I guess Waco47 thinks he is doing a public service by posting the same paragraphs over and over again.

Robert Wilson said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

This whole business of (i) trying to critique someone's entire life rather than focusing on what they did that is pertinent to the history books and then (ii) trying to judge their entire life not within the time period during which they lived or within the flow of history, but rather by today's standards is complete foolishness. Just a way to tear others down and make us feel better about ourselves. We could all be torn apart, out of context, by other fools in the future. Who cares.

---

What is out of context? The Alamo defenders fought for slavery. It's history. Learn from it.
What were their heroic goals? Slavery is not heroic ideal. You can't name any truly historic ideals.

---

The Alamo defenders did not fight for slavery. That's just reductionist bull***** You just gave a perfect example of out of context.

They fought for independence from Mexico. There were a lot of reasons for that - primary among them was Mexico not honoring its own Constitutional obligations towards Texas. Many of them were merely fighting against the heavy boot heel of Santa Anna. Few of them owned slaves or were even farmers. A few were and did, but they managed to continue that while part of Mexico anyway.

You think Davy Crockett went to Texas to fight for slavery? He went to Texas because he was pissed off he lost a Congressional election in Tennessee to the Jacksonians (another group I'm sure you detest) and he went west trying to find a frontier and a new place to live out the rest of his life, then got caught up in the revolution.

---

And of course the OP doesn't mention that a big part of Crockett's beef with the Jacksonians had to do with Indian removal. He was basically alone on what's now seen as the right side of history.

Waco1947 said:

---

Proud 1992 Alum said:

---

I guess Waco47 thinks he is doing a public service by posting the same paragraphs over and over again.

---

I am because it is the truth of our origins. Don't the paragraphs reveal the truth.
Try dealing with truth not imagined motivations

---

So those are magic paragraphs? Did you find them in a golden box at the end of a rainbow? Just because you found someone's writing persuasive doesn't mean it is the truth.

Waco1947 said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

The "americans" that moved to Texas were mexican citizens. The problems started when Mexico's republic government which made certain promises to the Texas region of Mexico changed its ruling processes when the political leadership and style of govt changed.

Heros like Bowie married a local Mexican woman and had children. There is a statue of Juan Seguin at the Alamo. The locals were not marginalized. The sacrifices made by the men and women who fought for independence at Goliad, Gonzalez, Refurio, the Alamo, and San Jacinto should not be marginalized by idiots who havent taken the time to read the letters and journals to get to the internal thoughts and feelings of those who were there

The US didnt want another slave state, Texas was a republic for years before becoming a state.

Everything about this book appears to be bias slanted trash having little to do with the truth of what happened.

---

Short sighted reading of San Antonio. Tejanos were marginalized as soon Texians arrived.

---

...arrived in areas so devoid of Mexican citizens that the Mexican government gave millions of acres of land grants to empresarios who were citizens of another country to bring citizens in from all over the world to settle drylands with marginal rainfall which were so cold in the winter, hot in the summer, and full of marauding indian tribes that Mexican citizens simply would not live there.

If it weren't for ideology, your posts would have no ideas at all.

GrowlTowel said:

---

So if Texans fought for slavery, it follows, 47, that Americans in WWI fought for Jim Crow and in WWII fought for segregation, using your logic?

Wow, if I were you I would find the person that taught you to hate yourself and kick his/her/its ass. You are truly one of the most evil persons I have ever come across.

---

Here is the deal, it is a garbage book with the sole purpose of it being written to make the people, the politics and the event of the Alamo look as bad as it possibly could. It was written to deconstruct the "whitewashed anglo" angle of the Alamo. To proclaim they weren't heroic, they didn't fight to the end, they had no idea what they were doing etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.

Were the people at the Alamo perfect, hell no, were their motives perfect, are motives ever, were the men at the Alamo the most heroic men ever born. Not all of them and maybe even not most of them.

But here is the angle this book was written with. You have a pastor, he is an all around good guy and he tries to lead his flock in the right direct. You want to write a book about him, your first 2 questions are.

1) Do you still beat your wife?

2) Are you ever going to stop stealing from your flock? and a third for good measure.

3) Are you still lusting after one of our elders wives?

