Confederate Monuments

[Scamp]

The North had no problem being complicit with slavery by bringing slaves here from Africa in the first place. They did this to make money selling those slaves. And they sent their ships to Europe full of the slave crops of cotton and tobacco to make money. The North could not grow the valuable crops of cotton and tobacco because of climate. Honest question...If the North could have grown the crops of tobacco and cotton, would they have had more slaves to capitalize on this Billion dollar enterprise like the South did? Or would their morals have been more important to them than money?

 

[rightwinger]

New times
New views on the morality of the confederacy

If today’s communities don’t want the confederacy shoved in their face

Take the statues down

 

[rightwinger]

The North had no problem being complicit with slavery by bringing slaves here from Africa in the first place. They did this to make money selling those slaves. And they sent their ships to Europe full of the slave crops of cotton and tobacco to make money. The North could not grow the valuable crops of cotton and tobacco because of climate. Honest question...If the North could have grown the crops of tobacco and cotton, would they have had more slaves to capitalize on this Billion dollar enterprise like the South did? Or would their morals have been more important to them than money?

Don’t see any monuments to slavery in the north

 

[Scamp]

Any statues of Ben Franklin from PA up north? Surprise...he was a slave owner and slave dealer. Bought and sold slaves.
How about Martin Van Buren from NY, slave owner. And as already memotioned, Ulysses S Grant from Ohio, slave owner.
But Northern history tries not to mention slavery in the North..They want people to falsely believe slavery was only a Southern thing. Makes Northern hypocrites feel better.

 

[rightwinger]

Any statues of Ben Franklin from PA up north? Surprise...he was a slave owner and slave dealer. Bought and sold slaves.
How about Martin Van Buren from NY, slave owner. And as already memotioned, Ulysses S Grant from Ohio, slave owner.
But Northern history tries not to mention slavery in the North..They want people to falsely believe slavery was only a Southern thing. Makes Northern hypocrites feel better.

A product of their times a hundred years earlier

We don’t celebrate their slave ownership
We do celebrate the Confederacy dedicated to slavery

 

[Scamp]

Any statues of Ben Franklin from PA up north? Surprise...he was a slave owner and slave dealer. Bought and sold slaves.
How about Martin Van Buren from NY, slave owner. And as already memotioned, Ulysses S Grant from Ohio, slave owner.
But Northern history tries not to mention slavery in the North..They want people to falsely believe slavery was only a Southern thing. Makes Northern hypocrites feel better.

A product of their times a hundred years earlier

We don’t celebrate their slave ownership
We do celebrate the Confederacy dedicated to slavery

Well then, unless someone is an ignorant hypocrite they would be calling for the removal of any statue of Ben Franklin, Martin Van Buren, and Ulysses S Grant? Right?

 

[rightwinger]

Any statues of Ben Franklin from PA up north? Surprise...he was a slave owner and slave dealer. Bought and sold slaves.
How about Martin Van Buren from NY, slave owner. And as already memotioned, Ulysses S Grant from Ohio, slave owner.
But Northern history tries not to mention slavery in the North..They want people to falsely believe slavery was only a Southern thing. Makes Northern hypocrites feel better.

A product of their times a hundred years earlier

We don’t celebrate their slave ownership
We do celebrate the Confederacy dedicated to slavery

Well then, unless someone is an ignorant hypocrite they would be calling for the removal of any statue of Ben Franklin, Martin Van Buren, and Ulysses S Grant? Right?

I would agree if those are monuments to their owning slaves

Confederate monuments are monuments to treason and involuntary servitude

 

[Scamp]

Any statues of Ben Franklin from PA up north? Surprise...he was a slave owner and slave dealer. Bought and sold slaves.
How about Martin Van Buren from NY, slave owner. And as already memotioned, Ulysses S Grant from Ohio, slave owner.
But Northern history tries not to mention slavery in the North..They want people to falsely believe slavery was only a Southern thing. Makes Northern hypocrites feel better.

A product of their times a hundred years earlier

We don’t celebrate their slave ownership
We do celebrate the Confederacy dedicated to slavery

Well then, unless someone is an ignorant hypocrite they would be calling for the removal of any statue of Ben Franklin, Martin Van Buren, and Ulysses S Grant? Right?

