Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: First it was press one for english, now....


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: First it was press one for english, now.... Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: First it was press one for english, now.... - 3/1/2014 2:16:32 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

You are a business owner, a manufacturer of goods, and 90% of your capital investment is tied up in what ever you use to make your goods.
Now the government comes along and outlaws that capital investment, and tells you to find another way to do it, and by the way, you aint getting a dime for the equipment you cant use.

Your argument is awful. The 'capital investment' was enslaved human beings. The Federal Government passed no laws to take away slaves from the southern states prior to their rebellion.

quote:

You see, the North had long been discriminating against Native Americans, non-whites, before the civil war.

Andrew Jackson, a Congress controlled by Southerners, a Supreme Court controlled by southerners, and the contrivance of the State of North Carolina to drive the Cherokees off their land. And you blame the North. There is no end to your rewriting of history, Jlf. Pathetic apologia.



Let me clue you in.

The law that made the Trail of tears possible was declared UNCONSTITUTIONAL by the Supreme Court of the United States! What part of that did you not grasp?

Andrew Jackson ignored the ruling and had federal troops forcibly remove Native Americans from their land. Please note, the emboldened text.

Jump to the years immediately before the civil war.

Southern Planters (slave owners) needed loans to handle losses due to drought or other reasons. They had to go to northern banks.

Now listed as collateral was land, equipment, livestock (please remember, slaves = livestock) see anything strange here?

Many northern banks were owned by staunch abolitionists.

When these banks collected on defaulted loans, guess what, they did not free the slaves, which abolitionists said were human beings, they sold all the livestock, including slaves.

Now, you really want to tell me they were any better than the southern slave owners?

Do you even have a clue as to the history of legislation introduced to end slavery in US congress?

Yes, the "equipment" was slaves, humans held in bondage. But the analogy is the same, regardless of what you want to think. Research how many slaves came over with colonists, how many slaves were transported by ships owned in the north in states that had ended slavery, and you want to insist on putting the blame just on the south?

Do you even know US history outside the crap that is taught in pre college schools?

Have you even read anything written by Lincoln about slavery?

Do you even have a clue about racism in the US pre and post civil war?

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 81
RE: First it was press one for english, now.... - 3/1/2014 2:36:34 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Don't bullshit me about benign states rights. It is still about prejudice and white supremacy. I am not surprised the argument is still going on. Nor am I blind to what it is truly about.

States rights is about white supremacy? Hoo boy. Don't forget to check under your bed, too.

They warned us that Fluoride could cause genetic damage.

K.


(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 82
RE: First it was press one for english, now.... - 3/1/2014 2:38:22 PM   
kalikshama


Posts: 14805
Joined: 8/8/2010
Status: offline
quote:

Slavery is long gone(?) but Jim Crow laws lingered for more than 80 years, southern states established prison chain gangs, and prison plantations to take the place of slavery. White only restaurants and drinking fountains. Share cropping. And still today discriminatory voting rights laws. Don't bullshit me about benign states rights. It is still about prejudice and white supremacy. I am not surprised the argument is still going on. Nor am I blind to what it is truly about.


http://www.uua.org/multiculturalism/208702.shtml

The New Jim Crow was selected as the 2012-2013 Unitarian Universalist Association (UUA) Common Read

http://www.uuabookstore.org/productdetails.cfm?PC=1648

In the era of colorblindness, it is no longer socially permissible to use race, explicitly, as a justification for discrimination, exclusion, and social contempt. Yet, as legal star Michelle Alexander reveals, today it is perfectly legal to discriminate against convicted criminals in nearly all the ways that it was once legal to discriminate against African Americans. Once you’re labeled a felon, the old forms of discrimination—employment discrimination, housing discrimination, denial of the right to vote, denial of educational opportunity, denial of food stamps and other public benefits, and exclusion from jury service—are suddenly legal.

Featured on The Tavis Smiley Show, Bill Moyers Journal, Democracy Now, and C-Span’s Washington Journal, The New Jim Crow has become an overnight phenomenon, sparking a much-needed conversation—including a recent mention by Cornel West on Real Time with Bill Maher—about ways in which our system of mass incarceration has come to resemble systems of racial control from a different era.

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 83
RE: First it was press one for english, now.... - 3/1/2014 2:41:42 PM   
kalikshama


Posts: 14805
Joined: 8/8/2010
Status: offline 		Stephen Colbert learns just how racist America really is



On the second to last night of the month, Stephen Colbert announced that “The Colbert Report” will be “dedicating the rest of February to African-American heritage” in honor of Black History Month.”It is such a rich, multifaceted culture for white people to embrace and make less black,” Colbert joked.

The comedian was fascinated by a recent NPR segment on the perception of race in America, in which Stanford sociologist Aliya Saperstein shared her findings that argue that an individual’s race isn’t fixed — it can change over time, and that these changes are often influenced by existing stereotypes.

Saperstein, along with researchers Andrew Penner and Jessica Kizer, pored over thousands of surveys from the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, which tracks its participants for several years. What Saperstein found from the responses was that “Twenty percent of the respondents in the NLSY survey experienced at least one change, and had the interviewer perceived them by race over the course of different observations.”

