-Caveat Lector-
William... I am having to post this directly to you because I quickly use up my
alloted 7 posts per day.
William Hugh Tunstall wrote:
> -Caveat Lector-
>
> Hawk,
> Thank you for serving our country. As a veteran, you put your life on the line for
>the country and
> that is to be respected. That's why I don't quite understand your political
>position.
The fact that I "put my life on the line" is precisely what started me on the road to
my political
position. I was in the USAF for almost seven years as a professional military officer
and aviator.
During three of those years, I was involved in what later became known as the "Delta
Force," but which
then was "Blue Triangle" and a couple of other secretive names. As such, I engaged in
numerous
"informal" wars, insurrections, and general mayhem for the govm't of the U.S. --
often not even allowed
to wear the uniform (we called these "T-shirt and blue-jean missions). I was also in
VietNam quite a
bit, before the conflict became a "war." In all of those missions, we were directly
involved on the
"wrong" side, or were sticking our noses into other peoples' affairs, generally
helping some dictatorial
govm't obtain or maintain its harsh control over the populace. Then, for three more
years, I was
directly involved in intelligence gathering operations. For three years, every
morning, I saw "raw
intelligence" -- information that had not been "laundered" for public consumption.
Not one time -- and
I mean not even ONCE -- did the truth about what was going on reach the average
American. We were lied
to on a continual basis, and are being lied to at the present time. I was trained in
the process of
developing "cover stories" about things that happened, and I can spot the various
techniques because
they are still in use today. In short, I distrust our govm't precisely because I know
it to be a lying
and manipulative government that has been and still is involved in an active effort to
deny or reduce
the freedom of everyone here and abroad. So, you see, neither I nor anyone else "in
the service of this
country" is responsible for the freedom that I do enjoy, and cerainly not for the
freedom of people in
other countries.
> I'm descended from people who owned slaves. If you want to look in the historical
>records of the
> state of North Carolina, you will find that twenty-two members of my family fought
>FOR the
> Confederacy. They were not "bad" people...they thought they were fighting for their
>friends and
> neighbors...defending their "southern way of life," a way of life that involved the
>enslavement of
> human beings...
I agree with you about what they were fighting for.
> My grandfather, born in 1886, would tell me stories about how much our family loved
>their slaves..how
> well they treated them, etc. My grandfather wasn't deliberately lying... sure, my
>family loved the
> slaves. They were valuable property.
That is not the only reason the loved their slaves. Surely you don't deny that close
personal bonds
were often deverloped between slaves and the family that owned them... It is well
documented.
> And they treated them humanely (if one can argue that owning a human being is a
> humane idea).
I do not say that "owning a human being is a humane idea" -- but neither is it an
inhumane act. Anyone
who understands the bible (which I allow as the only reliable source of determining
"good" and "evil"),
should quickly pick up on the idea that God does not consider the institution of
slavery as evil. And
if God doesn't consider it evil, then I certainly am not going to condemn HIM for His
position on it.
It is clear from the Bible that involuntary servitude is not preferable in many cases,
but it is not
condemned. It is the abuse of the relationship that is condemned.
> They didn't separate family members... I still have visions of my grandfather, old
>H.B., sitting in
> his chair, puffing on his cigar, telling me about how much the family lived their
>"....." My
> grandfather was a product of his generation.
Who isn't?
> And,for your information, the family had stories of the damned Yankees who
> came into North Carolina, seizing the food and valuables of everyone. In
> order to save their smoked hams, the family placed discolored flour on the
> cuts of meat, hoping that the Yankees would think them poisoned. I was
> raised on Civil War stories and states rights arguments.
Same here... Some of my ancestors lived in S. Carolina. They were a large and
prosperous family, and
when the Union army came through, they burned 30 of the Willis plantations to the
ground, leaving only
one standing, and it had been set fire to.
> Most white southerners were too poor to own slaves. Slavery was a complex
> institution--the large operations in the Deep South (cotton) were run differently
>from the the tobacco
> plantations of the border states (Ky, Tenn, NC and Virginia)...
As were the operations in Louisiana that involved mostly sugar cane growing.
> But slavery was an evil institution.
That is merely your opinion, and it does not comport with the Bible. You are welcome
to it, and you are
certainly not alone in that opinion. But I base my criteria on "stronger stuff" than
personal opinion.
By the way, at one time I would have agreed with you. I was "compelled" to study
slavery in order to
support my position that it was evil, but my study resulted in forcing me to reject my
initial beliefs
concerning it. As you may have gathered, I am VERY libertarian in my political
philosophy. As a
libertarian, I would have to reject slavery, either an an owner or a slave. But as a
Christian, I
cannot condemn it.
> ...and it brutalized both the slaves AND their owners.
pure conjecture, and I disagree with your position on that.
> In order to justify the system, white Southerners had to practice a form of denial.
No... All they had to do was adhere to the Bible. As such, it is not "a form of
denial." In order to
be an abolitionist, one had to adopt a form of denial, however, in rejecting the
teachings of scripture
and the entire history of human dealings with each other.
> How many Yankee boys had to have their guts and brains blown out to put an end to
>slavery?
None of them... They were all conned into thinking they were fighting "for the Union"
or "to free the
slaves." What they were actually fighting for, as is proven by events resulting from
their "victory,"
is totalitarian control by a national central government, eventually leading to
totalitarian control by
a centralized international government. Of course, they didn't know that... although
some people were
aware of it, R.L. Dabney for one.
> The Civil War was a vicious, evil affair...all of that nobility/romanticism/chivalry
>crap is a false
> portrait that does a disservice to both sides of the conflict.
Nobility, chivalry... crap? I thought they were pretty high ideals.
> When the southern military commanders took up arms against their government...that
>was a TREASONOUS
> act in my book.
They didn't take up arms against THEIR government... Their government was the
Confederate States of
America. If you doubt it, I can show you my gggrandfather's parole form printed by
the United States
government. I imagine those forms were fairly uniform in wording... Look at one, and
see if it does not
recognize the Confederate States of America.
> At the very least, they should have been barred from political office when they
>returned home from the
> war.
They never were able to "return home" from the war... They returned "to their homes,"
but their homeland
was then a federal satrapy.
> And in my opinion, the Union was far too conciliatory in their treatment of
> people who had taken up arms against it.
You may be right there... Although you seem to have a shallow understanding of
Reconstruction... It
didn't seem all that concilliatory to me.
> Murderous scum like Nathan Bedford Forrest, the heinous commander who
> supervised the massacare of Union soldiers at Fort Pillow, Tenn., were
> allowed to remain at large....
Now you are speaking of something you obviously know little about. For starters,
Forrest was not even
AT Ft. Pillow until the fighting was over. Furthermore, if he had actually been
guilty, why was he
never tried? It certainly wasn't due to lack of effort on the part of the govm't...
But every time they
thought they "had a case" they would find that their "witnesses" had perjured
themselves or fabricated
their stories.
> The Klan was the inevitable product of their treasonous activities...
Again, you are speaking about something in which you obviously do not know the truth.
During the early
years of Reconstruction, the Klan was the only "just justice" around. The people were
under a rogue
government of carpetbaggers, scalawags, and their former-slave lackeys in positions of
absolute martial
law authority.
> The Curtis family were hardheaded, stubborn people who believed that no human being
>should be the
> property of another. And they could point to Biblical passages that celebrated the
>idea of freedom
> and the dignity of the individual (the same Bible being read by my southern
>forebears).
However, they could not point to Biblical passages that supported the idea of slavery
as an evil
institution.... Not if they used the Bible ordinarily in use at the time, and which is
still in use
today. "Celebrating an idea" is not the same as "stating a doctrine."
> Both my Tunstall and Curtis forebears were descended from people who had
>participated in
> Revolutionary War.
As did my forefathers... Some of whom were killed in that war, and others of whom
suffered greatly at
the hands of their Tory neighbors.
> But in that terrible conflict which side would point the way to a better future? a
>better America?
To me the answer is unequivocable -- The Confederate States of America.
> Do you really believe that the United States would have been better off to have
>tolerated the
> institution of slavery?
Yep... Better off than it is now, which is a nation where (as in my case) the govm't
confiscates over
half of my annual income; and either controls, regulates, monitors, or taxes every
single activity of my
life -- and is moving steadily toward turning me over to the control of a godless
"one-world"
government. Slavery was not eliminated by the war... it merely changed its appearance.
> ...that the enslavement of human beings was a good idea?
Whether or not it is a "good idea" depends on several factors. I personally do not
wish to own a slave
nor be a slave... So it isn't a "good idea" to me in most respects. I can say
clearly, however, that it
isn't an evil idea.
> Do you believe that the New South of today would have been possible if the days of
>Jim Crow would have
> continued?
Of course it could. It would not look the same, though. I work in the field of
employment law, EEO,
Affirmative Action, etc... These are laws that are a detriment to society, being
passed off as
blessings... and surprisingly enough, people actually believe it.
> The Union was in the right to put an end to slavery. The South was in the
> wrong. The issue has been decided.
Oh, how rediculous.... The issue was decided by force of arms, which is a poor
substitute for reason.
Hawk
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
