Asclepias
Diamond Member
It was more than 3 and you have no way of proving what kills had what affect. Yes it was a shame white people had strict social norms, more guns, could read, and access to communication and resources than the Blacks did. That all changed once Black people got guns in hand with backing though didnt it? Prior to that slave uprisings generated a healthy respect for Blacks. Thats why slavery in the south was so brutal. They wanted to mentally nip anything in the bud. So you are wrong on that account. Whites lived in abject fear of Blacks. We know because they passed legislation showing this.Three KIA's doesn't win a war or free a people. It was mostly white boys that freed the blacks. And that includes some of my ancestors as well as your's. It is a shame that slaves weren't smart or strong enough to free themselves. It would have earned them some respect. Also would have saved a lot of dead white folks that you don't seem to appreciate.Nope. I had Black ancestors that fought in the Civil war and killed a bunch of honkys. 3 of them to be exact including a direct descendant.It wasn't your ancestors that did it, moron. It was a bunch of white boys from the Midwest.Good thing I was born free. Thanks to my ancestors.if you havent found something worth dying to gain then you havent lived. My ancestors killed up some racist honkys so I could be free.Maybe so but you took a very serious ass-whooping of your own to make it stick.That ass whooping said you couldnt secede. Give it a rest. The south will never rise again.Secession is not insurrection.Wrong the Constitution is clear the President and Congress CAN declare martial law and order troops to put down insurrection. If as you claim anyone at any time can simply declare they are no longer part of the US then there would be NO such clause as it would be meaningless.That was a Federal claim at the time and one of the things that was thought to be a violation of States' rights. After secession the CSA was the federal government of SC.LOL a State has NO authority on Federal land EXCEPT what the Federal Government cedes to it. Try this dumb ass if a Military member commits a crime on federal property Federal NOT state authorities have jurisdiction and a Military Court determines the punishment.Wrong, turd, the federal government cannot treat the property of Ft Sumter differnt than it can treat the property of any other state. The federal government cannot just nullify state laws.Actually RETARD the US Government is different then the State and while it may allow some state laws to be enforced reserves the right to make it that FEDERAL law applies to that property, go ahead and go to a US Base and READ the sign posted before you enter."Title" means it's just a piece of property. Walmart is not a separate country. It's part of the state where I live. It has the same exact kind of "title" to the property it sits on as the federal government had with respect to Ft Sumter. It's part of South Carolina. Of course you will idiotically continue to post this already debunked claim because otherwise you will have to admit that the federal government made war on the State of South Carolina.Title had passed to the US government.It wasn't an act of war, nimrod. Ft Sumter was SC territory. Firing on your own territory is not an act of war, period.
Your claim is 100% bullshit.
Nothing in the Constitution says that states cannot secede from the Union.
oh-----good-----they FREEED YOU. I am so glad
that you are happy now
There would be a lot of dead white people had I made it to adulthood in that system.