Memphis City Council unanimously votes to dig up Confederate General, wife

[bodecea]

This crap is getting out of hand. There is a civil war coming I'm afraid

-Geaux
-------------------------

Late Tuesday, the Memphis, Tennessee, City Council voted unanimously to dig up the remains of Confederate General Nathan Bedford Forrest and his wife, Talking Points Memo reported Wednesday. The council also voted to remove a statue placed in Forrest's honor. The move came after Mayor A.C. Wharton called for the bodies to be dug up and relocated.

Memphis City Council unanimously votes to dig up Confederate general wife - Spokane Conservative Examiner.com

This would be the same Nathan Bedford Forrest who was a founding member of the Ku Klux Klan and committed war crimes against Colored Union Soldiers during the Civil War.

Here was the thing. This park is not where he was originally buried. They've ALREADY moved his body once. His original resting place is ready to take him back, they just don't want the statue, which probably SHOULD be melted down because this guy doesn't deserve a statue.

So did Sherman against defenseless women and children when his troops were pillaging during his march behind front lines, raping and killing women and children. Oh.. I forgot, victors "do not commit" war crimes.

War is hell, isn't it?

 

[9thIDdoc]

Atrocities?
You mean like when the Union attacked New York City?
Or when Union soldiers tortured and murdered Southern POWs (including blacks) at Camp Douglas near Chicago?
Or when Sherman and his merry men murdered and raped, civilians and looted and burned civilian homes of no tactical value?
Or all those "freed" slaves who starved or drowned expecting Union forces to help them?

 

[9thIDdoc]

"Your ancestor fought for the right of rich people to own, brutalize and rape other human beings."

Bullshit. You're far too stupid to have a clue what he fought for and absolutely have no right to speak for him.

Yankees were just jealous of Southern prosperity and culture.

 

[bodecea]

Erase history and it goes away...............Erase anything that is not PC...............and we will sit back and smell the roses and live in a Liberal Utopia................

Erasing his history is the action of a feeble mind and dumb ass.........Kinda like trying to erase history in our school books..................

Liberal party and Joe...............The ERASER MEN.................LOL

Nobody wants to erase Forrest from history. We just want to put it in the proper perspective.

He committed war crimes and founded a terrorist racist group.

Forrest himself is a particularly noxious figure, so he makes an easy target, but the bigger question is whether we should continue to grant "honor" to the leaders of the CSA when they essentially committed treason in the name of continuing a racist institution.

And why did it take 150 years to have this discussion?

Because you dumb ass left loons think a flag caused a shooting at a church. That's just how fucking stupid you people are. Mindless drones

No one thinks a flag caused a shooting. But you don't seem bright enough to know that.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

Most Confederate generals, I would raise a fuss over.

But Forrest, with his history in the Klan, should not have a statue in his honor anywhere in the civilized world.

Put it on a leaky raft, and pull it into the Bermuda Triangle.

He quit the Klan when it went radical. He was appointed the head in those first couple years when it was a veterans social club and when it started to turn violent he quit and ordered it to disband. Not his fault they continued on in secret.

-Geaux

actually, he was grand wizard from 1867 through 1869, The klan did work as a group against blacks in 67. In 68 under his leadership the klan came up with their organization and principals, it in was the "application" to join the Klan, these are some of the questions on that form.
5. Are you opposed to Negro equality both social and political?

6. Are you in favor of a white man's government in this country?

7. Are you in favor of constitutional liberty, and a government of equitable laws instead of a government of violence and oppression?

8. Are you in favor of maintaining the constitutional rights of the South?

9. Are you in favor of the reenfranchisement and emancipation of the white men of the South, and the restitution of the Southern people to all their rights, alike proprietary, civil, and political?

10. Do you believe in the inalienable right of self-preservation of the people against the exercise of arbitrary and unlicensed power?

It is fairly clear that he did know about the klans activities and did not quit when the klan started killing blacks.

