I thank God that there are great people here in America that are willing to stand up for what they believe in! A++++ Weather You Agree With This Man Or Not, This Man Has The Right To Express His Opinion And Or His Opinions here in America!! The democrat party as well as the left wing movement here in America, want to suppress and silence.any person and or group that disagrees with their Left wing agenda, ideology, and or movement. We must not allow this to happen!!
I strongly admire this man---And for those of you who think that the American Civil War started over slavery I truely pity you---You all need to study American history a bit more in detail.
No actually you do, historians are agreed on the topic the war was because of slavery.
"The war was ABOUT slavery. [Catton's emphasis] Slavery had caused it: If slavery had vanished before 1861, the war simply would not have taken place." Bruce Catton "Reflections on the Civil War" p5
"Everything stemmed from the slavery issue," - James McPherson
"Within the profession [historians] there's virtually no discussion or debate left of slavery as central to the antebellum south and the fundamental cause of secession and the war. To the extent within the profession there's a debate about this, people will talk about other causal factors such as economic factors creating secession and the Civil War, but those economic factors always come down to a slave economy" Dr. Eric Walther of University of Houston
For those of you who don't know! This is what a house N looks like and sounds like. Keep him in chains and serving. I guess the old germans should be running around with the flag that they flew under his Nazi reign.
In June of 1863, Confederate General Kirby Smith sent a letter to General Taylor and states this:
"I have been unofficially informed that some of your troops have captured negroes in arms. I hope this may not be so, and that your subordinates who may have been in command of capturing parties may have recognized the propriety of giving NO QUARTER to armed negroes and their officers.
If they are taken, however, you will turn them over to the State authorities to be tried for crimes against the State, and you will afford such facilities in obtaining witnesses as the interests of the public service will permit."
Yup, not only did the confederacy not recognize ANY blacks as soldiers, they were just as likely to execute or enslave the black Union troops they captured.
STATESIDE TERRORISM is why the US population must be disarmed.
Rollout of the Federal Govt's Gun Ownership Ban should start during the initial months of Pres. Obama's 2nd 4-year term in office.
We expect little resistance from the citizenry thanks to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) which the President just signed into Federal Law.
Disarmament of all registered-gun owners (we know who you are) will be rolled out on a national-scale and should curtail any terrorism by armed patriots.
so what your saying is this man was resisting arrest? That's kinda hard to believe that Mr. Edgerton would do that, he's doing what he belives in, you hear that he used to be the president of the NAACP? Now he's doing that because of his heritage, not hate, I would be the first one to help post his bail if he was arrested for speaking his mind, for now our bill of rights allow us to speak our mind, he's not speaking hate at all!
@AlexWerkmeister712 Oh yeah, I'm totally mentally insufficient; that's why I can maintain a conversation without cursing, name calling, and using other immature childish language. If you want to debate, then let's do so. But be prepared for the facts that your high school texts leave out.
I've read much more than textbooks and "Yankee" articles.
I've been objective and have seen it from both sides. Southerner or not, your facts are twisted, and no, I don't feel like debating someone who gets their information from fallacious and biased sources.
I completely understand why @Rundstedt1 is getting so upset with you and has used a few colorful words. That's how normal people get when someone is so thickheaded about something so black & white. (No pun intended.)
@AlexWerkmeister712 Rundstedt1 has no excuse other than that he's an immature little kid who when pressured results to profanity in attacks. Such language really isnt necessary, he should have grown out of it when he reached adult hood. I dont get angry often, so I wouldnt know anything about that. The "objective" books you read are written from a yankee, pro union prespective, history is written by the victor. What facts have I twisted? Theyre all the truth, that you ignore.
And you have been shown a liar and a troll. As I have repeatedly pointed out real historians laugh at your poorly contrived crap, there were no co called 'black confederates' and no matter what garbage you try to pull out in support of your beloved slave system it will not change that. And again just pulling out the silly platitudes about who wrote history is just loser revisionist trash that shows you have no real actual support but from David Irving like debunked charlatans
No law prohibited Lee from freeing any slaves. What a ridiculous lie. Custis himself freed several slaves, and the rest expected freedom, too. Instead, Lee illegally kept them more than 5 years, LONGER than the will allowed, and freed them only on the eve of the second Emancipation Proclamation. Seriously, don't the neo-Nazi spammers EVER stop lying?
He's a fucking lying spammer, did you see this exchange, incredible, he thinks that slaves in modern times are just like soldiers, you too bad for the millions of Nazi "soldiers" that they worked to death huh? Yea those were combat deaths of soldiers according to him. How sick
“To tar the sacrifices of the Confederate soldier as simple acts of racism, and reduce the battle flag under which he fought to nothing more than the symbol of a racist heritage, is one of the great blasphemies of our modern age."
- Senator James Webb (D-Va) He is still the Senator in fact
@Rundstedt1 I never said Webb was a historian, but he did write a book on the history of the Scots Irish In America as well as other books. Are you even ware of the demographpics of Virginia? Who is he trying to buddy buddy with? You do know that Webb is a self imposed 1 term senator who won election by a thin margin.
And big deal, there were as many scots Irish in the Union army if not more.
"I have never quite understood this. There are key parts of the South which were not settled by Anglo-Celts or anyone who saw themselves that way. This isn't a very sustained, sophisticated study whatsoever of ethnic origins as such.
Rather, it's a superficial cultural explanation of those origins and, by and large, a false one. It doesn't have any meaning in terms of biology, and not an awful lot in terms of culture. It certainly wasn't the sort of thing that distinguished white Northerners from white Southerners.
Again, I am at a loss to figure out what truly is the origin of this idea.
There's nothing terribly distinguished about being Anglo-Celtic. But I think that this concept reflects the notion of a sort of ethnic purity, a unified ethnic group which has claims to a separatist nationalism based on ethnic homogeneity." Professor Simpson
@Rundstedt1 "There's nothing terribly distinguished about being Anglo-Celtic." Okay 1) I dont see whats your point in all of this. 2) I think everyone should be proud of their hertiage. 3) Im not anglo celtic so its unrelated to me
Mind you, you already posted these three comments before.
“In our government-controlled schools we are taught that Lincoln was our greatest president because his war ended slavery and saved the Union. As usual, the other side of the story – the side that reflects poorly on the government – somehow gets lost.” – Richard J. Maybury, The Abe Lincoln Hoax
What a joke the lying spammer BillyRay is, for example, he has repeatedly misrepresented the pervasiveness of slavery in the south by misusing statistics even though he's been corrected over and over about it
(He takes the amount of slave owners and tries to divide that by the entire white population to say hay look there's only X percentage of slave holders, when by doing so he is including little children who are the children of slave owners, women who are wives of slave holders, and others in slave holding families and trying to say that they were not affected by slavery. That is a way of making a blatant lie.
As we have repeatedly pointed out to him, the proper way to look at it is by family. And on average, 1/3 of southern families owed slaves, and this rose to about 1/2 in the deep South. But no, he continues to misuse a basic demographic. He's been told, and I'm sure he understands the misrepresentation, but he continues. He deserves no respect, no matter how polite he tries to come off. He's a lying sack of shit without scruples trying to support the unsupportable.)
He now pulls out a list of non historians like DiLorenzo who has been thoroughly debunked by the real academic community, and who refuses to debate and defend his bogus ideas against real civil war historians that are in the real civil war academic community, and others like woods who is also not a historian and is a member of a known hate group that promotes this anti historiacal crap for propaganda.
@Rundstedt1 "woods who is also not a historian and is a member of a known hate group that" Woods is a historian and it is crazy at the amount of organizations labeled hate groups by the SPLC or others. The Boy Scouts are considered a hate group, but that doesnt make them so. And its very absurd.
Most of the people I pull out to support my claims are people who were actually involved in the conflict. I feel its more interesting that way.
The SPLC doesn't label the boy scouts a hate group and you have been shown to be a lair again. Woods is not a historian, he is a professional hack for a propaganda organ of a hate group. Yea why don't you trot out David Irving next and deny the Holocaust?
@Rundstedt1 This truly shows your incompetence, I never said the SPLC labeled the Boy Scouts as a hate group, I said the Boy Scouts are labeld a hate group.
"Yea why don't you trot out David Irving next and deny the Holocaust?" That would be you not me, Im not the one who denys the existence of black confederates despite written and photographic evidence.
What photographic evidence? he debunked Louisiana guards that was really a union unit or the Chandler photo that shows a master dressing up his slave with useless state prop guns like an ancient pepper box and and a useless pinfire revolver that the South couldn't import ammunition for. The Civil war times already debunked that photo, it was of a slave not a soldier.
@Rundstedt1 What photgraphic evidence?! blackconfederatesoldiersDOTcom/authentic_photographs_black_confederate_soldiers_36DOThtml
"The car is the families" Look, it all comes down to who is the official owner. The child of the man who holds the deed to the house is not the owner, the man is. The child of the man who pays taxes is not a taxpayer, the man is.
AHahaha, and that took me too photos 'servants' aka slaves like Chandler that has already been debunked and the poor mascot non soldier Nelson. Nope sorry, that laughable garbage that can only be called another form of a lie by you.
@Rundstedt1 Yes slaves served in the Confederate army, as well as free blacks and whites. And if you consider the draft as a form of slavery as I do, then there were even more slaves on both sides. Of course what you fail to reason with is that if a slave served in the CS army, they would be freed once the war ended, obviously the CS lost the war but the slaves were freed anyway via the 13 amendment. You just keep on proving your ignorance.
So slaves were taken along by their masters as body servants, that's not a soldier.
And no it is totally different than a draft, draftees are citizens that had the benefits of the free community slaves did not. And there were NO provisions for freeing slaves even in the later proposal to use them in 1865, it was only 'suggested' not put in law, and it was actually recommended that the owners hire them out to the army.
@Rundstedt1 Slaves arent soldiers? Explain the thousands if not millions of slave armies in ancient times.
On March 23 1865, Jefferson Davis, through the War Department, issued General Order No. 14 stating "...No slave will be accepted as a recruit unless with his own consent and with the approbation of his master by a written instrument conferring, as far as he may, the rights of a freedman..."
Oh and what another dishonest quote mine, the so called 'right of a freedmen' was only concerning the actual military service and only for that duration. It also clearly states under article I sec 5:
"That nothing in this act shall be construed to authorize a change in the relation which the said slaves shall bear toward their owners, except by consent of the owners and of the States in which they may reside, and in pursuance of the laws thereof."
@Rundstedt1 "except by consent of the owners and of the States in which they may reside" Thats exactly what I showed you: "with the approbation of his master by a written instrument conferring, as far as he may, the rights of a freedman." Way to go genius.
The Confederates did enlist and arm slaves as well as freed blacks. Even Lincoln acknowledges to this.
"like those he himself enslaved on his plantation" Are you referring to the slaves which he had to deal with in his father
AGAIN only for the duration of service, after which the slave was returned to ownership of his master which may or may not actually free them. Again it clearly states under article I sec 5:
"That nothing in this act shall be construed to authorize a change in the relation which the said slaves shall bear toward their owners, except by consent of the owners and of the States in which they may reside, and in pursuance of the laws thereof."
