Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Got too big , the argument is to remove confederate monuments cause they are counted racist , Which I disagree , For them to be racist they must depict a racist person or a racist cause the civil war , neither of which they do. I will 3 facts and if any one can prove me wrong I will get a sledge out and knock them my self , Fact 1 General lee wasn't a racist he had freed his slaves pre war The south did not fight the war to keep slavery when Lincoln was elected he gave a speech which he said Fact 2 "I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so." A month before the civil war did break out southern states had formed the confederate states of America this offer was made to the south an amendment to the constitution Fact 3 The Corwin Amendment is a proposed amendment to the United States Constitution that would shield "domestic institutions" of the states (which in 1861 included slavery) from the constitutional amendment process and from abolition or interference by Congress.It was passed by the 36th Congress on March 2, 1861, and submitted to the state legislatures for ratification. Senator William H. Seward of New York introduced the amendment in the Senate and Representative Thomas Corwin of Ohio introduced it in the House of Representatives. Now if it was slavery that the south wanted they have it take that deal and it's there's , So the confederate states going to war has nothing to do with slavery the north was looking to hold the union together they needed the taxes collected from southern states which at the time was the wealthiest part of America contributing 70 to 80 % of federal taxes , the when the south declared independence the north union left troops at fort sumter which lead to confederate army engaging them there to expel them from the south , If I'm wrong with the facts above I'm wrong but I think they are pretty accurate , " every one of the opinions above that you posted singularly on the other thread have been countered and some i believe by a person from that country who know its constitution and laws pretty well.. putting them in one block doesn't change that.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Got too big , the argument is to remove confederate monuments cause they are counted racist , Which I disagree , For them to be racist they must depict a racist person or a racist cause the civil war , neither of which they do. I will 3 facts and if any one can prove me wrong I will get a sledge out and knock them my self , Fact 1 General lee wasn't a racist he had freed his slaves pre war The south did not fight the war to keep slavery when Lincoln was elected he gave a speech which he said Fact 2 "I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so." A month before the civil war did break out southern states had formed the confederate states of America this offer was made to the south an amendment to the constitution Fact 3 The Corwin Amendment is a proposed amendment to the United States Constitution that would shield "domestic institutions" of the states (which in 1861 included slavery) from the constitutional amendment process and from abolition or interference by Congress.It was passed by the 36th Congress on March 2, 1861, and submitted to the state legislatures for ratification. Senator William H. Seward of New York introduced the amendment in the Senate and Representative Thomas Corwin of Ohio introduced it in the House of Representatives. Now if it was slavery that the south wanted they have it take that deal and it's there's , So the confederate states going to war has nothing to do with slavery the north was looking to hold the union together they needed the taxes collected from southern states which at the time was the wealthiest part of America contributing 70 to 80 % of federal taxes , the when the south declared independence the north union left troops at fort sumter which lead to confederate army engaging them there to expel them from the south , If I'm wrong with the facts above I'm wrong but I think they are pretty accurate , every one of the opinions above that you posted singularly on the other thread have been countered and some i believe by a person from that country who know its constitution and laws pretty well.. putting them in one block doesn't change that.." are the statements true or not , | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Got too big , the argument is to remove confederate monuments cause they are counted racist , Which I disagree , For them to be racist they must depict a racist person or a racist cause the civil war , neither of which they do. I will 3 facts and if any one can prove me wrong I will get a sledge out and knock them my self , Fact 1 General lee wasn't a racist he had freed his slaves pre war The south did not fight the war to keep slavery when Lincoln was elected he gave a speech which he said Fact 2 "I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so." A month before the civil war did break out southern states had formed the confederate states of America this offer was made to the south an amendment to the constitution Fact 3 The Corwin Amendment is a proposed amendment to the United States Constitution that would shield "domestic institutions" of the states (which in 1861 included slavery) from the constitutional amendment process and from abolition or interference by Congress.It was passed by the 36th Congress on March 2, 1861, and submitted to the state legislatures for ratification. Senator William H. Seward of New York introduced the amendment in the Senate and Representative Thomas Corwin of Ohio introduced it in the House of Representatives. Now if it was slavery that the south wanted they have it take that deal and it's there's , So the confederate states going to war has nothing to do with slavery the north was looking to hold the union together they needed the taxes collected from southern states which at the time was the wealthiest part of America contributing 70 to 80 % of federal taxes , the when the south declared independence the north union left troops at fort sumter which lead to confederate army engaging them there to expel them from the south , If I'm wrong with the facts above I'm wrong but I think they are pretty accurate , every one of the opinions above that you posted singularly on the other thread have been countered and some i believe by a person from that country who know its constitution and laws pretty well.. putting them in one block doesn't change that..are the statements true or not , " it was explained to you what the reasoning was when the south submitted the Corwin amendment and you decided to ignore it.. saying that its a fact and that means you are right in your opinion but not looking at what that amendment constituted in relation to maintaining the right to keep slaves is a bit sighted and not very logical.. the reason they wanted to keep slaves was based on economics and prosperity that they had gotten used to and they did not want to jeopardise that.. that's something that is written into all the declarations of secession.. so if you want anyone to say is it a fact that an amendment was proposed then yes it was but you are not looking at the issue properly with any objectivity and i don't feel that whatever you are told that you will amend your view.. enjoy your thread.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Fuck ya course they were as was three quarters of the population at the time " Was that in response to my question about do you consider other confederate generals and leaders being racist? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Fuck ya course they were as was three quarters of the population at the time Was that in response to my question about do you consider other confederate generals and leaders being racist?" Ya it was without question | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Got too big , the argument is to remove confederate monuments cause they are counted racist , Which I disagree , For them to be racist they must depict a racist person or a racist cause the civil war , neither of which they do. I will 3 facts and if any one can prove me wrong I will get a sledge out and knock them my self , Fact 1 General lee wasn't a racist he had freed his slaves pre war The south did not fight the war to keep slavery when Lincoln was elected he gave a speech which he said Fact 2 "I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so." A month before the civil war did break out southern states had formed the confederate states of America this offer was made to the south an amendment to the constitution Fact 3 The Corwin Amendment is a proposed amendment to the United States Constitution that would shield "domestic institutions" of the states (which in 1861 included slavery) from the constitutional amendment process and from abolition or interference by Congress.It was passed by the 36th Congress on March 2, 1861, and submitted to the state legislatures for ratification. Senator William H. Seward of New York introduced the amendment in the Senate and Representative Thomas Corwin of Ohio introduced it in the House of Representatives. Now if it was slavery that the south wanted they have it take that deal and it's there's , So the confederate states going to war has nothing to do with slavery the north was looking to hold the union together they needed the taxes collected from southern states which at the time was the wealthiest part of America contributing 70 to 80 % of federal taxes , the when the south declared independence the north union left troops at fort sumter which lead to confederate army engaging them there to expel them from the south , If I'm wrong with the facts above I'm wrong but I think they are pretty accurate , every one of the opinions above that you posted singularly on the other thread have been countered and some i believe by a person from that country who know its constitution and laws pretty well.. putting them in one block doesn't change that..are the statements true or not , it was explained to you what the reasoning was when the south submitted the Corwin amendment and you decided to ignore it.. saying that its a fact and that means you are right in your opinion but not looking at what that amendment constituted in relation to maintaining the right to keep slaves is a bit sighted and not very logical.. the reason they wanted to keep slaves was based on economics and prosperity that they had gotten used to and they did not want to jeopardise that.. that's something that is written into all the declarations of secession.. so if you want anyone to say is it a fact that an amendment was proposed then yes it was but you are not looking at the issue properly with any objectivity and i don't feel that whatever you are told that you will amend your view.. enjoy your thread.." ok so we agree that amendment was proposed , If the only reason for war was slavery , this offered amendment would have prevented war ! Why would the south then go to war if they already had been handed what they wanted , | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Out of 55 delegates That signed the Constitutional Convention 27 were slave holders. More than a quarter of the last US presidents were slave holders. George Washington included! Are There enough crane hire firms available. That film National Treasure can be watched in a whole different light now. The Whole of the USA was built on Slavery, even native indians had slaves. Aztecs had slaves Egyptians had slaves, islam had slaves ( daesh still do) Roman empire had slaves, Britain had slaves Where do You stop? Is This all getting out of hand now. Rattle the cage a bit more, poke a stick in a hornets nest. Oh my giddy aunt time for a G and T one thinks. " That's the point where will it stop in the UK Kings Charles II, James II, Queen Anne, and George I were share holders in the south sea company which shipped the slaves to the US , will we start taking these statutes down now too , The words " The south will rise again " are springing to mind the rite to bare arms and a lot of militias in southern states , there is an insurrection upon us and no one seams to see it ,these statutes being removed is a direct treat to there heritage and it won't go unnoticed , | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Fuck ya course they were as was three quarters of the population at the time Was that in response to my question about do you consider other confederate generals and leaders being racist? Ya it was without question " You said in your OP " the argument is to remove confederate monuments cause they are counted racist , Which I disagree , For them to be racist they must depict a racist person or a racist cause the civil war... " You have stated that other generals and leaders were racist, therfore would you support their status being renamed? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Fuck ya course they were as was three quarters of the population at the time Was that in response to my question about do you consider other confederate generals and leaders being racist? Ya it was without question You said in your OP " the argument is to remove confederate monuments cause they are counted racist , Which I disagree , For them to be racist they must depict a racist person or a racist cause the civil war... " You have stated that other generals and leaders were racist, therfore would you support their status being renamed? " how do you mean rename them ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Fuck ya course they were as was three quarters of the population at the time Was that in response to my question about do you consider other confederate generals and leaders being racist? Ya it was without question You said in your OP " the argument is to remove confederate monuments cause they are counted racist , Which I disagree , For them to be racist they must depict a racist person or a racist cause the civil war... " You have stated that other generals and leaders were racist, therfore would you support their status being renamed? how do you mean rename them ? " Sorry, brain fart. Would you support military bases being renamed, such as Fort Bragg, Fort Polk etc. And statues of others being pulled down. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Fuck ya course they were as was three quarters of the population at the time Was that in response to my question about do you consider other confederate generals and leaders being racist? Ya it was without question You said in your OP " the argument is to remove confederate monuments cause they are counted racist , Which I disagree , For them to be racist they must depict a racist person or a racist cause the civil war... " You have stated that other generals and leaders were racist, therfore would you support their status being renamed? how do you mean rename them ? Sorry, brain fart. Would you support military bases being renamed, such as Fort Bragg, Fort Polk etc. And statues of others being pulled down. " Renaming military bases, roads , streets parks,schools ant physical change , the removal or destruction of monuments and statues is a total different thing , when you pull down or destroy a monument its willfully destroying a piece of history history good or bad should be preserved ,good history to show what is possible , and if it's bad let it be a reminder of what went wrong reminder not to go back there again , leaving them where they are ant going to cause problems ok a few politicians may not get reelected , , | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Fuck ya course they were as was three quarters of the population at the time Was that in response to my question about do you consider other confederate generals and leaders being racist? Ya it was without question You said in your OP " the argument is to remove confederate monuments cause they are counted racist , Which I disagree , For them to be racist they must depict a racist person or a racist cause the civil war... " You have stated that other generals and leaders were racist, therfore would you support their status being renamed? how do you mean rename them ? Sorry, brain fart. Would you support military bases being renamed, such as Fort Bragg, Fort Polk etc. And statues of others being pulled down. Renaming military bases, roads , streets parks,schools ant physical change , the removal or destruction of monuments and statues is a total different thing , when you pull down or destroy a monument its willfully destroying a piece of history history good or bad should be preserved ,good history to show what is possible , and if it's bad let it be a reminder of what went wrong reminder not to go back there again , leaving them where they are ant going to cause problems ok a few politicians may not get reelected , , " Oh, so it's got absolutely nothing to do with the racism that you mentioned in your OP then? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Fuck ya course they were as was three quarters of the population at the time Was that in response to my question about do you consider other confederate generals and leaders being racist? Ya it was without question You said in your OP " the argument is to remove confederate monuments cause they are counted racist , Which I disagree , For them to be racist they must depict a racist person or a racist cause the civil war... " You have stated that other generals and leaders were racist, therfore would you support their status being renamed? how do you mean rename them ? Sorry, brain fart. Would you support military bases being renamed, such as Fort Bragg, Fort Polk etc. And statues of others being pulled down. Renaming military bases, roads , streets parks,schools ant physical change , the removal or destruction of monuments and statues is a total different thing , when you pull down or destroy a monument its willfully destroying a piece of history history good or bad should be preserved ,good history to show what is possible , and if it's bad let it be a reminder of what went wrong reminder not to go back there again , leaving them where they are ant going to cause problems ok a few politicians may not get reelected , , " What if the descendants of slaves dont want to be reminded of slavery every day they walk past the monument on their way to work.Just like general lee you've not once considered the opinions of African Americans.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Fuck ya course they were as was three quarters of the population at the time Was that in response to my question about do you consider other confederate generals and leaders being racist? Ya it was without question You said in your OP " the argument is to remove confederate monuments cause they are counted racist , Which I disagree , For them to be racist they must depict a racist person or a racist cause the civil war... " You have stated that other generals and leaders were racist, therfore would you support their status being renamed? how do you mean rename them ? Sorry, brain fart. Would you support military bases being renamed, such as Fort Bragg, Fort Polk etc. And statues of others being pulled down. Renaming military bases, roads , streets parks,schools ant physical change , the removal or destruction of monuments and statues is a total different thing , when you pull down or destroy a monument its willfully destroying a piece of history history good or bad should be preserved ,good history to show what is possible , and if it's bad let it be a reminder of what went wrong reminder not to go back there again , leaving them where they are ant going to cause problems ok a few politicians may not get reelected , , What if the descendants of slaves dont want to be reminded of slavery every day they walk past the monument on their way to work.Just like general lee you've not once considered the opinions of African Americans. "Oh get an education. you snowflake. The fact is the USA stole the land, so what, every other town in the north ends in irk why because of the viking invaders. So where is my reparations from Norway. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Fuck ya course they were as was three quarters of the population at the time Was that in response to my question about do you consider other confederate generals and leaders being racist? Ya it was without question You said in your OP " the argument is to remove confederate monuments cause they are counted racist , Which I disagree , For them to be racist they must depict a racist person or a racist cause the civil war... " You have stated that other generals and leaders were racist, therfore would you support their status being renamed? how do you mean rename them ? Sorry, brain fart. Would you support military bases being renamed, such as Fort Bragg, Fort Polk etc. And statues of others being pulled down. Renaming military bases, roads , streets parks,schools ant physical change , the removal or destruction of monuments and statues is a total different thing , when you pull down or destroy a monument its willfully destroying a piece of history history good or bad should be preserved ,good history to show what is possible , and if it's bad let it be a reminder of what went wrong reminder not to go back there again , leaving them where they are ant going to cause problems ok a few politicians may not get reelected , , Oh, so it's got absolutely nothing to do with the racism that you mentioned in your OP then? " The statues don't shows discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, which it would have to do to be racist , If it was General lee trampling over slaves in chains then it's racist , do any of them depict any thing like that ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Fuck ya course they were as was three quarters of the population at the time Was that in response to my question about do you consider other confederate generals and leaders being racist? Ya it was without question You said in your OP " the argument is to remove confederate monuments cause they are counted racist , Which I disagree , For them to be racist they must depict a racist person or a racist cause the civil war... " You have stated that other generals and leaders were racist, therfore would you support their status being renamed? how do you mean rename them ? Sorry, brain fart. Would you support military bases being renamed, such as Fort Bragg, Fort Polk etc. And statues of others being pulled down. Renaming military bases, roads , streets parks,schools ant physical change , the removal or destruction of monuments and statues is a total different thing , when you pull down or destroy a monument its willfully destroying a piece of history history good or bad should be preserved ,good history to show what is possible , and if it's bad let it be a reminder of what went wrong reminder not to go back there again , leaving them where they are ant going to cause problems ok a few politicians may not get reelected , , What if the descendants of slaves dont want to be reminded of slavery every day they walk past the monument on their way to work.Just like general lee you've not once considered the opinions of African Americans.
