Replies

Let me give you an example of GOPcrapitalist's "big lie" technique.

In an earlier post on this page the liar posted this"

"... the 'story' of how the union army won the battle of Fort Davis in 1862."

Way back when, he took great umbrage when I post a passage from Aurora Hunt's book, The Army of the Pacific, 1860-1866, about the Union "capture" of Fort Jefferson Davis in western Texas.

He is sensitive about matters Texan, and the manifest cowardliness of the Texans in that campaign are a sore point with him. The word, "captured," was used correctly. A common definition is "take control of" and the context of the passage makes it clear that there was no battle - as the Texans had already skedaddled - leaving their wounded behind.

Flying the Stars & Stripes over reclaimed federal facilities in insurgent Texas was an important symbolic achievement for the Union forces in the West. However, in a fit of mental masturbation, the neo-rebs liars decided that creating an alternative reality was better than facing the truth, so they concocted the "Battle of Fort Davis" - along with lyrics!

How typical is it of habitial neo-reb liars to go to thse lengths? They do it all the time. GOPcrapitalist is trying to do it with his phony "violent post" claims against you.

He is invited to re-post the original post I made claiming there was some sort of "Battle of Fort Davis." He won't - not just because he is a coward, but because he is lying and no such post of mine exists. It is the same with the rest of his lies. He'll come up with some excuse.

He is an ardent DeLorenzo disciple. The 'Big Lie' tactic, the more it's repeated, today's neo-confeds really believe some like minded dimwits will begin to buy into the non-stop, wild, historic distortions & blatant lies. Once individuals have been positively identified as being in agreement with the 'cause' the deliberate camouflage for public consumption is removed. Real goals are only discussed among loyal seditionists for the 'lost cause'.

This backward element has a hidden deleterious agenda for portions this nation. An agenda is all they will ever hope to obtain. In here as well as many other Internet sites neo-confeds are being exposed constantly by their own incriminating screams of pure foolishness.

On the subject of Fort Davis I found the following post-Civil War data:

'On July 1st, 1867, companies C, F, H, and I, of the Ninth U. S. Cavalry under the command of Lieutenant Colonel Wesley Merritt, officially reoccupied the post at Fort Davis, Texas, that had been abandoned by federal troops since 1861. Merritt and the Ninth Cavalry had a sizable job ahead of them. In addition to helping to construct a new post, they had the Apaches and Comanches with whom to contend. A major responsibility was to protect travelers and the mail on the San Antonio-El Paso Road. In so doing, the army stationed small detachments of men at a number of stage stations,and sent other troops out on scouts and patrols.'

A REMARKABLE LEGACY

'In the history of Fort Davis, enlisted men of African-American heritage, or "Buffalo Soldiers" as they were called, amassed a notable record of accomplishments. They arrived at the post in 1867 when western Texas was still open to attack by raiding Apaches and Comanches. By the time they left in 1885, peaceful travel and settlement prevailed in much of the region.'

Source

He is sensitive about matters Texan, and the manifest cowardliness of the Texans in that campaign are a sore point with him.

Your recollection of events doesn't pass muster. The way I recall it, There was a dicsussion concerning the lack of success of the Union army in Texas; probably initiated by either rustbucket or GOPcapitalist. You responded with a list of what you considered considerable Union victories, one of which was the capture of Ft Jefferson Davis.

GOPcapitalist pointed out to you that Ft Davis was abandoned by the confederates, and that the Union forces had only to deal with indian raiders during the occupation, and you proceeded to engage in a symantics debate about the word 'capture.'

Sound about right to anyone else?

The word, "captured," was used correctly. A common definition is "take control of" ...

Then I guess I captured parts of California in my trip out there last May. Please send me the tax you owe me.

On the other hand, maybe I shouldn't claim to have captured parts of California. You Californians would probably want me to pay off some of the energy bills you ran up during your attempts to repeal the law of supply and demand.

The credit for holding your feet to the fire over loose use of the language belongs to GOPcapitalist.