Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It's ironic for someone supportive of the Con-federacy and the slavery of fellow humans to talk about the hate in others' hearts.Still playing dumb huh??You have no idea of the racial views of folks from the south?I have no idea of the racial views of the southern troopers of WWII. I can speak to those of the North, at least the ones I knew personally growing up.
You asked a question and I answered it. Do you have something to say in response, or is this where you admit that you don't give a fuck about the facts of the matter, you just spew hate?
Do you think a system of Jim Crow (legal apartheid) just popped up out of nowhere despite the objections of all of those "southern troopers"??
Do you think black men who also fought for this country in that same world war were lynched and their racist murderers not even convicted despite the objections of all of those "southern troopers"??
You folks really twist yourself into pretzels to defend your confederate fetish
Correct. Support for such programs could have been very high. Or they could have relatively weak majorities. Or they could have been somewhat unpopular, but with a strongly motivated minority supporting them against a less motivated majority.
I don't know. I've never looked into the support that policy had at that time period, historically.
But regardless, I was asked something good about Southern Whites, and I gave one example, ie they helped a lot, in defeating HItler and the Nazis.
Do you want to address that fact, or are you just here to bog the thread down in mindless partisan race baiting pap?
Ok....let's say there was a policy in the south that made it legal for black folks to go around and lynch and murder white women -- for no other reason than them being white women....they even nick name the policy Jane Crow...and on the rare occasion that someone is arrested for it -- the legal system insures that person gets off...
Obviously, it won't take a genius to deduce that most of the south would be against that.....
However, that is EXACTLY what the policy was in the south in regards to black men women and children-- that you some how claim you don't know much about....
Do you think this man would blow up a church killing four beautiful little girls and not expect legal punishment because he thought the white supremacist policy of Jim Crow wasn't popular??
View attachment 291796
I don't know. Possibly. Or it could be that he thought that the "Invisible Empire" would have the power to protect him, even though most people were against the murder of children.
I suspect you don't know either. YOU are just assuming the worst, because of the hate in your heart.
THat's the point....it's a load of crap that slaves were happy and well-cared for and better off as slaves than they would be in Africa.Worse – to propagate the revisionist ‘history’ of a nostalgic ante-bellum South where slaves were ‘happy’ and ‘well-cared for.’Your question is absurdAttack a culture dedicated to maintaining slavery?True.
The focus on the impressive military valor of the Confederate Army, instead of the less noble cause of the war, is the type of thing an healthy society does, when looking at itself.
So, RW, what other cultures, do you attack like this?
Yes
Are you pretending to be too stupid to understand a simple question, or are you seriously that fucking stupid?
Befitting of a poster who supports the institution of slavery and wants to erect monuments to a slave society
What a load of crap.
This is what happens when religions get to dictate government policies.Hey, Fort Fun Taliban,Good! Remove all the traitor statues. Especially from courthouses.Confederate statue removed from historic North Carolina courthouse
"A North Carolina county removed a Confederate statue from a historic courthouse early on Wednesday, joining the handful of places around the state where such monuments have come down in recent years despite a law protecting them.
News outlets reported that a subdued crowd of several dozen people watched as the statue of a soldier was taken down overnight outside the historic Chatham county courthouse, where it had stood since 1907. By dawn, even the base was gone..."
Burning books will be next...
You'd be a hit in Afghanistan
How do you know that suspect didn't expect punishment? He was probably a liberal, at the point in time the crime was committed, Alabama was solidly leftist
What Democrats of those days were also conservative, racist.
Conservatives have never been in favor of church bombings. Where did you get the idea they were?
The South has always been CONSERVATIVE.
As far as Alabama, they were certainly leftist for many years, going for the FDR Raw Deal 4 times in succession, voted for Wilson, Cox, Adlai E Stevenson, Al Smith, etc. All the liberal candidates.
Look at the Governors of Alabama.
You mean like George Wallace?
Exactly.
Someone is turning all potty mouthYea...200 years agoExactly. Dimwingers deny their racist history.Why am I not shocked to find out you are ignorant of your own state's history of slavery.
Several northern states had very small slave populations...NJ is one of them
We do not celebrate that history
We are not embracing the good ole days of slavery
You have to be Republican to do that
Shut your face anus.
I would find it very hard to sleep at night celebrating the valor of con-federates who fought to enslave their fellow humans. Can we assume that you have no conscience tugging at YOU in that regard?It's ironic for someone supportive of the Con-federacy and the slavery of fellow humans to talk about the hate in others' hearts.Still playing dumb huh??You have no idea of the racial views of folks from the south?