@Rundstedt1 No, you really arent reading it. The art 1 sec 5 says that nothing can change the relation of the slaves except by consent of the owner and the State where they reside. The Gen Order No 14 states that the slave is a freedman "with the approbation of his master by a written instrument." Same thing. Not to mention the Cleburne Memorial of Jan 2 1864 which called for the enlistment of blacks and the immediate emancipation of all slaves at the end of the war. Signed by over a
No, you are reading it wrong there is nothing unequivocal about the relationship not being effected, that means that the slave remains the slave when released from service. And while we're at it lets correct another piece of your garbage.
Too bad the Mack Lee story has been shown to be false.
"An example of a slave narrative that doesn't hold up under scrutiny is Rev. William Mack Lee, "History of the Life of Rev. Wm Mack Lee," 1918. Rev. Lee claimed that he was raised a slave at Arlington and served as cook to the general throughout the war. He is not listed on any inventory of Arlington slaves,
however; places Lee (and himself) at battles such as First Manassas, and claims to have cooked for a group of Southern Officers "in de Wilderness" on July 3, 1863, that included Stonewall Jackson and George Pickett as well as Lee. On this date, Jackson is dead, and Lee and Pickett were fighting the last desperate throes of the Battle of Gettysburg. Lee's Letters make no mention of William Mack Lee.
His personal servants and cook during the war were Perry and Lawrence Parks and Billy Taylor." Elizabeth Brown Pryor, "Reading the Man" p562, n39
So Mack Lee was not telling the truth, he was just using the lie to further his own personal fortunes in an era that ate up that lost cause garbage. Once again you don't know how to check the actual authenticity of the sources you use; or more probably, you don't care.
Yup the owners were NOT obligated to free the slaves and they were just contracted out. We only wish the Confederates were stupid enough to try and enlist and arm slaves. I could see it now. "General Lee our divisions are turning around and attacking US!!" The war would have been over in five minutes and Lee probably been killed by vengeful bondmen like those he himself enslaved on his plantation until forced to free them. LOL
I don't need, those were not modern democracies and the Civil War didn't happen in ancient times fool, and a slave has no power to give consent. "Jim consent or I'll whip you"
What a sad joke you are in defense of you slave system.
@Rundstedt1 in laws will, which were not his by law, and which he didnt whip as he claims and as one of the slaves claimed, Wesley Norris?
“I was raised by one of the greatest men in the world. There was never one born of a woman greater than Gen. Robert E. Lee, according to my judgment. All of his servants were set free ten years before the war, but all remained on the plantation until after the surrender.”
What crap you just dig up some old garbage that was used in the nadir of race relation in 1918 to try and justify the lost cause, and we know its false because Lee DID NOT free his slaves 10 years before the war. Yup, more David Irving crap. But real historians who have access to Lee's relate the truth.
"I remained with Gen. Lee about seventeen months, when my sister Mary, a cousin of ours, and I determined to run away, which we did in the year 1859; we had already reached Westminster, in Maryland, on our way to the North, when we were apprehended and thrown into prison, and Gen. Lee notified of our arrest; we remained in prison fifteen days, when we were sent back to Arlington;
we were accordingly stripped to the skin by the overseer, who, however, had sufficient humanity to decline whipping us; accordingly Dick Williams, a county constable was called in, who gave us the number of lashes ordered;
@Rundstedt1 via the people actually voting for the person. And the Senate was never meant to be elected that way.
I have no idea who Davis Irving is.
State law required that the slaves be funded in a liveliehood outside VA which could not be done until the debts of the etsate were paid off. Thats why he was not able to free the slaves immediately. The slaves were freed in '62, within the specified 5 years.
Again Lee was instructed by the terms of the will that he should sell off property as to pay the debts and finance the freedom, but he kept them and work them so he could try and keep the land. And Gee slaves were freed by the Custis family Lee could just as well have also.
Gen. Lee, in the meantime, stood by, and frequently enjoined Williams to "lay it on well," an injunction which he did not fail to heed; not satisfied with simply lacerating our naked flesh, Gen. Lee then ordered the overseer to thoroughly wash our backs with brine, which was done."
Gen. Lee, in the meantime, stood by, and frequently enjoined Williams to "lay it on well," an injunction which he did not fail to heed; not satisfied with simply lacerating our naked flesh, Gen. Lee then ordered the overseer to thoroughly wash our backs with brine, which was done."
And as reported in the Atlantic: "In all, Pryor found seven accounts of the event, all of which corroborate the basic elements of the original claim. It's important to remember as well that Norris' story was published in an antislavery newspaper in 1866, the year after the war ended; Lee was in good health and serving as president of Washington College in Lexington at the time.
He did not respond publicly, though privately he denied it. But Pryor makes the critical point abut Norris' story: "its veracity has been questioned by generations of Lee aficionados, and we might be tempted to dismiss it as the exaggerated ranting of a bitter ex-slave. Except for one thing: all of its facts are verifiable." Among the verifiable fact Pryor found was the receipt book showing payment to the constable."
So no, Lee kept legal ownership even after most his slaves were set free by the Union army, and only freed them when he was legally required by his inheritance. Lee held onto them until the very last minute and even petitioned the court to void the term of the will and extend their servitude
@Rundstedt1 The law actually prohibited Lee from freeing those slaves until the debts of the Custis estate were paid off. You need to really research more.
The American Government never was and still isnt a democracy. I never said the War to Prevent Southern Independence occured in ancient times, however you denied the existence of slaves as soldiers and Im just keeping you honest. Which is pretty tough might I add.
NO you need to be honest, the will stated the he should sell off land to finance the free of the slaves but he decided he could use them to pay the debts and keep the land.
The US isn't a democracy? Well maybe you don't vote, but it was still formed as a democracy. an don't even think of pulling the republic carp, they are not mutually exclusive.
Despite the fact nothing says that Lincoln was specifically referring to the proposal to officially enlist blacks. How do you explain Union Quartermaster general Montgomery C Meigs on Nov 18 1862 who said "The labor of the colored man supports the rebel soldier... and sometimes aids him on picket by rare skill with the rifle." I would like to see your revisonist excuse for this.
The US is not a democracy, only 1/3 of the federal government is "created"
Meigs is referring to slaves in the first part and is just plain wrong in the second. He gives no examples, there is no proof of what he said. One unsupported statement that is meaningless. And yes despite your idiotic libertarian trash this is a democracy, we vote, democracy, period
We do not vote for the president, we do not vote for any of the judges or justices. Thats a fact, despite your hopes. Remeber what you best friend/murderer said Stalin, its not what the vote count is but who's counting them thats important.
"So Mack Lee was not telling the truth" Ha, your conspiracies are very disgusting and with very little proof. Do you agree with that idiot Alex Jones who says 9/11 was an inside job? I guess we should just throw out every primary source then.
It does not matter the way that we vote for president or that there is another layer in between, it's still a democracy and if you were to try and claim it was not in any civics class you would fail that question.
And again, I use a legit source that went through all of Lee papers. Guess what Lee never mentions Mack and we know who is cooks were, it was not him.
@Rundstedt1 Are you kidding me? Any good government teacher would tell you the US is not a democracy and was intended as a republic. And still is for the most part.
The University of North Carolina put up a good detailed history of Mack, I recognize that there is skepticism but, I never said he served with Lee, the quote I posted was him simply showing his gratitude for the man, he could have lied, but how would that help him any? A lot of people claim to be related to Lee, most
@Rundstedt1 Of course, just because no one saw it hapen doesnt mean it didnt happen. No one saw me drive to work one day but does that mean it never happened? No, no one reported it. Im not saying this applies to Mack, but that could, and I stress could, of been the case. Nonetheless, its not totally 100% known either way.
Yea right, like the creationist pulls out the one or two so called 'scientists' to try and support their garbage, the lair Rev pulls out a similar list of charlatans and hacks. But it's just useless, those people refuse to meet and have defend their falsehoods against real academics in the field in a professional setting for they know they will be shown as fools, like Lochlainn Seabrook; also not a historian, and whose only qualification is being an 'unreconstructed Southern author'.
Or he misrepresents the argument of the author like Gallagher, who doesn't question that the war was caused by slavery but only that the North fought more for Union than to end slavery, which is an entirely different debate. And the fact is they fought for both reasons, more for the first in the beginning, but soon the two became inseparable goals.
And who despite the title of a book he wrote, doesn't support the Rev here either; for in it Gallagher talks about blacks who were cooks, teamsters, servants, musicians, laborers, and in other noncombatant roles in the Confederate armies and government or forced to take arms by threat of violence against them like the example I used before of the cowardly confederates forcing their slaves to load cannons under threat of death.
Yup, might as well bring out the all the creationist speakers next and try and tell us their garbage is valid even though all of the actual professionals field show them as fools. I mean really, what a joke. I would print a list of historians that say that the Rev is totally wrong on everything, but it would go for pages and pages, really all one need do is pick any of the plethora of historians that are actually in the Civil war historical community or watch any civil war debate on CSPAN.
The fact remains, the idea of there being these 'black confederates' is scoffed at by the real historical community and there is no evidence to support such a claim. The RevBillyRay is just liar supporting a racist cause, no matter what he says his motivation is.
@Rundstedt1 Look kid, and you must be a kid or a teenager (if not then you're very immature) at least using langauage like that. Werent you taught any better? I guess thats just a southern thing.
I havent lied or misused statistics. Less than 5% of southerners owned slaves, Im sorry but little girls and members of the family who dont hold the deed arent considered slave owners. Thats like saying a member of my family was a crook thus we must all be crooks. That makes no sense.
See you LIED AGAIN right here, on avg. 1/3 of southern families owned slaves, you are trying to say that the children of slave owners aren't slave owners, well duh, but meaningless, as they are part of a slave owning family. It like say that since the family owns a car the children don't have the benefits of a car in the family, it is a form of a lie.
@Rundstedt1 "you are trying to say that the children of slave owners aren't slave owners" Obviously as you pointed out. But your owner of the car ordeal makes no sense. Under who's name does the car belong to? Probably the dad, not the kids.
The car is the families, the family has the benefit of it like the family of the household whose head is a slave owner has the benefit of owning a slave.
You can try all you wish, but your purposeful misuse of statistics is still a lie.
More proven dishonesty from the Neo-confederate lair BillyRay.
"Back in 2007 two researchers came across a photograph often exhibited as proof of African Americans in Confederate service–a image labeled “1st Louisiana Native Guard.” An examination of the photograph revealed that the image in fact was of African Americans in Union service: one way in which the image was tampered with in order to misrepresent it was by cropping out the Union officer." - "Keeping It Honest" - Brooks D. Simpson
@Rundstedt1 If what you say were true about history being written by the victor is bullshit, then why were the Indians deemed bloodthirsty pagan savages who deserved to be killed throughout much of history? Or is this what you truly believe?
"I'm actually professionally trained in how to do proper research and to know what is valid." And Im not? I have a degree in history and anthropoligical science, I am a public historian if I get technical. You teach highschool, Im in the real
Are they in modern professional history? no. You can't compare the modern field to its more loosely and less scholarly past like you can't compare modern medicine to those who 'bleed' people in the past. And I've also taught at the college level. YOU have lied over and over in you posts, you have no degrees I don't believe one word of it. You are NOT a public historian if you tried to spout this carp the real historians would get you fired.
@Rundstedt1 Yes you taught at college, another leftist, lincoln cultist, revisionist professor, no suprise.
Is what not in modern professional history? "you can't compare modern medicine to those who 'bleed' people in the past." In some ways tribal medicine is more effective than modern medicine.
"real historians would get you fired." No doubt about that, Im not in the main stream leftist mentality garbage.
@Rundstedt1 I am considered a public historian, look it up.
Why the hell would I tell you my full name? You havent told me yours, nor do I want to know. If you want to know my first name then its Kaleb, my Indian name is Black Raven. I wont tell you my last name for security reasons.
Not many people at Jamestowne discuss the War for Southern Independence other than the Confederate fort that was on the Island. However, Bill Kelso, the leading archaeologist who everyone deemed
Oh bullshit, I've caught you misrepresenting what sources really relate and outright lying. You are not to be believed about anything, not even your supposed heritage. And then the old and silly refrain of the propagandist who no longer has a leg to stand on... "Oh those left wing scholars" what trash, if any other view than the one that is accepted by scholars could stand up to scrutiny it would prevail in academics no matter who or where it comes from.
@Rundstedt1 Im twisting lies? Despite that not being true I think the correct wording would be twisitng the truth, Im not sure how you twist lies.
Most in the "intellectual" business are left wing for whatever reason.
"I've caught you" Really? Are you sure about that? Where?
"prevail in academics no matter" My views do prevail in academics, there are dozens upon dozens of books on the topic and many dedicated proffesors such as W Scott Poole, Thomas Lawrenece Connelly, Barbara
You are a joke, and your twisting lies to support what is known to be false, and what you most probably really know is false, shows it, and that, not that you 'aren't in the Mainstream' is what would get you fired. You are a charlatan, a fraud and a hack.
@Rundstedt1 L Bellows, Tom DiLorenzo, Gary W Gallagher, Tom Woods, Sharon Hepburn, Michael Holt, to name a few as well as many other scholars such as Lochlainn Seabrook.
As I said before, these conversations never come up in my duties, they arent needed. I usually have to correct tourists on incorrect history of Jamestowne. But either way, you should know that its extremely difficult firing someone in the Park Service or any other part of the bureaucracy, theres a lot of red tape.
"not even your supposed heritage." Things like that upset me, I am a member of the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Tribe Reservation in Odanah Wisconsin. I am 1/4 Chippewa, My Dads Dad was full blooded, he married a German woman, my father was 1/2 Native, he married a white woman, I am 1/4 Native, I was married to a white woman, my kids are 1/8 but they dont qualify to be a member of the reservation because you have to be at least 1/4. wwwDOTbadriver-nsnDOTgov/home
@RevBillyRayCollins You're a lot more German than I am. I've calculated that I'd be 1/64th German by virtue of my German ancestor - Captain William von Sonntag of King Louis' French Army - that was present at the surrender of the British at Yorktown. I really can't believe the flak you're having to take with regard to your viewpoints. To me it just seems that you're making comments on historical occurrences.
Here an example of how the Confederates treated their black slave laborers
"Gun after gun was silenced and abandoned…every embrasure within range of a thousand yards was silent,” Colonel Ripley proudly wrote of their efforts, adding that Berdan’s men also suppressed Rebel small-arms fire. “The rebel infantry,” he wrote, “which at first responded with a vigorous fire, found that exposure of a head meant grave danger, if not death."
"As Ripley stated, deadly shots from the sharpshooters made manning the Confederate defenses dangerous work. In response, it seems some Southern troops then resorted to a desperate tactic. “They FORCED their negroes to load their cannon,” an officer in the 1st U.S.S.S. sadly noted. “They shot them if they would not load the cannon, and we shot them if they did." - "Killers in Green Coats, Civil War Times," February 20, 2008
So the Confederates forced under direct threat of death the hapless back slave labors to load the guns so the cowardly Rebs wouldn't come under Union fire. Those are NOT black soldiers! Those are unarmed human shields being used by war confederate criminals.
Oh and Lee tried the same garbage showing he didn't really respect he black as a soldier either, by having black Union soldiers shipped off into slavery and putting captured black soldiers to work on the Petersburg defenses under Union fire until Grant threatened to respond in kind and put the captured confederates on the Union works.
Just more poor twisting of reality that is another form of a lie by you.
And no black regiments were formed in Tenn., and even if they would have been, the Confedertate army wouldn't have accepted them; like they demanded and got the disbanding of the pre-war formed New Orleans militia
@Rundstedt1 uniforms," and armed with "rifles, muskets, sabres, bowie-knives, dirks, etc.... manifestly an integral portion of the Southern Confederacy." - L H Steiner's diary during the CS occupation of Frederick MD.
And Stiener account is recognized as wholly unreliable, he gets many things wrong like saying there were 74000 confederates and Howell Cobb who, in January of 1865 called the use of negros as soldiers “the most pernicious idea that has been suggested since the war began,” continuing, “you cannot make soldiers of slaves or slaves of soldiers. . .
The day you make soldiers of them is the beginning of the revolution. If slaves will make good soldiers, our whole theory of slavery is wrong.” Cobb wrote in 1865 so clearly there were no blacks in arms before that. And if there were blacks with Lee on the way to Antietam they he wouldn't have needed later to plead for their admission when the Confederacy was all but defeated.
Oh and by the way reading further into the Tenn. proposal, it was not for soldiers, but for laborers for military service. They are talked about being equipped only with spades, shovels axes ect... and even them most were impressed slaves hired out by their masters. Greeley, p522
Even Lincoln knew there were blacks in the CS Army: "There is one thing about the negro's fighting for the rebels which we can know as well as they can, and that is that they cannot at the same time fight in their armies and stay at home and make bread for them." -Lincoln March 17, 1865
Lying piece of scum, that was one month before the war ended and was talking about the never realized confederate proposal to enlist black units. And as a matter of fact it is that very debate in the confederacy that disproves there were any black confederates. Why debate whether to allow blacks in arms so late in the war if there were already so called black confederates?
I've already proven you a liar on another video and now here also.
@Rundstedt1 You know you should really control your anger, it doesnt provide a healthy debate, or lifestyle Im told.
One month before the war ended, so? Does that mean he didnt say it?
"the never realized confederate proposal" Hardly, June 1861 the TN Legislature passed a statute allowing the Gov to recieve into military service "all male free persons of color, btwn the ages of 15 and 50." Feb 4 1862 the VA Legislature passed a bill enrolling all of the states free blacks into
@Rundstedt1 service. Nov 23 1861 a 7 mile long line of CS soldiers was marched through New Orleans, among them 1400 free black soldiers. The souths first all black militia was formed on April 23 1861 known as the "Native Guards (colored) of Louisiana.
"Why debate whether" Because there was never any official blacks in the CS army, only unofficial or in state militias.
I already used a definition of soldier, so yes there were 3000 blacks in Jacksons army clad "in all kinds of
As stated that militia was forcibly disbanded by demands of he confederate army, it would not accept it as a unit, period. It was never given uniform or arms.
@Rundstedt1 "The labor of the colored man supports the rebel soldier, enables him to leave his plantation to meet our armies, builds his fortifications, cooks his food, and sometimes aids him on picket by rare skill with the rifle." -Union Quartermaster-General Montgomery C Meigs Nov 18 1862
I suggest you look up the man Louis Napoleon Nelson, a black Confederate with the 7th TN Cavalry, Company M who served valiantly at Lookout Mountain and other engagements.
OH what dishonesty, Nelson was just a pastor, he was given no rank, was not in the actual army and was called "Uncle" the typical racist term for black men in the South. He also was NOT a soldier but was just adopted by the unit as a chaplain
@Rundstedt1 you even watched the video were commenting on?
Nelson was, specifially, a chaplain as well as his masters sons, E R Oldham, bodygaurd. During the engagement at Lookout, Nelson actually snuck behind enemy lines at night and killed of of the yankees mules and stole the meat. He was even at Vicksburg
Yea his MASTERS SON'S asshole, he was a SLAVE, NOT a soldier. Lol
And what he might or might not have done because of the Stockholm syndrome is meaningless and actually unsupported except by more poor sourcing and lies.
@Rundstedt1 Now the spamming Holocaust denier is perpetuating the old lie about black confederates? Hilarious! As you have eloquently pointed out, the CSA refused to allow blacks to even enlist until the end of the war, and only a handful ever served. There are no records of any black confederates being killed, captured, or wounded, and they're absent from soldiers' letters. It's all a "fairy tale."
The first recorded yankee killed in the war, Mjr Theodore Winthrop of the 7th Reg NY State Militia, was killed by a black confederate sharpshooter at the Battle of Bethel Church, June 10 1861.
The Stonewall brigade had some 3000 black soldiers. "There are at the present moment, many colored men in the Confederate Army, doing not only as cooks... but as real soldiers, having muskets." -Frederick Douglass to Lincoln 1862
Nathan Forrest said once the blacks who served with him were of the best
Bullshit, the stonewall reference is to slave laborers and the Douglas quote is recognzed by historians as false on his part to push for the enlistment of blacks early in the North. And the first reference is just made up garbage without provenance.
The the Racist Forest who murdered lack soldiers when he captured them!!!
@Rundstedt1 "the first reference is just made up" No its not, you can find August Valentine Kautz's defintion of soldier in his book 'Customs of Service for Non-Commissioned Officers and Soldiers (as Derived from Law and Regulations and Practised in the Army of the United States)' 1864.
That wasn't what I was reffing to there, but Kautz can make any ridiculous claim he wishes. But hey the Nazis used slave labor to build fortifications too, gee I guess those were all soldiers then... what a sad twisted joke.
No laborers are not soldiers they are civilians being used by the military, in this case unwillingly, and they are NOT soldiers.
@Rundstedt1 Im just shocked that people deny the existence of black confederates, you're just in line with the Holocaust deniers, its just silly that you dont look at the evidence.
Oh fuck you, the holocaust deniers are the Neo-confederates with their dog whistle racist shit trying to deny the central purpose of the Confederacy which was to protect slavery and white supremacy. A fact the Confederacy admitted over and over. There is NO evidence for black confederates, but like the holocaust denier the neo-rebs must twist and manufacture some like the Neo- Nazis use David Irving the disgraced historian.
@Rundstedt1 "the Douglas quote is recognzed by historians as false" No, the real reason is that everything I show is either false or irrelevant. Of course if the source is biased towards the north, which most are, then it is the truth. Nonetheless I suggest you read 'Douglass' Monthly' published September 1861 Vol 4 pg 516.
Hahaha yea, right like historians haven't seen that and already taken it into account. Douglas was trying to shame the North into letting blacks serve by lying about the South.
