An act of desperation...


(Images courtesy of the Suffolk News-Herald)





Folks, I was quite surprised recently, to read this article in the Suffolk News-Herald by Tracy Agnew about a free born black named Anthony Boone, who the author implied was a black Confederate soldier.





“More than 100 people of all skin tones gathered Saturday to honor a Confederate veteran who was receiving a headstone for the first time, more than 87 years after his death.
Anthony Boone enlisted in 1862 and served with the Peninsula Light Artillery. His service took him to Lamberts Point, Portsmouth, Towne Point, Suffolk, Richmond, Manassas and Gordonsville.
But unlike most people’s idea of a Confederate soldier, Boone was black — born free as a direct descendant of Joe Skeeter, the European land surveyor for whom the Skeetertown area was named.
“The decision to serve with the South baffled some,” said Katherine Boone Hamilton, the great-great-niece of Anthony Boone. Her great-grandfather, Jason Boone, Anthony’s brother, also served with the Confederacy.”




The author adds:




"“It really was brother against brother, and it didn’t make any difference whether they were white or black,” said Frank Earnest, heritage defense coordinator for the Virginia Division of the Sons of Confederate Veterans.
Earnest said the reason blacks in the South would have taken up arms against the North is simple.
“What is so different about the black Confederate soldier? Absolutely nothing,” he said. “They came together in defense of their native land.”"





But folks, here is the problem with all of that, primary source documents show that Boone was not a soldier at all. The pension application submitted by Anthony Boone on August 5, 1926, was for A person who served the Confederate States in the war between the States as a body servant, cook, hostler or teamster, or who worked on the Confederate breastworks, under Act approved March 14, 1924.” There was a completely separate application for soldiers and sailors. Here is an example of one such application.









Anthony Boone's pension application. (Images courtesy of the Library of Virginia)





When asked, "In what branch of the service were you employed?” Boone's answer was, “principally throwing up breastworks with Capt Jones & Calahan.” And when asked, “What service did you render?” Boone's reply was, “Worked in trenches, throwing up breastworks, commencing at Lambert’s Point, Portsmouth, Town Point, Suffolk, Richmond and then worked in the woods, getting ties for rail road at Manassas”. But folks, the most galling part of this is not Tracy Agnew's shoddy journalism, nor Frank Earnest's clear attempt at deception of the public, but the absolutely pathetic attempt by Carl Roden to steer people away from the truth. I tried to correct this false narrative in the comments section of the article, only to find Mr. Roden directly lying to the public, in a sad attempt to head them off from reading the truth about Mr. Boone, the truth which directly refutes the entirely concocted lie that he was a soldier. Mr. Roden is so pathetic in fact, that he falsely claimed that the links I had posted to image files sourced from the Library of Virginia, were viruses. Fortunately, the public isn't as dumb as the pond scum that constitute the Confederate Heritage movement like Mr. Roden.





Carl Roden tells a bold faced lie. (Images courtesy of the Suffolk News-Herald)






Folks, what more can I say? I'll just let this photo speak for itself.





Susan Hathaway and Carl Roden, two people who shouldn't lecture anyone on morals. (Image courtesy of Facebook)





Apparently, telling the truth is not a part of Mr. Roden's moral code. Mr. Roden is welcome to dispute the fact that Mr. Boone WAS NOT a soldier below, but folks, don't wait for that to happen, because people like Mr. Roden have zero integrity. They are the lowest of the low.






Restoring the honor!





Comments

  1. They never quit...

    http://pilotonline.com/news/local/resting-places-of-two-confederate-soldiers-finally-marked-at-skeetertown/article_7ecc90c3-0f7c-59f0-9349-13c0c47bbda2.html

    ReplyDelete
  2. By the way, Mr. Rodent was specifically chosen as the poster boy for the Cuckfederate movement by the Alt-Right racists, how fitting!

    https://twitter.com/cuckfederate

    ReplyDelete
  3. Simple explanation -- they don't interpret historical documents like you. That doesn't mean they are insincere or lying; it doesn't mean they are wrong, either, nor does it mean you are right.

