?

Gotta wonder how the Germans feel about having the concentration camps still standing as monuments to the terrible history in their country.

Don't try to hide it or change it, or you’ll only end up repeating it.

Mike Malcolm was not a staunch racist look it up

mike, you shouldn't worry about malcolm x street. you should worry why the south is always last in education and last in everything else when compared to other states in america. i wish southerners would say "let's work together and fix the south" instead of constantly thinkiing about the confederacy days of over 100 yrs ago

Ravi123. Why is it that blacks are still stuck 100 years ago, blaming the Confederacy on there misfortunes now. And why are they pulling the race card still? Im sorry but that stuff is way over used and played now. Everyone in America has the same rights minus Gays unfortantely . Stop trying to blame the past on your now misfortunes you are what you make yourself. There is no such thing as product of there environment, or that their being held down by the system. No Im sorry you are your own product that's that. If the environment made me what I am today then I would be poor, I would be into drugs etc... That stuff is just ridiculous.

"There is no such thing as product of there environment, or that their being held down by the system. No Im sorry you are your own product that's that."

And you are living proof of that........................................

@dee. Malcom X was a black racist. Made no secret about it when he refered to white people as the "blue eyed devils". Look it up.

@lckmiblls Well if he was can you blame him? I certainly can't.

Serafina - racism is either OK or it isn't, it isn't excusable under certain circumstances like you seem to imply. If you believe racism and hating people based on color is OK in some instances than you can't be upset about this statue, here's a general who lost a war and saw newly freed blacks run roughshod over whites and a huge escalation in black on white crime. the same thing is happening today in South Africa, there are one million less whites today in S Africa then there were a decade ago, this is due to what can be described as a genocide on whites by blacks in that country, although I'm sure you would excuse that too.

ravi123. What in the hell are you talking about. You seem either bitter or jealous of the fine citizens in the south. Is your opinion based on the statue of a Confederate General being resurected? If so you have not cast a good reflection on yourself and others like you.

Stop trying to blame the past on your now misfortunes you are what you make yourself. There is no such thing as product of there environment, or that their being held down by the system. No Im sorry you are your own product that's that. If the environment made me what I am today then I would be poor, I would be into drugs etc... That stuff is just ridiculous.

cparson, I know this is late to the game, but I saw your post and felt the need to respond. Hope you'll get a chance to see this. I'll be the first to advocate making your own way, but I fully understand that it's incredibly difficult to turn things around when you're speaking of ideals in life. That's what you're really refering to and I don't think you have a firm grasp on that. You seem to think that the direction that parents give their children (which can have an effect for generations to come) just magically appears in the blink of an eye. It's not. If children are not instilled with good values at a very early age, I believe they have a very small chance of being productive members in society. The sad part is that it's a vicious cycle to break. How do I know this? Well, as a black man, I was born into it in the 60's. I grew up very poor with so many friends just like me. We had parents who had very few opportunities and their self-esteem was very low. With that, you're struggling just to get by, let alone worrying about instilling a good value system into your kids. So to people who do not understand why we, as a race, continue to experience things like teen-pregnancy at an alarming rate, crime, etc. you really have to understand that what we're talking about is a tide that's very hard to fight against. Is it impossible to overcome it? No. I'm living proof of that. But I did not do it alone. I still wonder if I could have done it alone - what would have happened if I didn't have a little help. Mine came in the form of a white man (my guidance counselor in high school) who told me that I could actually go to college and be what I wanted to be. He did this when so many others were telling me that my best chance was to try some trade and maybe get a job right out of high school. He even paid my application fees for colleges. He believed in me that much. I have reflected on that so many times in my life. Though he's dead and gone, I'm never going to let him down. I'm going to live the best life that I can and hopefully the values I'm giving my kids will be passed on for generations. Believe me, I understand how you can have your perspective. I just think you might feel a bit different if you fully (I mean REALLY) understood the background. Best of luck to you.

yes they did, and in the early 20th c. they gave it up... and the Republicans picked it up and are now running with it, wrapped in the American flag.