 

[bodecea]

"Your ancestor fought for the right of rich people to own, brutalize and rape other human beings."

Bullshit. You're far too stupid to have a clue what he fought for and absolutely have no right to speak for him.

Yankees were just jealous of Southern prosperity and culture.

Nope...he's spot on. You just, unfortunately, bought into the "Lost Cause" story very carefully cultivated in the South since the 1870s.

 

[bodecea]

And let's not forget this guy committed war crimes during the Civil War.

So did Sherman

Uh, no, he didn't. Sherman engaged in legitimate military actions to diminish the ability of the enemy to wage war.

Forrest slaughtered Colored Soldiers for the act of taking up arms against the South.

Uh, Joe....

You DO realize that Forrest was a Democrat, and was even delegate at their 1868 convention, don't you???

Yes he was. He was a Democrat. But are you trying to use that fact to connect him and his policies to today's Democrats?

 

[bodecea]

You people take this Civil War shit ( the one you lost and the one you're planning) way too seriously.

We take it too seriously? You're the one's wanting to dig up dead people.

I don't want to dig up dead people.....why are you lying about me.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

EXACTLY!!! The "brave men" under the valiant leadership of Sherman successfully raped and killed defenseless women and children, burned their houses, killed their livestock taking the livelihood away from the remaining survivors behind front lines. Yes, it reminds me of ISIS.

Except Sherman's troops did no such thing. They did attack the ability of the Confederacy to make war. They hit legitimate infrastructure targets.

But you guys keep pretending you were the wronged party here.

So say the victors. They eradicated eye witnesses, rewrote history and the gullible takes it as facts. You know, Clint Eastwood depicted some historical facts in the movie "The Outlaw Josie Wales" (Don't try to spin it that I believe that Wales single handedly destroyed a Union Camp and such and I romanticize about him as a hero) Redlegs raping women, murdering families and pillaging behind front lines, Union Army executing Confederates as they lay down their arms. These two elements are historical facts. How about you looking into the atrocities committed in Union run POW camps? You are romanticizing about the noble behavior of Union troops. You are wrong.

Andersonville

I cited a webpage listing Confederate atrocities including Andersonwillle. Maybe if you just followed the thread...

I did follow. I wanted to highlight it for the readers.

 

[bucs90]

"Your ancestor fought for the right of rich people to own, brutalize and rape other human beings."

Bullshit. You're far too stupid to have a clue what he fought for and absolutely have no right to speak for him.

Yankees were just jealous of Southern prosperity and culture.

Nope...he's spot on. You just, unfortunately, bought into the "Lost Cause" story very carefully cultivated in the South since the 1870s.

Based on his avatar...I think he may know more about war than you do.

 

[bucs90]

And let's not forget this guy committed war crimes during the Civil War.

So did Sherman

Uh, no, he didn't. Sherman engaged in legitimate military actions to diminish the ability of the enemy to wage war.

Forrest slaughtered Colored Soldiers for the act of taking up arms against the South.

Uh, Joe....

You DO realize that Forrest was a Democrat, and was even delegate at their 1868 convention, don't you???

Yes he was. He was a Democrat. But are you trying to use that fact to connect him and his policies to today's Democrats?

YES. Why not? Lefties want to connect todays whites to whites back then.

So...todays Democrats must be held accountable.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

"Your ancestor fought for the right of rich people to own, brutalize and rape other human beings."

Bullshit. You're far too stupid to have a clue what he fought for and absolutely have no right to speak for him.

Yankees were just jealous of Southern prosperity and culture.

So many people have been brainwashed into thinking the Civil war was over slavery, it was not.
it was almost halfway over before slavery became an issue, and then it was only because the south had sent a representative to France and one to Britan seeking help in the war. Thats when the north decided that by using slavery as a reason, the French who were morally against slavery would refuse to help the south.