@Rundstedt1 Douglass was not lying about black confederates, I have shown the numerous groups with black confederates, but you are right in saying that he was shaming the Union for not enlisting blacks.
Dont you realize that you have been fooled by the political game? History is written by the victor, you have been told all your life in the govt run schools that slavery was the cause and no blacks fought for the CS. All untrue.
You have shown nothing that historians and I haven't already addressed and shown to be lacking. And again with the silly anti-intellectual platitude of 'history is written by the victor' is bullshit! So I guess we can discount the holocaust, after all it was the allies that wrote the history. All you do is make a mockery of all of history.
@Rundstedt1 "So I guess we can discount the holocaust, after all it was the allies that wrote the history." The Nazis proudly boasted about what they did.
"'history is written by the victor' is bullshit!" This is why we cant have conversations, you believe every thing you hear.
"Yea his MASTERS SON'S" Yes he was a slave who went into the CS army, many slaves served in the CS army, many were also slaves to the draft.
So did the SOUTH asshole!!!! They stated over and over that they were all about slavery.
And NO it's YOU that believes everything you hear, I'm actually professionally trained in how to do proper research and to know what is valid.
NO slaves are NOT soldiers. HE was forced to do everything in his life, he had no choice of where he was, and was taken on by the unit like soldiers would take on a dog as a mascot, that not a soldier.
Again then tell us your real name, I'm sure the real Jamestown historians would love the mischaracterizations you spouted. No your just some looser tour guide with a High school diploma at most. You've shown your dishonesty over and over again.
@Rundstedt1 'Loser' not 'Looser' ;-) Here in England we've got a real problem with pseudo intellectual Marxists that have hijacked the British 'Labour' Party. None of them have ever had to do work for a shit wage. I follow the writings of the RevBillyRayCollins and I can't see anything wrong with anything he's written - it's his opinion and his right to freedom of speech and expression.
@Rundstedt1 "NO slaves are NOT soldiers" Im not up to date on history of the ancient world, but Im pretty sure most people who were in the army say during ancient egypt and africa, much of asia and the middle east, were conscripted against their will or were slaves, mostly from captured enemies. In fact, werent the jannisaries, however you spell it, a slave army?
The Civil war is NOT the ancient world!!! This was not Spartan Hoplites, Good Grief what a sad twisting of reality. Yea I guess all those slaves the Nazis used were soldiers, what a fucking joke you are in defense of you slave republic. You are disgusting.
@Rundstedt1 crazy for thinking he could find the fort in the mid 1990s since it was always wrongfully believed to be washed away in the James river, remains silent on the issue because Im sure he feels its irrelevant to the situation at hand. However he is an avid mythbuster to the commonly held myths of Jamestowne such as anyone getting their research from the disney film Pocahontas, as well as many other similar things.
@Rundstedt1 I dont just do tours, but lectures as well. I dont have the luxury of discussing these matters however. But I am also involved with the NPS' archaeology department at Jamestowne as well as other trivial procedures as writing parking tickets, eduacting the tourists about wilderness safety, picking up litter, which I enjoy doing since Im a conservationist. and dealing with the many federal contactors we have on the island.
@Rundstedt1 "The Civil war is NOT the ancient world" I never said it was, however you said no slave was ever a soldier, and that they arent soldiers. And I just pointed out the facts.
No I have a Bachelors of Scinece degree in history and anthropoligcal science from Radford University, you?
I'm shocked that dishonest intellectuals still try to say that there were no black confederates.
Using Union general August Valentine Kautz's defintion of a soldier in 1864: "In the fullest sense, any man in the military service who recieves pay, whether sworn in or not, is a soldiers, because he is subject to military law. Under this general head, laborers, teamsters, sutlers, chaplains, etc., are soldiers." This means there were some 500,000 to 1 million blacks in the CS army.
The real owners of America are Native Americans aka Red Indians. blacks and whites don't have a right to talk about that. fuck all whites to Europe and screw off all blacks to Africa.
But not for the Confederacy, they fought for the Union. The idea of black confederates is a myth designed to hide the racism of the slave state known as the Confederacy, and is not supported by historians as I have already explained.
The FULL Lee quote is that he considered slavery "a greater evil to the WHITE than to the colored race." Lee believed "blacks are immeasurably better off here than in Africa, morally, physically, and socially. The painful discipline they are undergoing is necessary for their further instruction as a race." He believed slavery should NEVER end unless and until God Himself---"a merciful Providence"---commanded it.
first of all I DONT SUPPORT SLAVERY, NEVER WILL. MY BEST AND DEAREST FRIEND, KURT WAS A BLACK SOUTHERNER. I THINK SLAVERY IS THE MOST DIGUSTING ANTI HUMAN THING IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD. robert e lee believed slavery should never end huh? that must be why he freed his slaves a year before the war started. and in 1862 took over the custis plantation, 5 years after custis died and freed all slaves on the plantation.
You are absolutely wrong and no legitimate historian would support you. Lee held onto legal ownership of his slaves until the last possible minute he could by the terms of his inheritance, and even petitioned the court to try have that extended so he could keep them into 1863. And the Union Army freed more of Lee's slaves than he did.
"The will stated that the slaves were to be freed within five years, and at the same time large legacies—raised from selling property—should be given to the Lee children. But as the executor of the will, Lee decided that instead of freeing the slaves right away—as they expected—he could continue to own and work them for five years in an effort to make the estates profitable and not have to sell the property
Lee was considered a hard taskmaster. He also started hiring slaves to other families, sending them away, and breaking up families that had been together on the estate for generations. The slaves resented him, were terrified they would never be freed, and they lost all respect for him.
There were many runaways, and at one point several slaves jumped him, claiming they were as free as he. Lee ordered these men to be severely whipped. He also petitioned the court to extend their servitude, but the court ruled against him and Lee did grant them their freedom on Jan. 1, 1863—ironically, the same day that Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation went into effect." Elizabeth Brown Pryor author of "Reading the Man: A Portrait of Robert E. Lee Through His Private Letters"
@RonPaulHatesBlacks Also, what is up with your name? who names their youtube account off of a false statement about a politician? Silly, none here can take you seriously.
@shiningbeans Yeah. I think I can guess why you ducked the question of whether you even graduated high school. How embarassing for you, boy.
High school and college are good things, son. It's important to read the South's own declarations of secession, and actually study American history, before you lecture people about it.
Maybe one day you'll accept that slavery is wrong, kiddo. Then you'll understand that the confederacy was wrong to secede and start a war to try to preserve slavery.
@RonPaulHatesBlacks I'm a American History minor at GW, if you must know. I don't know what I need to say to get it through your head, but I think slavery is an evil system(as did R.E.Lee) and I do not believe they should have succeeded as per an amendment agreed on during the time of the Articles. I think you are making assumptions of my positions. I was defending the fact that Lee was morally against slavery, as many in the south may have been, though they were still obviously racists.
Ole dumb azz, uncle ruckus looking, house ni@@a! YOU DUMB AZZ BASTERD IF THE REBS HAD WON YOU WOULD BE A SLAVE AZZHOLE!!!
williamgray713 19 hours ago
"Weather"?----interesting!
jim268262 19 hours ago
I thank God that there are great people here in America that are willing to stand up for what they believe in! A++++ Weather You Agree With This Man Or Not, This Man Has The Right To Express His Opinion And Or His Opinions here in America!! The democrat party as well as the left wing movement here in America, want to suppress and silence.any person and or group that disagrees with their Left wing agenda, ideology, and or movement. We must not allow this to happen!!
NOBULLANDNOSPIN 1 day ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I strongly admire this man---And for those of you who think that the American Civil War started over slavery I truely pity you---You all need to study American history a bit more in detail.
jim268262 1 day ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jim268262
No actually you do, historians are agreed on the topic the war was because of slavery.
"The war was ABOUT slavery. [Catton's emphasis] Slavery had caused it: If slavery had vanished before 1861, the war simply would not have taken place." Bruce Catton "Reflections on the Civil War" p5
"Everything stemmed from the slavery issue," - James McPherson
Rundstedt1 1 day ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jim268262
"Within the profession [historians] there's virtually no discussion or debate left of slavery as central to the antebellum south and the fundamental cause of secession and the war. To the extent within the profession there's a debate about this, people will talk about other causal factors such as economic factors creating secession and the Civil War, but those economic factors always come down to a slave economy" Dr. Eric Walther of University of Houston
Rundstedt1 1 day ago
For those of you who don't know! This is what a house N looks like and sounds like. Keep him in chains and serving. I guess the old germans should be running around with the flag that they flew under his Nazi reign.
tcage31 2 days ago
Black confederate? That is just well nuts like a Jewish Nazzi.
ghosttrain2066 2 days ago 5
@Sharsuils It's Clayton Bigsby!!! He's supported by people who say that the Nazis believed Jews are evil and the Nazis "were right in their belief."
RonPaulHatesBlacks 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
(1/2)
In June of 1863, Confederate General Kirby Smith sent a letter to General Taylor and states this:
"I have been unofficially informed that some of your troops have captured negroes in arms. I hope this may not be so, and that your subordinates who may have been in command of capturing parties may have recognized the propriety of giving NO QUARTER to armed negroes and their officers.
Rundstedt1 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
(2/2)
If they are taken, however, you will turn them over to the State authorities to be tried for crimes against the State, and you will afford such facilities in obtaining witnesses as the interests of the public service will permit."
Yup, not only did the confederacy not recognize ANY blacks as soldiers, they were just as likely to execute or enslave the black Union troops they captured.
Rundstedt1 3 days ago
Hell, I'm proud of him for knowing what General Cleburne's flag is. Give'em hell.
Voxpopuli1861 3 days ago
Is that Uncle Ruckus?
Sharsuils 3 days ago
Ummm...OK.
nakedscrewmonkey 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
STATESIDE TERRORISM is why the US population must be disarmed.
Rollout of the Federal Govt's Gun Ownership Ban should start during the initial months of Pres. Obama's 2nd 4-year term in office.
We expect little resistance from the citizenry thanks to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) which the President just signed into Federal Law.
Disarmament of all registered-gun owners (we know who you are) will be rolled out on a national-scale and should curtail any terrorism by armed patriots.
DeptOfLawEnforcement 5 days ago
I'm proud to say a neighboring Police Dept jailed this guy for resisting arrest.
DeptOfLawEnforcement 5 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DeptOfLawEnforcement
so what your saying is this man was resisting arrest? That's kinda hard to believe that Mr. Edgerton would do that, he's doing what he belives in, you hear that he used to be the president of the NAACP? Now he's doing that because of his heritage, not hate, I would be the first one to help post his bail if he was arrested for speaking his mind, for now our bill of rights allow us to speak our mind, he's not speaking hate at all!
thefireman774 5 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I don't see a big deal here... Yankees used slavery as an excuse to go to war...
Lgw1984 6 days ago
I hope this guy is kidding...
AlexWerkmeister712 6 days ago
@AlexWerkmeister712 if youre talking about revbillyraycollins i dont think so
dutchsouthernrockfan 4 days ago
@dutchsouthernrockfan
No, I was talking about the black confederate.
