Forrest is pretty much only celebrated for his military accomplishments. If you put those aside, there is not much else. That's like saying "putting military tactics aside, why do people celebrate Patton? He was a mean guy. He slapped a soldier suffering from PTSD." Forrest was a fantastic general, but also the person started the klan. Either of those true facts does not make the other false. The things he did on the battlefield were amazing. The things he did off the battlefield were the opposite. Erwin Rommel was a fantastic general who fought for Nazi germany. Attila the Hun was an absolutely worse person than either of the above people who committed horrible atrocities far worse than almost everyone in human history. He was also very successful on the battlefield. I would say for all the wars and death he caused, Napoleon was a pretty terrible person. Someone could admire and respect any of these people for their military accomplishments, while simultaneously holding them in low regard and not respecting them for the wrong things they did or which side they were fighting on. Besides, Sherman's troops burned cities, raped, pillaged, etc. What do you think Sherman's March to Sea was? The confederate prisoners of war were treated worse than union prisoners of war. Everything that happened in missouri/kansas was pretty terrible regardless of side. John Brown went around slaughtering people. War is hell. People on all sides tend to commit atrocities. In fact, one could say Winston Churchill was a great leader while another could say he firebombed Dresden. Both are true. The US has had plenty of officers involved in massacres forever. How many Americans since George Washington killed Indians? http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/06/25/military-ok-confederate-flag-now/29307077/ Here is our own military's take: So I guess the answer is if one says "oh the same Forrest that started the klan and fort pillow?" Those are true but that does not change the fact he was pretty victorious on the battlefield.
Andrew Young had this to say about the flag flap: "Black civil rights icon and former Mayor of Atlanta Andrew Young says that debate over the Confederate flag is a divisive non-issue which completely distracts from the real problem – the fact that 93% of blacks are killed by other blacks. “The challenge for us is not to wipe out our past history but to learn to live together in the future,” said Young. “I would never trade the flag for a single job,” he added. “The problems we face don’t have anything to do with the flag. The fact is that 93% of black people killed are killed by other black people. So black lives matter. Let us start believing that we matter.” Young refers to statistics on black crime that people have been lambasted as racists for even mentioning which illustrate that the biggest threat to black people is not police brutality or racist white people, but violence within the black community itself. Those same statistics show that black people commit over half of homicides despite making up only 13% of the population. http://www.dcclothesline.com/2015/0...illing-other-blacks-not-the-confederate-flag/ This will not set well with Sharpton and the many many race hustlers.
Young refers to statistics on black crime that people have been lambasted as racists for even mentioning which illustrate that the biggest threat to black people is not police brutality or racist white people, but violence within the black community itself. Those same statistics show that black people commit over half of homicides despite making up only 13% of the population. Yes, but that doesn't fit the narrative that the media is looking for. The same weekend as the Charleston shooting, 10 blacks were shot (one died) at a Detroit block party. That shooting barely made the national news. It was perceived as black-on-black crime. The media doesn't give a crap about black-on-black crime. It only cares about crimes against blacks that are perceived as racist in nature; white cop, black victim, etc. Black lives matter only in certain situations as far as the national media is concerned.
What role did those "Kraut" women and children in the Dresden Altstadt play in bombing London that warranted them getting barbecued? Keep in mind that the Red Army was already well inside of Germany at the time of the bombings. The war wouldn't have ended an hour earlier had we left the city center (which was of no military significance) alone. I don't have a problem with the entire mission. Dresden had some legitimate targets, but firebombing the old city center was a cheap shot. It was like beating a guy up and then kicking him in the nuts while he was already lying on the ground. This is also one of the very few points on which Germans will actually stick up for themselves. Generally, they take full blame for what the Nazis did during the war and don't blame the Allies for kicking them around, but for whatever reason, they make an exception for Dresden.