I would agree if those are monuments to their owning slaves

Confederate monuments are monuments to treason and involuntary servitude

So show us all where secession of states was treason according to The Constitution in 1861. You can't. But I can show you where Lincoln committed treason...

 

[rightwinger]

Any statues of Ben Franklin from PA up north? Surprise...he was a slave owner and slave dealer. Bought and sold slaves.
How about Martin Van Buren from NY, slave owner. And as already memotioned, Ulysses S Grant from Ohio, slave owner.
But Northern history tries not to mention slavery in the North..They want people to falsely believe slavery was only a Southern thing. Makes Northern hypocrites feel better.

A product of their times a hundred years earlier

We don’t celebrate their slave ownership
We do celebrate the Confederacy dedicated to slavery

Well then, unless someone is an ignorant hypocrite they would be calling for the removal of any statue of Ben Franklin, Martin Van Buren, and Ulysses S Grant? Right?

I would agree if those are monuments to their owning slaves

Confederate monuments are monuments to treason and involuntary servitude

So show us all where secession of states was treason according to The Constitution in 1861. You can't. But I can show you where Lincoln committed treason...

Taking up arms against you country is treason

Always has been

 

[Scamp]

Any statues of Ben Franklin from PA up north? Surprise...he was a slave owner and slave dealer. Bought and sold slaves.
How about Martin Van Buren from NY, slave owner. And as already memotioned, Ulysses S Grant from Ohio, slave owner.
But Northern history tries not to mention slavery in the North..They want people to falsely believe slavery was only a Southern thing. Makes Northern hypocrites feel better.

A product of their times a hundred years earlier

We don’t celebrate their slave ownership
We do celebrate the Confederacy dedicated to slavery

Well then, unless someone is an ignorant hypocrite they would be calling for the removal of any statue of Ben Franklin, Martin Van Buren, and Ulysses S Grant? Right?

I would agree if those are monuments to their owning slaves

Confederate monuments are monuments to treason and involuntary servitude

So show us all where secession of states was treason according to The Constitution in 1861. You can't. But I can show you where Lincoln committed treason...

Taking up arms against you country is treason

Always has been

Secession of States was legal. Lincoln sent an army to invade the South. You just admitted it was Lincoln who committed treason.

 

[rightwinger]

Let’s have northern states tear down all their statues honoring the confederacy

Just to be fair

 

[rightwinger]

A product of their times a hundred years earlier

We don’t celebrate their slave ownership
We do celebrate the Confederacy dedicated to slavery

Well then, unless someone is an ignorant hypocrite they would be calling for the removal of any statue of Ben Franklin, Martin Van Buren, and Ulysses S Grant? Right?

I would agree if those are monuments to their owning slaves

Confederate monuments are monuments to treason and involuntary servitude

So show us all where secession of states was treason according to The Constitution in 1861. You can't. But I can show you where Lincoln committed treason...

Taking up arms against you country is treason

Always has been

Secession of States was legal. Lincoln sent an army to invade the South. You just admitted it was Lincoln who committed treason.

The Confederacy attacked Ft Sumter

An act of treason

 

[Scamp]

Well then, unless someone is an ignorant hypocrite they would be calling for the removal of any statue of Ben Franklin, Martin Van Buren, and Ulysses S Grant? Right?

I would agree if those are monuments to their owning slaves

Confederate monuments are monuments to treason and involuntary servitude

So show us all where secession of states was treason according to The Constitution in 1861. You can't. But I can show you where Lincoln committed treason...

Taking up arms against you country is treason

Always has been

Secession of States was legal. Lincoln sent an army to invade the South. You just admitted it was Lincoln who committed treason.

The Confederacy attacked Ft Sumter

An act of treason

Wrong. When South Carolina legally seceded from the Union, Ft. Sumter became their sovereign property. They even asked the US to leave. But then Lincoln tried to reinforce the Fort. This was an act of treachery and an act of war.

 

[rightwinger]

I would agree if those are monuments to their owning slaves

Confederate monuments are monuments to treason and involuntary servitude

So show us all where secession of states was treason according to The Constitution in 1861. You can't. But I can show you where Lincoln committed treason...

Taking up arms against you country is treason

Always has been

Secession of States was legal. Lincoln sent an army to invade the South. You just admitted it was Lincoln who committed treason.