But that RevBillyRayCollins guy seems a bit mentally insufficient as well.
AlexWerkmeister712 4 days ago 8
This has been flagged as spam show
@AlexWerkmeister712 Oh yeah, I'm totally mentally insufficient; that's why I can maintain a conversation without cursing, name calling, and using other immature childish language. If you want to debate, then let's do so. But be prepared for the facts that your high school texts leave out.
RevBillyRayCollins 4 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@RevBillyRayCollins
You mean lies and garbage sources, not facts. I've shown all your stuff to be trash and you nothing more than a propagandist for a slaveorcracy.
So Called black confederates are a myth and the real historians agree on this as they agree that the cause of the Civil war was slavery.
Rundstedt1 4 days ago
@RevBillyRayCollins
I've read much more than textbooks and "Yankee" articles.
I've been objective and have seen it from both sides. Southerner or not, your facts are twisted, and no, I don't feel like debating someone who gets their information from fallacious and biased sources.
I completely understand why @Rundstedt1 is getting so upset with you and has used a few colorful words. That's how normal people get when someone is so thickheaded about something so black & white. (No pun intended.)
AlexWerkmeister712 3 days ago 9
This has been flagged as spam show
@AlexWerkmeister712 Rundstedt1 has no excuse other than that he's an immature little kid who when pressured results to profanity in attacks. Such language really isnt necessary, he should have grown out of it when he reached adult hood. I dont get angry often, so I wouldnt know anything about that. The "objective" books you read are written from a yankee, pro union prespective, history is written by the victor. What facts have I twisted? Theyre all the truth, that you ignore.
RevBillyRayCollins 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@RevBillyRayRacist
And you have been shown a liar and a troll. As I have repeatedly pointed out real historians laugh at your poorly contrived crap, there were no co called 'black confederates' and no matter what garbage you try to pull out in support of your beloved slave system it will not change that. And again just pulling out the silly platitudes about who wrote history is just loser revisionist trash that shows you have no real actual support but from David Irving like debunked charlatans
Rundstedt1 3 days ago
No law prohibited Lee from freeing any slaves. What a ridiculous lie. Custis himself freed several slaves, and the rest expected freedom, too. Instead, Lee illegally kept them more than 5 years, LONGER than the will allowed, and freed them only on the eve of the second Emancipation Proclamation. Seriously, don't the neo-Nazi spammers EVER stop lying?
RonPaulHatesBlacks 6 days ago
@RonPaulHatesBlacks
He's a fucking lying spammer, did you see this exchange, incredible, he thinks that slaves in modern times are just like soldiers, you too bad for the millions of Nazi "soldiers" that they worked to death huh? Yea those were combat deaths of soldiers according to him. How sick
Rundstedt1 6 days ago
“To tar the sacrifices of the Confederate soldier as simple acts of racism, and reduce the battle flag under which he fought to nothing more than the symbol of a racist heritage, is one of the great blasphemies of our modern age."
- Senator James Webb (D-Va) He is still the Senator in fact
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago in playlist black confederates 101
@RevBillyRayCollins
Webb, also not a historian and just politician trying to ingratiate himself with his bias electorate.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
@Rundstedt1 I never said Webb was a historian, but he did write a book on the history of the Scots Irish In America as well as other books. Are you even ware of the demographpics of Virginia? Who is he trying to buddy buddy with? You do know that Webb is a self imposed 1 term senator who won election by a thin margin.
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago in playlist black confederates 101
@RevBillyRayCollins (1/3)
And big deal, there were as many scots Irish in the Union army if not more.
"I have never quite understood this. There are key parts of the South which were not settled by Anglo-Celts or anyone who saw themselves that way. This isn't a very sustained, sophisticated study whatsoever of ethnic origins as such.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
@RevBillyRayCollins (2/3)
Rather, it's a superficial cultural explanation of those origins and, by and large, a false one. It doesn't have any meaning in terms of biology, and not an awful lot in terms of culture. It certainly wasn't the sort of thing that distinguished white Northerners from white Southerners.
Again, I am at a loss to figure out what truly is the origin of this idea.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
@RevBillyRayCollins (3/3)
There's nothing terribly distinguished about being Anglo-Celtic. But I think that this concept reflects the notion of a sort of ethnic purity, a unified ethnic group which has claims to a separatist nationalism based on ethnic homogeneity." Professor Simpson
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Rundstedt1 "There's nothing terribly distinguished about being Anglo-Celtic." Okay 1) I dont see whats your point in all of this. 2) I think everyone should be proud of their hertiage. 3) Im not anglo celtic so its unrelated to me
Mind you, you already posted these three comments before.
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago in playlist black confederates 101
“In our government-controlled schools we are taught that Lincoln was our greatest president because his war ended slavery and saved the Union. As usual, the other side of the story – the side that reflects poorly on the government – somehow gets lost.” – Richard J. Maybury, The Abe Lincoln Hoax
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago in playlist black confederates 101
@RevBillyRayCollins
Yup here comes the David Irving stuff...
Maybury not a historian and just another free-market Austrian economics hack
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
(1/9)
What a joke the lying spammer BillyRay is, for example, he has repeatedly misrepresented the pervasiveness of slavery in the south by misusing statistics even though he's been corrected over and over about it
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
Comment removed
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
(2/9)
(He takes the amount of slave owners and tries to divide that by the entire white population to say hay look there's only X percentage of slave holders, when by doing so he is including little children who are the children of slave owners, women who are wives of slave holders, and others in slave holding families and trying to say that they were not affected by slavery. That is a way of making a blatant lie.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
(3/9)
As we have repeatedly pointed out to him, the proper way to look at it is by family. And on average, 1/3 of southern families owed slaves, and this rose to about 1/2 in the deep South. But no, he continues to misuse a basic demographic. He's been told, and I'm sure he understands the misrepresentation, but he continues. He deserves no respect, no matter how polite he tries to come off. He's a lying sack of shit without scruples trying to support the unsupportable.)
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
(4/9)
He now pulls out a list of non historians like DiLorenzo who has been thoroughly debunked by the real academic community, and who refuses to debate and defend his bogus ideas against real civil war historians that are in the real civil war academic community, and others like woods who is also not a historian and is a member of a known hate group that promotes this anti historiacal crap for propaganda.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
@Rundstedt1 "woods who is also not a historian and is a member of a known hate group that" Woods is a historian and it is crazy at the amount of organizations labeled hate groups by the SPLC or others. The Boy Scouts are considered a hate group, but that doesnt make them so. And its very absurd.
Most of the people I pull out to support my claims are people who were actually involved in the conflict. I feel its more interesting that way.
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago
@RevBillyRayCollins
The SPLC doesn't label the boy scouts a hate group and you have been shown to be a lair again. Woods is not a historian, he is a professional hack for a propaganda organ of a hate group. Yea why don't you trot out David Irving next and deny the Holocaust?
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
@Rundstedt1 This truly shows your incompetence, I never said the SPLC labeled the Boy Scouts as a hate group, I said the Boy Scouts are labeld a hate group.
"Yea why don't you trot out David Irving next and deny the Holocaust?" That would be you not me, Im not the one who denys the existence of black confederates despite written and photographic evidence.
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago in playlist black confederates 101
@RevBillyRayCollins
What photographic evidence? he debunked Louisiana guards that was really a union unit or the Chandler photo that shows a master dressing up his slave with useless state prop guns like an ancient pepper box and and a useless pinfire revolver that the South couldn't import ammunition for. The Civil war times already debunked that photo, it was of a slave not a soldier.
More lies from you
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
@Rundstedt1 What photgraphic evidence?! blackconfederatesoldiersDOTcom/authentic_photographs_black_confederate_soldiers_36DOThtml
"The car is the families" Look, it all comes down to who is the official owner. The child of the man who holds the deed to the house is not the owner, the man is. The child of the man who pays taxes is not a taxpayer, the man is.
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago in playlist black confederates 101
@RevBillyRayCollins
AHahaha, and that took me too photos 'servants' aka slaves like Chandler that has already been debunked and the poor mascot non soldier Nelson. Nope sorry, that laughable garbage that can only be called another form of a lie by you.
You just keep on proving your dishonesty
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Rundstedt1 Yes slaves served in the Confederate army, as well as free blacks and whites. And if you consider the draft as a form of slavery as I do, then there were even more slaves on both sides. Of course what you fail to reason with is that if a slave served in the CS army, they would be freed once the war ended, obviously the CS lost the war but the slaves were freed anyway via the 13 amendment. You just keep on proving your ignorance.
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago
@RevBillyRayCollins
So slaves were taken along by their masters as body servants, that's not a soldier.
And no it is totally different than a draft, draftees are citizens that had the benefits of the free community slaves did not. And there were NO provisions for freeing slaves even in the later proposal to use them in 1865, it was only 'suggested' not put in law, and it was actually recommended that the owners hire them out to the army.
What a joke you are.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Rundstedt1 Slaves arent soldiers? Explain the thousands if not millions of slave armies in ancient times.
On March 23 1865, Jefferson Davis, through the War Department, issued General Order No. 14 stating "...No slave will be accepted as a recruit unless with his own consent and with the approbation of his master by a written instrument conferring, as far as he may, the rights of a freedman..."
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago
@RevBillyRayCollins (1/2)
Oh and what another dishonest quote mine, the so called 'right of a freedmen' was only concerning the actual military service and only for that duration. It also clearly states under article I sec 5:
"That nothing in this act shall be construed to authorize a change in the relation which the said slaves shall bear toward their owners, except by consent of the owners and of the States in which they may reside, and in pursuance of the laws thereof."
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Rundstedt1 "except by consent of the owners and of the States in which they may reside" Thats exactly what I showed you: "with the approbation of his master by a written instrument conferring, as far as he may, the rights of a freedman." Way to go genius.
The Confederates did enlist and arm slaves as well as freed blacks. Even Lincoln acknowledges to this.
"like those he himself enslaved on his plantation" Are you referring to the slaves which he had to deal with in his father
RevBillyRayCollins 6 days ago
@RevBillyRayCollins
AGAIN only for the duration of service, after which the slave was returned to ownership of his master which may or may not actually free them. Again it clearly states under article I sec 5:
"That nothing in this act shall be construed to authorize a change in the relation which the said slaves shall bear toward their owners, except by consent of the owners and of the States in which they may reside, and in pursuance of the laws thereof."
Rundstedt1 6 days ago
@Rundstedt1 No, you really arent reading it. The art 1 sec 5 says that nothing can change the relation of the slaves except by consent of the owner and the State where they reside. The Gen Order No 14 states that the slave is a freedman "with the approbation of his master by a written instrument." Same thing. Not to mention the Cleburne Memorial of Jan 2 1864 which called for the enlistment of blacks and the immediate emancipation of all slaves at the end of the war. Signed by over a
RevBillyRayCollins 6 days ago
@RevBillyRayCollins (1/4)
No, you are reading it wrong there is nothing unequivocal about the relationship not being effected, that means that the slave remains the slave when released from service. And while we're at it lets correct another piece of your garbage.