Oh get an education. you snowflake.
The fact is the USA stole the land, so what, every other town in the north ends in irk why because of the viking invaders.
So where is my reparations from Norway."Do you need a hug you seem so easily triggered. Untwist your panties.   | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Fuck ya course they were as was three quarters of the population at the time Was that in response to my question about do you consider other confederate generals and leaders being racist? Ya it was without question You said in your OP " the argument is to remove confederate monuments cause they are counted racist , Which I disagree , For them to be racist they must depict a racist person or a racist cause the civil war... " You have stated that other generals and leaders were racist, therfore would you support their status being renamed? how do you mean rename them ? Sorry, brain fart. Would you support military bases being renamed, such as Fort Bragg, Fort Polk etc. And statues of others being pulled down. Renaming military bases, roads , streets parks,schools ant physical change , the removal or destruction of monuments and statues is a total different thing , when you pull down or destroy a monument its willfully destroying a piece of history history good or bad should be preserved ,good history to show what is possible , and if it's bad let it be a reminder of what went wrong reminder not to go back there again , leaving them where they are ant going to cause problems ok a few politicians may not get reelected , , What if the descendants of slaves dont want to be reminded of slavery every day they walk past the monument on their way to work.Just like general lee you've not once considered the opinions of African Americans. "There is a lot of people of irish decent that have UK passports that don't want to be reminder of hundreds of years of occupation , that mean the UK is taking down statues on Nelson , Cromwell , Wellington , and so on ??? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I agree with Trumps view and I'm more annoyed with his drawback. The women who got killed was with a mob trying to stop the KKK from speaking, KKK are noted as being a white suprematist, terror organisation. Why? Let them have their march and that's it. The reason is KKK are speaking more sense than the liberal left, They have moral high ground by right, the liberal left are always right. The KKK, they're saying BLM is a racist organisation, they're right and they are a racist organisation but doesn't make them wrong, BLM are a racist organisation and killed over 100 people for being white. The fact is according to the new liberal left, white men follow the law, black/muslim men do what they like and they are murdering, raping children. Get through the nogging there is much more deaths to come on the white side and by a magnitude of 50 on black and muslim side unless someone put a lid on it." Got any proof that BLM have killed 100 people? http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/14/fbi-and-dhs-warned-of-growing-threat-from-white-supremacists-months-ago/amp/ Here is proof of the 49 murders by white supremacists. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Fuck ya course they were as was three quarters of the population at the time Was that in response to my question about do you consider other confederate generals and leaders being racist? Ya it was without question You said in your OP " the argument is to remove confederate monuments cause they are counted racist , Which I disagree , For them to be racist they must depict a racist person or a racist cause the civil war... " You have stated that other generals and leaders were racist, therfore would you support their status being renamed? how do you mean rename them ? Sorry, brain fart. Would you support military bases being renamed, such as Fort Bragg, Fort Polk etc. And statues of others being pulled down. Renaming military bases, roads , streets parks,schools ant physical change , the removal or destruction of monuments and statues is a total different thing , when you pull down or destroy a monument its willfully destroying a piece of history history good or bad should be preserved ,good history to show what is possible , and if it's bad let it be a reminder of what went wrong reminder not to go back there again , leaving them where they are ant going to cause problems ok a few politicians may not get reelected , , What if the descendants of slaves dont want to be reminded of slavery every day they walk past the monument on their way to work.Just like general lee you've not once considered the opinions of African Americans.
Oh get an education. you snowflake.
The fact is the USA stole the land, so what, every other town in the north ends in irk why because of the viking invaders.
So where is my reparations from Norway. Do you need a hug you seem so easily triggered.
Untwist your panties. "I hope you're joking, I really do. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Fuck ya course they were as was three quarters of the population at the time Was that in response to my question about do you consider other confederate generals and leaders being racist? Ya it was without question You said in your OP " the argument is to remove confederate monuments cause they are counted racist , Which I disagree , For them to be racist they must depict a racist person or a racist cause the civil war... " You have stated that other generals and leaders were racist, therfore would you support their status being renamed? how do you mean rename them ? Sorry, brain fart. Would you support military bases being renamed, such as Fort Bragg, Fort Polk etc. And statues of others being pulled down. Renaming military bases, roads , streets parks,schools ant physical change , the removal or destruction of monuments and statues is a total different thing , when you pull down or destroy a monument its willfully destroying a piece of history history good or bad should be preserved ,good history to show what is possible , and if it's bad let it be a reminder of what went wrong reminder not to go back there again , leaving them where they are ant going to cause problems ok a few politicians may not get reelected , , Oh, so it's got absolutely nothing to do with the racism that you mentioned in your OP then? The statues don't shows discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, which it would have to do to be racist , If it was General lee trampling over slaves in chains then it's racist , do any of them depict any thing like that ? " I asked if other statues were of racists and you said "Fuck ya course they were" You said "For them [the statues] to be racist they must depict a racist person" your words OP. You think the statues are racist | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"There is one of Jefferson with a slave on his knees in front of him that's racist " The rest your going to have a job to decide where to draw the line , Like the there is statues of slave traders do they go too ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The idea that Lee wasn't racist as all hell is fucking hilariously wrong. When people cite his letter where he calls slavery a "moral & political evil" he then goes onto claim "The blacks are immeasurably better off here than in Africa, morally, socially & physically. The painful discipline they are undergoing, is necessary for their instruction as a race, & I hope will prepare & lead them to better things." Lee believed that slavery was bad for white people, good for black people and the idea that black people might not want to be slaves didn't enter into it. And even if this myth of the kindly General Lee were true, it doesn't really matter. The statues in question were hastily erected in the 60s as a giant fuck you to the civil rights movement - that's their purpose, that's why they're important to white nationalists and that's why they have to go. So, we can stop pretending this revisionist version of history, and those that espouse it are worth paying attention to. " are you happy then for all slavers statues to go then ?? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The idea that Lee wasn't racist as all hell is fucking hilariously wrong. When people cite his letter where he calls slavery a "moral & political evil" he then goes onto claim "The blacks are immeasurably better off here than in Africa, morally, socially & physically. The painful discipline they are undergoing, is necessary for their instruction as a race, & I hope will prepare & lead them to better things." Lee believed that slavery was bad for white people, good for black people and the idea that black people might not want to be slaves didn't enter into it. And even if this myth of the kindly General Lee were true, it doesn't really matter. The statues in question were hastily erected in the 60s as a giant fuck you to the civil rights movement - that's their purpose, that's why they're important to white nationalists and that's why they have to go. So, we can stop pretending this revisionist version of history, and those that espouse it are worth paying attention to. are you happy then for all slavers statues to go then ??" and for statues of the ones that lived off the lives of slaves | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"There is one of Jefferson with a slave on his knees in front of him that's racist The rest your going to have a job to decide where to draw the line , Like the there is statues of slave traders do they go too ? " The line keeps moving with the zeitgeist .Keep up and stay on the right side. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm happy for all statues that celebrate the confederacy to go. Because, as previously stated, they're important to white nationalists and Nazis, and only exist because said people were trying to intimidate the civil rights movement. And traitors don't deserve statues." This is true.Also the only flag we need to remember is the white one they waved. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm happy for all statues that celebrate the confederacy to go. Because, as previously stated, they're important to white nationalists and Nazis, and only exist because said people were trying to intimidate the civil rights movement. And traitors don't deserve statues." So in your book it's ok to have statues of slavers then ?? And not for soldiers ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm happy for all statues that celebrate the confederacy to go. Because, as previously stated, they're important to white nationalists and Nazis, and only exist because said people were trying to intimidate the civil rights movement. And traitors don't deserve statues. This is true.Also the only flag we need to remember is the white one they waved. "you can't even answer one question I asked if the slavers statues should go as well ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm happy for all statues that celebrate the confederacy to go. Because, as previously stated, they're important to white nationalists and Nazis, and only exist because said people were trying to intimidate the civil rights movement. And traitors don't deserve statues. So in your book it's ok to have statues of slavers then ?? And not for soldiers ? " What in the fresh hell do you even think you're saying? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm happy for all statues that celebrate the confederacy to go. Because, as previously stated, they're important to white nationalists and Nazis, and only exist because said people were trying to intimidate the civil rights movement. And traitors don't deserve statues. This is true.Also the only flag we need to remember is the white one they waved. you can't even answer one question I asked if the slavers statues should go as well ? "You are continuing to be an apologists for Confederate ideology. As was said previously the only people who champion Confederate causes are racists, bigots and/or the completely uneducated and ignorant in society. I am fairly sure you don't want to be aligned with any of those descriptions. There really is nothing clever or cool about supporting anything at all that has Confederate associations. This is patently obvious from here in the UK, but if you spent any time, anywhere in the USA and specifically in the Carolina's, Louisiana or Arkansas you would have an appreciation about just how raw the association is between white supremacy and Confederacy ideology. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If they dragged a country into civil war for slavery , this argument is worth having since the war was not over slavery it should not be a question , , I'll put same question to you that I asked the other two that won't answer , should there be statues to slavers and slave traders keep and these removed ??? " What on earth are you trying to argue about? Take a step back, a deep breath and think about whether your focus on nuances is reLly relevant when your entire argument appears to be supporting Confederate ideology. You are not doing yourself any favours. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If they dragged a country into civil war for slavery , this argument is worth having since the war was not over slavery it should not be a question , , I'll put same question to you that I asked the other two that won't answer , should there be statues to slavers and slave traders keep and these removed ??? " You have said in your posts that if the people the statues depict are racist, then the statues are racist. You have said many of the generals and confederate leaders were indeed racist. So why do you want to keep something that you know is racist? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If they dragged a country into civil war for slavery , this argument is worth having since the war was not over slavery it should not be a question , , I'll put same question to you that I asked the other two that won't answer , should there be statues to slavers and slave traders keep and these removed ??? You have said in your posts that if the people the statues depict are racist, then the statues are racist. You have said many of the generals and confederate leaders were indeed racist. So why do you want to keep something that you know is racist? " And the question I asked you going to reply to that ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If they dragged a country into civil war for slavery , this argument is worth having since the war was not over slavery it should not be a question , , I'll put same question to you that I asked the other two that won't answer , should there be statues to slavers and slave traders keep and these removed ??? You have said in your posts that if the people the statues depict are racist, then the statues are racist. You have said many of the generals and confederate leaders were indeed racist. So why do you want to keep something that you know is racist? And the question I asked you going to reply to that ? " The American civil war was an attack on the US. You won't find many statues to Hitler or Napoleon in public places in the UK. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If they dragged a country into civil war for slavery , this argument is worth having since the war was not over slavery it should not be a question , , I'll put same question to you that I asked the other two that won't answer , should there be statues to slavers and slave traders keep and these removed ??? You have said in your posts that if the people the statues depict are racist, then the statues are racist. You have said many of the generals and confederate leaders were indeed racist. So why do you want to keep something that you know is racist? And the question I asked you going to reply to that ? The American civil war was an attack on the US. You won't find many statues to Hitler or Napoleon in public places in the UK. " that's not what I asked I asked should there be statues to slavers and slave traders keep and these removed ??? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If they dragged a country into civil war for slavery , this argument is worth having since the war was not over slavery it should not be a question , , I'll put same question to you that I asked the other two that won't answer , should there be statues to slavers and slave traders keep and these removed ??? You have said in your posts that if the people the statues depict are racist, then the statues are racist. You have said many of the generals and confederate leaders were indeed racist. So why do you want to keep something that you know is racist? And the question I asked you going to reply to that ? The American civil war was an attack on the US. You won't find many statues to Hitler or Napoleon in public places in the UK. that's not what I asked I asked should there be statues to slavers and slave traders keep and these removed ???" What do you think? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If they dragged a country into civil war for slavery , this argument is worth having since the war was not over slavery it should not be a question , , I'll put same question to you that I asked the other two that won't answer , should there be statues to slavers and slave traders keep and these removed ??? You have said in your posts that if the people the statues depict are racist, then the statues are racist. You have said many of the generals and confederate leaders were indeed racist. So why do you want to keep something that you know is racist? And the question I asked you going to reply to that ? The American civil war was an attack on the US. You won't find many statues to Hitler or Napoleon in public places in the UK. that's not what I asked I asked should there be statues to slavers and slave traders keep and these removed ??? What do you think? " I honestly don't know what you think ! Should the statues of the slavers and slave traders go ???? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If they dragged a country into civil war for slavery , this argument is worth having since the war was not over slavery it should not be a question , , I'll put same question to you that I asked the other two that won't answer , should there be statues to slavers and slave traders keep and these removed ??? You have said in your posts that if the people the statues depict are racist, then the statues are racist. You have said many of the generals and confederate leaders were indeed racist. So why do you want to keep something that you know is racist? And the question I asked you going to reply to that ? The American civil war was an attack on the US. You won't find many statues to Hitler or Napoleon in public places in the UK. that's not what I asked I asked should there be statues to slavers and slave traders keep and these removed ??? What do you think? I honestly don't know what you think ! Should the statues of the slavers and slave traders go ????" Do you think they should go? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Is it your opinion that it's ok to have statues of slavers ???? It's a very simple , " I'd rather not have statues of people in general, tbh. But I see this clumsy gambit of yours coming a mile off. Say yes and you shriek "well what about this royal family member something something East India Company, aha!" Which isn't as clever as you'd think - anyone else you can point to as what you'd call a slaver doesn't share the defining characteristics of people the statues in question are commemorating, namely "racist fucks that started and lost a war for the right to own people" And, indeed the statues of others that you would point to as being just the same as the Confederate ones, aren't. For a start they not cheap trash, hastily erected to remind black people of their place, the those statues aren't important to white nationalists and Nazis in the same way Confederate statues are. Really this entire charade is contemptible. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I would take out the statues of the people involved in slave trade without question ! Would you do the same ?? " Ok, but you think Lee should have a statue, why do you think he deserves a statue? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"My original post answers that question Now I asked you a simple question 3 times here it is the 4th Would you keep statues of slavers and slave traders ,? ? Can you manage to answer the above question ?? If you don't we have to assume you would be happy to keep them , " You didn't say in your opening post why you admire Lee and think that there are statues of him. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"My original post answers that question Now I asked you a simple question 3 times here it is the 4th Would you keep statues of slavers and slave traders ,? ? Can you manage to answer the above question ?? If you don't we have to assume you would be happy to keep them , You didn't say in your opening post why you admire Lee and think that there are statues of him. " I admire him because he put his money where his mouth was , he freed his slaves walked away from a business his plantation to put his life on the line to fight to free the confederate state from a union that was screwing them ! Now the 5 th time would you keep statues of the people involved in slave trade slavers and slave traders ?? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"My original post answers that question Now I asked you a simple question 3 times here it is the 4th Would you keep statues of slavers and slave traders ,? ? Can you manage to answer the above question ?? If you don't we have to assume you would be happy to keep them , You didn't say in your opening post why you admire Lee and think that there are statues of him. " Now don't be a chicken answer the question ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"My original post answers that question Now I asked you a simple question 3 times here it is the 4th Would you keep statues of slavers and slave traders ,? ? Can you manage to answer the above question ?? If you don't we have to assume you would be happy to keep them , You didn't say in your opening post why you admire Lee and think that there are statues of him. I admire him because he put his money where his mouth was , he freed his slaves walked away from a business his plantation to put his life on the line to fight to free the confederate state from a union that was screwing them ! Now the 5 th time would you keep statues of the people involved in slave trade slavers and slave traders ?? " Very Sad...You've failed here .Youve been weighed and measured and found wanting. That's a shame i expected more.Free hug if you need one.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"My original post answers that question Now I asked you a simple question 3 times here it is the 4th Would you keep statues of slavers and slave traders ,? ? Can you manage to answer the above question ?? If you don't we have to assume you would be happy to keep them , You didn't say in your opening post why you admire Lee and think that there are statues of him. I admire him because he put his money where his mouth was , he freed his slaves walked away from a business his plantation to put his life on the line to fight to free the confederate state from a union that was screwing them ! Now the 5 th time would you keep statues of the people involved in slave trade slavers and slave traders ?? " You mean the slaves that he inherited, which in the will which gifted them the Lee said that the slaves should be freed after 5 years? So he got a good 5 years of slavery out of them, and then released them as he had been told to do on the conditions that the white man had specified in the will. Are they the slaves you're talking about? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm the sad one that's hilarious , You BOBBANGS and Clcc , are the sad ones , you won't even agree that slavers and slave traders are wrong and there statues are a symbol of oppression , " What i thought they had said there wrong all along its YOU thats been arguing for these statues to stay...not only with those 2 but everyone else thats posted....so much you even stole the thread  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm the sad one that's hilarious , You BOBBANGS and Clcc , are the sad ones , you won't even agree that slavers and slave traders are wrong and there statues are a symbol of oppression , What i thought they had said there wrong all along its YOU thats been arguing for these statues to stay...not only with those 2 but everyone else thats posted....so much you even stole the thread "Another one that won't say that statues of slavers and slave traders are symbols of oppression | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm the sad one that's hilarious , You BOBBANGS and Clcc , are the sad ones , you won't even agree that slavers and slave traders are wrong and there statues are a symbol of oppression , What i thought they had said there wrong all along its YOU thats been arguing for these statues to stay...not only with those 2 but everyone else thats posted....so much you even stole the thread
Another one that won't say that statues of slavers and slave traders are symbols of oppression "From the last thread the one you stole...the one I ANSWERED YOU ON....im finding it hard to take you seriously tbh... " "Apparently my autocorrect thinks "wasn't" should be "wash" Ok step by step Pre war Lincoln inaugural speech Lincoln said I quote "I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so. Do you agree wit this bit Only yes or no answers Why move away from the argument you have been having for the past three days because first I was told the statute was being removed cause he racist then they war was over slavery , my point is statute should stay because there ant a valid reason no matter how you look at it to remove them " Nah your flip flopping about fella...they do represent raciest views....that's why all the KKK and other neanderthals were protesting about them being removed...is that so hard to understand Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"My original post answers that question Now I asked you a simple question 3 times here it is the 4th Would you keep statues of slavers and slave traders ,? ? Can you manage to answer the above question ?? If you don't we have to assume you would be happy to keep them , You didn't say in your opening post why you admire Lee and think that there are statues of him. I admire him because he put his money where his mouth was , he freed his slaves walked away from a business his plantation to put his life on the line to fight to free the confederate state from a union that was screwing them ! Now the 5 th time would you keep statues of the people involved in slave trade slavers and slave traders ?? You mean the slaves that he inherited, which in the will which gifted them the Lee said that the slaves should be freed after 5 years? So he got a good 5 years of slavery out of them, and then released them as he had been told to do on the conditions that the white man had specified in the will. Are they the slaves you're talking about?" Are they the slaves you're talking about? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm the sad one that's hilarious , You BOBBANGS and Clcc , are the sad ones , you won't even agree that slavers and slave traders are wrong and there statues are a symbol of oppression , " Poor old General lee would be turning in his grave at your lack of knowledge. I think ive come up with a solution. Instead of removing the statues of him on horse back, just change the plaque to read. Came second. Or maybe something simple like.Racist on horseback. You get to keep your beloved statue and everyone else gets to smile. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
Whats not to like. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You can argue that the confederacy has negative connotations in regards to slavery. However I look at it like this. Why hasn't the removal of the statues happened before? Why is it only RECENTLY the Confederate flag has been banned? I'll continue about the statue in a moment. People use the confederate flag to highlight they are from the Southern states. The stereotypical redneck will wave a confederate flag, does that make them a racist? Do you not think that some black people in the south were waving it to highlight their southern heritage? The only reason people assume it's a racist icon is because when you see it in the media, it's normally being waved by far right, anti-immigration supporting isolationists or white supremacists. With regards to the statue; do I think you should remove them? Because it's a statue going back to a time of us vs them yes, especially in this chaotic presidency of Trump. But don't destroy them. Put them in specialised Civil War museums. We have museums all over the world with Nazi memorabilia, does that mean you support nazism? No. Does it mean you want to educate people who weren't there nearly 80 years ago about the nazis? Perhaps. History is written by the winners. If history says Gen. Lee was a racist then that's what you will be taught. Does anyone tell you about the fact Britain had concentration camps in China and South Africa? I doubt it. Or are schools taught about how Cromwell decimated both England and Ireland? Nope. Dishearteningly, Trump said one thing I agree with. Both sides had faults. That's it. But if you put one part far right, one part far left, one part politically aligned news agencies that manipulate your thinking the other one is wrong and wants to destroy your culture, and two parts extreme hate, you'll get shit like extremists ramming cars into people indiscriminately for their cause which they don't even understand." I can agree with some if this.The Confederate statues and monuments, like the one of Robert E. Lee in Charlottesville, are blatant symbols of hate, discrimination and racism. When we honor and celebrate the Confederacy in public arenas, we validate and empower the people who wish to perpetuate the hatred and division that it represents. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So do you agree on the statues of slavers and slave traders ? Should be removed as well ?" How can I put it. Slavery is bad, without question, but just because the people in the Union didn't have slaves in the north, there is nothing saying they couldn't invest in farms in the south. If they were truly against slavery and the bondage of black people, wouldn't the civil war have happened long before? If we say that the US Civil War was about Slavery exclusively, name me three other wars where someone else fought to liberate slaves. Resources or religion. The only things that cause war. The Union needed the southerners resources, which in this case is profits of slavery if not the slaves themselves, to boost their coffers. One thing that a lot of people also forget about the transatlantic slave trade is that white Europeans were used as slaves as punishment. If they where shipped off to Australia or America as a punishment it doesn't matter, they weren't going for a voyage where they might return. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So do you agree on the statues of slavers and slave traders ? Should be removed as well ? How can I put it. Slavery is bad, without question, but just because the people in the Union didn't have slaves in the north, there is nothing saying they couldn't invest in farms in the south. If they were truly against slavery and the bondage of black people, wouldn't the civil war have happened long before? If we say that the US Civil War was about Slavery exclusively, name me three other wars where someone else fought to liberate slaves. Resources or religion. The only things that cause war. The Union needed the southerners resources, which in this case is profits of slavery if not the slaves themselves, to boost their coffers. One thing that a lot of people also forget about the transatlantic slave trade is that white Europeans were used as slaves as punishment. If they where shipped off to Australia or America as a punishment it doesn't matter, they weren't going for a voyage where they might return." At least you agree the war wasn't about slavery | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So do you agree on the statues of slavers and slave traders ? Should be removed as well ?" Are you referring to Statues of Jefferson. Yes, Jefferson participated in the violent and dehumanizing institution of slavery and, as a man of great intellect, he should be held accountable for that. However, equating Jefferson and Lee's legacies as many, including Trump, have done in the wake of Charlottesville disregards key differences in the contributions that each man made to America and it history. Jefferson worked to unite the early republic; Lee fought on behalf of the Confederate states seeking to maintain slavery. Jefferson wanted to move the country forward; Lee became a hero of the "lost cause" version of Civil War history, which glorified the country's dark ages at a time when they needed light. While Jefferson sought to end slavery in the original draft of the Declaration of Independence, Lee died feeling it was his supreme right to own and oppress another people. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So do you agree on the statues of slavers and slave traders ? Should be removed as well ? Are you referring to Statues of Jefferson. Yes, Jefferson participated in the violent and dehumanizing institution of slavery and, as a man of great intellect, he should be held accountable for that. However, equating Jefferson and Lee's legacies as many, including Trump, have done in the wake of Charlottesville disregards key differences in the contributions that each man made to America and it history. Jefferson worked to unite the early republic; Lee fought on behalf of the Confederate states seeking to maintain slavery. Jefferson wanted to move the country forward; Lee became a hero of the "lost cause" version of Civil War history, which glorified the country's dark ages at a time when they needed light. While Jefferson sought to end slavery in the original draft of the Declaration of Independence, Lee died feeling it was his supreme right to own and oppress another people. "How about we start with Edward Colston statues and move from there he is responsible for the loss of 20,000 in transport alone | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So do you agree on the statues of slavers and slave traders ? Should be removed as well ? Are you referring to Statues of Jefferson. Yes, Jefferson participated in the violent and dehumanizing institution of slavery and, as a man of great intellect, he should be held accountable for that. However, equating Jefferson and Lee's legacies as many, including Trump, have done in the wake of Charlottesville disregards key differences in the contributions that each man made to America and it history. Jefferson worked to unite the early republic; Lee fought on behalf of the Confederate states seeking to maintain slavery. Jefferson wanted to move the country forward; Lee became a hero of the "lost cause" version of Civil War history, which glorified the country's dark ages at a time when they needed light. While Jefferson sought to end slavery in the original draft of the Declaration of Independence, Lee died feeling it was his supreme right to own and oppress another people. "You free say... 2,000,000 slaves from why they've known all their life. What do you do to A) house, feed, basically care for them? B) those that didn't want freedom? C) freed slaves that chose to fight for the confederacy? Ultimately you're forcing people to choose something that you have no way to support them because all the resources you need from the south will ultimately have to go on those you've displaced from, for lack of a better term, home. You end up with nothing but say to the 2,000,000 you've "freed" that they're not slaves but now they have to pay you for rescuing them, even if they didn't want rescuing, because you've had to build new homes. You have to remember this was a time when not even poor white Americans had a vote. So the money men, all knowing how to make money, would be about to come into large amounts of it, your congress for example would be full of rich white guys whose family fortune probably had slave blood on it somewhere, wouldn't be about to hand it back out. Nobody on either side really gave a damn about the suffering of other people. We still don't as a species. We only care about what happened then because we don't have to solve the problems they had then. Yes it was horrendous but we don't care about the fact to this day, slavery still exists. Do you care that the little chips in your phones, for all there power, have materials where the people who make them get pennys for mining them? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So do you agree on the statues of slavers and slave traders ? Should be removed as well ?" You still haven't grasped the difference between people who have statues BECAUSE they're slavers and slave traders and people who have them in spite of that, have you? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So do you agree on the statues of slavers and slave traders ? Should be removed as well ? How can I put it. Slavery is bad, without question, but just because the people in the Union didn't have slaves in the north, there is nothing saying they couldn't invest in farms in the south. If they were truly against slavery and the bondage of black people, wouldn't the civil war have happened long before? If we say that the US Civil War was about Slavery exclusively, name me three other wars where someone else fought to liberate slaves. Resources or religion. The only things that cause war. The Union needed the southerners resources, which in this case is profits of slavery if not the slaves themselves, to boost their coffers. One thing that a lot of people also forget about the transatlantic slave trade is that white Europeans were used as slaves as punishment. If they where shipped off to Australia or America as a punishment it doesn't matter, they weren't going for a voyage where they might return. At least you agree the war wasn't about slavery " It was, the very states the formed the confederacy cited slavery as the reason why they left the union, so you're wrong, you've always been wrong. end of story. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So do you agree on the statues of slavers and slave traders ? Should be removed as well ? Are you referring to Statues of Jefferson. Yes, Jefferson participated in the violent and dehumanizing institution of slavery and, as a man of great intellect, he should be held accountable for that. However, equating Jefferson and Lee's legacies as many, including Trump, have done in the wake of Charlottesville disregards key differences in the contributions that each man made to America and it history. Jefferson worked to unite the early republic; Lee fought on behalf of the Confederate states seeking to maintain slavery. Jefferson wanted to move the country forward; Lee became a hero of the "lost cause" version of Civil War history, which glorified the country's dark ages at a time when they needed light. While Jefferson sought to end slavery in the original draft of the Declaration of Independence, Lee died feeling it was his supreme right to own and oppress another people.
You free say... 2,000,000 slaves from why they've known all their life. What do you do to
A) house, feed, basically care for them?
B) those that didn't want freedom?
C) freed slaves that chose to fight for the confederacy?
Ultimately you're forcing people to choose something that you have no way to support them because all the resources you need from the south will ultimately have to go on those you've displaced from, for lack of a better term, home. You end up with nothing but say to the 2,000,000 you've "freed" that they're not slaves but now they have to pay you for rescuing them, even if they didn't want rescuing, because you've had to build new homes.
You have to remember this was a time when not even poor white Americans had a vote. So the money men, all knowing how to make money, would be about to come into large amounts of it, your congress for example would be full of rich white guys whose family fortune probably had slave blood on it somewhere, wouldn't be about to hand it back out.