But instead of him getting to answer these charges, his worst enemy in the world is getting to answer them.

It is simply a hit piece, written for folks who eat up "critical race" stuff. If the Alamo story has 10 different angles, this was written leaving out 9 of them.

Quote:

---

Remembering Rutherford: Forrest was postwar activist for black civil rights
People Places and Stories

Greg Tucker, Daily News Journal, July 13, 2015

Retired Confederate Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest was an outspoken advocate for the civil rights of the freedmen in postwar Tennessee.

This advocacy and his popularity with the Memphis black community were resented by some of his white contemporaries who spread false rumors to discredit the general and further their own political interests.
Shortly after the end of the Civil War and while Memphis was still under U.S. military command, Forrest spoke to the federal authorities regarding the former slaves within their command. He noted that many of the freedmen were skilled artisans and should be employed.

Additionally, he urged the authorities to establish training programs for the younger blacks, so the next generation would not be dependent.

Forrest also approached the Memphis Board of Aldermen, according to newspaper accounts, and argued that the black citizens could be doctors, clerks, bankers or anything else if given the opportunity and education. He believed that the blacks were a part of the community and should be involved and employed like anyone else.
Although his words to the federal authorities and the city aldermen went unheeded, Forrest conducted his own business consistent with what he urged upon others.

As president of the Selma, Marion & Memphis Railroad, he employed former slaves as construction engineers, crew foremen, train engineers and conductors. Blacks were hired as managers, as well as laborers.
In 1875, Forrest was invited to address a meeting of the Independent Order of Pole Bearers, an early black civil rights organization in Memphis, at its Fourth of July barbecue.

Although told by several whites that he should not participate, Forrest accepted the invitation. See McClarey, "Nathan Bedford Forrest and Racial Reconciliation," American Catholic (Aug. 6, 2010).

Just before he spoke, Forrest was presented a bouquet of flowers by the daughter of a Pole Bearers' officer. The gathering was at the Memphis fairgrounds, and Forrest's short, extemporaneous speech was reprinted in the Memphis newspaper, as follows:

"Ladies and Gentlemen, I accept the flowers as a memento of reconciliation between the white and colored races of the Southern states. I accept it more particularly as it comes from a colored lady, for if there is any one on God's earth who loves the ladies I believe it is myself. (Immense applause and laughter.)

"I came here with the jeers of some white people, who think that I am doing wrong. I believe I can exert some influence and do much to assist the people in strengthening fraternal relations and shall do all in my power to elevate every man, to depress none. (Applause.)

"I want to elevate you to take positions in law offices, in stores, on farms and wherever you are capable of going. I have not said anything about politics today. I don't propose to say anything about politics.

"You have a right to elect whom you please, vote for the man you think best, and I think, when that is done, you and I are freemen. Do as you consider right and honest in electing men for office.

"I did not come here to make you a long speech, although invited to do so by you. I am not much of a speaker, and my business prevented me from preparing myself. I came to meet you as friends and welcome you to the white people.

"I want you to come nearer to us. When I can serve you I will do so. We have but one flag, one country; let us stand together. We may differ in color, but not in sentiment.

"Many things have been said about me which are wrong, and which white and black persons here, who stood by me through the war, can contradict.

"Go to work, be industrious, live honestly and act truly, and when you are oppressed I'll come to your relief. I thank you, ladies and gentlemen, for this opportunity you have afforded me to be with you, and to assure you that I am with you in heart and in hand." (Prolonged applause.)

After the speech Forrest thanked the young black woman for the bouquet and kissed her on the cheek. This public familiarity between the races was unheard of at the time.

In his speech Forrest referred to "black persons here who stood by me through the war." Apparently in the crowd were some of the cavalrymen who served in his command.

When Forrest's cavalry surrendered in May 1865, sixty-five blacks were on Forrest's muster role, including eight in Forrest's Escort, the general's handpicked elite inner circle. Commenting on the performance of his black soldiers, Forrest said: "Finer Confederates never fought."

Forrest detractors allege that the Confederate general was the "founder of the KKK." This is factually incorrect. The 19th century Ku Klos was founded as a fraternal organization on Dec. 24, 1865, in Pulaski by Thomas M. Jones, a Giles County judge; Frank O. McCord, publisher of the Pulaski newspaper; and four other Confederate veterans. Though not present at a Ku Klos meeting in Nashville in 1867, Forrest was elected as grand wizard of the organization.

