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.
We fought German expansionism. A country is free to determine its own destiny, not conquer other nations. If Germany simply expelled the jews and other "undesirables" the world would have done nothing.Because White Nationalism is what the NAZIS who your father fought had.
Why would he fight them if they were good?
That's because you're a brainwashed idiot.
That Fort was within the boundaries of South Carolina, moron. It may have been federal property, but it wasn't federal territory. The federal government cannot station troops on any property it happens to own in a foreign country without the permission of the host country..
No, I don't admit that, douchebag. Lincoln invaded Virginia. It's as simple as that.So you admit he didn't start the war and their secession did, thank you
The fuck is this take? They were the same country until the CONFEDERATES started the civil war. Why the fuck would the Union expel the Confederacy?
The whole point of the war is to do the opposite.
There is no legal way out of the union, the only way is war. We aren't Canada
No, I don't admit that, douchebag. Lincoln invaded Virginia. It's as simple as that.
SC seceded, which means they weren't the same country. If they were the same country, then Lincoln violated the Constitution by making war on one of the states of the union. In fact, he committed treason. As I just explained, the confederates didn't start the war.
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.
Note the use of the plural. That means making war against any of the states is treason.
Who says there is no legal way out of the United States aside from servile members of the Lincoln cult like you? Please quote the text of the Constitution that makes it illegal to secede. Has there ever been any organization of any kind that you weren't allowed to leave? The very idea is preposterous.
Lincoln knew exactly what would happen, because Buchanan did the same thing and Lincoln wanted the same response.
"You and I both anticipated that the cause of the country would be advanced by making the attempt to provision Fort Sumter, even if it should fail ; and it is no small consolation now to feel that our anticipation is justified by the result. "
Abraham Lincoln, in a letter to Gustavus Fox, May 1, 1861
"The affair at Fort Sumter, it seems to us, has been planned as a means by which the war feeling at the North should be intensified, and the administration thus receive popular support for its policy.... If the armament which lay outside the harbor, while the fort was being battered to pieces [the US ship The Harriet Lane, and seven other reinforcement ships], had been designed for the relief of Major Anderson, it certainly would have made a show of fulfilling its mission. But it seems plain to us that no such design was had. The administration, virtually, to use a homely illustration, stood at Sumter like a boy with a chip on his shoulder, daring his antagonist to knock it off. The Carolinians have knocked off the chip. War is inaugurated, and the design of the administration accomplished." ~ The Buffalo Daily Courier, April 16, 1861.
"We have no doubt, and all the circumstances prove, that it was a cunningly devised scheme, contrived with all due attention to scenic display and intended to arouse, and, if possible, exasperate the northern people against the South.... We venture to say a more gigantic conspiracy against the principles of human liberty and freedom has never been concocted. Who but a fiend could have thought of sacrificing the gallant Major Anderson and his little band in order to carry out a political game? Yet there he was compelled to stand for thirty-six hours amid a torrent of fire and shell, while the fleet sent to assist him, coolly looked at his flag of distress and moved not to his assistance! Why did they not? Perhaps the archives in Washington will yet tell the tale of this strange proceeding.... Pause then, and consider before you endorse these mad men who are now, under pretense of preserving the Union, doing the very thing that must forever divide it." ~ The New York Evening Day-Book, April 17, 1861.
Why did Lincoln need a war? He needed to force the South to pay for his massive corporate welfare agenda, the old Whig agenda.
"But what am I to do in the meantime with those men at Montgomery [meaning the Confederate constitutional convention]? Am I to let them go on... [a]nd open Charleston, etc., as ports of entry, with their ten-percent tariff. What, then, would become of my tariff?" ~ Lincoln to Colonel John B. Baldwin, deputized by the Virginian Commissioners to determine whether Lincoln would use force, April 4, 1861.