    I don't think their understanding and interpretation of history are unreliable, but for argument's sake, let's say they are. Your understanding and interpretation of history is no more reliable than theirs. If you're both unreliable about it, what makes their position morally superior is that their motive is positive; they are motivated by the desire to recognize the service of those who served. You are motivated by animosity for people living today. You are motivated by impugning their motives. You are motivated by your desire to demonize them and foment hatred for them.

    Quote: "Susan Hathaway and Carl Roden, two people who shouldn't lecture anyone on morals."

    They aren't the type to lecture others, but they certainly could. You are the one lacking the authority to lecture others about morality. Unlike you, neither one of them has a blog that exists for no reason except to evilize people; they aren't motivated by animosity for people and dedicated to fomenting the same animosity in others.

    Jealousy and anger are destructive things, Jacob. You really need to purge them from your spirit.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Simple explanation -- they don't interpret historical documents like you."

      I think you meant to say "like most rational people". Most rational people base their beliefs on facts.

      Delete
    2. Jacob? That's his actual name?
      Thanks Connie, it helps to put a name rather than refer to Mr. Anonymous as he/she/it, (I refuse to dignify the avatar and screen handle).

      Delete
    3. "Jacob? That's his actual name?"

      Ummm, no. If you believe anything Chastain says, 'nuff said.

      Delete
    4. Well then he/she/it it is up to me to inform you that I don't take any one source at face value. That you think I would....well, enough said.

      Delete
    5. So Connie and Carl, could you show me how you two and the SCVs might interpret the pension file to show that these brothers were soldiers?

      Honestly I would like to understand your thinking on this.

      Delete
    6. Carl, could you provide more documentation on these two brothers...so that we can expand our understanding of their lives...since you don't take these sources at face value like the rest of us do?

      Delete
    7. Connie has written blog posts about her position, which is that she doesn't have one. She's smart enough to know that this is a losing battle.

      Delete
    8. "In the fullest sense, any man in the military service who receives pay, whether sworn in or not is a soldier, because he is subject to military law. Under this general head, laborers, teamsters, sutlers, chaplains, &c. are soldiers."

      Customs for Service for Non Commissioned Officers and Soldiers
      August V. Kautz, Brigadier General US Army (written during the WBTS)

      I rest my case, your honor. (mike drop)

      Delete
    9. That's the US Army...not the Confederate Army

      Delete
    10. I would remind you that the Confederate Army's rules of conduct were copied word for word from those of the US Army. This is accepted historical fact. Try again dude.

      Delete
  4. Well, bluff called. This should be fun.
    I don't normally lower myself to hate blogs - though recently I did have a rather heated back and forth with an anal probe name Heimbach (which I "The Man Deniers Fear Most" won, of course, details forthcoming on my blog: http://southernfriedcommonsense.blogspot.com/)- but since you NOT so eloquently issued the challenge and I just can't resist one, and have never lost a real argument with your kind, I asked myself, dare I?
    Since it is your blog (assuming I am dealing with more than one person, hard to tell when the source is "anonymous"), I will let you have the first shot.

    Oh and since I know y'all like to censor your posts and edit them, be advised that I will copy and paste all my posts to my blog and document this little back and forth - as well as noting any attempts to edit the conversation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Carl, I'm not sure what you want to debate? The primary source documents are pretty clear. Do you have anything additional to add? If not, you lose.

      Delete
    2. You tell me, you issued the challenge. I know it was a hollow attempt at stroking your own...."ego"....but hey, I'm here.
      I do not dispute the source documents, but I do fail to see how they disprove that the men honored are not Confederate veterans. Perhaps you can give me some insight into your mode of thinking to start us off.
      Till then, you have proving nothing except that you are good at promoting Black Confederate Denier propaganda.

      Delete
    3. 1. I did not issue a "challenge". I said that if you wanted to continue the discussion, you were more than welcome to bring it over here. So far, you're not doing a very good job of discussing anything relating to Anthony Boone.

      2. How could you? I never mentioned anything about being a "Confederate Veteran".

      3. I'm not sure what you mean? Anthony Boone was not a soldier. That is my position. What is yours and why? I offered my evidence, what do you have to back-up your beliefs?

