"Monument Honoring Black ACW Unit Rededicated" Topic

A Boston memorial to a famed Civil War unit made up of Black soldiers was rededicated Wednesday after a three-year long restoration with a ceremony filled with song and somber reflection…

Military: link

A unit worthy of their monument and glad it is back.

Too bad the article does not mention who defaced it and what was going on when they defaced it. Obviously they had no knowledge of history, or if they did, did not care.

It must be under the "other factors" stated in the article.

@35th, in case you are not aware, after the Black Brigade of Cincinnati filled its quota, black men from Ohio went to MA to join the 54th since they could not get into a local unit.

Didn't get defaced during some of the protests in the area?

Protestors don't damage property and hurt people. Rioters damage property and hurt people.

Thought we were not allowed to call them riots?

It is a nice monument. Unfortunately, it is hard to preserve nice things in public places.

Too bad the article does not mention who defaced it and what was going on when they defaced it.

They couldn't mention who defaced it because no one knows their identities.

Although, I dont know why this is important for this topic, the point is that we all agree it deserved to be restored.

It's a beautiful monument, right across the street from the State house. I have seen it many times. It's one of those things, when you look at it as a little kid, you want to get yourself some civil war soldiers….come to think of it, as an adult you do as well.

It it is a monument to honorable men, defaced by others to honor a man who was not worthy of these men. By those who probably had no idea who the 54th Massachusetts was, or who it was made up of. If they did know, that makes it Infinitely worse.

Of course this is IMO.

Yes 79th I think I remember that now, but thank you.

I did take trip especially to see the monument many years ago.
I suggest it is worthy pf being on any civil war tick list.
Wonderful.

martin

From an article, it was defaced during the George Floyd "protests" because it looks like the men of the 54th are subservient to Shaw. It has been recommended to be moved because of the issue.

link

From an article, it was defaced during the George Floyd "protests" because it looks like the men of the 54th are subservient to Shaw. It has been recommended to be moved because of the issue.

We know when the damage happened but not who did it and why.

The article speculates on the reasons but it isn't grounded in evidence which can connect it to the act, it's just part of a story the writer is trying to create interest with.

The article also mentions the monument has been defaced several times in the past. For all we know, some "persons" used cover of the protests to finish a job they couldn't from years before.

Why dont they have a camera on this monument 24/7? If they dont, they should.

My understanding at the time was that the protesters defaced it because they assumed it was about white Union soldiers and had no idea what it actually represented. I believe we had a previous discussion about this issue on the "Boards" when it originally happened.

Pas, you seem determined to excuse rioters as long as they are black.

(Btw, I don't really believe that about you. But it parallels things you have implied about me.)

Thanks for the link jsmcc91. It is nice to know that deep thinkers like Kevin Peterson don't understand the Blacks volunteered to "serve" under Col. Shaw to end the evil of slavery in America.

Pas, you seem determined to excuse rioters as long as they are black.

With a couple of narrow exceptions, vandals should always be prosecuted. I don't approve of rioters but I also am not a big fan of sweeping, unsupported conclusions for what smacks of a vigilante mindset. It could've been vandalized by a White Power hate group and it could've been pro BLM dummies too. We dont really know.

I think important monuments should have better security, dont you?

(Btw, I don't really believe that about you. But it parallels things you have implied about me.)

Who knows, the vandalism of the 54th's monument could've been wrought by a disgruntled white student who couldn't get into medical school :)

The local Boston news was pretty much Unanimous that it was BLM. They defaced other monuments as well. With BLM, you don't know the race, but you do know the political bent.

We also know that it cost 3 Million to restore. Was that privately funded, taxpayer funded, both? We can be sure it was not BLM funded.

From the Washington Examiner

Subject: George Floyd rioters deface 16 Boston statues, including memorial honoring black Civil War regiment | Washington Examiner


link

Please, a break from the blame thing would be nice. I would say some of the money likely went to restore wear and tear as well. It is great to see it looking like the day it was done…

The local Boston news was pretty much Unanimous that it was BLM. They defaced other monuments as well. With BLM, you don't know the race, but you do know the political bent.

Were they? Did they have any actual proof or was it just inference?

We also know that it cost 3 Million to restore. Was that privately funded, taxpayer funded, both? We can be sure it was not BLM funded.

Maybe the citizens of Boston can sue BLM for the $3 USD million on the grounds that all the Boston News says it was them? Isn't that how it works?

From the Washington Examiner

Subject: George Floyd rioters deface 16 Boston statues, including memorial honoring black Civil War regiment | Washington Examiner


link

OK, not from Boston and doesn't mention BLM. I feel like we've been here before with poorly selected supporting links.

The Boston sources from then, now require a subscription, which I refuse to pay. But please feel free.

But you are right, how could I be so blind!? It was the evil but devious Al-Qaeda, using the George Floyd riots going on in Boston at the time as a cover to vandalize the 54th Massachusetts monument, along with all the others. They are always looking for symbolic targets. Painting what they did on it was Diabolical of them. They probably claimed credit, but it was covered up by the government at the time, so as not to appear weak on Terrorism. My apologies for being taken in by the Ruse.

@Tort. I want the parties responsible for the destruction, to pay the tag for that destruction. I want accountability. I would hope others would want that too.

As I expressed at the beginning, it is great to have it back again. The 54th deserves it.

Uh oh, the dreaded "I don't have a subscription" reason. The Globe and Herald both started charging for subscriptions long before the 54th monument was defaced, or perhaps it was a different publication being referred to that was read in 2020.

And what is that following paragraph of additional crud all about, it currently isn't making much sense, if any.

Almost surprised the link didn't go to the NY Post, yet not surprised it went to the Examiner instead.

Depressed I didn't use CNN, NYT, or some other "liberally" accepted sources? I tried that with Russian collusion and a certain laptop. Just did not work.

So bypassing the normal rounds of attempts of Belittlement and rapier wit, which seems to be the norm lately between the 3 of us. 😉

You please tell us who was responsible for defacing the monument?
What was going on in town when the monument was defiled, along with others?
Was the article incorrect, if so why? Try to be exact.
Do you believe the monument should have been defiled? You believe it was justified?

Actually I find it hard to believe you had trouble with that paragraph. Let me help:
It was sarcasm. I would think of anyone on TMP, you would be Infinitely familiar with it.

Now if you are addressing my response to Tort, I could understand your inability to understand that. It is a call for responsibility.

The Boston Globe reported: "Memorials in three of the city's major parks were hit with graffiti and vandalism Sunday night after tensions mounted between demonstrators and police following a day of mostly peaceful protest marches that wound through Boston."

One of those memorials, the Globe noted, was the monument to the 54th: "One of the memorials targeted by vandals was the Robert Gould Shaw and the 54th Regiment Memorial, which was unveiled 137 years ago Sunday and depicts a pioneering group of Black soldiers marching into battle during the Civil War."

Also (and I do love how all the articles seem to start out with: "after a day of mostly peaceful protests")

Subject: City Parks Left in Ruins Following Sunday's Protests | Beacon Hill Times


link

As a fun little side note, the first black unit in the ACW was raised in Louisiana to fight for the south. A milita unit whose services were declined. Later fought in the red river campaign. The first Kansas Coloured Regiment was the first black unit (illegally raised) for the north by Sen. Jim Lane, the grim chieftain. Old Abe said they could serve, but quit that stuff Jim. Originally in a Zouave uniform they had some nip and tuck actions on the kansas border. Of course, when there is no chance of surrender, you must win or die.

35th, who gets the bill for the destruction in the Capitol? We all pay it and hope we never see that happen again. I don't disagree with you but I am getting weary, and just want to let it go.

Depressed I didn't use CNN, NYT, or some other "liberally" accepted sources? I tried that with Russian collusion and a certain laptop. Just did not work.
So bypassing the normal rounds of attempts of Belittlement and rapier wit, which seems to be the norm lately between the 3 of us. 😉
…
Actually I find it hard to believe you had trouble with that paragraph. Let me help: It was sarcasm. I would think of anyone on TMP, you would be Infinitely familiar with it.
Now if you are addressing my response to Tort, I could understand your inability to understand that. It is a call for responsibility.