The Confederacy attacked Ft Sumter

An act of treason

Wrong. When South Carolina legally seceded from the Union, Ft. Sumter became their sovereign property. They even asked the US to leave. But then Lincoln tried to reinforce the Fort. This was an act of treachery and an act of war.

Wrong

Ft Sumter was US Property and had not been transferred to S Carolina
Just like Guantanamo in Cuba

Shelling it was an act of war

 

[Scamp]

So show us all where secession of states was treason according to The Constitution in 1861. You can't. But I can show you where Lincoln committed treason...

Taking up arms against you country is treason

Always has been

Secession of States was legal. Lincoln sent an army to invade the South. You just admitted it was Lincoln who committed treason.

The Confederacy attacked Ft Sumter

An act of treason

Wrong. When South Carolina legally seceded from the Union, Ft. Sumter became their sovereign property. They even asked the US to leave. But then Lincoln tried to reinforce the Fort. This was an act of treachery and an act of war.

Wrong

Ft Sumter was US Property and had not been transferred to S Carolina
Just like Guantanamo in Cuba

Shelling it was an act of war

BS. And wrong again leftwinger. No one was ever charged in the legal event that took back SC property. But Lincoln was charged with war crimes. And his Presidency was terminated.

 

[del]

I would agree if those are monuments to their owning slaves

Confederate monuments are monuments to treason and involuntary servitude

So show us all where secession of states was treason according to The Constitution in 1861. You can't. But I can show you where Lincoln committed treason...

Taking up arms against you country is treason

Always has been

Secession of States was legal. Lincoln sent an army to invade the South. You just admitted it was Lincoln who committed treason.

The Confederacy attacked Ft Sumter

An act of treason

Wrong. When South Carolina legally seceded from the Union, Ft. Sumter became their sovereign property. They even asked the US to leave. But then Lincoln tried to reinforce the Fort. This was an act of treachery and an act of war.

the war was all about states' rights, amirite?

 

[Scamp]

So show us all where secession of states was treason according to The Constitution in 1861. You can't. But I can show you where Lincoln committed treason...

Taking up arms against you country is treason

Always has been

Secession of States was legal. Lincoln sent an army to invade the South. You just admitted it was Lincoln who committed treason.

The Confederacy attacked Ft Sumter

An act of treason

Wrong. When South Carolina legally seceded from the Union, Ft. Sumter became their sovereign property. They even asked the US to leave. But then Lincoln tried to reinforce the Fort. This was an act of treachery and an act of war.

the war was all about states' rights, amirite?

No. The war was all about the South defending their land and homes from an army invasion sent by a Tyrant.

 

[ding]

Taking up arms against you country is treason

Always has been

Secession of States was legal. Lincoln sent an army to invade the South. You just admitted it was Lincoln who committed treason.

The Confederacy attacked Ft Sumter

An act of treason

Wrong. When South Carolina legally seceded from the Union, Ft. Sumter became their sovereign property. They even asked the US to leave. But then Lincoln tried to reinforce the Fort. This was an act of treachery and an act of war.

the war was all about states' rights, amirite?

No. The war was all about the South defending their land and homes from an army invasion sent by a Tyrant.

Neither of you are right.

 

[ding]

The North had no problem being complicit with slavery by bringing slaves here from Africa in the first place. They did this to make money selling those slaves. And they sent their ships to Europe full of the slave crops of cotton and tobacco to make money. The North could not grow the valuable crops of cotton and tobacco because of climate. Honest question...If the North could have grown the crops of tobacco and cotton, would they have had more slaves to capitalize on this Billion dollar enterprise like the South did? Or would their morals have been more important to them than money?

Don’t see any monuments to slavery in the north

All we saw were northern Democrats voting in lock step with southern Democrats.

 

[ding]

I would agree if those are monuments to their owning slaves

Confederate monuments are monuments to treason and involuntary servitude

So show us all where secession of states was treason according to The Constitution in 1861. You can't. But I can show you where Lincoln committed treason...

Taking up arms against you country is treason

Always has been

Secession of States was legal. Lincoln sent an army to invade the South. You just admitted it was Lincoln who committed treason.

The Confederacy attacked Ft Sumter

An act of treason

Wrong. When South Carolina legally seceded from the Union, Ft. Sumter became their sovereign property. They even asked the US to leave. But then Lincoln tried to reinforce the Fort. This was an act of treachery and an act of war.

You misspelled resupply. The men there were starving.