Too bad the Mack Lee story has been shown to be false.
Rundstedt1 6 days ago
@RevBillyRayCollins (2/4)
"An example of a slave narrative that doesn't hold up under scrutiny is Rev. William Mack Lee, "History of the Life of Rev. Wm Mack Lee," 1918. Rev. Lee claimed that he was raised a slave at Arlington and served as cook to the general throughout the war. He is not listed on any inventory of Arlington slaves,
Rundstedt1 6 days ago
@RevBillyRayCollins (3/4)
however; places Lee (and himself) at battles such as First Manassas, and claims to have cooked for a group of Southern Officers "in de Wilderness" on July 3, 1863, that included Stonewall Jackson and George Pickett as well as Lee. On this date, Jackson is dead, and Lee and Pickett were fighting the last desperate throes of the Battle of Gettysburg. Lee's Letters make no mention of William Mack Lee.
Rundstedt1 6 days ago
@RevBillyRayCollins (4/4)
His personal servants and cook during the war were Perry and Lawrence Parks and Billy Taylor." Elizabeth Brown Pryor, "Reading the Man" p562, n39
So Mack Lee was not telling the truth, he was just using the lie to further his own personal fortunes in an era that ate up that lost cause garbage. Once again you don't know how to check the actual authenticity of the sources you use; or more probably, you don't care.
Rundstedt1 6 days ago
@RevBillyRayCollins (2/2)
Yup the owners were NOT obligated to free the slaves and they were just contracted out. We only wish the Confederates were stupid enough to try and enlist and arm slaves. I could see it now. "General Lee our divisions are turning around and attacking US!!" The war would have been over in five minutes and Lee probably been killed by vengeful bondmen like those he himself enslaved on his plantation until forced to free them. LOL
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
@RevBillyRayCollins
I don't need, those were not modern democracies and the Civil War didn't happen in ancient times fool, and a slave has no power to give consent. "Jim consent or I'll whip you"
What a sad joke you are in defense of you slave system.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Rundstedt1 in laws will, which were not his by law, and which he didnt whip as he claims and as one of the slaves claimed, Wesley Norris?
“I was raised by one of the greatest men in the world. There was never one born of a woman greater than Gen. Robert E. Lee, according to my judgment. All of his servants were set free ten years before the war, but all remained on the plantation until after the surrender.”
-William Mack Lee (Robert E. Lee’s black servant)
RevBillyRayCollins 6 days ago
@RevBillyRayCollins (1/9)
What crap you just dig up some old garbage that was used in the nadir of race relation in 1918 to try and justify the lost cause, and we know its false because Lee DID NOT free his slaves 10 years before the war. Yup, more David Irving crap. But real historians who have access to Lee's relate the truth.
Rundstedt1 6 days ago
@RevBillyRayCollins (2/8)
"I remained with Gen. Lee about seventeen months, when my sister Mary, a cousin of ours, and I determined to run away, which we did in the year 1859; we had already reached Westminster, in Maryland, on our way to the North, when we were apprehended and thrown into prison, and Gen. Lee notified of our arrest; we remained in prison fifteen days, when we were sent back to Arlington;
Rundstedt1 6 days ago
@RevBillyRayCollins (3/8)
we were accordingly stripped to the skin by the overseer, who, however, had sufficient humanity to decline whipping us; accordingly Dick Williams, a county constable was called in, who gave us the number of lashes ordered;
Rundstedt1 6 days ago
@Rundstedt1 via the people actually voting for the person. And the Senate was never meant to be elected that way.
I have no idea who Davis Irving is.
State law required that the slaves be funded in a liveliehood outside VA which could not be done until the debts of the etsate were paid off. Thats why he was not able to free the slaves immediately. The slaves were freed in '62, within the specified 5 years.
RevBillyRayCollins 6 days ago
@RevBillyRayCollins
Again Lee was instructed by the terms of the will that he should sell off property as to pay the debts and finance the freedom, but he kept them and work them so he could try and keep the land. And Gee slaves were freed by the Custis family Lee could just as well have also.
Rundstedt1 6 days ago
@RevBillyRayCollins (4/8)
Gen. Lee, in the meantime, stood by, and frequently enjoined Williams to "lay it on well," an injunction which he did not fail to heed; not satisfied with simply lacerating our naked flesh, Gen. Lee then ordered the overseer to thoroughly wash our backs with brine, which was done."
Testimony of one of Lee's slaves.
Rundstedt1 6 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@RevBillyRayCollins (5/8)
Gen. Lee, in the meantime, stood by, and frequently enjoined Williams to "lay it on well," an injunction which he did not fail to heed; not satisfied with simply lacerating our naked flesh, Gen. Lee then ordered the overseer to thoroughly wash our backs with brine, which was done."
Testimony of one of Lee's slaves.
Rundstedt1 6 days ago
@RevBillyRayCollins (6/8)
And as reported in the Atlantic: "In all, Pryor found seven accounts of the event, all of which corroborate the basic elements of the original claim. It's important to remember as well that Norris' story was published in an antislavery newspaper in 1866, the year after the war ended; Lee was in good health and serving as president of Washington College in Lexington at the time.
Rundstedt1 6 days ago
@RevBillyRayCollins (7/8)
He did not respond publicly, though privately he denied it. But Pryor makes the critical point abut Norris' story: "its veracity has been questioned by generations of Lee aficionados, and we might be tempted to dismiss it as the exaggerated ranting of a bitter ex-slave. Except for one thing: all of its facts are verifiable." Among the verifiable fact Pryor found was the receipt book showing payment to the constable."
Rundstedt1 6 days ago
@RevBillyRayCollins (8/8)
So no, Lee kept legal ownership even after most his slaves were set free by the Union army, and only freed them when he was legally required by his inheritance. Lee held onto them until the very last minute and even petitioned the court to void the term of the will and extend their servitude
Rundstedt1 6 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Rundstedt1 The law actually prohibited Lee from freeing those slaves until the debts of the Custis estate were paid off. You need to really research more.
The American Government never was and still isnt a democracy. I never said the War to Prevent Southern Independence occured in ancient times, however you denied the existence of slaves as soldiers and Im just keeping you honest. Which is pretty tough might I add.
RevBillyRayCollins 6 days ago
@RevBillyRayCollins
And again the you fucking lair, Lincoln was only referring to the PROPSAL not any actual existing black confederates.
Rundstedt1 6 days ago
@RevBillyRayCollins
NO you need to be honest, the will stated the he should sell off land to finance the free of the slaves but he decided he could use them to pay the debts and keep the land.
The US isn't a democracy? Well maybe you don't vote, but it was still formed as a democracy. an don't even think of pulling the republic carp, they are not mutually exclusive.
Rundstedt1 6 days ago
@Rundstedt1 dozen officers.
Despite the fact nothing says that Lincoln was specifically referring to the proposal to officially enlist blacks. How do you explain Union Quartermaster general Montgomery C Meigs on Nov 18 1862 who said "The labor of the colored man supports the rebel soldier... and sometimes aids him on picket by rare skill with the rifle." I would like to see your revisonist excuse for this.
The US is not a democracy, only 1/3 of the federal government is "created"
RevBillyRayCollins 6 days ago
@RevBillyRayCollins
Meigs is referring to slaves in the first part and is just plain wrong in the second. He gives no examples, there is no proof of what he said. One unsupported statement that is meaningless. And yes despite your idiotic libertarian trash this is a democracy, we vote, democracy, period
Rundstedt1 6 days ago
We do not vote for the president, we do not vote for any of the judges or justices. Thats a fact, despite your hopes. Remeber what you best friend/murderer said Stalin, its not what the vote count is but who's counting them thats important.
"So Mack Lee was not telling the truth" Ha, your conspiracies are very disgusting and with very little proof. Do you agree with that idiot Alex Jones who says 9/11 was an inside job? I guess we should just throw out every primary source then.
RevBillyRayCollins 6 days ago
@RevBillyRayCollins
It does not matter the way that we vote for president or that there is another layer in between, it's still a democracy and if you were to try and claim it was not in any civics class you would fail that question.
And again, I use a legit source that went through all of Lee papers. Guess what Lee never mentions Mack and we know who is cooks were, it was not him.
You lie again though a bogus source.
Rundstedt1 6 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Rundstedt1 Are you kidding me? Any good government teacher would tell you the US is not a democracy and was intended as a republic. And still is for the most part.
The University of North Carolina put up a good detailed history of Mack, I recognize that there is skepticism but, I never said he served with Lee, the quote I posted was him simply showing his gratitude for the man, he could have lied, but how would that help him any? A lot of people claim to be related to Lee, most
RevBillyRayCollins 6 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Rundstedt1 arent telling the truth, but what they are telling the truth is that they love the man, as most southerners do.
RevBillyRayCollins 6 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Rundstedt1 Of course, just because no one saw it hapen doesnt mean it didnt happen. No one saw me drive to work one day but does that mean it never happened? No, no one reported it. Im not saying this applies to Mack, but that could, and I stress could, of been the case. Nonetheless, its not totally 100% known either way.
RevBillyRayCollins 6 days ago
(5/9)
Yea right, like the creationist pulls out the one or two so called 'scientists' to try and support their garbage, the lair Rev pulls out a similar list of charlatans and hacks. But it's just useless, those people refuse to meet and have defend their falsehoods against real academics in the field in a professional setting for they know they will be shown as fools, like Lochlainn Seabrook; also not a historian, and whose only qualification is being an 'unreconstructed Southern author'.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
(6/9)
Or he misrepresents the argument of the author like Gallagher, who doesn't question that the war was caused by slavery but only that the North fought more for Union than to end slavery, which is an entirely different debate. And the fact is they fought for both reasons, more for the first in the beginning, but soon the two became inseparable goals.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
(7/9)
And who despite the title of a book he wrote, doesn't support the Rev here either; for in it Gallagher talks about blacks who were cooks, teamsters, servants, musicians, laborers, and in other noncombatant roles in the Confederate armies and government or forced to take arms by threat of violence against them like the example I used before of the cowardly confederates forcing their slaves to load cannons under threat of death.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
(8/9)
Yup, might as well bring out the all the creationist speakers next and try and tell us their garbage is valid even though all of the actual professionals field show them as fools. I mean really, what a joke. I would print a list of historians that say that the Rev is totally wrong on everything, but it would go for pages and pages, really all one need do is pick any of the plethora of historians that are actually in the Civil war historical community or watch any civil war debate on CSPAN.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
(9/9)
The fact remains, the idea of there being these 'black confederates' is scoffed at by the real historical community and there is no evidence to support such a claim. The RevBillyRay is just liar supporting a racist cause, no matter what he says his motivation is.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
@Rundstedt1 Look kid, and you must be a kid or a teenager (if not then you're very immature) at least using langauage like that. Werent you taught any better? I guess thats just a southern thing.
I havent lied or misused statistics. Less than 5% of southerners owned slaves, Im sorry but little girls and members of the family who dont hold the deed arent considered slave owners. Thats like saying a member of my family was a crook thus we must all be crooks. That makes no sense.