Nobody on either side really gave a damn about the suffering of other people. We still don't as a species. We only care about what happened then because we don't have to solve the problems they had then. Yes it was horrendous but we don't care about the fact to this day, slavery still exists. Do you care that the little chips in your phones, for all there power, have materials where the people who make them get pennys for mining them?"You should know better than post something like this , it's not what people here want to hear | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So do you agree on the statues of slavers and slave traders ? Should be removed as well ? How can I put it. Slavery is bad, without question, but just because the people in the Union didn't have slaves in the north, there is nothing saying they couldn't invest in farms in the south. If they were truly against slavery and the bondage of black people, wouldn't the civil war have happened long before? If we say that the US Civil War was about Slavery exclusively, name me three other wars where someone else fought to liberate slaves. Resources or religion. The only things that cause war. The Union needed the southerners resources, which in this case is profits of slavery if not the slaves themselves, to boost their coffers. One thing that a lot of people also forget about the transatlantic slave trade is that white Europeans were used as slaves as punishment. If they where shipped off to Australia or America as a punishment it doesn't matter, they weren't going for a voyage where they might return. At least you agree the war wasn't about slavery It was, the very states the formed the confederacy cited slavery as the reason why they left the union, so you're wrong, you've always been wrong. end of story." I really feel sorry for you , your mix of ignorance and arrogance astounds me , If you can manage it ! please read The Corwin Amendment to the United States Constitution that would shield "domestic institutions" of the states (which in 1861 included slavery) it's at the top of the page , this was offered to the south to avoid war , but the south was fighting for far more than slavery they were carrying the majority of the tax burden , propping up the north , which was why they formed the confederate states of America , Lincoln own instigation speech , said he had no right legally to abolish slavery in states where it already exists , | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It was over 150 years ago in one of the colonies. Education, morals, beliefs and so on then were massively different to today so we can't judge those people by todays standards. Plus no one alive today is directly oppressed as a direct result. In other words; Who gives a fuck
"former colonies , let's keep this pc | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So do you agree on the statues of slavers and slave traders ? Should be removed as well ? How can I put it. Slavery is bad, without question, but just because the people in the Union didn't have slaves in the north, there is nothing saying they couldn't invest in farms in the south. If they were truly against slavery and the bondage of black people, wouldn't the civil war have happened long before? If we say that the US Civil War was about Slavery exclusively, name me three other wars where someone else fought to liberate slaves. Resources or religion. The only things that cause war. The Union needed the southerners resources, which in this case is profits of slavery if not the slaves themselves, to boost their coffers. One thing that a lot of people also forget about the transatlantic slave trade is that white Europeans were used as slaves as punishment. If they where shipped off to Australia or America as a punishment it doesn't matter, they weren't going for a voyage where they might return. At least you agree the war wasn't about slavery It was, the very states the formed the confederacy cited slavery as the reason why they left the union, so you're wrong, you've always been wrong. end of story. I really feel sorry for you , your mix of ignorance and arrogance astounds me , If you can manage it ! please read The Corwin Amendment to the United States Constitution that would shield "domestic institutions" of the states (which in 1861 included slavery) it's at the top of the page , this was offered to the south to avoid war , but the south was fighting for far more than slavery they were carrying the majority of the tax burden , propping up the north , which was why they formed the confederate states of America , Lincoln own instigation speech , said he had no right legally to abolish slavery in states where it already exists , " Only one of us is engaging in historical revisionism, so I wouldn't be so quick to printed that it's everyone else who is both ignorant and arrogant. Please, tell us more of how Lincoln's inauguration speech was enough to convince you that slavery would be protected, but not enough to convince the Confederate states who, and this is at least the third time I've corrected you on this, citied the protection of slavery as the reason they were leaving the union. It'll be fucking fascinating, I'm sure. Fiction always is. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" " I really feel sorry for you , your mix of ignorance and arrogance astounds me , If you can manage it ! please read The Corwin Amendment to the United States Constitution that would shield "domestic institutions" of the states (which in 1861 included slavery) it's at the top of the page , this was offered to the south to avoid war , but the south was fighting for far more than slavery they were carrying the majority of the tax burden , propping up the north , which was why they formed the confederate states of America , Lincoln own instigation speech , said he had no right legally to abolish slavery in states where it already exists , "" Right. So when I said the union DIDN'T fight to stop slavery, which you've cited both the Corwin ammendment AND Lincoln's inauguration speech, I was wrong. The then government wasn't against it, which means the civil war wasn't started over slavery. But you then contradict both yours AND my point that it wasn't by saying the confederates say it was over slavery on their part. Clearly if Johnny Reb said it was that, that they're using it as propoganda akin to... I don't know... Hitler saying the Jews were stealing German wealth? Yes I am using extreme points (nazis, sweatshops etc.) but I've not changed my stance about the cause of the civil war, protectionism of resources. Confederacy had the wealth, Union wanted it. Long and short; the Civil War was cause by want/need for resources and some people didn't want to hand it over. Slavery still existed whether it be farms or financial. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So do you agree on the statues of slavers and slave traders ? Should be removed as well ? How can I put it. Slavery is bad, without question, but just because the people in the Union didn't have slaves in the north, there is nothing saying they couldn't invest in farms in the south. If they were truly against slavery and the bondage of black people, wouldn't the civil war have happened long before? If we say that the US Civil War was about Slavery exclusively, name me three other wars where someone else fought to liberate slaves. Resources or religion. The only things that cause war. The Union needed the southerners resources, which in this case is profits of slavery if not the slaves themselves, to boost their coffers. One thing that a lot of people also forget about the transatlantic slave trade is that white Europeans were used as slaves as punishment. If they where shipped off to Australia or America as a punishment it doesn't matter, they weren't going for a voyage where they might return. At least you agree the war wasn't about slavery It was, the very states the formed the confederacy cited slavery as the reason why they left the union, so you're wrong, you've always been wrong. end of story. I really feel sorry for you , your mix of ignorance and arrogance astounds me , If you can manage it ! please read The Corwin Amendment to the United States Constitution that would shield "domestic institutions" of the states (which in 1861 included slavery) it's at the top of the page , this was offered to the south to avoid war , but the south was fighting for far more than slavery they were carrying the majority of the tax burden , propping up the north , which was why they formed the confederate states of America , Lincoln own instigation speech , said he had no right legally to abolish slavery in states where it already exists , Only one of us is engaging in historical revisionism, so I wouldn't be so quick to printed that it's everyone else who is both ignorant and arrogant. Please, tell us more of how Lincoln's inauguration speech was enough to convince you that slavery would be protected, but not enough to convince the Confederate states who, and this is at least the third time I've corrected you on this, citied the protection of slavery as the reason they were leaving the union. It'll be fucking fascinating, I'm sure. Fiction always is. " you say they citied slavery as the reason to leave the union , are you referring to their declarations of secession ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So do you agree on the statues of slavers and slave traders ? Should be removed as well ? How can I put it. Slavery is bad, without question, but just because the people in the Union didn't have slaves in the north, there is nothing saying they couldn't invest in farms in the south. If they were truly against slavery and the bondage of black people, wouldn't the civil war have happened long before? If we say that the US Civil War was about Slavery exclusively, name me three other wars where someone else fought to liberate slaves. Resources or religion. The only things that cause war. The Union needed the southerners resources, which in this case is profits of slavery if not the slaves themselves, to boost their coffers. One thing that a lot of people also forget about the transatlantic slave trade is that white Europeans were used as slaves as punishment. If they where shipped off to Australia or America as a punishment it doesn't matter, they weren't going for a voyage where they might return. At least you agree the war wasn't about slavery It was, the very states the formed the confederacy cited slavery as the reason why they left the union, so you're wrong, you've always been wrong. end of story. I really feel sorry for you , your mix of ignorance and arrogance astounds me , If you can manage it ! please read The Corwin Amendment to the United States Constitution that would shield "domestic institutions" of the states (which in 1861 included slavery) it's at the top of the page , this was offered to the south to avoid war , but the south was fighting for far more than slavery they were carrying the majority of the tax burden , propping up the north , which was why they formed the confederate states of America , Lincoln own instigation speech , said he had no right legally to abolish slavery in states where it already exists , Only one of us is engaging in historical revisionism, so I wouldn't be so quick to printed that it's everyone else who is both ignorant and arrogant. Please, tell us more of how Lincoln's inauguration speech was enough to convince you that slavery would be protected, but not enough to convince the Confederate states who, and this is at least the third time I've corrected you on this, citied the protection of slavery as the reason they were leaving the union. It'll be fucking fascinating, I'm sure. Fiction always is. you say they citied slavery as the reason to leave the union , are you referring to their declarations of secession ? " Is this where you bring up the Texas declaration of secession, pick out the bits about being beset by Mexicans and Indians, and a good measure of old fashioned Texan conspiracy nonsense, and call it a day, without putting any thought as to why they then refer to themselves and the other Confederate states as the "slave holding states" and not the "leaving the union for complicated social and economic reasons states"? To put this in perspective the fucking people who chose to leave the union self identified as "the slave holding states" and your trying to argue that despite their chosen title, this wasn't to do with slavery? Historical revisionism: not even fucking once. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" At least you agree the war wasn't about slavery " Yeah, but it was. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" At least you agree the war wasn't about slavery Yeah, but it was." No but it wasn't , | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yep they are , did you read the post just above you or is it a cast of turn the blind eye it didn't happen , " So if they are indeed the slaves you're talking about, then you know that he freed them in 1862. The civil war started in 1861. So he hadn't freed them before the civil war as you stated in your OP. The same OP where you said you would knock yourself out if you were wrong. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I th I I'll put the question I had that every one dogged up as separate thread ??? "But this wasnt your thread...YOU STOLE it | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I th I I'll put the question I had that every one dogged up as separate thread ???