Do you think a system of Jim Crow (legal apartheid) just popped up out of nowhere despite the objections of all of those "southern troopers"??
Do you think black men who also fought for this country in that same world war were lynched and their racist murderers not even convicted despite the objections of all of those "southern troopers"??
You folks really twist yourself into pretzels to defend your confederate fetish
Correct. Support for such programs could have been very high. Or they could have relatively weak majorities. Or they could have been somewhat unpopular, but with a strongly motivated minority supporting them against a less motivated majority.
I don't know. I've never looked into the support that policy had at that time period, historically.
But regardless, I was asked something good about Southern Whites, and I gave one example, ie they helped a lot, in defeating HItler and the Nazis.
Do you want to address that fact, or are you just here to bog the thread down in mindless partisan race baiting pap?
Ok....let's say there was a policy in the south that made it legal for black folks to go around and lynch and murder white women -- for no other reason than them being white women....they even nick name the policy Jane Crow...and on the rare occasion that someone is arrested for it -- the legal system insures that person gets off...
Obviously, it won't take a genius to deduce that most of the south would be against that.....
However, that is EXACTLY what the policy was in the south in regards to black men women and children-- that you some how claim you don't know much about....
Do you think this man would blow up a church killing four beautiful little girls and not expect legal punishment because he thought the white supremacist policy of Jim Crow wasn't popular??
View attachment 291796
I don't know. Possibly. Or it could be that he thought that the "Invisible Empire" would have the power to protect him, even though most people were against the murder of children.
I suspect you don't know either. YOU are just assuming the worst, because of the hate in your heart.
Only if you ignore the last 150 years of American history, where celebrating the valor of the Confederate fighting men, has been seen as harmless, even healthy regional pride, and understood to NOT be supporting the defeated institution of slavery.
It is not credible that you missed that, so why are you pretending to be unaware of it?
Yeah.....after he finally grew up. When can we expect the same from you?What Democrats of those days were also conservative, racist.
Conservatives have never been in favor of church bombings. Where did you get the idea they were?
The South has always been CONSERVATIVE.
As far as Alabama, they were certainly leftist for many years, going for the FDR Raw Deal 4 times in succession, voted for Wilson, Cox, Adlai E Stevenson, Al Smith, etc. All the liberal candidates.
Look at the Governors of Alabama.
You mean like George Wallace?
Exactly.
This George Wallace?
Ah...and here we have the victimhood I've come to expect from you.Someone is turning all potty mouthYea...200 years agoExactly. Dimwingers deny their racist history.Several northern states had very small slave populations...NJ is one of them
We do not celebrate that history
We are not embracing the good ole days of slavery
You have to be Republican to do that
Shut your face anus.
YOu fucktards do nothing but spew the most hateful slurs against good people, all day long and then are shocked when people respond to you, as you so richly deserve.
NOt only are you fucking assholes, but you are pussies about it.
THat's the point....it's a load of crap that slaves were happy and well-cared for and better off as slaves than they would be in Africa.Worse – to propagate the revisionist ‘history’ of a nostalgic ante-bellum South where slaves were ‘happy’ and ‘well-cared for.’Your question is absurdAttack a culture dedicated to maintaining slavery?
Yes
Are you pretending to be too stupid to understand a simple question, or are you seriously that fucking stupid?
Befitting of a poster who supports the institution of slavery and wants to erect monuments to a slave society
What a load of crap.
NAZIS is not a good analogy ONLY because the Third Reich lasted twice as long as the loser Con-federacy did......maybe if the Con-federacy leaders had be held responsible in war crime trials like the leading NAZIS did, we wouldn't have had the Lost Cause Movement.Really? Germany, after the Nazis genocides, has ZERO POINT TWO PERCENT, reporting as Jewish.
America, after the Confederacy, has over TWELVE percentage black population.
Do you even know what the word "genocide" means? Or is it just a buzzword to you, to use to smear people you hate?
Do you understand the crimes and inhumanity that was done by the Confederacy.
Do you understand the fucking stupidity of a Nazi analogy, and pretending that 12 percent is the same as fucking ZERO POINT TWO percent?
I mean, I was talking to RW. He is the fucking moron that made that comparison, and stood by it. And that is the conversation you jumped into. If you want to comment on his fucking stupid post, then address his fucking stupid post.
I am discussing the rest of this issue, in the rest of this thread. THIS bit, is about the stupid shit you people say, and me calling you on it.
