alt.war.civil.usa

"casca" <@ > wrote in message
news: $ @ ...
> Ray O'Hara wrote:
> > "casca" <@ > wrote in message
> > news: $ @ ...
> >>>
> >> He is not the only source. He is just research. I didn't discover
> >> anything that hasn't been found before. It is evident you have not
> >> researched it. I didn't have to look very far. Great Grand Pa was not
an
> >> embellisher. GGGrandPa fought for the Union. No bias for the South here
> >> or against it.
> >> You apparently stopped before what was written and in circulation
before
> >> and during the "War." Go looking some more it's fun but tiring.
> >
> >
> > actually you've discovered things that have been debunked time and
again.
> >
> >
> > . the south started the war, their cause was slavery. so thus the war
was
> > about slavery.
> > may i suggest you read the website of jim epperson.
> > /jfepperson/
> >
> >
> > it has the south's own words on why they did what they did.
> >
> > as to research. you'll find that your dealing with people here who have
read
> > dozens and more books, who have perused the official records,. who have
> > visited every battlefield several times.
> >
> >
> > coming in and thinking you can bullshit anybody here is a mistake.
> >
> > most of us have even read the looney crap like the kennedy brothers and
> > charles adams libertarian crap.
> >
> >
> > trust me, you have shown in this one thread you are the most uninformed
> > person here.
> >
> >
> They weren't debunked. I ran across what everyone has. It appears
> whoever is looking stops at what they want to find. You have to believe
> some one but not because they reinforce a bias.


they have been debunked.
find any credible proof there were 65,000 black confederates that weren't
slaves dragged off to seve as menials.