And if you have any doubt about the confederacy's attitudes towards blacks, here are snippets from their own declarations of secession.
From Georgia: "They entered the Presidential contest again in 1860 and succeeded. The prohibition of slavery in the Territories, hostility to it everywhere, the equality of the black and white races".
From Mississippi: "It advocates negro equality, socially and politically".
From Texas: "She (Texas) was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as negro slavery-- the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits"
Also from Texas: "They demand the abolition of negro slavery throughout the confederacy, the recognition of political equality between the white and negro races, and avow their determination to press on their crusade against us, so long as a negro slave remains in these States."
Another from Texas: "that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable."
If you want to make the case that none of this is true then run with it, but here's more if you're interested.
I attempted to make no such case, and you merely ran from the case I did make. In response to your anonymous, discredited drivel of an offered story, I offered the scholarly and peer-reviewed work of the multiple award winning historian Dr. David Silkenat. As is obvious, you were unable to do so much as offer any substantive rebuttal to the scholarly work of Dr. Silkenat.
Last time you served up an anonymous internet article. This time you serve one up from the British tabloid, The Daily Mail, offering up the same misidentified image. This article was under the byline, Khaleda Rahman.
This Khaleda Rahman. Apparently you have extremely low standards in your choice of "expert historians."
https://medium.com/@jayfifield/khaleda-rahman-of-the-daily-mail-is-disgraceful-c12c5e1f2be5
Khaleda Rahman of The Daily Mail is a Disgraceful Human BeingJay Fifield
Jul 3, 2018·1 min read
Daily Mail Editor: Please do the ethical thing & remove this story. It is completely false and maliciously damaging. My youngest son Nicholas was diagnosed with autism at age 7 & honestly is loved by everyone he’s ever known. The accusation was immediately and repeatedly recanted. The charge was dismissed & the record expunged. This matter involved typical teenage consensual romantic behavior between two high functioning special needs children within the context of a several months-long dating relationship, approved of by both sets of parents. The arrest and prosecution were recklessly false as everyone with actual knowledge of the case knows. Justice was to prevail early on, then an incompetent reporter & twisted editor from the Des Moines Register selfishly tried to push the non-matter to go viral. Your crack reporter Khadela fell for it. She might try something called “research” next time before blindly ruining the future of more struggling special needs minors. For truth in regard to this see my page on medium.com.
Apparently, Ms. Rahman "researches" as you do.
Iowa tennis star, 18, will be spared jail for sexually abusing a mentally-ill teen who he forced to perform sex acts
- Nicholas Fifield was 17 when he met the 18-year-old woman online
- He asked her group home's staff and parents to take her out last year
- Instead of taking her to the movies, he took her to his Des Moines home
- He was charged with felony sex abuse but entered plea to lesser charge
- It means he will avoid jail as prosecutors have said they won't oppose just probation
By Khaleda Rahman For Dailymail.com
Published: 19:18 EDT, 14 August 2016 | Updated: 02:44 EDT, 15 August 2016
An Iowa tennis star will be spared jail for sexually assaulting an autistic and mentally-ill teenager after entering a plea deal.
Nicholas Fifield, 18, has been set to go on trial this week, after being charged last December with felony third-degree abuse of a person ‘suffering from a mental defect or incapacity, which precludes giving consent,’ according to the Des Moines Register.
But he entered an Alford plea to a lesser charge of assault with intent to commit serious injury. The plea means he admits no guilt, but acknowledges there was enough evidence to convict him.
Fifield, who graduated Valley High School this year, was 17, met the 18-year-old woman, a resident at a group home, through a dating site, according to authorities.
[...]
Rahman's cited Alford Plea was thrown out by the Court. An Alford Plea originates from the case North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25 (1970).
See Des Moines Register here and here
The case was dismissed with prejudice on motion by the prosecutors. Subsequently, the record was expunged.
https://medium.com/@jayfifield/tuesday-march-7-2017-b370ea4b222c
Prosecutor drops charge “in the interest of justice” …Tuesday, March 7, 2017
In the Iowa District Court for Polk County
Tuesday, March 7, 2017
State of Iowa,
Plaintiff,
v.
NICHALAS JAMES FIFIELD,
Defendant.Criminal No: FECR292368
Order of Dismissal
The Court has reviewed the State’s motion to dismiss and finds that it should be granted.
This matter is dismissed: with prejudice
State to pay court costs
Iowa Code Section 901C.1 allows a defendant to file a motion to request that a dismissed case be expunged (erased) from the clerk of court’s public records. Before the expungement, the defendant must prove all of the following:
1) all charges in the case were dismissed;
2) at least 180 days have passed since the case was dismissed (or the defendant proves, and the court finds, good cause to expunge the records sooner such as when the defendant was the victim of an identity theft);
3) the dismissal was not based on a finding that the defendant was incompetent to stand trial or was not guilty by reason of insanity; and
4) all court costs, fees, or other financial obligations ordered by the court have been paid.
If the request is not resisted by the state, the motion may be granted without hearing if the defendant’s motion includes two attachments: A) an affidavit swearing to the four matters set out above; and B) proof from the clerk of court that all costs, fees and other financial obligations have been paid.
Defendant was personally served with a copy of this order.
In addition to all other persons entitled to a copy of this order, the Clerk shall provide a copy to the following: FELCC,
On a point of history, the question is who to believe, British tabloid reporter Khaleda Rahman, or multiple award winning historian Dr. David Silkenat in a scholarly and peer reviewed article published in a history journal.