I don't dispute these stastics, nor the ones reporting in Black on White crime. What is troubling is that morons like Dylann Roof blame the "Black Community" rather than black individuals for these crimes. Just like I don't hold Clean, Deez or 6721 responsible for meth heads and white trash that steal their grandparents oxycontin or robbing and stealing to support drug habits, I don't blame my black superviser living in the burbs for inner city Black violence. I think a lot of justice will come from the Charleston Violence, compassion, healing, forgivness and seeing people as individuals or members of a chosen community rather than "white community" or "black community." One thing that makes me happy is the prospect that Roof, so troubled by black rapists, murders and robbers, will perhaps get a chance to meet some of the perps who really did the crap that troubled him. (Hey Roof, Bible Study, unless it's in jail, is a really stupid place to confront the criminal element.) Bet a lot of black men are shaking in their orange jumpsuits thinking about that hateful white boy with the bowl haircut
Oh the irony. What about those that blame statues in Austin and a flag in Columbia? Or the hundreds of thousands of those that wave the confederate flag over the actions of 1 dude that had it in a couple of his 64 photos and did not even mention it in his manifesto (terrible read, I do not recommend. He was mostly focussed on Trayvon Martin and in his really warped mind was somehow getting "justice" for Zimmerman). Also where is the movment to ban Rhodesian flags? Dude was more obsessed with those.
I don't know when they bombed your grandmother's house, but if it was part of The Blitz, there was a definite reason for that. Britain was interfering with Germany's plans in the East, and they wanted to force Britain into an armistice. I don't condone any of that, obviously, but there was a strategic reason, and it served that reason. There really wasn't a reason to burn the Dresden old town. Two points. First, Germany was losing and desperate. Losing nations do desperate things. Winning nations don't. Second, the Allies were supposed to have a higher moral standard than Nazi Germany did, and they obviously did. However, the bombing of old town Dresden was not a demonstration resembled the Nazis' moral standard more than the usual Allies' standard.
I can't speak for those that "blame" the flag. This thread though, I think shows reason some dislike the Confederate Battle Flag. It also shows why some, like Roof, the KKK and those who opposed integration and civil rights for blacks find it an inspirational symbol. I certainly wouldn't want to ban Confederate memorials or private display of rebel flags. Maybe it would be helpful if they were accompanied by a truth squad response sometimes. https://www.washingtonpost.com/post...ecause-our-textbooks-and-monuments-are-wrong/
If he avoids the death penalty, I could see him living like Richard Speck. He'll end up being someone's *****.
You cannot control what people find inspiration from or what inspiration they find. They same Koran that inspires to some to commit acts of terror also inspires many to do good. As alluded to the article I posted from the US military, the same confederate flag and confederate generals have brought inspiration to some southern soldiers that fought in America's wars since the civil war. (One great irony of comparing the southern flag to the nazis, is that so many proud, flag waving southerners fought and died ridding the world of nazis.) If one wanted to, they could argue that Star Spangled Banner inspired some to commit atrocities against Indians. Depending on ones perspective, one could blame it for a plethora of things (and some do). In fact, the Star Spangled Banner probably has greater inspiration on the modern KKK (not the one from the 1870s which almost certainly never flew the star spangled banner) than any other flag. Remember that the modern klan was a sick national movement, not a regional movement. I know when I see those yahoos on TV, I see them with the star spangled banner more than anything else. It is obviously the star spangled banner has a completely different meaning for them (as evidenced by their "I want my country back" comments). I stated in my other, now gone posts, the proper response would be to do what UT did and add MLK, Barbara Jordan statutes. They could also add a slavery memorial nearby. (The real crime is the lack of any statues of the numerous great Tejanos this state has had anywhere on campus. Meanwhile we have statues of Joe Jamail, etc.) The proper response would be to give a clearly historical picture, not revise or take away part of the picture as UT will do soon with the statutes on the south mall. Go check out the committee, it's completely biased with many of the members being from the North. The statues do not have a prayer with a committee like that. I think the great moral of the story is that everyone at some point has blamed a scapegoat whether it be a symbol, an individual, a group or an entire race for the actions of one or a few. We are all guilty of blaming things or people out of anger that do not deserve blame even in a personal context at some point. I find myself guilty of it in this thread with respect to the germans. Some have acted on that blame and it has sometimes led to disastrous consequences for humanity. I am left to conclude, that this is a human trait we are stuck with and will have to endure. I do not know that blaming things or people, instead of the individual themselves, is ever productive.... even with regards to the confederate battle flag.
