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

RE: [civilwarwest] Re: (unknown)

Expand Messages
  • Brad Sportsman
    Yea i know i just wish when we taught ourchildren we taught them the truth if they knew the truth they might not hold lincoln(SPIT) in high regard ... From:
    Message 1 of 63 , Jan 15, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Yea i know i just wish when we taught ourchildren we taught them the truth if they knew the truth they might not hold lincoln(SPIT) in high regard

      --- On Fri, 1/15/10, shaun c <shaunchattey@...> wrote:

      From: shaun c <shaunchattey@...>
      Subject: RE: [civilwarwest] Re: (unknown)
      To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
      Date: Friday, January 15, 2010, 12:28 PM

       
      Ignorance runs through all levels of society, in all ages of history. Educated or not. There'ss only 3 certain things in life, death, taxes and the ignorance of the majority.


      To: civilwarwest@ yahoogroups. com
      From: tpkacasanova1@ yahoo.com
      Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 12:26:17 +0000
      Subject: [civilwarwest] Re: (unknown)

       
      You know thats what chaps my hide kids these days are taoght that the war was all about slavry it wasnt and yet everyday kids are brainwashed into believing that it was. Akid just the other day one of my nephews friends say my flag and asked if i was predjudis I asked him why and he said that anybody that was a confederate was " a person who likes having slaves" this is so wrong I almost cried tears of anger what can we do

      --- In civilwarwest@ yahoogroups. com, "kamills" <kamills@... > wrote:
      >
      > So if I am to understand your position correctly, the Union side
      > is not biased at all? The position that the war was fought over
      > slavery (well, seccession which was caused by slavery) is the only
      > position to take? We have to accept the northern view only of the
      > war? That to me is being biased. It is a book about the Southern
      > viewpoint of the war. History books are written by the victors
      > and that viewpoint is what prevails. It is the same as blaming
      > the Germans for WWI.
      >
      > Andy
      >
      > ---------- Original Message ------------ --------- --------- ----
      >
      > Andy,
      >
      > With all due respect, the *last* thing the Kennedy Brothers did
      > was a "thorough investigation. "  They did an extremely biased
      > investigation, and one that's interesting simply for the direction
      > they took.  It (TSWR) is worth reading, if only for the bias.
      >
      > But it is far from thorough.
      >
      > And, BTW, I've read it.
      >
      > Dave
      >




      Keep your friends updated— even when you’re not signed in.

    • Stanley Balsky
      Have you ever read the Constitution of the United States ? SB ... From: shaun c Subject: RE: [civilwarwest] Re: (unknown) To:
      Message 63 of 63 , Jan 16, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Have you ever read the Constitution of the United States ?
        SB

        --- On Fri, 1/15/10, shaun c <shaunchattey@...> wrote:

        From: shaun c <shaunchattey@...>
        Subject: RE: [civilwarwest] Re: (unknown)
        To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Friday, January 15, 2010, 6:14 PM

         
        'There was no right to secede, there was no "country"'

        Wow what an amazingly ignorant statement. The right to secede was one of the primary tenants of the revolution, and the 'country' was the individual states that people were in, north and south, until the consolidation by war of the union.


        To: civilwarwest@ yahoogroups. com
        From: rtaubman@rogers. com
        Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 15:12:39 -0800
        Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] Re: (unknown)

         

        Really, is there anything new?   We have heard this same story/claim, over, and over, and over again.  There was no right to secede, there was no "country" to be invaded by "foreigners" .  The only "foreigners" in the south, were those serving in both North and Southern armies.
         

         


        From: shaun c <shaunchattey@ hotmail.com>
        To: civilwarwest@ yahoogroups. com
        Sent: Fri, January 15, 2010 3:05:21 PM
        Subject: RE: [civilwarwest] Re: (unknown)



        As i said 'restoring the union'.
        If you look intthe states had a right to secede, the Union refused to accept this, however you look at it its Union soldiers used to repress southern rights to govern.
        To restore a union with a country which does not want that union, is in fact an invasion by a foreigner. Whether the Union wanted to paint it that way or not.


        To: civilwarwest@ yahoogroups. com
        From: wilber6150@aol. com
        Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 20:00:17 +0000
        Subject: [civilwarwest] Re: (unknown)

         


        --- In civilwarwest@ yahoogroups. com, shaun c <shaunchattey@ ...> wrote:
        >
        >
        > > Personally I see little merit in 'restoring the union', it is little more than the invasion of a foreign nation in order to annex it, a belligerent and offensive war if I've ever seen one.
        > I'm British, so i hold no cultural tie to the Confederacy either.
        > Formal education will instill current political ideals into the person, self education will allow the person/child to understand in their own way both sides of the story and make their own mind up.
        >
        >The Northern men who faught the war didnt see it as a foreign nation invading another one, they saw it as a battle to hold the country they held dear together and not let it be split apart..




        Windows Live Hotmail: Your friends can get your Facebook updates, right from Hotmail®.




        Windows Live: Make it easier for your friends to see what you’re up to on Facebook.

      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.