 

[defcon4]

Atrocities?
You mean like when the Union attacked New York City?
Or when Union soldiers tortured and murdered Southern POWs (including blacks) at Camp Douglas near Chicago?
Or when Sherman and his merry men murdered and raped, civilians and looted and burned civilian homes of no tactical value?
Or all those "freed" slaves who starved or drowned expecting Union forces to help them?

Yes, that's what I meant. It is unfortunate that Union atrocities were not recorded extensively because the victors write and rewriter history. I am quite sure Union atrocities were more brutal and extensive than it was recorded and that is based on the recorded massacres, rapes and pillaging of Sherman. If that much was recorded can you imagine those which were not recorded?

 

[Maryland Patriot]

Atrocities?
You mean like when the Union attacked New York City?
Or when Union soldiers tortured and murdered Southern POWs (including blacks) at Camp Douglas near Chicago?
Or when Sherman and his merry men murdered and raped, civilians and looted and burned civilian homes of no tactical value?
Or all those "freed" slaves who starved or drowned expecting Union forces to help them?

Yes, that's what I meant. It is unfortunate that Union atrocities were not recorded extensively because the victors write and rewriter history. I am quite sure Union atrocities were more brutal and extensive than it was recorded and that is based on the recorded massacres, rapes and pillaging of Sherman. If that much was recorded can you imagine those which were not recorded?

Of Sherman or By Sherman.
because, I don't remember in history class reading about Sherman being raped.
its possible I suppose.

 

[defcon4]

This crap is getting out of hand. There is a civil war coming I'm afraid

-Geaux
-------------------------

Late Tuesday, the Memphis, Tennessee, City Council voted unanimously to dig up the remains of Confederate General Nathan Bedford Forrest and his wife, Talking Points Memo reported Wednesday. The council also voted to remove a statue placed in Forrest's honor. The move came after Mayor A.C. Wharton called for the bodies to be dug up and relocated.

Memphis City Council unanimously votes to dig up Confederate general wife - Spokane Conservative Examiner.com

This would be the same Nathan Bedford Forrest who was a founding member of the Ku Klux Klan and committed war crimes against Colored Union Soldiers during the Civil War.

Here was the thing. This park is not where he was originally buried. They've ALREADY moved his body once. His original resting place is ready to take him back, they just don't want the statue, which probably SHOULD be melted down because this guy doesn't deserve a statue.

So did Sherman against defenseless women and children when his troops were pillaging during his march behind front lines, raping and killing women and children. Oh.. I forgot, victors "do not commit" war crimes.

War is hell, isn't it?

It sure is. Especially when killing defenseless women and children. I don't show the same euphoric celebration about defenseless people were massacred during WW II. Is there any particular reason for that? Massacre is massacre, isn't it? If you just would display some consistency.

 

[defcon4]

Atrocities?
You mean like when the Union attacked New York City?
Or when Union soldiers tortured and murdered Southern POWs (including blacks) at Camp Douglas near Chicago?
Or when Sherman and his merry men murdered and raped, civilians and looted and burned civilian homes of no tactical value?
Or all those "freed" slaves who starved or drowned expecting Union forces to help them?

Yes, that's what I meant. It is unfortunate that Union atrocities were not recorded extensively because the victors write and rewriter history. I am quite sure Union atrocities were more brutal and extensive than it was recorded and that is based on the recorded massacres, rapes and pillaging of Sherman. If that much was recorded can you imagine those which were not recorded?

Of Sherman or By Sherman.
because, I don't remember in history class reading about Sherman being raped.
its possible I suppose.

Nitpicking English language professor, thank you for grading my paper; yes it is BY Sherman

 

[Maryland Patriot]

Atrocities?
You mean like when the Union attacked New York City?
Or when Union soldiers tortured and murdered Southern POWs (including blacks) at Camp Douglas near Chicago?
Or when Sherman and his merry men murdered and raped, civilians and looted and burned civilian homes of no tactical value?
Or all those "freed" slaves who starved or drowned expecting Union forces to help them?