Having mentioned "Boston news", with a link to a Washington DC publication (and now CNN and NYT that aren't based in Boston either), and then a claim of not wanting to buy a subscription as your reason for not providing one … it's about integrity or rather lack of such. When failing to site a "Boston news" source, while failing to site such a source that mentions the defacing came from BLM as well, and naming multiple other publications that aren't, and then bringing up something about "Russian collusion and a certain laptop" (which I've not seen you do, and that's ok, but here it is now in this thread on the restoration of a monument to the 54th Massachusetts), well it's no wonder a person couldn't figure out the wild ride of sarcasm. Because it ends up being so convoluted, that it starts seeming like distraction, and inappropriate accordingly.

And then this …

The Boston Globe reported: "Memorials in three of the city's major parks were hit with graffiti and vandalism Sunday night after tensions mounted between demonstrators and police following a day of mostly peaceful protest marches that wound through Boston."
One of those memorials, the Globe noted, was the monument to the 54th: "One of the memorials targeted by vandals was the Robert Gould Shaw and the 54th Regiment Memorial, which was unveiled 137 years ago Sunday and depicts a pioneering group of Black soldiers marching into battle during the Civil War."
Also (and I do love how all the articles seem to start out with: "after a day of mostly peaceful protests")
Subject: City Parks Left in Ruins Following Sunday's Protests | Beacon Hill Times

link

… pulling out quotes from a Boston Globe article anyway (wondering where'd that come from when not getting a subscription) which does not have mention of BLM as was previously claimed, and then linking to a Beacon Hill Times article that doesn't mention BLM either. Wait for it … the word is … integrity. And speaking of responsibility, a seeming unwillingness to practice what's being preached.

When folks just outright act like a rabbit, and jump around from one claim to other items that don't even support the claim, its not about "belittlement" nor "rapier wit", it's about calling out the crud that's being provided.

Why do I waste my time? Like dealing with Nathan and Mimsey.

Let's see.
1) BLM was the Instigator of the protests and riots that happened that day and night in Boston, as they were elsewhere.
2) The monument Specifically had "Black Lives Matter" painted as one the defacements. Along with their other normal graffiti.
3) all wise one… my company at the time had subscriptions everywhere, (I am retired now.) I could read any source then. surprise!!!
4) my email attachments from Boston sources disappeared with my company computer and now magically, only sources a liberal will NOT accept, that put the blame on BLM, (although some mention ANTIFA if that makes you happier) come from conservative leaning sites. They DON'T charge, like those greedy liberal ones. All the liberal sites that did mention BLM at all, including the Boston Globe, stories have pretty much left the web after 2 years, don't show up on my Google searches, or require subscriptions for private individuals. Being retired I refuse to pay them.
5) I even below supplied you with a liberal source where a black woman defaced it back in 2012. It is there to show a pattern of individuals vandalizing that which they don't understand or comprehend.
6) I had even included a picture of the graffiti on the monument in my last "Boston" post, in this thread.
7) I got the quote from a "conservative" site Breitbart which had quoted from the Boston Globe and still had the link. But again I ran into that liberal greed when trying to get to the "globe" link in the article. 😢
8) I notice like always, you refuse to answer any questions put to you. Typical lefty deflections instead.

(Monument graffiti)
"The conservator's recent prep work protected the front of the bronze relief with plywood, but its granite backside was vandalized with four-letter words and phrases including "Black Lives Matter," "No Justice, No Peace," and "Police are Pigs.""

Now those who like can make their own decisions. They can judge by what happened that day and night in Boston, the graffiti on the monument, and what groups were in town instigating the riots, as to responsibility.

Or they can read deflections and apologies from some other posts in here and believe them.

- link
& here – link
& here – link
& here – link

@Tort of course the taxpayers. But many of those at the Capital are still in jail, many still without trials. Not so, with those at Boston.

I see your point, 35th.

But the trial matter is a different issue. The pre trial release rate was about 70% of the Capitol accused – usually its 75% of accused wait a year or more for trial for some of these charges. Only the planners and leaders have been held and have all been tried or scheduled, just as is done for any accused with such charges. . Even the zip tie guy was released pre trial.

