Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: jeffersondem
jeffersondem: "I can somewhat understand your viewing your off-axis arguments as “mirror image.”
Just remember, when you advocate the opposite of the truth you are not advocating the truth."

But my term "mirror image" referred to "a silly or insulting post," which by definition cannot be the truth.
So as usual, your concern here is misplaced.

But I should say that I do appreciate your attention to the fine points of word definitions, and indeed your use of some more unusual words when on the prod to chivvy your mess & gom into a tally book.

216 posted on 07/14/2018 1:38:18 PM PDT by BroJoeK ((a little historical perspective...))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 212 | View Replies ]


Not exactly on point to this discussion but I can’t see a Union victory without Grant. I’m a Southerner born and bred but like the late Shelby Foote I have an abiding respect for Grant and that other Ohio boy William Tecumseh Sherman (who would rather shoot an abolitionist than a rebel), true sons of the Northwest Ordinance of 1887.

I highly recommend Jean Edward Smith’s bio of Grant and Horace Porter’s ‘Campaigning With Grant’.

Smith: “If Appomattox was Grant’s finest hour, then his determination to protect those who surrendered there ranks a close second.” Just so. It was Grant’s magnanimity and word that saved Lee from the gallows.

An excellent article (10 minute read) on R. E. Lee and the issue of treason by historian Allen C. Guelzo.

https://www.weeklystandard.com/allen-c-guelzo/the-trial-that-didnt-happen

Grant forwarded his own views to Secretary of War Edwin Stanton on June 16, 1865:

In my opinion the officers and men paroled at Appomattox Court-House, and since, upon the same terms given to Lee, cannot be tried for treason so long as they observe the terms of their parole. This is my understanding. Good faith, as well as true policy, dictates that we should observe the conditions of that convention. Bad faith on the part of the Government, or a construction of that convention subjecting the officers to trial for treason, would produce a feeling of insecurity in the minds of all the paroled officers and men. If so disposed they might even regard such an infraction of terms by the Government as an entire release from all obligations on their part. I will state further that the terms granted by me met with the hearty approval of the President at the time, and of the country generally. The action of Judge Underwood, in Norfolk, has already had an injurious effect, and I would ask that he be ordered to quash all indictments found against paroled prisoners of war, and to desist from further prosecution of them.

Another fine article about Grant and Lee:

http://www.civilwarprofiles.com/grant-protects-lee-from-treason-trial/


217 posted on 07/14/2018 1:58:23 PM PDT by donaldo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 216 | View Replies ]

To: BroJoeK

“But my term “mirror image” referred to “a silly or insulting post,” which by definition cannot be the truth.”

You state that an insulting post “by definition cannot be the truth.” I’m not following your thinking.

An insult may not be a nice thing to utter - that’s why I work so hard to avoid them - but they can be the truth.


219 posted on 07/14/2018 7:25:31 PM PDT by jeffersondem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 216 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson