Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

1334Re: South Mountain

Expand Messages
  • tjrhys62
    Apr 28, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Kevin,

      No one is referring to you; nor is anyone questioning your motives.
      Let's be a little less sensitive. The dishonesty I invoke is
      inherent and deliberate to the entire mountain "preservation"
      process, infused into its every fiber from the get-go. When it all
      began back in the `80s only George Brigham and I gave a damn. George
      went off the deep end; I went back to the books where I remain. The
      next publishing installment appears in June.

      You and I both owe Richard a bit more candor. Of course the Reno and
      Garland monuments will stay put! The former has been there over a
      century; the latter is little more than a headstone sunk into CMHL
      land 250 yards from the site. How contrived. Richard of course knew
      they would remain, posing his question in saddened rhetoric. One can
      scarcely blame him, one who can appreciate D.H. Hill's dilemma.

      Those of us who have been on the "inside", who have experienced
      covert agendas, and who have been disgusted at the ensuing
      spectacle, owe it to every person interested in these sites to tell
      it like it was, is, and mostly likely will remain. The maxim is "qui
      tacet consentire": silence betokens consent.

      I don't like to admit it, but the grim truth is that the South
      Mountain battlefield (Turner's and Fox's) is a goner. Like those
      I've learned to detest, I could continue to pretend something
      meaningful is afoot. But it isn't. Only egos, careers, and bank
      accounts matter these days.

      You have my sincere sympathy for your past efforts, much good may
      they do you. But now isn't the time to let the bastards get away
      with it using our good will, tax dollars, and patience. It's time we
      all called a spade a spade in both historical and preservation
      contexts. Go through the URLs I sited to Richard; then tell me your
      blood doesn't boil.

      If we don't speak out, who will? Thanks for caring as always.


      --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, "Rawlings, Kevin"
      <kevin.rawlings@s...> wrote:
      > Tim,
      > No one is being dishonest if you are referring to me. There is
      some truth to
      > what you say and I agree with you about the state, political and
      > concerns of the South Mountain battlefields. His question about
      the Reno and
      > Garland monuments being moved, as far as I know, there are no
      plans afoot to
      > move either unless you know something I do not. Also, at this
      point in time
      > I am not associated with any group except Save Historic Antietam
      > I left CMHL awhile back because of a plethora of back stabbing
      politics and
      > lip service in the name of battlefield preservation in the board of
      > directors' current make up. Further, I have not been terribly
      happy with
      > what the state has been up to(or not up to as the case may be)in
      the last
      > several years. I am not anyone's agent just as you are not. Just a
      > civil war historian as you are.
      > Kevin Rawlings
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: tjrhys62 [mailto:tjreesecg@e...]
      > Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 3:59 PM
      > To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: [TalkAntietam] Re: South Mountain
      > Richard,
      > Your South Mountain question seems to have resurrected naïve
      > assumptions about cooperative, incongruent battlefield ownership,
      > its purported preservation, and the likelihood of achieving any
      > symbiosis toward accessible park status. Complex questions require
      > far more than simple answers, given the disparate groups involved
      > possessed of wholly divergent if not incompatible objectives. Pay
      > attention to that man behind the curtain.
      > Instead may I direct your attention to http://cwbn.blogspot.com/
      > insightful investigation into the matter, postings for 3/5, 3/10,
      > 3/12, 3/16. This is an intermittent thread which you will easily
      > pick up, a welcome breath of candor.
      > Also, if you seek honest definition of "South Mountain"
      > battlefields, and the political chicanery at work behind the
      > have a look at http://home.earthlink.net/~tjreesecg/id6.html. All
      > not as it appears.
      > Having waded through all this, then see
      > Documents/2000rs/bills/hb/hb1183t.pdf for the official language of
      > what South Mountain "Fake" Battlefield is and is not. It's icing
      > without a cake which children naturally prefer.
      > While the kiddies play, the house burns. Santa can't get down this
      > chimney.
      > Tim
      > --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, <richard@r...> wrote:
      > > Thanks Kevin -- I feel a littel better.
      > > ----- Original Message -----
      > > From: "Rawlings, Kevin" <kevin.rawlings@s...>
      > > To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
      > > Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 2:21 PM
      > > Subject: RE: [TalkAntietam] Re: South Mountain
      > >
      > >
      > > > Richard,
      > > >
      > > > The Reno and Garland monuments art not going anywhere. The
      > Garland
      > > monumment
      > > > is on Central Maryland Heritage League land and the state now
      > owns the
      > > > Daniel Wise home site and the Appalachain Trail owns much of
      > right of
      > > > way through there. Much of the land at Fox's Gap are is own by
      > one group
      > > or
      > > > the other or development rights have been bought up by the
      > state. At
      > > > Turner's Gap as Tim Reese described the Frostown Road are is
      > under
      > > > developement attack but the Alt 40 up the gap is protected.
      > > >
      > > > Kevin Rawlings
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------
      -~--> Buy
      > Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
      > at MyInks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada.
      > http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
      > http://us.click.yahoo.com/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/GmiolB/TM
      > -------------------------------------------------------------------
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
    • Show all 25 messages in this topic