Posted on 02/25/2004 11:52:26 AM PST by 4CJ
THOMASVILLE -- Nelson Winbush knows his voice isn't likely to be heard above the crowd that writes American history books. That doesn't keep him from speaking his mind, however.
A 75-year-old black man whose grandfather proudly fought in the gray uniform of the South during the Civil War, Winbush addressed a group of about 40 at the Thomas County Museum of History Sunday afternoon. To say the least, his perspective of the war differs greatly from what is taught in America's classrooms today.
"People have manufactured a lot of mistruths about why the war took place," he said. "It wasn't about slavery. It was about state's rights and tariffs."
Many of Winbush's words were reserved for the Confederate battle flag, which still swirls amid controversy more than 150 years after it originally flew.
"This flag has been lied about more than any flag in the world," Winbush said. "People see it and they don't really know what the hell they are looking at."
About midway through his 90-minute presentation, Winbush's comments were issued with extra force.
"This flag is the one that draped my grandfathers' coffin," he said while clutching it strongly in his left hand. "I would shudder to think what would happen if somebody tried to do something to this particular flag."
Winbush, a retired in educator and Korean War veteran who resides in Kissimmee, Fla., said the Confederate battle flag has been hijacked by racist groups, prompting unwarranted criticism from its detractors.
"This flag had nothing to with the (Ku Klux) klan or skinheads," he said while wearing a necktie that featured the Confederate emblem. "They weren't even heard of then. It was just a guide to follow in battle.
"That's all it ever was."
Winbush said Confederate soldiers started using the flag with the St. Andrews cross because its original flag closely resembled the U.S. flag. The first Confederate flag's blue patch in an upper corner and its alternating red and white stripes caused confusion on the battlefield, he said.
"Neither side (of the debate) knows what the flag represents," Winbush said. "It's dumb and dumber. You can turn it around, but it's still two dumb bunches.
"If you learn anything else today, don't be dumb."
Winbush learned about the Civil War at the knee of Louis Napoleon Nelson, who joined his master and one of his master's sons in battle voluntarily when he was 14. Nelson saw combat at Lookout Mountain, Bryson's Crossroads, Shiloh and Vicksburg.
"At Shiloh, my grandfather served as a chaplain even though he couldn't read or write," said Winbush, who bolstered his points with photos, letters and newspapers that used to belong to his grandfather. "I've never heard of a black Yankee holding such an office, so that makes him a little different."
Winbush said his grandfather, who also served as a "scavenger," never had any qualms about fighting for the South. He had plenty of chances to make a break for freedom, but never did. He attended 39 Confederate reunions, the final one in 1934. A Sons of Confederate Veterans Chapter in Tennessee is named after him.
"People ask why a black person would fight for the Confederacy. (It was) for the same damned reason a white Southerner did," Winbush explained.
Winbush said Southern blacks and whites often lived together as extended families., adding slaves and slave owners were outraged when Union forces raided their homes. He said history books rarely make mention of this.
"When the master and his older sons went to war, who did he leave his families with?" asked Winbush, who grandfather remained with his former owners 12 years after the hostilities ended. "It was with the slaves. Were his (family members) mistreated? Hell, no!
"They were protected."
Winbush said more than 90,000 blacks, some of them free, fought for the Confederacy. He has said in the past that he would have fought by his grandfather's side in the 7th Tennessee Cavalry led by Gen. Nathan Bedford Forest.
After his presentation, Winbush opened the floor for questions. Two black women, including Jule Anderson of the Thomas County Historical Society Board of Directors, told him the Confederate battle flag made them uncomfortable.
Winbush, who said he started speaking out about the Civil War in 1992 after growing weary of what he dubbed "political correctness," was also challenged about his opinions.
"I have difficulty in trying to apply today's standards with what happened 150 years ago," he said to Anderson's tearful comments. "...That's what a lot of people are attempting to do. I'm just presenting facts, not as I read from some book where somebody thought that they understood. This came straight from the horse's mouth, and I refute anybody to deny that."
Thomas County Historical Society Board member and SVC member Chip Bragg moved in to close the session after it took a political turn when a white audience member voiced disapproval of the use of Confederate symbols on the state flag. Georgia voters are set to go to the polls a week from today to pick a flag to replace the 1956 version, which featured the St. Andrew's cross prominently.
"Those of us who are serious about our Confederate heritage are very unhappy with the trivialization of Confederate symbols and their misuse," he said. "Part of what we are trying to do is correct this misunderstanding."