“If someone went from being employed to being unemployed, or being out of prison to being in prison, or being off welfare to being on welfare, the interviewer was more likely to see the person as black — after they experienced that sort of downward mobility — than before,” she said.

Saperstein found the same trends across other races — for example, people who died from liver failure were more likely to be listed as Native American on the coroner’s report, even if the family indicated another race.

According to NPR’s social science correspondent Shankar Vedanta, the study suggests “that race is actually socially constructed. And this provides data for the theory at the individual level.”

“One fascinating thing that Saperstein has found is that it isn’t just other people’s perceptions of you that change,” Vendanta added. “The survey that she followed also asked people to report their own race. And she found that when people went to prison, they became more likely to think of themselves as black. And that’s because their minds were also subject to this very same stereotypes.”

Colbert summarized the finding more simply as, “Americans believe black people do certain things, therefore people who do those things must be black.”

The findings are disheartening, but not entirely surprising. Attempting to find a way to make America more colorblind, Colbert said, “I believe we can use America’s inescapable racism to finally defeat America’s inescapable racism.”

“Minorities simply have to behave in ways that change our perception of their race,” he joked. “For instance, Mexicans: You can seem a lot less Mexican if you complain about all the Mexicans coming here to steal our jobs.”

“Of course, the quickest way to achieve racial equality is just to send everyone to prison,” Colbert said mockingly. “… then we would all be black. And once we’re all black, maybe Americans will finally realize it does not matter what color you are … so I pick white. I wonder what race that makes me seem like.”

Watch video: http://www.salon.com/2014/02/28/must_see_morning_clip_stephen_colbert_learns_just_how_racist_america_really_is/

(in reply to kalikshama)
Profile   Post #: 84
RE: First it was press one for english, now.... - 3/1/2014 2:50:32 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML


Read the article in its entirety. Mexico established its independence from Spain in 1821. Texas was part of that new Mexico. There was no independent state or Republic of Texas before 1836. The claim is bullocks.



Gee, are you saying that after fighting a war of independence, the new republic had no right to exist?

That would mean that the United States has no right to exist, or any nation that won its independence by rebellion, by your argument.

I can't wait for you to try and twist yourself out of this one.

By the way, you may actually want to take a couple of advanced college level history courses, civics courses, and look at what states' rights really is all about. You may be surprised to know the argument is still going on and slavery is long gone.

I also suggest you read, I do mean read, the Federalist Papers, the writings of Thomas Jefferson, Madison, and others among the founding fathers who had a problem with the constitution because of the supremacy clause.

There simply was no Republic of Texas separate from Mexico until the southern slave owners pulled off a coup. More made up shit. Un-fucking-believable.



OH sweet jesus.

First, let me educate you.

The first whites in Texas was a group brought in by Stephen Austin, and they were not slave owners.

At the time of the Texas war of Independence, slavery was legal in Mexico, but they did not just enslave blacks, they enslaved native tribesman as well.

For its size, there were less slaves in Texas per capita than any southern state, at the time of the war. Big shock. There were fewer whites than Mexicans in Texas at the time of the war for independence.

The majority of the men who died in the Alamo were not white, but Mexicans, who volunteered to be there. The majority of troops under Sam Houston's command at the battle of San Jacinta were Mexican volunteers.

Now, the Mexican government decided it wanted no more Anglos in Texas, they could settle anywhere else, but not Texas. The Mexican government passed taxes on anything entering Texas from the US. Just Texas mind you, not the rest of Mexico.

At the time of the war of Independence, it is estimated there were 30000 Anglos in Texas, that included those hispanicized Germans that entered the territory before Mexico gained its independence from Spain. Now this is important, because the Mexican Government grouped them with the settlers from the US, and not with the Hispanics in that were there from the start.

You want to talk about revisionist history? You are doing a damn good job of creating one.

Now to continue, in 1835, the Mexican Government transitioned from a federalist model to centralism. Texans, white and hispanic began forming committees of correspondence and safety.

Now Santa Anna ordered Stephen Austin arrested, but no charges were ever made.

Santa Anna gave his brother in law a nice order "repress with strong arm all those who, forgetting their duties to the nation which has adopted them as her children, are pushing forward with a desire to live at their own option without subjection to the laws" You know the type of order, do whatever the hell you want to the citizens.

Now the militias formed by the order of the Mexican government prior to Santa Anna were ordered disarmed by Santa Anna, you know, kinda like the British, but what the hell that was different, that happened in a northern state.

Then the shit hit the fan, so to speak.

Of course, the fact that Santa Anna refused to talk with the Texans might have been a small problem, or arrests made by order of Mexican governors loyal to Santa Anna with no charges, both white and non whites, might have been a slight problem, but neither are really any thing to get upset with.

Now on the topic of the United States revolution, we have slave owning colonists openly rebelling against an oppressive government. Also these colonists had indentured servants, a neat term describing people performing slave labor to pay off a debt.

And the all of this was the fault of southern slave owners.

