[carton253]

I don't understand the flat out rejection of Anna Jackson's statements that she and her husband owned slaves.

Jackson did own slaves... It is not a pack of lies... and when I write that he did, it does not make me a hater of the South.

I have great admiration for all the men who fought on both sides of this war. But, Jackson is my favorite. But, I like Hancock and Chamberlain, as well as JEB Stuart and Lee.

[lentulusgracchus]

I don't understand the flat out rejection of Anna Jackson's statements that she and her husband owned slaves.

You're posting to people who've been 300 heavyweight rounds with one another over these issues in other threads.

You and I might think that whether General Thomas M. Jackson owned slaves a small matter, but elsewhere the point will have been fought over in the course of a contest over the proposition that "Jackson owned slaves; therefore, he was/is moral scum, and barks in hell today for it", or something equally charming, that the Marxist-inspired revisionist historians and their Southern counter-revisionist historiopolemicists will have been waging war over as the Marxists try to "prove" that the South was/is evil, and that Midwesterners of good conscience can't be caught dead shaking hands with "those people". It's the old divide-and-conquer strategy being prosecuted by the Marxists at an intellectual level, with the White House the putative prize.

[Non-Sequitur]

I don't understand the flat out rejection of Anna Jackson's statements that she and her husband owned slaves.

You don't understand stand watie. I'm not sure any of us do.

[stand watie]

IF the General did own slaves, then why are there NO TAX RECORDS of such ownership?????

PLEASE explain that to me.

free dixie,sw