If you don't want to discuss how fucking stupid you libs are, when you just use buzz words, with no understanding of what the words actually mean, because you are fucking retarded,
THEN DON'T.
What you fucking don't fucking underfuckingstand in this fuckingly fucked analogy, is that fucking bad actors don't fucking all fucking work the same fucking way. Just because fucking Nazis fucking dealt in fucking genocide while fucking slaveholders fucking enslaved people, doesn't fucking affuckingfect the fucking fact that fucking Germany doesn't fucking hang up fucking statues and fucking monuments trying to fucking dilute and fucking sanitize and fucking whitewash the fucking inhufuckingmanity of their own fucking past, as do the fucking UDC edifices. Fucking both of them lost their fucking wars, did they fucking not?
Goodness gracious, that is a specious comparison.
And you are doing the same stupid fucking thing that rw and supercrackhead are doing. Pretending that some very minor similarity, means that they should have been dealt with the exact same way, and that if not, it is some sort of problem.
My point stands. There are good reasons for the way that we, here in America, dealt with the aftermath of the Civil War, and just saying "nazis" is not a good analogy, and in fact, is fucking stupid, and if you do that, then you are fucking stupid.
If you continue, I will point out some of the other many ways that the two sets of people are very different, and the two situations are very different, and thus, how incredibly fucking stupid you are.
It's ironic for someone supportive of the Con-federacy and the slavery of fellow humans to talk about the hate in others' hearts.Still playing dumb huh??You have no idea of the racial views of folks from the south?
Do you think a system of Jim Crow (legal apartheid) just popped up out of nowhere despite the objections of all of those "southern troopers"??
Do you think black men who also fought for this country in that same world war were lynched and their racist murderers not even convicted despite the objections of all of those "southern troopers"??
You folks really twist yourself into pretzels to defend your confederate fetish
Correct. Support for such programs could have been very high. Or they could have relatively weak majorities. Or they could have been somewhat unpopular, but with a strongly motivated minority supporting them against a less motivated majority.
I don't know. I've never looked into the support that policy had at that time period, historically.
But regardless, I was asked something good about Southern Whites, and I gave one example, ie they helped a lot, in defeating HItler and the Nazis.
Do you want to address that fact, or are you just here to bog the thread down in mindless partisan race baiting pap?
Ok....let's say there was a policy in the south that made it legal for black folks to go around and lynch and murder white women -- for no other reason than them being white women....they even nick name the policy Jane Crow...and on the rare occasion that someone is arrested for it -- the legal system insures that person gets off...
Obviously, it won't take a genius to deduce that most of the south would be against that.....
However, that is EXACTLY what the policy was in the south in regards to black men women and children-- that you some how claim you don't know much about....
Do you think this man would blow up a church killing four beautiful little girls and not expect legal punishment because he thought the white supremacist policy of Jim Crow wasn't popular??
View attachment 291796
I don't know. Possibly. Or it could be that he thought that the "Invisible Empire" would have the power to protect him, even though most people were against the murder of children.
I suspect you don't know either. YOU are just assuming the worst, because of the hate in your heart.
Only if you ignore the last 150 years of American history, where celebrating the valor of the Confederate fighting men, has been seen as harmless, even healthy regional pride, and understood to NOT be supporting the defeated institution of slavery.
It is not credible that you missed that, so why are you pretending to be unaware of it?
What Democrats of those days were also conservative, racist.
Conservatives have never been in favor of church bombings. Where did you get the idea they were?
The South has always been CONSERVATIVE.
As far as Alabama, they were certainly leftist for many years, going for the FDR Raw Deal 4 times in succession, voted for Wilson, Cox, Adlai E Stevenson, Al Smith, etc. All the liberal candidates.
Look at the Governors of Alabama.
You mean like George Wallace?
Exactly.
This George Wallace?
The first slave holder in America (not the U.S. yet) was John Rolfe in Jamestown....show us that he was a black man. And by the time the U.S. was created in 1776, there were hundreds if not thousands of slaveholders......how do YOU determine which one was "the first"? Eh?Why would I accept a culture that enslaved, maimed, raped, lynched and murdered my ancestors.
Because otherwise, this nation is over. And the sooner you admit that you have no plan to live in peace with your fellow citizens, the sooner we can work on what to do about that.
All I am asking is that your side stop with the lies.
We live in peace now, I don't need to see statues and honor those who harmed black folks to do that.
What did I lie about?
