Restricted Forrest's Grave spray painted.

Nathanb1

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Forum Host
Retired Moderator
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Location
Smack dab in the heart of Texas
What if I wanted to be contradictory and put "Roundhead Lives Matter" on Buckingham Palace?:rofl:

And therein lies my pointed point.....there is a process for protest. There are legal channels--such as voting, participating in other government forums, emails and letter writing, letters to the editor, publicity campaigns (legitimate ones, not vandalism)...all have worked for a couple of centuries here. Maybe all of us should avail ourselves of these avenues of expression.
 

Desert Kid

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Location
Arizona
And therein lies my pointed point.....there is a process for protest. There are legal channels--such as voting, participating in other government forums, emails and letter writing, letters to the editor, publicity campaigns (legitimate ones, not vandalism)...all have worked for a couple of centuries here. Maybe all of us should avail ourselves of these avenues of expression.

Well in Forrest's case, that's just not happening.
 

Desert Kid

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Location
Arizona
And in other news, it turns out that the renaming of the parks that happened two years ago has now been busted open again. The SCV lawsuit has brought the State Chancery to overturn Shelby County's dismissal in 2013.
 

Allie

Captain
Joined
Dec 17, 2014
And in other news, it turns out that the renaming of the parks that happened two years ago has now been busted open again. The SCV lawsuit has brought the State Chancery to overturn Shelby County's dismissal in 2013.
Okay, I've lost track of this one. The City renamed the parks, someone challenged the renaming, the challenge was dismissed by Shelby county, the SCV sued over - what, the removed signage? And now State Chancery has overturned the dismissal? Have I got that right? So what happens next? Who is challenging who and in what jurisdiction?
 

Desert Kid

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Location
Arizona
Okay, I've lost track of this one. The City renamed the parks, someone challenged the renaming, the challenge was dismissed by Shelby county, the SCV sued over - what, the removed signage? And now State Chancery has overturned the dismissal? Have I got that right? So what happens next? Who is challenging who and in what jurisdiction?

I think its all with the state now.
 
Joined
Sep 28, 2013
Location
Southwest Mississippi

E_just_E

Captain
Forum Host
Retired Moderator
Joined
Sep 3, 2014
Location
Center Valley, PA
"Mayoral candidate charged in connection with Bedford Forrest statue vandalism"

http://www.myfoxmemphis.com/story/29851187/nathan-bedford-forrest-statue-vandalized-again


That confused me for a second. Thought that this guy was responsible for the OP vandalism "Black Lives Matter", but that vandal is still not caught.

So this is a second vandalism, where this guy vandalizes the statue by signing his name. Not sure who would make a smarter Mayor, him or the current. Got to love that hidden gem in that story:

"Earlier this week, the city council voted to allow a private group to take the statue out of the park.
It will be up to the Historic Commission to decide if the statue can be moved.
Forrest's relatives said they may take this to court."

Allow. Alrighty.
"A private group". Would love to know which group that might be.
Might be a "group to be named later", or "any group"...
 

Allie

Captain
Joined
Dec 17, 2014
That confused me for a second. Thought that this guy was responsible for the OP vandalism "Black Lives Matter", but that vandal is still not caught.

So this is a second vandalism, where this guy vandalizes the statue by signing his name. Not sure who would make a smarter Mayor, him or the current. Got to love that hidden gem in that story:

"Earlier this week, the city council voted to allow a private group to take the statue out of the park.
It will be up to the Historic Commission to decide if the statue can be moved.
Forrest's relatives said they may take this to court."

Allow. Alrighty.
"A private group". Would love to know which group that might be.
Might be a "group to be named later", or "any group"...
I read it as "whichever group volunteers to pay for the removal because this is sure not in the budget."

I still want to know who these theoretical relatives are.
 

JPK Huson 1863

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Feb 14, 2012
Location
Central Pennsylvania
Is there a problem with Forrest's relative's wishing to pay to move the statue? Honest, am not arguing with anyone at all, am just so lost with this thread I couldn't follow breadcrumbs back to the source if they were chocolate sprinkles and I were menopausal.

Seems safe to state on the spray painting; Still against, on the 2nd spray painting, ditto, on moving it, wherever people stop colorizing it, on Forrest's relatives, if this is going in your back yard you better have a lot of parking.
 

Allie

Captain
Joined
Dec 17, 2014
Is there a problem with Forrest's relative's wishing to pay to move the statue? Honest, am not arguing with anyone at all, am just so lost with this thread I couldn't follow breadcrumbs back to the source if they were chocolate sprinkles and I were menopausal.

Seems safe to state on the spray painting; Still against, on the 2nd spray painting, ditto, on moving it, wherever people stop colorizing it, on Forrest's relatives, if this is going in your back yard you better have a lot of parking.
Forrest's relatives are supposedly opposed to removal of the statue.
 

diane

Retired User
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Location
State of Jefferson
Forrest's relatives are supposedly opposed to removal of the statue.

I'm wondering who they are as well - his relations here haven't been bashful about saying so! :thumbsup: I do know there's at least one group who claim to be his friends...and with friends like that he doesn't need enemies...

Wasn't it the Nathan Bedford Forrest chapter of the UDC that put it up in the first place? I understand they dissolved after Forrest's granddaughter died, though. If I understand it right, and I'm wandering in the wilderness with JPK looking for cookie crumbs! - the only reason the NBF chapter of the SCV has standing is they paid for later embellishments and signs?

Which brings up a rather interesting tangent. There are tries to eliminate many of these groups, or change their names to something less...offensive than the names of Forrest or Lee or Davis. Does that mean that if they do these groups will lose that 'standing' in future controversial issues?
 

Desert Kid

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Location
Arizona
I'm wondering who they are as well - his relations here haven't been bashful about saying so! :thumbsup: I do know there's at least one group who claim to be his friends...and with friends like that he doesn't need enemies...

Wasn't it the Nathan Bedford Forrest chapter of the UDC that put it up in the first place? I understand they dissolved after Forrest's granddaughter died, though. If I understand it right, and I'm wandering in the wilderness with JPK looking for cookie crumbs! - the only reason the NBF chapter of the SCV has standing is they paid for later embellishments and signs?

Which brings up a rather interesting tangent. There are tries to eliminate many of these groups, or change their names to something less...offensive than the names of Forrest or Lee or Davis. Does that mean that if they do these groups will lose that 'standing' in future controversial issues?

To Hell with 'em I say. They think it's offensive then they can suck it up.
 
Top