There is no evidence that Forrest ever wore any Klan costume or ever "rode" on any Klan activity. He did, however, on Oct. 20, 1869, order that all costumes and other regalia be destroyed and that Klan activity be ended.

This was confirmed by the U. S. Congress in 1871: "The natural tendency of all such organizations is to violence and crime, hence it was that Gen. Forrest and other men of influence by the exercise of their moral power, induced them to disband." See U. S. Congressional Committee Report (June 27, 1871).
When Forrest died in 1877, Memphis newspapers reported that his funeral procession was over two miles long. The throng of mourners was estimated to include over 3,000 black citizens of Memphis.
A special thanks for research assistance to Billy Miller (Murfreesboro) and Dan McGuire and Lee Millar (Memphis).

---

I believe the entirety of the article was better to be included, as the man obviously was much more equitable and fair in mind, in the end, than the vast majority of people living even today, much less in 1875.

Forest Bueller_bf said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

So if Texans fought for slavery, it follows, 47, that Americans in WWI fought for Jim Crow and in WWII fought for segregation, using your logic?

Wow, if I were you I would find the person that taught you to hate yourself and kick his/her/its ass. You are truly one of the most evil persons I have ever come across.

---

Here is the deal, it is a garbage book with the sole purpose of it being written to make the people, the politics and the event of the Alamo look as bad as it possibly could. It was written to deconstruct the "whitewashed anglo" angle of the Alamo. To proclaim they weren't heroic, they didn't fight to the end, they had no idea what they were doing etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.

Were the people at the Alamo perfect, hell no, were their motives perfect, are motives ever, were the men at the Alamo the most heroic men ever born. Not all of them and maybe even not most of them.

But here is the angle this book was written with. You have a pastor, he is an all around good guy and he tries to lead his flock in the right direct. You want to write a book about him, your first 2 questions are.

1) Do you still beat your wife?

2) Are you ever going to stop stealing from your flock? and a third for good measure.

3) Are you still lusting after one of our elders wives?

But instead of him getting to answer these charges, his worst enemy in the world is getting to answer them.

It is simply a hit piece, written for folks who eat up "critical race" stuff. If the Alamo story has 10 different angles, this was written leaving out 9 of them.

---

Yep, the author is attempting to describe the picture on a 1000 piece jigsaw puzzle using only one piece

Waco1947 said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

This whole business of (i) trying to critique someone's entire life rather than focusing on what they did that is pertinent to the history books and then (ii) trying to judge their entire life not within the time period during which they lived or within the flow of history, but rather by today's standards is complete foolishness. Just a way to tear others down and make us feel better about ourselves. We could all be torn apart, out of context, by other fools in the future. Who cares.

---

What is out of context? The Alamo defenders fought for slavery. It's history. Learn from it.
What were their heroic goals? Slavery is not heroic ideal. You can't name any truly historic ideals.

---

You have zero comprehension of Texas history .

You have zero comprehension of the history of the West .

You have zero comprehension of US history .

Merely a very old mediocrity bored out of his mind in assisted living .

Continually posting semi literate trash hoping to generate responses in the vain hope to pass still another day of empty hours .

Waco1947 said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

This whole business of (i) trying to critique someone's entire life rather than focusing on what they did that is pertinent to the history books and then (ii) trying to judge their entire life not within the time period during which they lived or within the flow of history, but rather by today's standards is complete foolishness. Just a way to tear others down and make us feel better about ourselves. We could all be torn apart, out of context, by other fools in the future. Who cares.

---

What is out of context? The Alamo defenders fought for slavery. It's history. Learn from it.
What were their heroic goals? Slavery is not heroic ideal. You can't name any truly historic ideals.

---

You have zero comprehension of Texas history .

You have zero comprehension of the history of the West .

You have zero comprehension of US history .

Merely a very old mediocrity bored out of his mind in assisted living .

Continually posting semi literate trash hoping to generate responses in the vain hope to pass still another day of empty hours .