You're a scholar and a Gentleman - But I suspect your knowledge of African American History is limited to what Big Brother has drilled into your head for the purpose of keeping you on the plantation. Do you know who the first slave holder in USA was ... a Black Man ... do you know that the Roots saga [Alex Haley] is pure fiction ... do you that slavers did not go ashore & capture Africans - too risky, they bought them mostly from moslems --- who still practice slavery today. Do you know the story of whipped William and how he was used to rile up Northern whites to fight against the south ? So far as the statues go --- I don't really care - that's just Big Brother trying to create issues to keep us at each others throats
Actually well before that was the colony attempted by the Spaniard Lucas Vásquez de Ayllón in 1526 which brought at least 100 enslaved Africans to what would eventually become South Carolina. That would be 495 years ago. They were the first African slaves, although six years prior his associates had taken some 70 Indian slaves.
Especially in the attempt to get slavery established in new territories.Duty,honor, and bravery are never “lost causes.”
NAZIS is not a good analogy ONLY because the Third Reich lasted twice as long as the loser Con-federacy did......maybe if the Con-federacy leaders had be held responsible in war crime trials like the leading NAZIS did, we wouldn't have had the Lost Cause Movement.Do you understand the crimes and inhumanity that was done by the Confederacy.
Do you understand the fucking stupidity of a Nazi analogy, and pretending that 12 percent is the same as fucking ZERO POINT TWO percent?
I mean, I was talking to RW. He is the fucking moron that made that comparison, and stood by it. And that is the conversation you jumped into. If you want to comment on his fucking stupid post, then address his fucking stupid post.
I am discussing the rest of this issue, in the rest of this thread. THIS bit, is about the stupid shit you people say, and me calling you on it.
If you don't want to discuss how fucking stupid you libs are, when you just use buzz words, with no understanding of what the words actually mean, because you are fucking retarded,
THEN DON'T.
What you fucking don't fucking underfuckingstand in this fuckingly fucked analogy, is that fucking bad actors don't fucking all fucking work the same fucking way. Just because fucking Nazis fucking dealt in fucking genocide while fucking slaveholders fucking enslaved people, doesn't fucking affuckingfect the fucking fact that fucking Germany doesn't fucking hang up fucking statues and fucking monuments trying to fucking dilute and fucking sanitize and fucking whitewash the fucking inhufuckingmanity of their own fucking past, as do the fucking UDC edifices. Fucking both of them lost their fucking wars, did they fucking not?
Goodness gracious, that is a specious comparison.
And you are doing the same stupid fucking thing that rw and supercrackhead are doing. Pretending that some very minor similarity, means that they should have been dealt with the exact same way, and that if not, it is some sort of problem.
My point stands. There are good reasons for the way that we, here in America, dealt with the aftermath of the Civil War, and just saying "nazis" is not a good analogy, and in fact, is fucking stupid, and if you do that, then you are fucking stupid.
If you continue, I will point out some of the other many ways that the two sets of people are very different, and the two situations are very different, and thus, how incredibly fucking stupid you are.
The analogy is flying over Purell's hood because he keeps trying to compare "the Nazis" with "the Confederates" instead of the real point of comparison, which is to compare "what the Lost Cause tried to do about the Confederacy's image" with "what Germany did NOT try to do with the Nazi image".
LiesSeveral northern states had very small slave populations...NJ is one of them
We do not celebrate that history
The poster with the geographical challenge is trying to float yet another dishonest argument, suggesting that the conflict might have been about who "had" slaves. It was not, of course --- it was about who could prohibit slavery. That was the whole point of secession --- control of the future power of the legality of slavery.
New Jersey had already abolished, like many states phasing out over time. West Virginia did the same, and even separated itself from the Confederate cause by seceding from the secession. The Confederacy's whole hangup was that they feared they would lose control over slavery and be forced to abandon it. But here's a poster who wants to distract to "where slaves existed" just like the other "leftist Alabama" klown who wants to make it about "George Washington".
I've seen nothing to indicate that that was his intent. Seems like something you pulled out of your ass.
Whelp --- read the post he started with and tell us what else he could have meant.
He entered the thread shortly after RW made the fucking stupid claim that a number of issues, including slavery, was the legacy of the confederacy.
It seems likely that he was pointing out that slavery, was not solely a legacy of the Confederacy.
Doooooooooooon't think so since he specified not a "legacy" but the time period DURING the War.
