Confederate Soldiers= Terrorists

[Guest bkelm18]

Wow. I have no confederate ancestry but this quite frankly is appalling.

Were Confederate soldiers terrorists? - CNN.com

Were Confederate soldiers terrorists?

(CNN) -- Based on the hundreds of e-mails, Facebook comments and Tweets I've read in response to my denunciation of Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell's decision to honor Confederates for their involvement in the Civil War -- which was based on the desire to continue slavery -- the one consistent thing that supporters of the proclamation offer up as a defense is that these individuals were fighting for what they believed in and defending their homeland.

In criticizing me for saying that celebrating the Confederates was akin to honoring Nazi soldiers for killing of Jews during the Holocaust, Rob Wagner said, "I am simply defending the honor and dignity of men who were given no choice other than to fight, some as young as thirteen."

Sherry Callahan said that supporting the Confederacy is "our history. Not hate; it's about heritage and history."

Javier Ramirez called slavery evil, but prefaced his remarks by saying that "Confederate soldiers were never seen as terrorists by [President Abraham] Lincoln or U.S. generals on the battlefield. They were accorded POW status, they were never tried for war crimes. Not once did Confederate soldiers do any damage to civilians or their property in their invasion of the north. The same is not true of Union soldiers."

Realskirkland sent me a Tweet saying, "Slavery is appalling, but was not the only reason for the CW [Civil War]. Those men, while misguided on some fronts stood up for what they felt was right. They embodied that American ideal that the states have a right to govern themselves. THAT is what a confederate soldier stood for."

If you take all of these comments, don't they sound eerily similar to what we hear today from Muslim extremists who have pledged their lives to defend the honor of Allah and to defeat the infidels in the West?

When you make the argument that the South was angry with the North for "invading" its "homeland," Osama bin Laden has said the same about U.S. soldiers being on Arab soil. He has objected to our bases in Saudi Arabia, and that's one of the reasons he has launched his jihad against us. Is there really that much of a difference between him and the Confederates? Same language; same cause; same effect.

If a Confederate soldier was merely doing his job in defending his homeland, honor and heritage, what are we to say about young Muslim radicals who say the exact same thing as their rationale for strapping bombs on their bodies and blowing up cafes and buildings?

If the Sons of Confederate Veterans use as a talking point the vicious manner in which people in the South were treated by the North, doesn't that sound exactly like the Taliban saying they want to kill Americans for the slaughter of innocent people in Afghanistan?

Defenders of the Confederacy say that innocent people were killed in the Civil War; hasn't the same argument been presented by Muslim radicals in Iraq, Afghanistan and other places where the U.S. has tangled with terrorists?

We can't on the one hand justify the actions of Confederates as being their duty as valiant men of the South, and then condemn the Muslim extremists who want to see Americans die a brutal death. These men are held up as honorable by their brethren, so why do Americans see them as different from our homegrown terrorists?

The fundamental problem with extremism is that when you're on the side that is fanatical, all of your actions make sense to you, and you are fluent in trying to justify every action. Every position of those you oppose is a personal affront that calls for you to do what you think is necessary to protect yourself and your family.

Just as radical Muslims have a warped sense of religion, Confederate supporters have a delusional view of what is honorable. The terrorists are willing to kill their own to prove their point, and the Confederates were just as willing in the Civil War to take up arms against their fellow Americans to justify their point.

Even if you're a relative of one of the 9/11 hijackers, that man was an out-and-out terrorist, and nothing you can say will change that. And if your great-great-great-granddaddy was a Confederate who stood up for Southern ideals, he too was a terrorist.

They are the same.

As a matter of conscience, I will not justify, understand or accept the atrocious view of Muslim terrorists that their actions represent a just war. They are reprehensible, and their actions a sin against humanity.

And I will never, under any circumstances, cast Confederates as heroic figures who should be honored and revered. No -- they were, and forever will be, domestic terrorists.

[Guest SUNTZU]

[Garufa]

I just got through reading that then saw you posted.

I am too to comment. "Terrorists". Really? That is the biggest load of I've ever seen.

[Guest SUNTZU]

I guess Roland Martin, after looking at his articles, was told to get something that will garner attention or be facing a layoff himself. Yet another sycophant of the system. Reminds me of the article by the man praising the killers of Shannon Christian and Chris Newsom. **** this guy.

[Il Duce]

[Guest 2HOW]

The "civil war" was not a civil war as the history books claim. It was a move by the Confederate states to withdraw from the union or what was becoming the "United States" I think we need to line up all the writers of history and shoot them, because most of what is taught in school is dead wrong.

[sigmtnman]

"...If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves, I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that..."

[Mark@Sea]

I'm not sure if this is stage two (anger) or stage three (bargaining - angry readers are better than no readers) but CNN is going down faster than a porn queen at a Tiger Woods open invitational. It's really kind of sad, seeing the wretched remains of what was once a great and respected organization.

Edited April 11, 2010 by Mark@Sea

[kb4ns]

Just as radical Muslims have a warped sense of religion, Confederate supporters have a delusional view of what is honorable.