The misinformation was that we were told that people were held without trial, but not that people are very often held with out trial due to system overload, but still retain all their rights. And the glaring omission – far more of these folks were released pre trial than is typical.

Yes the graffiti people should have been caught and charged. But there is no trove of thousands of hours of video in this case. Graffiti people are harder to id in general.

There has been civil unrest and a historic pandemic with a million deaths. A lot of weary people out there.

Ah, the truth is coming out … there's lot's of interest by OVI in making points from an extreme position on the political spectrum, instead of appreciating the idea that the damage has been corrected, regardless of who the protesters were or weren't. There's really no appropriate reason for defacing public property no matter who ya are.

Also, since the publications were read from your previous employer's subscription, then the recall of a word for word quote from the Globe could be impressive, except I doubt such is what happened. Especially when it is admitted that the quote was taken from Breitbart. And yet the quote doesn't even mention BLM, but now I'm repeating what I wrote previously.

And I'm not sure how a defacing in 2012 is connected with that of 2020, especially when the article linked even quotes what the woman said about her vandalism, while also confronting her comment as well. Although not surprised one is being connected, after seeing all the other stream of consciousness crud that flowed out in that thread on Seidule's new book.

Plus in the link to wbur, besides being a shift away from the previous print media sources, that article speaks of how the monument incurs "mixed feelings", and with things like "white commander out in front of black soldiers", as they said, it still "isn't a paen to the Confederacy". So still just supposition that someone actually acted with any sense of real understanding.

Although that is typical of the emotionalism being expressed by vandals. Hopefully I don't need to repeat myself on how I view that, because it has already provided several sentences above, and in this same post.

As for the lack of response to most questions, there hasn't been an appreciation of answers provided on other threads previously, not sure it would be different here. Besides, and perhaps more importantly, not sure if some of them are rhetorical or real anyway. Either of which could be unfortunate crud, and so currently it makes no sense to provide answers.

However, here's an answer to one from one of your links to a wbur article that explains who funds the upkeep of the monument. It includes a group called Friends of the Public Garden who've created an endowment (not a public source), the City of Boston (there's a public source), the National Park Service (there's another public source), and the Museum of African-American History (also not a public source). So the answer is both.

@ Gamy pretty much the answers I have come to expect from you. You never fail to surprise me.

As I said, the quote is in the Breitbart article. Feel free to look it up, if you don't turn to stone by reading sources that don't kowtow to your world views and opinions.

Glad you admit though, that taxpayers did foot a lot of the bill, and not just for this monument, but all the others defaced as well, during the ("but mostly peaceful") rioting. Not to mention the damages to Boston or cost of police, firemen, etc.

Again I leave it to others to make their own decisions.

Then don't ask the cruddy questions, if you're not surprised by the answers, it just shows the questions are still cruddy. Also, I didn't say whether Breitbart had been read or not, that has nothing to do with my point(s) being made.

Additionally, I didn't say the "taxpayers did foot a lot of the bill", because your link to the article didn't include such info to measure that. Nor did your link to the article provide information about the other damages. Nor did your question ask about the other damages. Nor did the original post of the thread reference anything about the other damages.

What I did say was that it was funded by both. While the original post doesn't seem to have had anything to do with your posting for political reasons.

So once again, no appreciation for the answer to a question, and instead another cruddy response that traipses off along a different course than the original question provided. This leads me to think that your question was another cruddy one as well. More evidence that the interest isn't in the damage being corrected, but instead making political points from an extreme position of the political spectrum.

And … there's no leaving it to others to make their own decisions, when it's at a minimum being insinuated that your conclusions are correct, whether or not such conclusions are really so. And on top of this, including links and quotes in your posts that don't directly back up the claim(s) being made.

You must have a pretty "Cruddy" life. 🙂

I think everyone knows from where your views come and I am sure they know from where mine come.

I have Provided enough information and links for people to make their own decisions if interested, even pulling from Boston and liberal sites, just for you. I am not going to take your bait and keep doing research for you In your continuously ever widening net of accusations and questions, do it yourself.