      Delete
    4. So far you haven't done a good enough job proving that Anthony Boone WASN'T a soldier. It has been firmly established that official recognition by the Confederate government alone does not confirm or deny the status of "soldier" at all.
      No you didn't mention anything about him being a Confederate Veterans, which by the way shows more proof of your intellectual dishonesty. Thanks for point that out, FYI.
      And he/she/it you DID in fact issue a challenge the moment you made the erroneous claim that I would not come here to dispute the status of this man as a Confederate serviceman.
      Can you try for once to be coherent...or is this truly your default setting?

      Delete
    5. Carl, all you are doing is making yourself look like an idiot. I don't have to prove anything. You accept the primary source documents. Case closed. He wasn't a soldier. The narrative of the article is misleading. My point is, he wasn't a soldier. I don't have to prove anything because the documents available show that he wasn't. You have provided nothing new, and obviously have nothing to contribute to this conversation, so start backing up your claims, or walk the plank.

      Delete
    6. Carl, show proof of his enlistment into the Confederate States army or other branch of service.

      Delete
    7. I've looked for CSR's for both brothers and have been unable to locate them. It could be because one never existed, or the records could have been lost/destroyed, but that doesn't change the fact that the records that do exist show that neither brother was a soldier.

      Delete
    8. The descendants of these people seem to believe he and his brothers were soldiers. Are you implying that the family, the people who know the history from the horses mouths themselves, are liars?

      Delete
    9. Corey, show me proof that he didn't in fact preform the service of a Confederate soldier. Show me proof he stayed in camp and did nothing. Show me proof that you can do more than grandstand.

      Delete
    10. Sorry Carl...the burden of proof is on you.

      Delete
    11. If he performed the service of a soldier, why did he fill out a form for a body servant (or similar classification)? If there was no difference between a soldier and a body servant, why did Southern states create separate forms? Doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Folks, look no further than 'ol Jim Crow for the answer.

      Delete
  5. All skin tones. You know, like a Benetton ad.

    I was hoping Bannon would be cast aside. Looks like the alt-right will be sticking around for a while.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Something that people don't understand is that the Alt-Right isn't going away. The Alt-Right is the growing push back against changing demographics in this country. There is a segment of white society that feels vulnerable and threatened. A system of white supremacy has been cemented in place since the founding of this country, and they see that slipping away. It has a lot to do with why Trump won this election.

      Delete
    2. Oh wow, what's next: Trump is one of David Icke's Lizard Men?

      Delete
    3. I mean what the hell does the Alt-Right have to do with the subject of Black Confederates and recognition of their status exactly? In fact what does that have to do with anything related to this topic?

      Perhaps you can explain exactly how recognition of black men as Confederate Veterans in any way, shape, or form advances the cause of the "Alt-Right" or any white supremacist group at all? FYI white supremacists hate Black Confederates too.

      I truly want a detailed explanation of that logic, assuming you can in fact preform enough mental gymnastics to provide one.

      Delete
    4. "I mean what the hell does the Alt-Right have to do with the subject of Black Confederates and recognition of their status exactly? In fact what does that have to do with anything related to this topic?"

      Nothing. No one said it did. It was a discussion started by sledridge, that you butted your nose into. He made a comment, and I replied. It had nothing to do with the discussion, and neither of us gave any indication that it did. The only person who thinks it has anything to do with black Confederates is you, apparently.

      Delete
    5. Quote: "The Alt-Right is the growing push back against changing demographics in this country. There is a segment of white society that feels vulnerable and threatened."

      I had seen the term "alt-right" a few times online and wondered if it might have a connection to the old "alt.thought..." news groups. Back in 2000 or so, I sometimes read alt.thought.southern, but the usenet format was worse than chaotic, and I quit reading. I recently Googled "alt.thought.southern" and it brings up a link to Google.groups, which are also chaotic in format -- no better than Yahoo groups, whose format has deteriorated to near unreadability (I'm still a member of several Yahoo groups; haven't attempted to read them in years.)

      A few weeks ago Dimmy tried to connect me with alt.right. Supposing it to be an updated version of an old alt.newsgroup about conservatism, I was mildly curious and I started researching alt.right when I had the time. I've already learned enough to know that Jacob's statement is wrong. "Changing demographics" and "white fear and vulnerability" are typically simplistic, and deceptive, leftist concepts. I guess the left's "follower" persons can't understand something as extensive and complex as ideology, so they have to be fed the lowest-information and most emotionally based "talking points" they can understand.