Yes, that's what I meant. It is unfortunate that Union atrocities were not recorded extensively because the victors write and rewriter history. I am quite sure Union atrocities were more brutal and extensive than it was recorded and that is based on the recorded massacres, rapes and pillaging of Sherman. If that much was recorded can you imagine those which were not recorded?

Of Sherman or By Sherman.
because, I don't remember in history class reading about Sherman being raped.
its possible I suppose.

Nitpicking English language professor, thank you for grading my paper; yes it is BY Sherman

Just messing with you. Im sure if you go through my posts you will find greater mishaps than what I toyed with on yours.

 

[defcon4]

EXACTLY!!! The "brave men" under the valiant leadership of Sherman successfully raped and killed defenseless women and children, burned their houses, killed their livestock taking the livelihood away from the remaining survivors behind front lines. Yes, it reminds me of ISIS.

Except Sherman's troops did no such thing. They did attack the ability of the Confederacy to make war. They hit legitimate infrastructure targets.

But you guys keep pretending you were the wronged party here.

So say the victors. They eradicated eye witnesses, rewrote history and the gullible takes it as facts. You know, Clint Eastwood depicted some historical facts in the movie "The Outlaw Josie Wales" (Don't try to spin it that I believe that Wales single handedly destroyed a Union Camp and such and I romanticize about him as a hero) Redlegs raping women, murdering families and pillaging behind front lines, Union Army executing Confederates as they lay down their arms. These two elements are historical facts. How about you looking into the atrocities committed in Union run POW camps? You are romanticizing about the noble behavior of Union troops. You are wrong.

Andersonville

I cited a webpage listing Confederate atrocities including Andersonwillle. Maybe if you just followed the thread...

I did follow. I wanted to highlight it for the readers.

…. because of???? Ah.. You think they are not capable to read without you highlighting it? Makes sense...

 

[bucs90]

In a nutshell....

If the Civil War was judged by todays society...Sherman and his men would be jailed and tried for war crimes. The winning army in a war can still commit these. Just as modern US troops have been jailed for crimes while in Iraq.

The war was complicated. And the South was morally wrong. So was the Union. Abraham Lincoln despised blacks. History class rarely teaches that. He wanted all blacks DEPORTED. But because they were "property"...the 4th Amendment prevented him fro seizing them and deporting them. He needed them to be freed....so he could deport them. (GOOGLE IT...its fact.)

There was no moral high ground in that war.

 

[defcon4]

Atrocities?
You mean like when the Union attacked New York City?
Or when Union soldiers tortured and murdered Southern POWs (including blacks) at Camp Douglas near Chicago?
Or when Sherman and his merry men murdered and raped, civilians and looted and burned civilian homes of no tactical value?
Or all those "freed" slaves who starved or drowned expecting Union forces to help them?

Yes, that's what I meant. It is unfortunate that Union atrocities were not recorded extensively because the victors write and rewriter history. I am quite sure Union atrocities were more brutal and extensive than it was recorded and that is based on the recorded massacres, rapes and pillaging of Sherman. If that much was recorded can you imagine those which were not recorded?

Of Sherman or By Sherman.
because, I don't remember in history class reading about Sherman being raped.
its possible I suppose.

Nitpicking English language professor, thank you for grading my paper; yes it is BY Sherman

Just messing with you. Im sure if you go through my posts you will find greater mishaps than what I toyed with on yours.

You see the sad thing is that many pursue this issue not because they had ancestors in the war on either side but for the purpose of causing further division among the population. That's the only thing they have at stake with it. They are very successful in the black vs. white, Christian vs. non Christian, national origin vs. national origin…. and now to further divide they are pitching South against North again. However, if you say anything about jews, you are immediately labeled as Nazi. When they trash Christians (Guano et al.) it is OK.