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago
@RevBillyRayCollins
See you LIED AGAIN right here, on avg. 1/3 of southern families owned slaves, you are trying to say that the children of slave owners aren't slave owners, well duh, but meaningless, as they are part of a slave owning family. It like say that since the family owns a car the children don't have the benefits of a car in the family, it is a form of a lie.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
@Rundstedt1 "you are trying to say that the children of slave owners aren't slave owners" Obviously as you pointed out. But your owner of the car ordeal makes no sense. Under who's name does the car belong to? Probably the dad, not the kids.
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago in playlist black confederates 101
@RevBillyRayCollins
The car is the families, the family has the benefit of it like the family of the household whose head is a slave owner has the benefit of owning a slave.
You can try all you wish, but your purposeful misuse of statistics is still a lie.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
More proven dishonesty from the Neo-confederate lair BillyRay.
"Back in 2007 two researchers came across a photograph often exhibited as proof of African Americans in Confederate service–a image labeled “1st Louisiana Native Guard.” An examination of the photograph revealed that the image in fact was of African Americans in Union service: one way in which the image was tampered with in order to misrepresent it was by cropping out the Union officer." - "Keeping It Honest" - Brooks D. Simpson
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
@Rundstedt1 If what you say were true about history being written by the victor is bullshit, then why were the Indians deemed bloodthirsty pagan savages who deserved to be killed throughout much of history? Or is this what you truly believe?
"I'm actually professionally trained in how to do proper research and to know what is valid." And Im not? I have a degree in history and anthropoligical science, I am a public historian if I get technical. You teach highschool, Im in the real
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago
@RevBilly
Are they in modern professional history? no. You can't compare the modern field to its more loosely and less scholarly past like you can't compare modern medicine to those who 'bleed' people in the past. And I've also taught at the college level. YOU have lied over and over in you posts, you have no degrees I don't believe one word of it. You are NOT a public historian if you tried to spout this carp the real historians would get you fired.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Rundstedt1 Yes you taught at college, another leftist, lincoln cultist, revisionist professor, no suprise.
Is what not in modern professional history? "you can't compare modern medicine to those who 'bleed' people in the past." In some ways tribal medicine is more effective than modern medicine.
"real historians would get you fired." No doubt about that, Im not in the main stream leftist mentality garbage.
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Rundstedt1 I am considered a public historian, look it up.
Why the hell would I tell you my full name? You havent told me yours, nor do I want to know. If you want to know my first name then its Kaleb, my Indian name is Black Raven. I wont tell you my last name for security reasons.
Not many people at Jamestowne discuss the War for Southern Independence other than the Confederate fort that was on the Island. However, Bill Kelso, the leading archaeologist who everyone deemed
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago
@RevBillyRayCollins
Oh bullshit, I've caught you misrepresenting what sources really relate and outright lying. You are not to be believed about anything, not even your supposed heritage. And then the old and silly refrain of the propagandist who no longer has a leg to stand on... "Oh those left wing scholars" what trash, if any other view than the one that is accepted by scholars could stand up to scrutiny it would prevail in academics no matter who or where it comes from.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
@Rundstedt1 Im twisting lies? Despite that not being true I think the correct wording would be twisitng the truth, Im not sure how you twist lies.
Most in the "intellectual" business are left wing for whatever reason.
"I've caught you" Really? Are you sure about that? Where?
"prevail in academics no matter" My views do prevail in academics, there are dozens upon dozens of books on the topic and many dedicated proffesors such as W Scott Poole, Thomas Lawrenece Connelly, Barbara
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago
@RevBillyRayCollins
You are a joke, and your twisting lies to support what is known to be false, and what you most probably really know is false, shows it, and that, not that you 'aren't in the Mainstream' is what would get you fired. You are a charlatan, a fraud and a hack.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
@Rundstedt1 L Bellows, Tom DiLorenzo, Gary W Gallagher, Tom Woods, Sharon Hepburn, Michael Holt, to name a few as well as many other scholars such as Lochlainn Seabrook.
As I said before, these conversations never come up in my duties, they arent needed. I usually have to correct tourists on incorrect history of Jamestowne. But either way, you should know that its extremely difficult firing someone in the Park Service or any other part of the bureaucracy, theres a lot of red tape.
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago
"not even your supposed heritage." Things like that upset me, I am a member of the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Tribe Reservation in Odanah Wisconsin. I am 1/4 Chippewa, My Dads Dad was full blooded, he married a German woman, my father was 1/2 Native, he married a white woman, I am 1/4 Native, I was married to a white woman, my kids are 1/8 but they dont qualify to be a member of the reservation because you have to be at least 1/4. wwwDOTbadriver-nsnDOTgov/home
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@RevBillyRayCollins You're a lot more German than I am. I've calculated that I'd be 1/64th German by virtue of my German ancestor - Captain William von Sonntag of King Louis' French Army - that was present at the surrender of the British at Yorktown. I really can't believe the flak you're having to take with regard to your viewpoints. To me it just seems that you're making comments on historical occurrences.
RedGoblinus 1 week ago
(1/3)
Here an example of how the Confederates treated their black slave laborers
"Gun after gun was silenced and abandoned…every embrasure within range of a thousand yards was silent,” Colonel Ripley proudly wrote of their efforts, adding that Berdan’s men also suppressed Rebel small-arms fire. “The rebel infantry,” he wrote, “which at first responded with a vigorous fire, found that exposure of a head meant grave danger, if not death."
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
(2/3)
"As Ripley stated, deadly shots from the sharpshooters made manning the Confederate defenses dangerous work. In response, it seems some Southern troops then resorted to a desperate tactic. “They FORCED their negroes to load their cannon,” an officer in the 1st U.S.S.S. sadly noted. “They shot them if they would not load the cannon, and we shot them if they did." - "Killers in Green Coats, Civil War Times," February 20, 2008
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
(3/3)
So the Confederates forced under direct threat of death the hapless back slave labors to load the guns so the cowardly Rebs wouldn't come under Union fire. Those are NOT black soldiers! Those are unarmed human shields being used by war confederate criminals.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
(3/3)a
Oh and Lee tried the same garbage showing he didn't really respect he black as a soldier either, by having black Union soldiers shipped off into slavery and putting captured black soldiers to work on the Petersburg defenses under Union fire until Grant threatened to respond in kind and put the captured confederates on the Union works.
Black confederates? THERE WAS NO SUCH THING.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
@RevBillyRayCollins
Just more poor twisting of reality that is another form of a lie by you.
And no black regiments were formed in Tenn., and even if they would have been, the Confedertate army wouldn't have accepted them; like they demanded and got the disbanding of the pre-war formed New Orleans militia
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
@Rundstedt1 uniforms," and armed with "rifles, muskets, sabres, bowie-knives, dirks, etc.... manifestly an integral portion of the Southern Confederacy." - L H Steiner's diary during the CS occupation of Frederick MD.
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago
@RevBillyRayCollins (1/2)
And Stiener account is recognized as wholly unreliable, he gets many things wrong like saying there were 74000 confederates and Howell Cobb who, in January of 1865 called the use of negros as soldiers “the most pernicious idea that has been suggested since the war began,” continuing, “you cannot make soldiers of slaves or slaves of soldiers. . .
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
@RevBillyRayCollins (2/2)
The day you make soldiers of them is the beginning of the revolution. If slaves will make good soldiers, our whole theory of slavery is wrong.” Cobb wrote in 1865 so clearly there were no blacks in arms before that. And if there were blacks with Lee on the way to Antietam they he wouldn't have needed later to plead for their admission when the Confederacy was all but defeated.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
@RevBillyRayCollins
Oh and by the way reading further into the Tenn. proposal, it was not for soldiers, but for laborers for military service. They are talked about being equipped only with spades, shovels axes ect... and even them most were impressed slaves hired out by their masters. Greeley, p522
What a joke, you lie by excluding the reality.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
soldiers he's ever seen.
Even Lincoln knew there were blacks in the CS Army: "There is one thing about the negro's fighting for the rebels which we can know as well as they can, and that is that they cannot at the same time fight in their armies and stay at home and make bread for them." -Lincoln March 17, 1865
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago
@RevBillyRayCollins
Lying piece of scum, that was one month before the war ended and was talking about the never realized confederate proposal to enlist black units. And as a matter of fact it is that very debate in the confederacy that disproves there were any black confederates. Why debate whether to allow blacks in arms so late in the war if there were already so called black confederates?
I've already proven you a liar on another video and now here also.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
@Rundstedt1 You know you should really control your anger, it doesnt provide a healthy debate, or lifestyle Im told.
One month before the war ended, so? Does that mean he didnt say it?
"the never realized confederate proposal" Hardly, June 1861 the TN Legislature passed a statute allowing the Gov to recieve into military service "all male free persons of color, btwn the ages of 15 and 50." Feb 4 1862 the VA Legislature passed a bill enrolling all of the states free blacks into
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago
@Rundstedt1 service. Nov 23 1861 a 7 mile long line of CS soldiers was marched through New Orleans, among them 1400 free black soldiers. The souths first all black militia was formed on April 23 1861 known as the "Native Guards (colored) of Louisiana.
"Why debate whether" Because there was never any official blacks in the CS army, only unofficial or in state militias.
I already used a definition of soldier, so yes there were 3000 blacks in Jacksons army clad "in all kinds of
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago
@RevBillyRayCollins
As stated that militia was forcibly disbanded by demands of he confederate army, it would not accept it as a unit, period. It was never given uniform or arms.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
@Rundstedt1 "The labor of the colored man supports the rebel soldier, enables him to leave his plantation to meet our armies, builds his fortifications, cooks his food, and sometimes aids him on picket by rare skill with the rifle." -Union Quartermaster-General Montgomery C Meigs Nov 18 1862
I suggest you look up the man Louis Napoleon Nelson, a black Confederate with the 7th TN Cavalry, Company M who served valiantly at Lookout Mountain and other engagements.
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago
@RevBillyRayCollins
OH what dishonesty, Nelson was just a pastor, he was given no rank, was not in the actual army and was called "Uncle" the typical racist term for black men in the South. He also was NOT a soldier but was just adopted by the unit as a chaplain
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
@Rundstedt1 you even watched the video were commenting on?
Nelson was, specifially, a chaplain as well as his masters sons, E R Oldham, bodygaurd. During the engagement at Lookout, Nelson actually snuck behind enemy lines at night and killed of of the yankees mules and stole the meat. He was even at Vicksburg
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago
@RevBillyRayCollins
Yea his MASTERS SON'S asshole, he was a SLAVE, NOT a soldier. Lol
And what he might or might not have done because of the Stockholm syndrome is meaningless and actually unsupported except by more poor sourcing and lies.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
@Rundstedt1 Now the spamming Holocaust denier is perpetuating the old lie about black confederates? Hilarious! As you have eloquently pointed out, the CSA refused to allow blacks to even enlist until the end of the war, and only a handful ever served. There are no records of any black confederates being killed, captured, or wounded, and they're absent from soldiers' letters. It's all a "fairy tale."
civilwargazette[DOT]wordpress[DOT]com/2008/03/13/did-blacks-fight-in-combat-for-the-confederacy/
RonPaulHatesBlacks 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The first recorded yankee killed in the war, Mjr Theodore Winthrop of the 7th Reg NY State Militia, was killed by a black confederate sharpshooter at the Battle of Bethel Church, June 10 1861.
