I got a good laugh

Al Mackey makes this comment on his blog –https://studycivilwar.wordpress.com/2015/10/16/the-neoconfederates-william-wallace/#respond

“William Wallace was born around 1270, which means he would have been around 11 years old at the time of the alleged quotation. No surviving document or eyewitness account places those words either in Wallace’s mouth or from his pen. Wallace also wasn’t “Sir William Wallace” until December of 1297.”

If you recall reading the comments from the last two post I put up, documents really don’t mean anything to Mackey unless they agree with his version of history. As many documents as I have posted on Negroes In Gray, he still denies the existence of Black Confederates.

Perhaps Mackey is not truthful?????

Another Biased blogger exposed

It appears that Nick Sacco with his bigoted and biased views of Negroes serving the Confederacy cannot deal with facts. It is evident in his responses he refuses to read post information, yet wants “documentation.” I tried to make the response to his post below but for some reason I kept getting this cannot be posted message, length perhaps???

Oh well below is the last massage Sacco sent to me and my response. Oh well what can I say, he always has the support of the likes of Jimmy Dick, Al Mackey, and Rob Baker LOL LOL LOL

In response to post at https://pastexplore.wordpress.com/2015/10/09/that-moment-when-someone-completely-misreads-your-arguments/#comments

Nick Sacco October 13, 2015 at 10:53 am


I have engaged in a prolong discussion with you on a number topics after you posted your thoughts here, on this website. I have tried, within those conversations, to address your claims squarely and fairly. Your last post about me on your website was unfair and derogatory, and I felt like it was pointless to continue the discussion under those circumstances. I will write some final thoughts right here in regards to your claims about “loyal” blacks fighting for and supporting the Confederacy.

Your SHAPE website does not prove that 10,000 blacks supported and fought for the Confederacy. The vast majority of your evidence involves pension records for former slaves who were impressed into the service of the Confederacy, mostly as cooks and servants for their masters. They were not soldiers but enslaved camp servants who were forced into this particular position. Various Southern states offered pensions to former camp servants in the 1910s and 1920s, and these are what you cite. They do not tell us, however, that these black camp servants were in the position that they were because they chose to do so under their own free will and out of a genuine sense of loyalty to their enslavers and the Confederacy. Where is the documentary evidence from the voices of 10,000 “black Confederates” individually confirming that they fought loyally in support of the Confederate war effort?

No reputable historian has ever claimed that 10,000 blacks “fought for” or even voluntarily “supported” the Confederacy. Mississippi Now has a good article on these topics here: http://mshistorynow.mdah.state.ms.us/articles/289/black-confederate-pensioners-after-the-civil-war and there is a multitude of other thoughtful discussions that have popped up online about the idea of “Black Confederates” in recent years. The pension records don’t tell us the story you want us to believe. I am not going to do any other research for you in finding these other resources. That’s on you.

Once again, I do not doubt that there are some isolated incidents in which blacks did some sort of service or offered support to the Confederacy out of a genuine sense of loyalty, but your numbers, interpretations, and conclusions are completely off and in fact irresponsible. How you can claim that 10,000 blacks were “loyal” to the Confederacy is completely beyond me. There is no definitive “number” that we can responsibly give to this question, although we can reasonably say that it’s nowhere near 10,000. I am not going to bend my interpretations and the historical record to suit some sort of agenda. Now please, *please* stop making false claims and attacks towards me and about me.


Again you have never engaged me in a prolonged discussion, at least not one that I can remember. Don’t whine about any comment on Cold Southern Steel, you were treated there better than I was treated here. That is fact.

You haven’t proved that not one of the 10,000 or so names or number of people listed on that website did not support the Confederacy. In fact I doubt very seriously you actually a whole page. So they were former slaves, how does that prove they could not be loyal to the Confederacy? If you would have actually read the entries you would have know there were free blacks listed also. I know all about the camp servant argument, it doesn’t hold water. Where are your voices of the 180,000 former slaves who not treated equal in a separate unit and forced to fight for the Union. You see you have nothing but a straw man argument.

I know all about Mississippi and several other states. I also know several websites including the Official records that does support Negroes serving in the Confederate ranks. If you had actually read some of the “Negroes In Gray”website (http://negrosingrey.southernheritageadvancementpreservationeducation.com/page.php?2) you would have found all the documentation you could ask for.

You haven’t done any research for me!!!!!!!! Besides what sort of historian would openly say he refuses to find the truth. Thank you for showing your true colors!!!!!!!

Once you haven’t a clue what you are talking about, it is obvious you are biased in your opinion. I haven’t made any false claims about you, everything I have said is absolutely true. Post these false claims or just admit you are lying.

Oh and if you really would have read Negroes in Gray, then without bias you would admit I am right. There is info there that leaves no doubts.

When someone doesn’t know the truth

Well folks it seems that Nick Sacco doesn’t want to come here and discuss the Uccle jack Statue. he had rather stay on his own blog surround by the brilliant minds of Jimmy Dick and Al Mackey. Fine with me Nick, what ever floats your boat. So let’s take a look at Nick’s latest post shall we. he posted it here https://pastexplore.wordpress.com/2015/10/09/that-moment-when-someone-completely-misreads-your-arguments/

Mr. Sacco starts off by explaining his motive for writhing the Uncle Jack article, no big deal there, but it does appear that Mr. Sacco cannot discuss facts without the help of Al Mackey and Jimmy Dick’s insult. We all know those two fellows hate anything Confederate, and their strong suit is insults not fact. That is evident from the first post Mackey makes — and Sacco allows him to continue to insult while warning me. Talk about a one sided argument!!!

