Talk:Isaiah Bradley

Recreate
Is there a source for the claim that this was an attempt to *recreate* Cap's serum and Cap already existed at the time? Ken Arromdee 18:58, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes. The experiments on Isaiah and his fellow soldiers were shown as taking place in 1942, and Isaiah enlisted following Pearl Harbor. Numerous other Marvel titles, including ones published subsequent to The Truth's release, have shown Steve Rogers was already Captain America in 1941, and already a member of the Invaders around the time of Pearl Harbor. The appearance of the comic Captain America #1 in an issue of The Truth actually supports this, despite one cynical soldier wrongly dismissing it as propaganda. And in Marvel's Official Handbook it is explicitly stated that the experiments on Isaiah were an attempt to recreate the experiment carried out on Steve Rogers. 85.211.125.55 16:42, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Why was the title called "Truth"? How was there a mislead of Cap's origin if Cap was still first? Also, why would the government first test something on a white man (who would be considered a more precious life than a black person) when they had no idea what would happen and make further tests on blacks when it was already proven successful for one white person? Given the nature of America's history, this makes no sense. A laundry equivalent; one would test a new detergent on an workout shirt before one would test it on a more valued dress shirt. My belief is that the powers that be at Marvel, got cold feet regarding the original premise that Isaiah Bradley and the group he was with were the first tested before Steve Rogers was given a perfected serum. The chronology given to back up Rogers being before Bradley was, and is, an exploted error.

Sorry, but no. The initial plan was for the series to be out of continuity, and Bradley first. However, by moving the series into continuity, the timeline "Truth" itself established means Bradley isn't first, and simply cannot be. The "chronology given to back up Rogers being before Bradley" is accurate. Rogers was Captain America and active as such before America joined the Second World War. He interacted with dozens of other established heroes and joined a team of same DAYS AFTER Pearl Harbor. Bradley didn't join the army until February 1942, and was there is no way that "Truth" can write off the myriad other tales which establish Rogers as active earlier as "propaganda." As to "why would the government first test something on a white man... and make further tests on blacks when it was already proven successful for one white person" - because presumably at first very few people believed Erskine's procedure would achieve anything, so it wasn't permitted (or perhaps not funded) for mass testing, and they frankly weren't too bothered about who it got tested on. Then it succeeded, but Erskine was killed; now the government needed the formula reconstructed. A year later they had no success, and possibly found that the attempts they had done proved lethal to the test subject; America entered the war, and within days of Pearl Harbor German agents managed to reproduce Erskine's process and create a super-soldier (Master Man), though luckily they too suffered a mishap which meant the process was again lost. With these developments, the US government / army decided it was imperative to successfully recreate Erskine's formula. The Truth's Reinstein was brought in, and mass testing approved; and yes, they do decide that black lives are less valuable so they can be used as test subjects - the horror and inhumanity of their actions remains, as does their bigoted reasoning. 84.9.79.248 18:38, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

The statements from both the writer and artist for The Truth miniseries, now on the main page, seem to end the debate once and for all. They both have said that The Truth is set after Steve Rogers debut, that "Cap already existed." 84.9.78.184 11:00, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Captruth.png
Image:Captruth.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 18:57, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Legal Issues
I've heard that Marvel is no longer able to use Bradley or any of his family as a result of a legal dispute between them and Robert Morales' estate. Does anyone know if this is true or not? -- MidnightSoldier (talk) 17:22, 10 May 2015 (UTC)