      Delete
    6. Says the woman who applied to join Gab, the newest free speech social media site for the Alt-Right racist crowd...

      http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/11/16/banned-alt-right-twitter-users-flee-to-invite-only-press-free-safe-space.html



      Delete
    7. One of the worst things about attempting to communicate with leftists is that dealing with their constant lying is... Just. Exhausting. But somebody has to correct the lies with truth.

      Gab is not FOR the alt.right. Some alt.right commenters were banned by Twitter so they made accounts at Gab. Can't continue my research on them at Twitter if they're leaving it, so I joined Gab.

      The leftist lying is practiced by The Daily Beast; what a surprise. I Googled Gab, found a landing page, clicked a button labeled Let Me In. I received an email advising me how long it could take before my invitation arrived. TDB's characterization of Gab as "invitation only" is pretty silly wnen you generate the invitation yourself by clicking "Let me in." It appears that information is too complex for the "journalists" at The Daily Beast to discover.

      Delete
    8. Folks, do you know why the Alt-Right is gravitating towards Gab? Because Gab has signaled that it will tolerate these Nazi scum who have been banned from other social media. Interesting that Connie seems to have found a place she fits in. Gab, although not explicitly marketed to the Alt-Right has quickly become the de facto social media platform for the Alt-Right. The claim that it's not an "Alt-Right" platform is just plausible deniability hogwash. I have an account there, and I can attest firsthand it is not only overrun with well known Alt-Right Nazis, but in my opinion was created to offer a safe space to this scum. They even have a goddamned frog as a mascot, how cute. These clowns are so full of shit.

      Delete
  6. Folks, I just wanted to share some correspondence I just received from one of these Heritage dingbats in regards to the Boone brothers. No need to mention this person's name, this is just to illustrate how dishonest they are. These folks have no conscience whatsoever and will lie til they die.

    "Sir:

    Apparently you adhere to the strict definition of a soldier as one who carries a gun. As I have stated previously, both then and today, many who serve in the military do so without being under arms. The difference between you and I is that I prefer to give a man (regardless of his color) the benefit of the doubt and honor his service. You on the other hand (because of a man/s color) seem to choose every possible way to deny his service. The fact that you use a pension record only bears evidence of this service to the Confederate Army. I shall engage in no further discussion as I do not feel you and I will ever view this subject in the same way.

    (Name redacted), Southern Patriot"

    Folks, I adhere to facts. Period. I don't care about Anthony Boone's skin color, it is irrelevant to the facts here. The facts are, he was not a soldier. When they refer to "service", they do so in a purposely deceptive manner. The Confederate government did not recognize people like Anthony Boone and his service at the time because of his skin color specifically. He does not appear to have been enlisted. If anyone can produce a Compiled Service Record which shows that he was, please feel free to share. I have this far been unable to locate one. Perhaps Teresa Romney has one?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That should read "Roane" not "Romney".

      Delete
    2. So one has to be formally enlisted to actually be a soldier? Really?
      Humm, bet that would be news to every Patriot and Loyalist Militiaman who fought in the Southern Campaign of the American Revolutionary War.

      Delete
    3. "So one has to be formally enlisted to actually be a soldier?"

      Not necessarily, no, but in respect to this discussion, about this man, yes. Carl, perhaps you could tell me why Mr. Boone did not apply on the pension application for a soldier or sailor, after all, according to you, he was one, so why the discrepancy? What was different about Mr. Boone that he filled out a different pension application. Want to take a guess?

      Delete
    4. I could but I figure you would go ahead and tell me anyhow, so....whats the point? LOL!

      Delete
    5. The point is, there was a reason that he filled out the application that he did, which wasn't for a soldier or sailor. That wasn't a mistake.

      Delete
    6. "So one has to be formally enlisted to actually be a soldier? Really?" - The Confederacy didn't, but we're supposed to?

      Delete
    7. Carl, we are not talking about enlistment in the Revolutionary War period...we are talking about enlistments between 1861 and 1865. You do understand that what constituted enlistments varies from period to period, right?

      Delete
    8. I think Carl's "fun" ended prematurely when he realized that he was going nowhere with his non-points. He's grown suddenly silent like his friend Susan. :(

      Delete
    9. By "grown suddenly silent" I think you actually mean logged off for a time to resume my real life.
      You know, when you take the time to lift your frame out of the computer desk chair, crawl up the stairs out of your mom's basement and go out into the sunlight, you realize that there is a whole world out there that doesn't give you eye-strain. Not to mention full of people you can talk to face to face.
      I kinda like to devote the majority of my time doing that than responding to an anonymous sock puppet that I am still not completely convinced is a real single person.

      Delete
    10. Well Corey-boy, the concept is still the same for all of the above, that is the point I am making. A point that you failed to refute, by the by.

      Delete
    11. And he/she/it, the reason he filled out the application as he did was because that was his official duty, and since we have firmly established that Black Confederates are Confederate Veterans who did fight in an unofficial capacity in the role of soldier, your point is invalid and disingenuous. THAT is the real point.

      Delete
    12. You have not proved they fought...why is there no mention in letters and diaries of these black soldiers who were enlisted....

      Delete
  7. Jacob, you heritage-haters -- with the trademark leftist view that appearance is all that matters -- look at words on a piece of paper (subject to your interpretation, of course) as the only "evidence" admissible. Others look at actions, deeds, events ... did this person of color pick up a gun and shoot at yankee soldiers? Did they support those who did -- either by foraging, cooking, tending livestock, digging breastworks, setting up or breaking down camps, and numerous other activities without which the army could not have operated? Some consider the reality of what service these men performed; you dismiss that reality to totally focused on what a piece of paper says or doesn't say.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I never said the man did not contribute to the Confederate war cause, or that his work was not important to the Confederacy, and that is not my position. But ask yourself, how would all of those whites be able to concentrate on doing what the whites were "meant" to do without people like Anthony Boone? If Boone was an enlisted soldier, he would have completed a different application for pension, Form 4, but he completed Form 6, which WAS NOT for soldiers. But there is more to this story. Maybe Connie could explain why he filled out Form 6? There is some reason why people like Boone were not soldiers. Now, what on earth could it be?

      No one here is dismissing the important labor this man performed for the Confederacy, only pointing out that todays Neo-Confederates continue to make false claims that these men were soldiers, or were recognized as soldiers by the Confederate government, and that just isn't the case. But there is a reason why they are doing this, and that reason is because they are despicable human beings, who have no arguments or facts for their beliefs. They hide behind a false narrative of what the Confederacy was. How sad.

      Delete
    2. Connie, can you prove that these men did any of the things you mentioned in your list? And can you explain why they were not allowed to file pensions for soldiers...and by explain I would like to see more than just your thoughts...you know...show some documentation.

      Delete
    3. Corey, can you prove without question that these men did not do any of the things Connie mentioned?

      Delete
    4. "But there is a reason why they are doing this, and that reason is because they are despicable human beings, who have no arguments or facts for their beliefs. They hide behind a false narrative of what the Confederacy was. How sad."

      LMFAO! ROFL! You actually wrote what you said without seeing the major contradiction in your statement, and expect thinking reasoning people to accept it as truth? How sad.

      Did it ever actually occur to you that the reason that the SCV and UDC honor these people as they do is because they actually respect these men and their service no different than any other Confederate veteran? That they hold the descendants of these people in the same regard as any other modern Confederate descendant? That none of this has anything to do with justifying the War, why it was fought, or "rewriting" anything at all? That we simply do it because it is the right thing to do without some political or social ideological underpinning whatsoever?

      From your past statements on the subject and others, the answer is obvious. Yet you provide no proof of your allegations about the alleged intentions of so-called "neo-Confederates".

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Shaun Winkler becomes unglued over the Sons of Confederate Veterans "pet monkey"...

Hate Not Heritage: Black Confederates reportedly enroute to Tupelo rally, armed white nationalists and Klansmen slated to attend...

Aryan Nations Throws Its Racist Support Behind Dylann Roof | Hatewatch