So wanting to withdraw from a Union that was no longer adhering to the Constitution and was detrimental to the individuals is less than honorable?? And I definitely agree with 2HOW on getting rid of the writers of history based on their terrible inaccuracies. I get so tired of hearing that the "civil war" was over slavery. Yes, it played a role, but if it was "the" reason, explain why the still-confederate state of Tennessee abolished slavery in 1864 before the outcome of the war was decided! There's no way hundreds of thousands of poor southern boys would have put themselves through the hell of that war for the rights of a small percentage of southerners to own slaves. And let us not forget the 10's of thousands of free black men who volunteered for the CSA.

[Currently]

So wanting to withdraw from a Union that was no longer adhering to the Constitution and was detrimental to the individuals is less than honorable?? And I definitely agree with 2HOW on getting rid of the writers of history based on their terrible inaccuracies. I get so tired of hearing that the "civil war" was over slavery. Yes, it played a role, but if it was "the" reason, explain why the still-confederate state of Tennessee abolished slavery in 1864 before the outcome of the war was decided! There's no way hundreds of thousands of poor southern boys would have put themselves through the hell of that war for the rights of a small percentage of southerners to own slaves. And let us not forget the 10's of thousands of free black men who volunteered for the CSA.

+10,000

Even though I was raised and schooled in the north, I had some very good teachers. The civil war was not about slavery, that was used by the media as a flash point to inflame the northern masses. If you dig deep enough, there is enough citations to point that the south had the ability to secede and be very successful with the resources it had and the north could not do without.

To this day, I thank those two teachers that were critical thinkers and had no issues presenting multiple sides of an issue. It was something that I took for granted till I realized how rare it was.

[Mark@Sea]

Oh, that article and author are so wrong it isn't worth getting worked up over. It's just an attention grabber, like a kid that deliberately breaks a window. Best to ignore it entirely (unless of course you have the fortunate opportunity to give him a swift kick to the nads, in which case, I'd take it as a personal favor if you gave him an extra for me).

[Worriedman]

These are the same folks that consider veterans, pro life advocates, and Tea Party members as worthy of watching for terrorist tendencies.

[kb4ns]

These are the same folks that consider veterans, pro life advocates, and Tea Party members as worthy of watching for terrorist tendencies.

To them, "terrorist tendencies" sounds better than "anti-socialist tendencies".

[Guest 6.8 AR]

"...If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves, I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that..."

sigh, I was thinking the same thing.

I expect this kind of stuff to get worse. Racists, now terrorists. So be it. They will regret this stuff, one of these days.

[greenego]

I now find out my ancestors were terrorists and I'm a racists. Go figure.

[Guest reaper1880]

if you can find the now banned book the confederate reader you should read it.

it states while most reb soldiers made 8 or 9 dollars a month, alot a slaves made 11 dollars a month and were only whipped by few for assualtling women (white), theft, or murder. it is a good read if you can find it..

[Guest bkelm18]

if you can find the now banned book the confederate reader you should read it.

it states while most reb soldiers made 8 or 9 dollars a month, alot a slaves made 11 dollars a month and were only whipped by few for assualtling women (white), theft, or murder. it is a good read if you can find it..

Found it.

Amazon.com: The Confederate Reader: How the South Saw the War (9780486259802): Richard B. Harwell: Books

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/The-Confederate-Reader/Richard-B-Harwell/e/9780880297578

http://www.borders.com/online/store/TitleDetail?sku=0486259803

Edited April 11, 2010 by bkelm18

[mikegideon]

Somebody needs to bitch slap Roland for this one.

[Raoul]

[Ebow1]

I was at Sears Auto center and the tv was set to CNN and this report came on. As the proud descendant of a Confederate colonel I was infuriated by the comment equating Confederates to terrorists, and I couldn't believe the CNN correspondent was sitting there telling people on national television that the main cause of the civil war was the fact that the south refused to give up slavery. I had always heard CNN was far left, but I gave them the benefit of the doubt that what they reported was still some shred of factual news. That footage just goes to show that as soon as white people try to have anything close to a white history month there's going to be a liberal black guy ranting on tv about how we are all a bunch of racists. He was on tv yelling about how the Confederates were terrorists and commited treason. Did they commit treason? Sure, but so did the founding fathers, and every country that revolted against British colonial rule, or colonial rule by any foriegn country WHICH INCLUDES MOST OF AFRICA. Does he have any idea what the word terrorist means? No. The Confederate states said they didn't want to be any part of America. The Union attempted to make them do it with military force and they proudly and honorably defended their rights and their land in open warfare. Terrorists use guerilla tactics in an attempt to intentionally instill a sense of fear within the civilian population.

[Guest mikedwood]

If the Confederates were terrorists there would be no Confederate Flag or Confederate uniform.

The war wasn't about slavery.

[Guest malbolja]

That's what you get for watching the Commie News Network. That guy's just trying to stir up s*it to get attention.

[roverboy]

Wanna talk about terrorists. What about William T. Sherman.

[Guest BEARMAN]

I'm throwing the BS flag on CNN, for this gross misstatement...

Them sum beaches ought to be ashamed of themselves for this type of conduct...but, like a crack head...they have no soul left to be ashamed of.

A dying network, in it's last throes of life, is what we have here. IMO

They are a boil on the a$$ of society, and the quicker they're gone, the better.

[Hgunner]

Things really depend on how one views thems, after secession the Confideracy was a Soverign Nation. Therefore it wasn't a Civil War, but the victors write the histories. I was always partial to The War of Northern Aggression.