The Civil War News & Views Open Discussion Forum - Archive

Re: "Traitors"
In Response To: Re: "Traitors" ()

AMAZING!! I was told to come read this stuff and could not believe my eyes. I thought he was kidding me. Turns out he had it nailed. If I hadn't seen this for myself I never could have believed it.

George: "Yes I can see the full accuracy of your posts how you would not accept legitimate answers to your question but kept fishing for someone to second your opinion and claim to be able to read the minds of men of 140 years ago."

WRONG-O George. The opinion he gave several times given was CLEARLY that dishonor was probably not the intent of the burial party of Fort Wagner, that is was the expediency of the July heat, but that other factors may have played a part. He then said CLEARLY that even had dishonor been intended it was ineffectual because the overall effect on BOTH sides was to accept these men were indeed to be treated in the future as soldiers.
At no time did Phil ever try to fish someone to agree that mass burials was a dishonor. That was his whole point on the Tennessee board originally.

George: "I can also see how you refused to answer simple questions and continually claimed you could not see how anyone (you meant blacks) could fight for a country that denied them their rights"

WRONG AGAIN GEORGE!!

Anyone who can read with comprehension, can see that Phil never asks 'how could blacks fight for the Confederacy' he asked how can citizens of Massachusets be legally called "traitors to a Confederacy" where they never had resided. If you cannot make such clear and obvious distintions, if you insist each time to twist things into the exact opposite, what on earth are you doing here claiming to "school someone"? Incredible!

I was amazed when I was asked to read your posts could not believe it, when I saw for myself how completely and totally you misread what someone wrote, and then attacked him for your imaginary fictions of what you thought he said.

Even more unbelieveable, is your constant inability to understand basic techiques of discussion, how it is useful to lay out both sides of an issue, and when answers are given, one way or another, to dig deeper into the subject at hand. It is inconcievable to me how anyone on a "discussion board" could not understand the most basic principles of true discussion.

Your repeated invitation for him to just leave is just laughable. I assume had your Confederacy won, you see yourself as one of the ruling elite? Maybe Minister of Education?

"People don't take kindly to you for two reasons, 1)you won't accept a factual answer, you "yes but" every answer given to you and 2) you won't give direct answers."
-- George Purvis
Proud descendant of over 30 Confederate heroes.

Zeez are za rules for posting here, Comrade.

By no means vill you be permitted to post a question in a form that raises both zides of an issue for discussion. It is stricly verbotten. Ve do not and vill not approve of such tactics. Ziz is not a diuscussion forum. Zis is a place for zhose ssekers who need schooling to receive za lessons wee vill give them.

Vee do not take kindly to anyone who vill not follow zees instruction, or any instuction from us, to ze letter. Ya?

Vee alone vill post here only vhat vee decide is permissible for you to read.

If vee do not post it ourselves, the subject is not for you to bring up on your own.

You vill post only vith permission.

You vill accept as facts any post vee make. It is not up to you to decide what is factual. Our answers are zee only facts you vill need.

Our answers are zee proper answers. You vill not make any comments about any post you read here. Zhat vill not be tolerated.

You will zubmit to questioning but vill be permitted to give direct answers only za questions asked, in za exact form ve require for za answers. Your answers must be limited to only Yes or no, that will be sufficient. Or a zimple choice of A B C if vee zubmit our questions in zat form.

You vill only makes za posts that agree vith us and zhen you must leave, unless you haff been pre-approved by us to remain and zhen you may simply observe.

If you dizagree viz a post, ve don't care, just go away.

If you agree with a post, ve also do not care. Do not ask any additional questions, or add any further comments of your own, vee are not interested.

Vee and vee alone vill decide what you meant to zay in any post. If vee do not interpret your post in zee manner you meant, it is not for you to correct us, in any fashion, ever. Ziz is abzolutely unacceptable. To avoid confusion, it is zimply best that you just do not post at all. Go away.

It is permissible for you to post only to zimply agree vit us, and zhen you must leave, schnell.

Unt, have a Dixie Day!

PS Reading FedMo's posts today I guess anyone can see that your limited "factual" answers to Phil were not quite adequate, that there was, after all, much more to the story of Wagner than what you cared to share or could provide. I can only thank God the red white and blue won, and can only say God Bless America if this is an example the type of mindset of anyone who would be leading the confederacy today.

Messages In This Thread

"Traitors"
Re: "Traitors"
Re: "Traitors"
Re: "Traitors"
Re: "Traitors"
Re: "Traitors"
Re: "Traitors"
Re: "Traitors"
Re: "Traitors"
Re: "Traitors"
Re: "Traitors"
Its a New Year everybody!
Re: Its a New Year everybody!
Re: Its a New Year everybody!
Re: Its a New Year everybody!
Re: Its a New Year everybody!
Re: Its a New Year everybody!
Re: "Traitors"
Re: "Traitors"
Re: "Traitors"
Re: "Traitors"
Re: "Traitors"
Re: "Traitors"
Re: "Traitors"
Re: "Traitors"
Re: "Traitors"
Re: "Traitors"
Re: "Traitors"
Re: "Traitors"
Re: "Traitors"
Re: "Traitors"
Re: "Traitors"
Re: "Traitors"
Re: "Traitors"
Re: "Traitors"
Re: "Traitors"
Re: "Traitors"
Re: "Traitors"
Re: "Traitors"
Re: "Traitors"
Congratulations