He listed a series of states calling them "northern" states with slavery. Only one (NJ) was actually "northern", three of them were border states, and among them Missouri, West Virginia and Maryland, as well as DC, had all abolished slavery before the War ended, and that sole northern state of NJ had already done so decades earlier. So it's fairly clear both what his time frame and his purpose were.
The first slave holder in America (not the U.S. yet) was John Rolfe in Jamestown....show us that he was a black man. And by the time the U.S. was created in 1776, there were hundreds if not thousands of slaveholders......how do YOU determine which one was "the first"? Eh?So, what other groups, do you fight with them, over their heritage?
What gives you the right to attack this culture?
Do you realize that your actions, reveal that the concept of multiculturalism has completely failed?
Why would I accept a culture that enslaved, maimed, raped, lynched and murdered my ancestors.
Because otherwise, this nation is over. And the sooner you admit that you have no plan to live in peace with your fellow citizens, the sooner we can work on what to do about that.
All I am asking is that your side stop with the lies.
We live in peace now, I don't need to see statues and honor those who harmed black folks to do that.
What did I lie about?
You're a scholar and a Gentleman - But I suspect your knowledge of African American History is limited to what Big Brother has drilled into your head for the purpose of keeping you on the plantation. Do you know who the first slave holder in USA was ... a Black Man ... do you know that the Roots saga [Alex Haley] is pure fiction ... do you that slavers did not go ashore & capture Africans - too risky, they bought them mostly from moslems --- who still practice slavery today. Do you know the story of whipped William and how he was used to rile up Northern whites to fight against the south ? So far as the statues go --- I don't really care - that's just Big Brother trying to create issues to keep us at each others throats
NAZIS is not a good analogy ONLY because the Third Reich lasted twice as long as the loser Con-federacy did......maybe if the Con-federacy leaders had be held responsible in war crime trials like the leading NAZIS did, we wouldn't have had the Lost Cause Movement.Do you understand the crimes and inhumanity that was done by the Confederacy.
Do you understand the fucking stupidity of a Nazi analogy, and pretending that 12 percent is the same as fucking ZERO POINT TWO percent?
I mean, I was talking to RW. He is the fucking moron that made that comparison, and stood by it. And that is the conversation you jumped into. If you want to comment on his fucking stupid post, then address his fucking stupid post.
I am discussing the rest of this issue, in the rest of this thread. THIS bit, is about the stupid shit you people say, and me calling you on it.
If you don't want to discuss how fucking stupid you libs are, when you just use buzz words, with no understanding of what the words actually mean, because you are fucking retarded,
THEN DON'T.
What you fucking don't fucking underfuckingstand in this fuckingly fucked analogy, is that fucking bad actors don't fucking all fucking work the same fucking way. Just because fucking Nazis fucking dealt in fucking genocide while fucking slaveholders fucking enslaved people, doesn't fucking affuckingfect the fucking fact that fucking Germany doesn't fucking hang up fucking statues and fucking monuments trying to fucking dilute and fucking sanitize and fucking whitewash the fucking inhufuckingmanity of their own fucking past, as do the fucking UDC edifices. Fucking both of them lost their fucking wars, did they fucking not?
Goodness gracious, that is a specious comparison.
And you are doing the same stupid fucking thing that rw and supercrackhead are doing. Pretending that some very minor similarity, means that they should have been dealt with the exact same way, and that if not, it is some sort of problem.
My point stands. There are good reasons for the way that we, here in America, dealt with the aftermath of the Civil War, and just saying "nazis" is not a good analogy, and in fact, is fucking stupid, and if you do that, then you are fucking stupid.
If you continue, I will point out some of the other many ways that the two sets of people are very different, and the two situations are very different, and thus, how incredibly fucking stupid you are.
Really? Only because of that?
1.What nations were the Confederacy splint into after the war?
2. What ethnic groups did the Confederacy commit genocide on?
3. What nations did the Confederacy try to conquer?
4. DId the Confederacy and the Nazis share economic policy?
5. What outside nations occupied the Confederacy after the war?
6. How much of the Industrial heartland of the Confederacy was destroyed by heavy bombing?
7. HOw many nations occupied majority Confederate ethnic territory at the beginning of the war?
8. How many over seas colonies were taken by foreign powers in the decades prior to the Civil War?
9. What large and powerful nations did the Confederacy have secret alliances with prior to the war?
10 How close were the Confederates to the Atomic Bomb, by the end of the war?
Please show how in each of these limited examples, that the Nazis and the Confederates were soooo fucking alike, and their situations were sooo fucking alike,
or admit that you were just talking shit.