You either believe BLM and their associates were guilty of the Defilement of the monument(s) and never held accountable, or you don't. If you don't, then who was responsible?

I am never sure what points you are trying to make, they always just seem to be mere accusations about me, my sources, OH, and my "cruddy" views.

Now put down your paint brush and do it yourself, or go back to painting and give it rest. I doubt you can, but try.

This is how the brain of the Left works:

1964 – Berkeley Free Speech Movement
link

2022 – Federal DHS Disinformation Board
link

LOL! Presto! What happened to Free Speech?

B

I like my alternate facts and misinformation straight from the top, with Congress as my second choice. This has served us well in recent years.

@GamesPoet

It occurs to me that we are thinking he's being cute but he might actually believe that those sources mention BLM as the culprit.

There was this member from Canada who used to post articles that always said the exact opposite of what he claimed they said. When the error was pointed out to him, he doubled down and started accusing those posters of being on the "other side"; which always made me feel better.

It couldve been BLM, it couldve been the Proud Boys or some other White Supremacy, domestic terrorist group. We just dont know.

We would all like to know who defaced it and make them pay and that's why they need security cameras on that work of art.

It's as if the articles aren't being read further than the headline. There's even an attempt to infer he's doing research, even telling me I should stop painting to go do some research, and on a hobby site like this one.

Yep, a constant mention of BLM, and it doesn't show up in the linked articles, despite his claim that "Boston news" was claiming such. It's all smoke, and he doesn't seem to be looking in the mirror either.

Then we got Blutarski with another drive by that doesn't come close to being on target.

- – – – – -

Hey OVI … I have a fabulous life, and may yours be as well.

Meanwhile, the claim of knowing where my views come from, and actually knowing, those are two different things. Continuing to routinely be incorrect on this, that already shows it's all hat and no cattle. Plus … the insinuation that I wanted research done for me, that's at least a misunderstanding, if not a mischaracterization of my comments, and neither are good.

And here's one of my points again >>> your original claim on "Boston news" has so far been faulty, including the links and quotes to back it up not showing what was claimed. Me having to do research on something that your claiming isn't the way this is going to work, and what really needs to happen is for your own research to be better than it has demonstrated itself to be.

So … after the emotions calm for a bit, put all that political mumbo jumbo on hold for at least awhile, if that's possible, and get out that paint brush for some enjoyment, relaxation, and productivity.

Oh, and as far as your newest question, I'm again reminded of this …
YouTube link

😂
Gentlemen you were outgeneraled just like Napoleon at Waterloo, by a Brit and a Prussian. But until next time, adieu.

Not having an accurate point of merit to rest upon, and convinced of one's own self delusion as real, such doesn't change the use of distraction, or deceit, or both as inappropriate. Intentionally or not, it shows a continued disrespect of the monument's restoration, and that's almost as bad, if not the same, as the defacing was itself.

Gentlemen you were outgeneraled just like Napoleon at Waterloo, by a Brit and a Prussian. But until next time, adieu.

Wait, are you a Brit or a Prussian? If youre one, who is the other? And what does this have to do with the fact that you are able to blend judgments with conclusions? Do you have any idea how terrifying that is for a real conservative who believes in the operation of law and order?

How could we be "out generaled" when we responded to your questions and your inaccuracies? Do you think making false statements for your own points constitutes superior genralship?

If you want to condemn BLM with no proof, go ahead but dont try and drag the rest of us with you.

Also Au revoir means until next time, "adieu" means goodbye forever. What a fitting, ironic underlining of your sloppiness.

I debated putting this last link in, but it is worth watching. But this takes place in Boston, during a BLM protest against the police and deals with the 54th Massachusetts monument vandalism that had taken place previously. This gentleman expresses who he believes was responsible for it, his perspective on both the vandalism and those Participating in this protest. Pay special attention to the last 2:20 minutes. He in all of this video, expresses my feelings on the monument, on the contribution of the 54th and on those there that day, at this protest and who were also involved in the organizing and riots the night the original vandalism of this monument and others originally took place.

