It is a shame the New Republic were the ones to get their hands on these letters rather than someone more reputable. There was no reason at all to divert form

It is a shame the New Republic were the ones to get their hands on these letters rather than someone more reputable. There was no reason at all to divert form the interesting historical war component to some sort of shameful generalisation about the racism of the letter writer. Especially the implication the language used, which is not appropriate today, but was commonly used at the time is relevant. The letter writer spoke his mind, which seemed rare back then. But is brought down, after years of war and post war atrocities because they spoken openly. They obviously cared about being prejudiced, which I cannot see being common at the time. They New Republic cannot even bothered putting in the proper quote without comment - > There was a lengthy screed about his black comrades-in-arms, which began with the always troubling disclaimer, “I am NOT prejudiced—whether you believe me or not”: