"The War Between the States (The Civil War?) was not a rebellion. There was no rebellion -- except in West Virginia, which threw off the lawful authority of the State of Virginia and her government, and sought protection from a military tyrant." The elected United States government is the military tyrant?
The rebellion continues in 2005!
Quoting: 'Isham G. Harris, the fire-eating governor of Tennessee, wrote to Jefferson Davis, "The burning of railroad bridges in East Tennessee shows a deep-seated spirit of rebellion in that section. Union men are organizing. This rebellion must be crushed out instantly, the leaders arrested, and summarily punished."
Wow, what was that again? Pro-slaver secessionists arresting elected popular political leaders in Eastern Tenn & loyal Americans fighting for the Union must be "crushed out instantly, the leaders arrested, and summarily punished!"" (i.e., gunned down for being loyal American citizens?)
'The vote for secession followed closely the distribution of slaves or the number of bales of cotton produced in Alabama. Winston County held only 122 slaves, or 3.41% of the population, and in most of the loyal counties, the proportion of slaves was less than 20%. However, substantial Unionist sentiment was found even in the plantation counties. In Green County, with 76.5% of the population being African slaves, nearly 40% of voters wished to remain within the Union.'
'The Confederates felt justified in executing men who had left the Confederate Cause to join the Union. Yet, these men claimed the only reason they wore the Gray was because of the draft, and had they been given a choice, they would have worn the Blue in the first place.'
Below another example of insane pro-slavery double talk:
"Every one acquainted with Southern slaves knows that the slave rejoices in the elevation and prosperity of his master." Virgina Professor Thomas R. Dew, 1852
Today's Neo-Confederate hidden agenda is dedicated to turning the clock back some 150 years.
Amen to your post!
Nope - Paleo-confederates simply want the federal leviathan ended, and the Constitutional republic restored.
TRULY i did NOT know that you were that big a FOOL and/or a LIAR.
are you STUPID, a LIAR or are you BOTH????
the sound you hear is not thunder, but rather the SMART FReepers, of all sorts/opinions, RIDICULING your IGNORANT & FALSE post.
free dixie,sw
The rebellion continues in 2005!
There was no rebellion when the Southern States left the Union, and there is no rebellion now. You're lying for polemical effect. Why are you emulating the worst propagandists the world has ever seen?
Wow, what was that again? Pro-slaver secessionists arresting elected popular political leaders in Eastern Tenn & loyal Americans fighting for the Union must be "crushed out instantly, the leaders arrested, and summarily punished!" (i.e., gunned down for being loyal American citizens?)
1. Your statement is pure propaganda bull. "Gunned down" is a color phrase added by you for polemical effect and to heighten the drama of the point you are attempting to make, at the expense of the responsible officers of the State of Tennessee.
2. When Tennessee held its plebiscite to leave the Union, the majority ruled. The statewide vote was 2:1 in favor.
3. States are the basic political unit in our part of North America, because our history and our organic law make them the basis of government in America. States may join or leave the Union, but dissident municipalities within a State may not partition a State.
4. The Unionists who took arms against their State were breaking the law -- which the Confederates were not doing -- and needed to be stopped and brought to justice. They were hurting their home State and their neighbors. They had no other State, and no other neighbors. They hadn't the right to take arms against them because the majority took Tennessee out of the Union, any more than someone else would have had a right to take arms against their state government because Texas, say, had joined the Union.
Today's Neo-Confederate hidden agenda is dedicated to turning the clock back some 150 years.
You'd be merely obtuse if you actually believed that, but you put it up as a malevolent smear on the people who disagree with you. Your statement is so clearly not true, that you should be embarrassed to put things like that up over your signature.