Replies

"I know nothing about it because I don't live for this subject like you guys do. I usually come here to post the words of the secessionists themselves and when the twisting starts get led into all areas. So tell me all about it and if your story looks suspicious I'll look at it myself from historical documentation rather than biased bookwriters and go from there."

You actually chose one of the only possible options, and said you know nothing about it. That's good, because you've provided a framework for us to work in. On the whole, your reply was nearly non-evasive, and I give you credit for that.

You've spelled out ground rules about what kind of sources you'd discount -- and I agree to abide by them. Since bookwriters are biased, I won't use them. The only kind of historical documentation left, then, are eyewitness accounts by participants in the battle of the Crater itself, so that's what I'll use. Though you didn't specify it, I'll have to rule out any source that is Confederate, or even Southern, or sympathetic to the South or the Confederacy -- lest anyone object that it has a pro-Southern bias.

I propose to only use sources that were in the Union army at that battle. Maybe a general or so, or a commanding officer, or even the black Union soldiers in that battle.

Will those Union sources be acceptable, or do they still have too much pro-Southern bias?

You actually chose one of the only possible options, and said you know nothing about it. That's good, because you've provided a framework for us to work in. On the whole, your reply was nearly non-evasive, and I give you credit for that. You've spelled out ground rules about what kind of sources you'd discount -- and I agree to abide by them. Since bookwriters are biased, I won't use them. The only kind of historical documentation left, then, are eyewitness accounts by participants in the battle of the Crater itself, so that's what I'll use. Though you didn't specify it, I'll have to rule out any source that is Confederate, or even Southern, or sympathetic to the South or the Confederacy -- lest anyone object that it has a pro-Southern bias. I propose to only use sources that were in the Union army at that battle. Maybe a general or so, or a commanding officer, or even the black Union soldiers in that battle. Will those Union sources be acceptable, or do they still have too much pro-Southern bias?

I'll use my discernment to see if it's suspicious no matter what your source is. Most northerners fought to save the union, not to end slavery, and we have ugly people here even today, most of whom are Democrats. Individuals acts of cruelty by anyone would not surprise me. That's the trouble with neoconfederates, they will never admit that anything bad was ever done by anyone on their side. It's why nothing a neoconfederates says can be believed in some cases, they are so biased they're delusional.