The Stonewall brigade had some 3000 black soldiers. "There are at the present moment, many colored men in the Confederate Army, doing not only as cooks... but as real soldiers, having muskets." -Frederick Douglass to Lincoln 1862
Nathan Forrest said once the blacks who served with him were of the best
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago
@RevBillyRayCollins
Bullshit, the stonewall reference is to slave laborers and the Douglas quote is recognzed by historians as false on his part to push for the enlistment of blacks early in the North. And the first reference is just made up garbage without provenance.
The the Racist Forest who murdered lack soldiers when he captured them!!!
No the reference is to slave laborers he used
What a lying sack of shit you are.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
@Rundstedt1 "the first reference is just made up" No its not, you can find August Valentine Kautz's defintion of soldier in his book 'Customs of Service for Non-Commissioned Officers and Soldiers (as Derived from Law and Regulations and Practised in the Army of the United States)' 1864.
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago
@RevBillyRayCollins
That wasn't what I was reffing to there, but Kautz can make any ridiculous claim he wishes. But hey the Nazis used slave labor to build fortifications too, gee I guess those were all soldiers then... what a sad twisted joke.
No laborers are not soldiers they are civilians being used by the military, in this case unwillingly, and they are NOT soldiers.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
@Rundstedt1 Im just shocked that people deny the existence of black confederates, you're just in line with the Holocaust deniers, its just silly that you dont look at the evidence.
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago
@RevBillyRayCollins
Oh fuck you, the holocaust deniers are the Neo-confederates with their dog whistle racist shit trying to deny the central purpose of the Confederacy which was to protect slavery and white supremacy. A fact the Confederacy admitted over and over. There is NO evidence for black confederates, but like the holocaust denier the neo-rebs must twist and manufacture some like the Neo- Nazis use David Irving the disgraced historian.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago 6
@Rundstedt1 "the Douglas quote is recognzed by historians as false" No, the real reason is that everything I show is either false or irrelevant. Of course if the source is biased towards the north, which most are, then it is the truth. Nonetheless I suggest you read 'Douglass' Monthly' published September 1861 Vol 4 pg 516.
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago
@RevBillyRayCollins
Hahaha yea, right like historians haven't seen that and already taken it into account. Douglas was trying to shame the North into letting blacks serve by lying about the South.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
@Rundstedt1 Douglass was not lying about black confederates, I have shown the numerous groups with black confederates, but you are right in saying that he was shaming the Union for not enlisting blacks.
Dont you realize that you have been fooled by the political game? History is written by the victor, you have been told all your life in the govt run schools that slavery was the cause and no blacks fought for the CS. All untrue.
Not all Confederate supporters are racists, have
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago
@RevBillyRayCollins
You have shown nothing that historians and I haven't already addressed and shown to be lacking. And again with the silly anti-intellectual platitude of 'history is written by the victor' is bullshit! So I guess we can discount the holocaust, after all it was the allies that wrote the history. All you do is make a mockery of all of history.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Rundstedt1 "So I guess we can discount the holocaust, after all it was the allies that wrote the history." The Nazis proudly boasted about what they did.
"'history is written by the victor' is bullshit!" This is why we cant have conversations, you believe every thing you hear.
"Yea his MASTERS SON'S" Yes he was a slave who went into the CS army, many slaves served in the CS army, many were also slaves to the draft.
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago
@RevBillyRayCollins
So did the SOUTH asshole!!!! They stated over and over that they were all about slavery.
And NO it's YOU that believes everything you hear, I'm actually professionally trained in how to do proper research and to know what is valid.
NO slaves are NOT soldiers. HE was forced to do everything in his life, he had no choice of where he was, and was taken on by the unit like soldiers would take on a dog as a mascot, that not a soldier.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago 5
@Rundstedt1 world, Ive contributed to history, and not just being involved with Jamestowne archaeology.
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago
@RevBillyRayCollins
Again then tell us your real name, I'm sure the real Jamestown historians would love the mischaracterizations you spouted. No your just some looser tour guide with a High school diploma at most. You've shown your dishonesty over and over again.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Rundstedt1 'Loser' not 'Looser' ;-) Here in England we've got a real problem with pseudo intellectual Marxists that have hijacked the British 'Labour' Party. None of them have ever had to do work for a shit wage. I follow the writings of the RevBillyRayCollins and I can't see anything wrong with anything he's written - it's his opinion and his right to freedom of speech and expression.
RedGoblinus 1 week ago
@Rundstedt1 "NO slaves are NOT soldiers" Im not up to date on history of the ancient world, but Im pretty sure most people who were in the army say during ancient egypt and africa, much of asia and the middle east, were conscripted against their will or were slaves, mostly from captured enemies. In fact, werent the jannisaries, however you spell it, a slave army?
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago
@RevBillyRayCollins
The Civil war is NOT the ancient world!!! This was not Spartan Hoplites, Good Grief what a sad twisting of reality. Yea I guess all those slaves the Nazis used were soldiers, what a fucking joke you are in defense of you slave republic. You are disgusting.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Rundstedt1 crazy for thinking he could find the fort in the mid 1990s since it was always wrongfully believed to be washed away in the James river, remains silent on the issue because Im sure he feels its irrelevant to the situation at hand. However he is an avid mythbuster to the commonly held myths of Jamestowne such as anyone getting their research from the disney film Pocahontas, as well as many other similar things.
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Rundstedt1 I dont just do tours, but lectures as well. I dont have the luxury of discussing these matters however. But I am also involved with the NPS' archaeology department at Jamestowne as well as other trivial procedures as writing parking tickets, eduacting the tourists about wilderness safety, picking up litter, which I enjoy doing since Im a conservationist. and dealing with the many federal contactors we have on the island.
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Rundstedt1 "The Civil war is NOT the ancient world" I never said it was, however you said no slave was ever a soldier, and that they arent soldiers. And I just pointed out the facts.
No I have a Bachelors of Scinece degree in history and anthropoligcal science from Radford University, you?
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I'm shocked that dishonest intellectuals still try to say that there were no black confederates.
Using Union general August Valentine Kautz's defintion of a soldier in 1864: "In the fullest sense, any man in the military service who recieves pay, whether sworn in or not, is a soldiers, because he is subject to military law. Under this general head, laborers, teamsters, sutlers, chaplains, etc., are soldiers." This means there were some 500,000 to 1 million blacks in the CS army.
RevBillyRayCollins 1 week ago
The real owners of America are Native Americans aka Red Indians. blacks and whites don't have a right to talk about that. fuck all whites to Europe and screw off all blacks to Africa.
SquareCrystal 1 week ago
Comment removed
SquareCrystal 1 week ago
i luz mee sum niggaz cuz dey be soopa funie
GAYDUDE9895621 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I WANT TO BE A SLAVE!!!
RusPrideAK 1 week ago
God bless this man! He is whiter inside than 99% of what's left of the white race!
melvinkowznowsky 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@melvinkowznowsky Not White , just proud of his people that fought in the same war !!!
gryfortner1 1 week ago
Comment removed
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@gryfortner1
But not for the Confederacy, they fought for the Union. The idea of black confederates is a myth designed to hide the racism of the slave state known as the Confederacy, and is not supported by historians as I have already explained.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i love this guy :D
9ko3 1 week ago
wtf?
Reyludd 1 week ago
The FULL Lee quote is that he considered slavery "a greater evil to the WHITE than to the colored race." Lee believed "blacks are immeasurably better off here than in Africa, morally, physically, and socially. The painful discipline they are undergoing is necessary for their further instruction as a race." He believed slavery should NEVER end unless and until God Himself---"a merciful Providence"---commanded it.
Education defeats racism every time.
How many slaves would you own? Don't be shy.
RonPaulHatesBlacks 1 week ago
@RonPaulHatesBlacks
first of all I DONT SUPPORT SLAVERY, NEVER WILL. MY BEST AND DEAREST FRIEND, KURT WAS A BLACK SOUTHERNER. I THINK SLAVERY IS THE MOST DIGUSTING ANTI HUMAN THING IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD. robert e lee believed slavery should never end huh? that must be why he freed his slaves a year before the war started. and in 1862 took over the custis plantation, 5 years after custis died and freed all slaves on the plantation.
swordsallday 1 week ago
@RonPaulHatesBlacks lee freed his slaves after his father died and he took over the plantation and freed the custis slaves
swordsallday 1 week ago
@swordsallday (1/4)
You are absolutely wrong and no legitimate historian would support you. Lee held onto legal ownership of his slaves until the last possible minute he could by the terms of his inheritance, and even petitioned the court to try have that extended so he could keep them into 1863. And the Union Army freed more of Lee's slaves than he did.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
@swordsallday (2/4)
"The will stated that the slaves were to be freed within five years, and at the same time large legacies—raised from selling property—should be given to the Lee children. But as the executor of the will, Lee decided that instead of freeing the slaves right away—as they expected—he could continue to own and work them for five years in an effort to make the estates profitable and not have to sell the property
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
@swordsallday (3/4)
Lee was considered a hard taskmaster. He also started hiring slaves to other families, sending them away, and breaking up families that had been together on the estate for generations. The slaves resented him, were terrified they would never be freed, and they lost all respect for him.
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
@swordsalld (4/4)
There were many runaways, and at one point several slaves jumped him, claiming they were as free as he. Lee ordered these men to be severely whipped. He also petitioned the court to extend their servitude, but the court ruled against him and Lee did grant them their freedom on Jan. 1, 1863—ironically, the same day that Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation went into effect." Elizabeth Brown Pryor author of "Reading the Man: A Portrait of Robert E. Lee Through His Private Letters"
Rundstedt1 1 week ago
@RonPaulHatesBlacks Also, what is up with your name? who names their youtube account off of a false statement about a politician? Silly, none here can take you seriously.
shiningbeans 1 week ago
@shiningbeans Yeah. I think I can guess why you ducked the question of whether you even graduated high school. How embarassing for you, boy.
High school and college are good things, son. It's important to read the South's own declarations of secession, and actually study American history, before you lecture people about it.
Maybe one day you'll accept that slavery is wrong, kiddo. Then you'll understand that the confederacy was wrong to secede and start a war to try to preserve slavery.
RonPaulHatesBlacks 1 week ago
@RonPaulHatesBlacks I'm a American History minor at GW, if you must know. I don't know what I need to say to get it through your head, but I think slavery is an evil system(as did R.E.Lee) and I do not believe they should have succeeded as per an amendment agreed on during the time of the Articles. I think you are making assumptions of my positions. I was defending the fact that Lee was morally against slavery, as many in the south may have been, though they were still obviously racists.
shiningbeans 1 week ago