Saco then references to my previous post “Fighting White Supremacy” and states I quote him out of content. I admit I did misread your dates, related to the statue, but Sacco I did not get your quotes wrong, I got the exact words directly from your page. Nor like you did I get facts about the war wrong. Like it or not. Now Sacco although the Confederacy and the South are not one and the same, the words are often interchanged to represent on or the other. If you were any sort of historian you would know that.

Regarding the term Negroes, please post a source that list African American as a race and show me ONE use of the word African American in the period we are discussing.

Appears to me you just shot your argument in the foot!!!!!

Now Nick, you attack me and Uncle Jack, because we are just nice guys, and want to attach some sort of symbolism to the fact Jack tips his hate. WEll I guess you just didn’t absorb what I said about men still doing that today. It is a custom in the part of the country where Jack and I come from. I don’t expect you to understand, since you have your mind made up. At any rate you haven’t proven that jack didn’t tip his hate just because he was a nice guy.

some enslaved people may have stayed home out of a genuine sense of loyalty to their enslavers,

There you go with that some again. Can you come up with a number. Numbers are 1,2,3, and so on. I can. You make a statement can you back it up with fact? I can. But what does the numbers matter, if it was only Jack who stayed home, there is a statue to honor him, if it was 100, a 1,000 or 10,0000 what does it matter. The statue is to honor these people. I find it amazing that the WHITE SUPREEMACIST folks of Louisiana want to erect a statue to honor a black man. Does anyone else????

You want to make a big deal about the number of Black men who served the USCT. That is United States Colored Troops, separate and not equal to the US Army, segregated in their own units, sometimes forced away from home at the point of a Yankee gun. Go ahead tell us about them. You state the subject of forced service is irrelevant to the discussion, you brocahed the subject with the statement– <em>”roughly 180,000 African American men enlisted in the military through United States Colored Troops regiments following President Lincoln’s 1863 Emancipation Proclamation; and many other slaves,”

So what is the deal Nick, do we discuss facts or not?

Sacco, I didn’t know this was going to be this easy, but you really should do some research on your own. It would make you look more knowledgeable. I just absolutely love this statement—

Mr. Purvis finally concludes by quoting me out of context and getting to his real conclusion – that the “loyal” slaves who chose to stay home did so because they actually supported the Confederacy. That claim assumes, without documentary evidence,

SURPRISE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Here is your names numbers and documentation. and there is more coming!!!!!!!!!!!


Watch his response folks he will deny any of the 10,000 entries that are listed, but he will not be able to prove they were not supporters of the Confederacy.

Fighting White Supremacy —-

by taking down a statue of a Black man. Yep you read that statement right. Let me explain.

It seems in Natchitoches, Louisiana, there is a statue of one Black man, “Uncle Jack” who was never a slave and was born after the war. His image is used to honor those slaves and freemen loyal to his loyal to the Confederacy during the War For Southern Independence. This statue was dedicated in 1927.

Nick Sacco tries to make his case here in stating how submissive “Uncle Jack” must have been to stay with his owners during the war and how he could not enjoy such white privileges as voting (https://pastexplore.wordpress.com/2015/10/01/louisianas-uncle-jack-statue-and-the-problem-of-interpreting-iconography-in-history-museums/comment-page-1/#comment-2543) he tips his hat and is just a nice polite guy. Where I was born , men still tip their hats and open doors for women. What is wrong with that?

Well gee Nick I remember when 18 year olds could not vote, but could carry a gun, there was a time when white women couldn’t vote and for the most part men and women’s restrooms are still separated. So what??? In ten years all of this may change.

Nick goes on to say this– “Any casual student of nineteenth century U.S. history can easily see how this statue distorts what actually happened during the war. Thousands — Really Nick? That is the best you have? How about we throw out some facts instead of just opinions? Thousands ran away to Contraband camps– how many died? there? I have read as many as one forth of those who entered the camps never left. Roughly 180,000 negroes entered the Union Army. OK I accept that number, but how many were forced? How many got equal pay to the white soldiers? United States Colored Troops, separate not equal. Provided intelligence– yes I am sure the Confederates got intelligence from the Negroes also. oh yes and Mr. Sacco wants to bring up the Emancipation Proclamation, you know the document which ONLY freed the slaves in the rebelling areas. The loyal slave-owners could keep their slaves. In closing this paragraph, Mr. Sacco throws out one of those infinite words that really has no meaning– some. How many is some, as in —“Some enslaved people may have stayed home out of a genuine sense of loyalty to their enslavers,” Give us a number Nick you are a scholar. How many is some?

Duh did we just stumble on the purpose of the statue? To honor those who stayed beside their masters

Now this is the part that really gets me — Nick says–but these inconveniences are but a small price to pay for a more advanced, progressive society organized by the dictates of scientific racism, Jim Crow laws, and white supremacy. So we need to take down a statue to those who stayed with the white families, who cared for them while the men were in the field fighting an invaded to their homeland. Could it be not so much as what pose the statue is in or what symbolism someone thinks is forwarded from the statue, but the simple facts these loyal slaves supported the Confederacy? is that really the burr in your saddle Nick?

George Purvis