If it was so bad for the Democrats back then, why does the GOP now embrace it? Wrong is wrong no matter what color state you're from. The GOP is on the wrong side of this argument and love to counter that "the Democrats started it" without manning up and saying that they'll finish it.

Luke...please settle into the 21st century...the parties values changed over the years. Please go back to school and review your history.

In later years we had the great Dixiecrat who ran for president and after failing he switched to the Republican Party and they adored him even when he too feeble mindedold to do his job they would vote him in office until he died. That was the Republican hero Strom Thurman Keep bringing up Byrd well he was a young teen and didn't realize what the KKK was I had a neighbor once that had joined them and he thought he was joining a religous organization and when he found out he dropped his membership. .

Way to lie Charlie. And since when did the republican party pick that up? No facts so you made it up.

lukewarm you are an idiot. go back to school (or just search the friggin internet!) and you will learn that the party of lincoln (old repub) is now the democratic party. duh! this is not new or news pal- wake up.

Hey Charlie, you are just throwing around accusation with nothing to support your position. Are you just repeating crap that someone else tells you?

To say that a HUGE group of people are racist is ridiculous, unless that group stands up and says they are.

To accuse republicans of being racists just shows your ignorance.

They would defend Hitler if he was a registered democrat. Especially now that the 21st century democrat party is fast becoming The New Fascist Party of the 21st century.

... the KU KLUX KLAN is a Democratic Fraternity started to keep blacks from voting or at least voting for Republicans.

.... OBAMA has set back the African American Community as a whole 60 years of Socioeconomic gains ... I think this qualifies OBAMA as the new GRAND WIZARD of the KU KLUX KLAN as well as an Uncle Tom and a Jim Crow. Obama hates black people ...

Hey has anybody heard of this new movie called Run Away Slave ...

In the Netherlands we change the text on memorials to fit present day. We had our Golden Century in the 17th century. In that century we supressed Indonesia, discovered Australia, opened relations with Japan, ransacked and pillaged many tribal countries, founded and suppressed many African coastal area's and on SouthCape South Africa and founded New Amsterdam, now called Manhattan and New York.

Today we recognize in text that we did use unneeded violence towards many people and that our heroes, were not that heroic at all. I guess we Dutch are not that into honoring violent racists like the South.

Here we go again. What is it about the fine people in the southern part of the country that makes you think we're all racist.

I've been to over 30 countries and have friends in all of them and can tell you racist people exist in all of them including your's.

you mean shot by his own drunk troops and the mess covered up to make him a war hero?

KKK Grand Wizard Nathan Beford Forest was a DEMOCRAT.

Amazing how the Dems deny that it was part of the kkk. Remember Robert KKK Bird? Now they are aligned with the black panthers. No matter how hard they try, they can`t change history.

vern and indy- GO FUKING LEARN SOMETHING! The old DEMs you speak of are now republicans! you sirs are idiots.

No ... their still Democrats and they keep the African Americans in Ghettos and only let them out ever two years to vote. Not only do the Democrats keep blacks caged up in the Ghettos they give the blacks the worst G D teachers, a bunch of liberals tenured pot heads that don't teach anything and just pass the kids on to the next tenured liberal pot head ... \

Watch the movie Run Away Slave if you want the truth ...

Charles, Well Gen. Grant was a Gambler and a Drunk! During his career in the military he had been disciplined more then once because of his drinking and failure to perform duties.

agreed on all points; hopefully, we're smarter than they were 150 yrs. ago; and given that some people are, anyone that is having an issue with this needs to look at their own prejudice, and realize that it must be a slow news day.

Of course Mexicanshave there own language, you thought they spoke Chinese read your history.

john- holy @!$%# man what are you doing comparing the belief that slavery is an "ok" and acceptable thing to a nation's language or a religious place of worship or a place of education, which you clearly are lacking?? go climb back under your rock.

wowicantbelieveit.... get over it... everybody has ancesters that were slaves.

Bill, if these crybabies were treated like The American Indians they'd really have somethiong to cry about. They should be thankful their ancestors were brought here to be slaves. They surely wouldn't want to live in Africa, if so, I'll be the first to donate for plane fare.

You'll have to shout. Democrats don't hear so well.