I always find it ironic that whenever I see BLM in action, it seems to be made up in the major part, by young whites. (Yes I am sure that will Illicit some sarcastic Rejoinder). Actually the gentleman in the video makes the same observations.

Subject: ANTIFA/BLM Vandalized 1st all black ARMY Regiment memorial in Boston!? – YouTube


YouTube link

Antifa/BLM is not a thing. These two groups are quite different, other than they are both decentralized with no hierarchy. They are far more likely to perpetrate property crimes than crimes against people.

Mai I respectfully suggest you bid adieu to the little digs and insults? You all make some good points, but having a slightly more civil conversation would have more impact.

Antifa and BLM are very much a thing: someone set all of those fires.

The video 35th posted is worth watching.

Thanks

Doc, I thought I was referring to the lumping them together headline. And I did refer to the property crime they are responsible for. But they are very different entities, to the extent that they exist as anything more than a loose framework. BLM in particular has maintained extensive nation wide support, often more than 60 per cent of the country and is not especially known for violence. But there are some in every crowd no matter who when it comes to opportunity.

I also think that much of the burning and looting had nothing to do with ideology, just thugs jumping at the opportunity to loot.

Another source not associated with "Boston news", and even this one only mentions BLM as being associated with the vandalism in the title, yet no evidence presented, not even in the video.

The guy talking across the video is out of New York City, and supported Rand Paul for President. In the video he shows a picture of the spot where the monument had been removed for restoration after the vandalism had occurred, and he says, "it's destroying history right there". Makes me wonder if there's an understanding of the word "restoration" on the sign that he reads out loud in the video.

And to see it written here that OVI finds it "ironic" that young whites would stand up for black people. More crud, same thread, different moment.

GamesPoet says: And to see it written here that OVI finds it "ironic" that young whites would stand up for black people. More crud, same thread, different moment.

Also interesting that he makes arguments for the legalities of long dead Southerners seceding and demands that anyone else give inscrutable proof that they legally could not secede and, in addition, chastises posters that they shouldn't condemn everyone with a broad brush just because they were there or Southern. However, with the living, well, any feeling is good enough to convict them…all of them.

So anyone associated with George Floyd protests are ANTIFA/BLM and burning the country to the ground but the secession was just a legal freakin peaceful exercise?

Torterella says: You all make some good points, but having a slightly more civil conversation would have more impact.

Perhaps you would point out the good points 35th OVI has made?

doc says:Antifa and BLM are very much a thing: someone set all of those fires.

Thousands upon thousands were arrested during those George Floyd protests. How come, for the defacement of the 54th's monument, Boston didnt arrest anyone or prosecute BLM? How come they never pursued all the BLM people everyone knows defaced that monument?

I should clarify that we do not know who set the fires in 2020. There were a lot of angry people around and they did it, and probably people who wanted stuff did it. Every city police force was outmanned, contained what they could.

I have said before when I was young and Newark burned downed and other towns around me were in trouble, the tanks came up my street. I could hear automatic weapons for a brief time, then quiet. I could smell the burning in Plainfield, I believe. Nobody tried to explain it. I thought it was just something that happened here sometimes. LA in 92. I still don't really get who we all are.

Well gentlemen, I'm impressed by your strenuous efforts to invent some sort of plausible denial of BLM's BLM's responsibility for the gross vandalism and defacement inflicted of those 16 historic Boston monuments on the day of BLM's "protest demonstration".

The four cites posted by OVI35 all came from local Boston sources:

> WBUR is the PBS station in Boston (since 1950!).
> Art Fuse is a Lefty Boston artist/activist community organization.
> Huffpost I'm sure you are familiar with.

If the "Proud Boys" had been involved in the vandalism in any way, shape or form, I'm pretty confident that it would have been splashed all over the local Boston media. Given that the only person arrested for said vandalism was a 38 yr old black woman (Rosseline Occean), it seems rather unlikely that the "Proud Boys were involved – nice try, though.

Meanwhile, your implied argument – that the defacement and vandalism of the 16 historic Boston monuments on the same day that that BLM staged its major "protest demonstration" in Boston was a matter of sheer coincidence – is deliciously comical.

+1 OVI35th.

B