I will add one more thing. This country has a serious problem with mass shootings. Charles Whitman The Killeen Luby's shooting Aurora, Colorado Colombine Sandy Hook Charleston The DC Sniper The Long Island Rail Road massacre Virginia Tech That idiot in dallas the other week that tried to do so with a Zombie van Century 21 in San Antonio The worst part about it, this is just off the top of my head. I am sure I am forgetting many. The shooters have come from all different races and different backgrounds. So far only one has had any sort of confederate flag connection. I do not know what the answer is. I do not know if it is gun control. I do not know if it is a better mental health system. I do not know if it is simply ensuring a better economic quality of life for all (not all, but many of the shooters tend to be on the bottom rung of society. The Charleston Shooter dropped out of school in the 9th grade.) I do not know the answer. I do know that removing the flag is not going to solve anything other than possibly piss a new group of people off.
Htown77 Like you I do not know the answer. But I do know if all the people( including media) now spending time and energy blaming a flag spent even 1/3 the same time and energy on addressing the issues among blacks on blacks crimes that stat of 93% of blacks killed being killed by blacks, add in how many blacks are shot by blacks and that would be a sea change .
True, I don't see the Confederate flag being tied to those instances but rather that it's become the prevailing symbol or flag for ~400 racist organizations being tracked by the Southern Poverty Center that I referenced previously. The flag isn't the cause of racism but has been coopted by the racists. Whether we like to admit it below, there are racists that are hiding among (or behind?) the confederate flag waving traditionalists. I've said it before but I'll repeat that the flag should not be limited by law. With that said, were I Southern I'd find another way to express my pride in Southern traditions to avoid being confused with the racists. As far as mass shootings, sensible gun control has to at least be an option or I'd argue that those attempting to fix the problem aren't equipped to do so. Are the mass shooters from low income profiles? Columbine, VaTech, and the Aurora shooting were all from students from middle income backgrounds. Maybe the problem is the media coverage. I think the one commonality is a desire for maximum media exposure.
The Dresden firebombing is a direct result of the November 1940 "Operation Moonlight Sonata". Churchill made sure Germany paid for Coventry.
The Seattle Mariners baseball cap is one of ten top hats worn by gangs. Do you avoid wearing those so you are not confused as a gang banger? Liberal hypocrisy knows no bounds. They claim to be against stereotyping, then stereotype those they look down upon. As for gun control, what "sensible" gun control would have stopped the idiot in South Carolina?
When the story was about Roof, and not about the flag, they said he was awaiting trial for felony drug charges. He bought the gun after it appeared he was going to jail anyway. It seems like a reasonable gun control would be that one could not buy guns until felony charges are dismissed or the person is acquitted. Currently the law says one cannot buy guns only after a conviction. It's seems like a good idea to have that law to me. Someone who feels like they are going to jail anyway could very well go do more bad things like Roof. Now maybe people would get guns anyway, but it seems like a sensible step to take. It is a shame this topic got very little discussion as the the discussion became entirely about the flag. So has the star spangled banner. Is there not at least one racist hiding behind the star spangled banner? What about with illegal immigration? I bet some (not all, probably not even most) are racists hiding behind the american flag on that one. Again, people should have to change because they are being confused with another group? That's like saying people cannot wear hoodies because they are being confused with criminals. It's ridiculous.' This could very well be the case. I did not think about this, but it is certainly possible. There is a CLEAR rise in these shooting since the late 80s. There are some before the 80s, but there is a clear rise since. Maybe it is mass media? I do not know.
Nobody said you "have" to change or take down anyone's Confederate Battle Flag or choose to wear or eschew hoodies. It's your choice. Unless you have some personality disorder that means my or Seattle's preference not to display the flag is somehow binding on you, I can't see where you are coming from. Look, I don't like Scotch Whiskey. If you ask me for a recommendation it would be to buy Kentucky or Canadian Whiskey instead. Do I want to outlaw Scotch? Nope. Do I think you are crazy to spend $60 for a bottle of it? Nope. Am I an ignoramus for seeing no value in something loved by so many? Nope. I know my palate and it doesn't find Scotch pleasing. I'm not being a hypocrite. I'm not for denying the rights of Scotch drinkers. Just none for me please.
No, y'all are just saying if you were cold, you would wear something other than a hoodie to avoid being confused with criminals. Also, y'all do not understand why anyone wears a hoodie in the first place because they are not your culture.
I have not kept up with his initial prosecution, but I thought the gun was purchased by his parents? Regardless, this will not stop a crazed idiot from stealing a gun and committing this act. He could have also used a homemade bomb like the idiot in Boston or a car or really a number of other things. Sensible laws do not stop insensible people.
http://www.newsweek.com/dylann-roof-purchased-handgun-used-charleston-shooting-legally-345994 That was the initial story that later proved false (like a lot with this story or most stories the media covers nowadays). I agree however, he may have obtained a gun otherwise. I am not pro gun control in general, however I think this is a sensible law that would not prevent anyone responsible that wants to buy a gun from buying one. It does not matter, society is focussed on the flag so this law is not happening. I am sure the NRA is gleefully pointing at the flag as well.
So '77 you are saying to prove appropriate sensitivity to yours and others' cultural heritage I should wear a hoodie and fly a Confederate Battle Flag?
Nope. Just commenting on the coments. You have free spreech, I have free speech, we all have free speech. God Bless America!
Six potential arsons have occurred near Charleston. Sensible laws also needed to prevent the purchase of matches? I get what you are saying and thinking. I have no problem with felons and those under felony indictment being prevented from purchasing guns. However, it does very little to actually prevent heinous acts like this one. Most felons capable of this kind of violence are more than willing to steal a gun if they want a gun. As for the arsons, homeland security should be full force investigating it as terrorism.
H77 Root would not have been able to buy a gun from a licensed gun dealer. Federal law prohibits people with pending felony charges from obtaining firearms. It is possible the gun dealer did not do the background check but what are the odds a licensed dealer would not run a required background check on a 21 y o? The story Reuters reported, that the father bought the gun seems more likely. If that is so the father should go to jail along side his murderering son. The one trait that is a thread through most mass killings is mental illness but as you point out the way our laws are now we can't force people to get help or put them where they can't harm people.
Maybe one broad answer--a very unsatisfactory one--is that we humans are still a work-in-progress in terms of evolution and some people will do crazy **** that is just inexplicable to the vast majority of reasonable people. Take away guns and someone will drive a car into a group of people or build a bomb or whatever they can come up with. I don't know what it means except that we will not find a "policy" solution to deal with unpredictable human behavior.
Pretty good essay on the topic from an Alabama Civil Rights lawyer. http://yellowhammernews.com/faithan...nfederate-flag-because-charleston-didnt-riot/ Here is an excerpt: Poor, poor media–no Ferguson, no Trayvon Martin, no Oscar Grants. Instead, the good people of Charleston and of South Carolina unified and came together–all races, all creeds. They marched hand in hand to pay respect to the poor souls lost and to strengthen their community. In short–they did what Southerners do. They put their faith forward and did the right thing ‘cause their mommas raised them right. So, what are they left to do? Well, the Confederate flag seems like a fine substitute–and it worked. Now, don’t get me wrong; I don’t think the Confederate flag has any place flying over any governmental building for several reasons: (1) the Confederacy was a briefly lived nation–they lost the war–they don’t exist anymore…hello??? (2) the only flags that should fly over any governmental buildings in the United States are those of the United States and the sovereign State itself, let alone that of a defunct government (see No. 1); and (3) regardless of what an individual’s intention is regarding the Confederate flag, it is a symbol of governmental oppression to many in this nation as recently as only 1-2 generations ago so a present day governmental unit flying it is…well…not good. Period. But (you knew there would be a “but,” right?), if an individual wants to own, fly, wear, burn, or otherwise have emblazoned on them a tattoo of the Confederate flag then Hell–knock yourself out. It’s not my place (or anyone else’s) to tell you that you can’t do that. Are all people who display or own a Confederate flag racist? No. Are there racists who display and own Confederate flags. Yes. Can it be offensive? Yes. Does that mean that all Confederate flags are to be banned or wiped out? Well, of course not. This is America…remember?
Well, we can all rest easy. Nickelodeon has cancelled the 2 per day showings of "The Dukes of Hazzard" since the car is named the "General Lee" and has a confederate flag on the hood. This should help out our racial issues, most certainly.
This is an incalculable cultural loss. But they will have to pry the Daisy Duke poster from my cold dead fingers.
Well sometimes it is small gestures like this that can have a cumulative effect on things in a positive way.