"Union means so many millions a year lost to the South; secession means the loss of the same millions to the North. The love of money is the root of this as of many other evils....The quarrel between the North and South is, as it stands, solely a fiscal quarrel".... Charles ****ens in a London periodical in December 1861
"The contest is really for empire on the side of the North and for independence on that of the South....". ..... London Times of 7 Nov 1861
"Slavery is not the cause of the rebellion ....Slavery is the pretext on which the leaders of the rebellion rely, 'to fire the Southern Heart' and through which the greatest degree of unanimity can be produced....Mr. Calhoun, after finding that the South could not be brought into sufficient unanimity by a clamor about the tariff, selected slavery as the better subject for agitation"..... North American Review (Boston October 1862)
"They [the South] know that it is their import trade that draws from the people's pockets sixty or seventy millions of dollars per annum, in the shape of duties, to be expended mainly in the North, and in the protection and encouragement of Northern interests....These are the reasons why these people [the North] do not wish the South to secede from the Union." ..... New Orleans Daily Crescent 21 January 1861
"In one single blow our foreign commerce must be reduced to less than one-half what it now is. Our coastwise trade would pass into other hands. One-half of our shipping would lie idle at our wharves. We should lose our trade with the South, with all of its immense profits. Our manufactories would be in utter ruins. Let the South adopt the free-trade system, or that of a tariff for revenue, and these results would likely follow." .... Chicago Daily Times December 1860
"At once shut down every Southern port, destroy its commerce and bring utter ruin on the Confederate States." ..... NY Times 22 March 1861
"the mask has been thrown off and it is apparent that the people of the principal seceding states are now for commercial independence. They dream that the centres of traffic can be changed from Northern to Southern ports....by a revenue system verging on free trade...." .... Boston Transcript 18 March 1861
WE also know Lincoln wasn't going to do a thing about slavery, because he said so, many times.
The south believed in state's rights. Damn right they were going to form their own country after northerners stuck their nose where it didn't belong.Slavery was always going to end as soon as they made it a propaganda line, irrelevant of what the elites thought
And this is just how nations work? Wow shocker we were worried about losing our tax base, key ports, and population. So we decided it would be war.
Nothing in here that justifies secession
The south believed in state's rights. Damn right they were going to form their own country after northerners stuck their nose where it didn't belong.
Really? Where is that written?The right of secession does not exist
And we have no legal framework built in to our system to allow it
Really? Where is that written?
Nothing disallows it.
You're blowing hot gas out your ass.
Says who?There is no natural right to secession and/or self determination. There is no legal framework
Thus no right exists at all
You have no idea what you're talking about.
Says who?
You're spewing hot gas out your ass. Why does it require a "legal framework?" The freedom of association is mentioned in the Constitution. Why doesn't that include the right of state to associate or not with other states?
You haven't made your case. You have simply bloviated and made unsubstantiated assertions.
Really? Where? Even if it did, how does that make it true?Says America you little retard
And every nation with some little people who want to break away
You get representation not self determination in a liberal representative republic
Ask the Kurds about self determination.
What a maroon!That Fort was within the boundaries of South Carolina, moron. It may have been federal property, but it wasn't federal territory.
I've read that 10,000 times. They retained the right to enforce the laws of South Carolina on the territory. That means it was still SC territory.What a maroon!
"Resolved, That this state do cede to the United States, all the right, title and claim of South Carolina to the site of Fort Sumter and the requisite quantity of adjacent territory, Provided, That all processes, civil and criminal issued under the authority of this State, or any officer thereof, shall and may be served and executed upon the same, and any person there being who may be implicated by law; and that the said land, site and structures enumerated, shall be forever exempt from ...
That and sufficient adjacent territory was ceded. It says so right in the agreement.That means it was still SC territory.
Slavery was always going to end as soon as they made it a propaganda line, irrelevant of what the elites thought
And this is just how nations work? Wow shocker we were worried about losing our tax base, key ports, and population. So we decided it would be war.
Nothing in here that justifies secession
That and sufficient adjacent territory was ceded. It says so right in the agreement.
I take back that you're a maroon. They at least have sufficient reading comprehension.
and of course you're full of shit. Secession was legal from the beginning, verified by Madison and the Constitution Conventional, and using Federal force against a state was a power specifically rejected by the Convention; the Union was to be voluntary, and in fact it was New England states who spent the first 40-50 years of our existence threatening to secede every time they didn't get their way; they even threatened to secede when Jefferson won the Presidency, as they continually sniveled about the power and influence of the state of Virginia.
Your just an ignorant little parrot, no knowledge of real history, just a collection of slogans and some stupid idea that you're 'fightin' slavery and stuff' 160 years after the war, thinking it gives you some sort of moral authority to harass other posters with your virtue signaling rubbish, is all. The fact is if you were such a great FreeDum Fighter N Stuff you would be somewhere actually fighting slavery, but we all know you're a fraud and a liar, and wouldn't be caught dead 'Social Justice Warriorring' anywhere but from under your bed.
Nationalism was coined to be bad by the globalist shills in the media, entertainers and elites. Not one of you mind living good by it though.the KKK was both pro white and also nationalist.
But the KKK only want blacks out of the USA, not really change anything else.
The nazis wanted to control everything.
I suppose though that white nationalism is just racism.
Well, talking about it keeps 'em all fired up 'n stuff.The right of secession does not exist
And we have no legal framework built in to our system to allow it