---

Yes I know Texas history

---

not based on your posts

Waco1947 said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

This whole business of (i) trying to critique someone's entire life rather than focusing on what they did that is pertinent to the history books and then (ii) trying to judge their entire life not within the time period during which they lived or within the flow of history, but rather by today's standards is complete foolishness. Just a way to tear others down and make us feel better about ourselves. We could all be torn apart, out of context, by other fools in the future. Who cares.

---

What is out of context? The Alamo defenders fought for slavery. It's history. Learn from it.
What were their heroic goals? Slavery is not heroic ideal. You can't name any truly historic ideals.

---

You have zero comprehension of Texas history .

You have zero comprehension of the history of the West .

You have zero comprehension of US history .

Merely a very old mediocrity bored out of his mind in assisted living .

Continually posting semi literate trash hoping to generate responses in the vain hope to pass still another day of empty hours .

---

Yes I know Texas history

---

not based on your posts

---

Point out my errors

---

They've been pointed out, repeatedly

Waco1947 said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

This whole business of (i) trying to critique someone's entire life rather than focusing on what they did that is pertinent to the history books and then (ii) trying to judge their entire life not within the time period during which they lived or within the flow of history, but rather by today's standards is complete foolishness. Just a way to tear others down and make us feel better about ourselves. We could all be torn apart, out of context, by other fools in the future. Who cares.

---

What is out of context? The Alamo defenders fought for slavery. It's history. Learn from it.
What were their heroic goals? Slavery is not heroic ideal. You can't name any truly historic ideals.

---

You have zero comprehension of Texas history .

You have zero comprehension of the history of the West .

You have zero comprehension of US history .

Merely a very old mediocrity bored out of his mind in assisted living .

Continually posting semi literate trash hoping to generate responses in the vain hope to pass still another day of empty hours .

---

Yes I know Texas history

---

not based on your posts

---

Point out my errors

---

Believing the effort, sacrifice, and cause weren't noble or just because there was injustice in the world at the time. It's really a fatal flaw in your's and many in the historical grievance camp.

Waco1947 said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

This whole business of (i) trying to critique someone's entire life rather than focusing on what they did that is pertinent to the history books and then (ii) trying to judge their entire life not within the time period during which they lived or within the flow of history, but rather by today's standards is complete foolishness. Just a way to tear others down and make us feel better about ourselves. We could all be torn apart, out of context, by other fools in the future. Who cares.

---

What is out of context? The Alamo defenders fought for slavery. It's history. Learn from it.
What were their heroic goals? Slavery is not heroic ideal. You can't name any truly historic ideals.

---

You have zero comprehension of Texas history .

You have zero comprehension of the history of the West .

You have zero comprehension of US history .

Merely a very old mediocrity bored out of his mind in assisted living .

Continually posting semi literate trash hoping to generate responses in the vain hope to pass still another day of empty hours .

---

Yes I know Texas history

---

You know nothing and are lucid barely 50% of the time .

The sins committed throughout your unproductive and failure prone existence..... will not be transferred to others posting ridiculous trash on an internet fan site .

So take your pills offered by the night nurse and try not to soil your bedsheets for once .

I think it's funny that there are people who still think Waco1947 is the pastor of a church. Feeding the troll, folks.

4th and Inches said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

This whole business of (i) trying to critique someone's entire life rather than focusing on what they did that is pertinent to the history books and then (ii) trying to judge their entire life not within the time period during which they lived or within the flow of history, but rather by today's standards is complete foolishness. Just a way to tear others down and make us feel better about ourselves. We could all be torn apart, out of context, by other fools in the future. Who cares.

---

What is out of context? The Alamo defenders fought for slavery. It's history. Learn from it.
What were their heroic goals? Slavery is not heroic ideal. You can't name any truly historic ideals.

---

You have zero comprehension of Texas history .

You have zero comprehension of the history of the West .

You have zero comprehension of US history .

Merely a very old mediocrity bored out of his mind in assisted living .

Continually posting semi literate trash hoping to generate responses in the vain hope to pass still another day of empty hours .

---

Yes I know Texas history

---

not based on your posts

---

Point out my errors

---

They've been pointed out, repeatedly

---

It's challenging to win an argument against an intelligent person. It's IMPOSSIBLE to win an argument against an idiot.