This can be true only in #3World, using a definition of "slander" from the #3LegalDictionary.
Perhaps your tax lawyer will explain the real world meaning of the word "slander" to you.
Some believe he was mad at his men for allowing Schofield to escape from Spring Hill to Franklin.
I've never tried to trace down the source for the claim, but I wonder if it actually came from something Hood said. The problem is compounded by his gross incompetence; was it disciplinary, or just a stupid move? Hood's career was pretty rife with the latter, and it would be no surprise to learn that his men would generate rumors like this; not too difficult to believe that even Hood might have started the rumor to excuse a bad tactical decision.
The site doesn't source it, but maybe it's worth looking into some more. If I find time today (not likely, but who knows?) I'll see what I can find.
[Blake] What was that??
[Hawkeye] I think 'the wind' just broke its arm!
I don't know the details of the battles, but Hood lost 11,000 men in two attacks near Atlanta against Sherman in July 1864. The Battle of Franklin was just another example or the problem with Hood's tactics. Was he mad at his men against Sherman too or just slow to understand what he was doing?
In defense of the attack philosophy, a Southern colonel observed that the South generally faced larger, better equiped, and better supplied armies and had to take more risks to overcome what would otherwise be the inevitable result of those advantages.
what was done by the damnyankees was TARGETED intentionally to strike CIVILIANS.
that makes it a WAR CRIME, THEN & NOW.
free dixie,sw
damnyankees have ever been "holier than thou" HYPOCRYTES!
it is their NATURE!
free dixie,sw
AND that i KNOW that no matter what i did post that you, FOOL that you demonstrably are,would say was false/propaganda.
face it 3, everybody here is ON to your game.
and you DID run to the admin mods didn't YOU???
a simple yes or no will surfice.
free dixie,sw
If he behaves anything like his persona on this forum one may easily predict the following scenario: The tax lawyer will try in vain to correct his definition, but he'll probably respond by calling the poor guy names and telling the lawyer that his understanding of the law is wrong. When the lawyer tries to leave he will continue following the guy out the door and down the street while berating him with subsequent insults and attempting to bait him into further conversation.
rotflmRao!
did you run to your mommy too????
free dixie,sw
rotflmRao!
free dixie,sw
lincoln, the tyrant & WAR CRIMINAL,is the "little tin god" & clayFOOTED saint of every LIB, damnedyankee & marxist i've ever met.
free dixie,sw
as for Hiroshima, it was a MILITARY target.
killing civilians, WHILE targeting military facilities, is acceptable under the LAW of WAR.
MURDER,LOOTING,TORTURE, RAPE & ROBBERY of CIVILIANS during wartime AND ABUSING helpless POWs are WAR CRIMES, which are punishable by DEATH by hanging/firing squad.
BIG DIFFERENCE!
free dixie,sw
rotflmRao!
free dixie,sw
Being that they weren't citizens, it's no different than the movement to deport Mexicans today. The southern states held 4 million slaves which would be proportional to 40,000,000 immigrants today. No state would be able to handle 40,000,000 jobless immigrants. There are only 10,000,000 Mexican immigrants scattered in more than one state and you see the hand-wringing over that here. And can you try to discuss this without all the name-calling?
Having arrived before the Mayflower, it would seem undeniable that Africans were established here by the time Lincoln spoke.
Illinois had laws against massive immigration. That's who it applied to, those that weren't here yet, the same as our immigration laws today.
It appears you believe neither the slaves nor the free Blacks worked.
They have to assimilate. Bringing in all at once, they can't assimilate.
Perhaps you feel that Africans who arrived here in chains, without a Green Card, committed an offense which meant that their descendants, living here centuries later, could be subjected to deportation.
I believe that being that they weren't citizens, Illinois had a right for the states that brought them to solve the problems of assimilation. Slavery had to be ended and citizenship granted before Illinois could allow open immigration between states so there wouldn't be a problem with assimilation to just one state.
I'm sure you meant to say free people with black skin.
They weren't freed yet. Just one state could not take them all in, it would be the equivilant of 40,000,000 today.
Illinois did not want an excessive number of people with black skin in their neighborhood. #3Fan does not want an excessive number of people with brown skin in his neighborhood. No te preocupes. Ellos no vayan comer sus niños.
Amazing you guys will just lie about anything you feel like. Character means nothing to you.
You quoted him out of context proving that nothing you say can be trusted.
His partner will know all about it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.