But this wasnt your thread...YOU STOLE it "I didn't steal it I offered an opinion and got attacked | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I th I I'll put the question I had that every one dogged up as separate thread ???
But this wasnt your thread...YOU STOLE it I didn't steal it I offered an opinion and got attacked "No you stole it....Fabio made the original thread...people stopped talking on it as you wouldnt accept what they were saying...and these were American and probably know a damm lot more of American history than you | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yep they are , did you read the post just above you or is it a cast of turn the blind eye it didn't happen , So if they are indeed the slaves you're talking about, then you know that he freed them in 1862. The civil war started in 1861. So he hadn't freed them before the civil war as you stated in your OP. The same OP where you said you would knock yourself out if you were wrong. "So you are just going to ignore this and start a new tgread instead huh? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yep they are , did you read the post just above you or is it a cast of turn the blind eye it didn't happen , So if they are indeed the slaves you're talking about, then you know that he freed them in 1862. The civil war started in 1861. So he hadn't freed them before the civil war as you stated in your OP. The same OP where you said you would knock yourself out if you were wrong.
So you are just going to ignore this and start a new tgread instead huh? "Sorry about the delay was out shopping , you be surprised how hard it is to find a three quarter length gray coat
Hold my hands up I got the date wrong ,
But that doesn't mean he didn't release them | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yep they are , did you read the post just above you or is it a cast of turn the blind eye it didn't happen , So if they are indeed the slaves you're talking about, then you know that he freed them in 1862. The civil war started in 1861. So he hadn't freed them before the civil war as you stated in your OP. The same OP where you said you would knock yourself out if you were wrong.
So you are just going to ignore this and start a new tgread instead huh?
Sorry about the delay was out shopping , you be surprised how hard it is to find a three quarter length gray coat
Hold my hands up I got the date wrong ,
But that doesn't mean he didn't release them "Do you think he would have released them if it hadn't been specified in the will? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Yep they are , did you read the post just above you or is it a cast of turn the blind eye it didn't happen , So if they are indeed the slaves you're talking about, then you know that he freed them in 1862. The civil war started in 1861. So he hadn't freed them before the civil war as you stated in your OP. The same OP where you said you would knock yourself out if you were wrong.
So you are just going to ignore this and start a new tgread instead huh?
Sorry about the delay was out shopping , you be surprised how hard it is to find a three quarter length gray coat
Hold my hands up I got the date wrong ,
But that doesn't mean he didn't release them
Do you think he would have released them if it hadn't been specified in the will?"Yes the viability of having slaves would have brought it to an end either way , | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Disappointing to read that Blane Salamoni has been dismissed for losing his temper. . No wonder he lost his temper when came up against a thug ( Sterling ) fuelled on cocaine, methamphetamine, opioids and other drugs who refused to carry out instructions and total noncompliance. . it appears justice is on the side of the criminals in todays World." you say you "read" the verdict.... so i take it you haven't seen the police body cam footage that was released yesterday then... because what you have described in your "hot take" doesn't really go, with what we see it the video.... lucky for us....the cam has both audio and video..... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3OX5xUJQag warning for everyone except cask.... the video is graphic! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Disappointing to read that Blane Salamoni has been dismissed for losing his temper. . No wonder he lost his temper when came up against a thug ( Sterling ) fuelled on cocaine, methamphetamine, opioids and other drugs who refused to carry out instructions and total noncompliance. . it appears justice is on the side of the criminals in todays World." Go and look at the footage, to use the word 'justice' in the context you have is bizarre.. the guy was not being a thug, the language and actions of the cop put only him in that bracket.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Pig arrives... first thing out of its mouth is 'do as I say or I will shoot you in the head' followed by 'taze the motherfucker' a couple of minutes later the pig has shot the man he threatened and is standing over him saying 'fuck him' 'leave him' and repeatedly calling him a 'stupid motherfucker'. If that is not video evidence of a premeditated violent assault ending in murder what is?" The police are constantly harassed by drug crazed lunatics like this man (Sterling) If there had been any evidence of police brutality the policeman involved would have been jailed this did not happen. . If Sterling had done as he was instructed he would still be here today. . I think most on here watch far too much of programs such as "Seven Seconds" which brain washes your views | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The police are constantly harassed by drug crazed lunatics like this man (Sterling) If there had been any evidence of police brutality the policeman involved would have been jailed this did not happen. . If Sterling had done as he was instructed he would still be here today. . I think most on here watch far too much of programs such as "Seven Seconds" which brain washes your views" I think you should have watched the police bodycam footage before commenting because clearly from your comments you have not watched it. The only violent and out of control person present had a gun and was in a blue uniform. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Pig arrives... first thing out of its mouth is 'do as I say or I will shoot you in the head' followed by 'taze the motherfucker' a couple of minutes later the pig has shot the man he threatened and is standing over him saying 'fuck him' 'leave him' and repeatedly calling him a 'stupid motherfucker'. If that is not video evidence of a premeditated violent assault ending in murder what is? The police are constantly harassed by drug crazed lunatics like this man (Sterling) If there had been any evidence of police brutality the policeman involved would have been jailed this did not happen. . If Sterling had done as he was instructed he would still be here today. . I think most on here watch far too much of programs such as "Seven Seconds" which brain washes your views" Watch the footage, it's evident who in that situation was being a thug.. It's also part of why he lost his job.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
