Of course he was talking about the Territories further west in later years, not Texas, but it's the same thing.

Well, Strick, there ya go again. Ya see, its NOT the same thing. And that's a fact.

you called them the Klan in response

I'd be grateful if you'd show me where I identified a Texas group
as being "The Klan". You keep falling back specifically on the Texas situation; I'm talking about the whole former Confederacy.


even with the same facts in front of us, we wouldn't be able to agree on intepreting them I thinwe'd finnd more points of convergence than difference if we agreed to apply the 'preponderance of evidence' test.

Bobert: RE: the discussion... is of little value if it does not effect change in those folks who still suffer from the affects of "slavery, poverty and culture".

Couldn't agree more- and while a substantial segment of the population remains in denial about their own history I don't think much headway will be made in the direction both of us would like to see.

Kevin- ALL of the U.S. most certainly, but the situation was influenced by world economic factors as well. Palmerston's government supported the Confederacy, as did most of Lancashire, for economic reasons. Cheap U.S. cotton- produced by slave labor prior to 1865 and by what was slave labor in all but name after 1865- enriched many a mill owner in the Black Country. A complicated situation.