Once more you ignore the fact that the rebels in Texas were for the most part, non slave owning people, who had no desire to own slaves, so why the fuck are they going to fight a war to support slavery?

For that matter, all those non slave owning southern boys that fought for the confederacy in a war to support slavery, as you put it, who are going to gain absolutely fucking nothing if they win, are fighting for what exactly?

And you have yet to address the fact that Northern banks owned by abolitionists did not free slaves but sold them as livestock, and ship owners primarily out of Boston a hot bed for the abolitionist were making money transporting slaves to the south.

And once more, the whole thing is the fault of the southern slave owners.

Does the term hypocrisy mean anything to you?

Oh, some of those Boston ship owners were still transporting slaves after it was illegal to import slaves to the US, they just took them to the Caribbean plantations, and then turned around and transported them to the southern states, since the slaves from the Caribbean were exempt from the law against importing slaves. after the war, these shipping tycoons transported slaves to countries where slavery was still legal. But that is perfectly okay since they were in northern states, right?



_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 85
RE: First it was press one for english, now.... - 3/1/2014 3:16:04 PM   
fucktoyprincess


Posts: 2337
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

You are quite right, Hinduism developed in India around 2000 BCE.

Beringia, the land bridge that connected Asia to America did indeed exist.

However, the claim that Hindus circa 2000 BCE took the swastika has a bit of a problem, you see that land bridge that would have been the way for the Hindu people to get to North America kinda sorta was submerged about 11000 years ago.

Now unless you are suggesting that people from India sailed through the Indian Ocean into the Pacific and across to North America around 4000 years ago, the swastika as used by Native Americans was probably a result of independent development, you know, like the pre Colombian pyramids in the Mayan, Aztec and Teotihuacan cultures.



They have found swastikas in artifacts as old as 10,000 BCE in Asia. This is what we have found, not the earliest it existed. You seem to be confusing two different things. It is in fact more than theoretically possible that the swastika came to North America from Asia. There is no evidence to support that the swastika in the Americas has a completely independent development.

_____________________________

~ ftp

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 86
RE: First it was press one for english, now.... - 3/1/2014 3:23:25 PM   
fucktoyprincess


Posts: 2337
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

When did the confederate battle flag come to represent a racist movement, 1950!



Oh my. Yes, isn't this the point that many of us have been trying to make. That regardless of the origin of a symbol that if TODAY it means something hateful and racist then that's what it means. You yourself are admitting that the confederate flag TODAY (and for at least the past 60+ years) is a racist/hateful symbol. I have only been talking about what symbols mean TODAY. (I still disagree with your timeline about the symbology of hate in the confederate flag, but I'll take 1950 if that's what you want to agree to.) It still means that TODAY, a confederate flag cannot be viewed solely as a symbol of "Southern pride", but has to necessarily take it account its association with racism.

And that is what brings us to this in 2014:

http://www.ajc.com/news/news/ole-miss-stuggling-to-stay-ahead-of-its-past/ndYjt/

Are you honestly going to tell me the flag was on this particular stature as a symbol of "Southern Pride" and had ZERO to do with racism? Not to mention is it not clear from this that the message being sent to blacks is "you don't belong here, you should all be slaves". Are you honestly saying that this flag is completely benign and that the young white man who placed it there was just welcoming all students, of whatever background, to the South with some good old Southern charm???

_____________________________

~ ftp

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 87
RE: First it was press one for english, now.... - 3/1/2014 3:49:40 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

You are quite right, Hinduism developed in India around 2000 BCE.

Beringia, the land bridge that connected Asia to America did indeed exist.

However, the claim that Hindus circa 2000 BCE took the swastika has a bit of a problem, you see that land bridge that would have been the way for the Hindu people to get to North America kinda sorta was submerged about 11000 years ago.

Now unless you are suggesting that people from India sailed through the Indian Ocean into the Pacific and across to North America around 4000 years ago, the swastika as used by Native Americans was probably a result of independent development, you know, like the pre Colombian pyramids in the Mayan, Aztec and Teotihuacan cultures.



They have found swastikas in artifacts as old as 10,000 BCE in Asia. This is what we have found, not the earliest it existed. You seem to be confusing two different things. It is in fact more than theoretically possible that the swastika came to North America from Asia. There is no evidence to support that the swastika in the Americas has a completely independent development.


I highlighted a section to make a point.

First, The earliest swastika known has been found in Mezine, Ukraine. It is carved on late paleolithic figurine of mammoth ivory, being dated as early as about 10,000 BC. It has been suggested this swastika may be a stylized picture of a stork in flight and not the true swastika that is in use today.

Now the Ukraine is not in Asia, but eastern Europe.

Now, as for the Asian swastikas, we are talking Iron Age at the earliest, so between 1200 and 200 BCE. As for its Hindu symbolism, the earliest date does not predate the Ukraine, or neolithic findings in England, most notably Ilkley Moor. The period between 7000 BCE and 3000BCE in Greece and 1700BCE the beginning of the bronze age in Northern Europe.

Now, India is part of Asia, known as south asia, but there are barriers between it and the rest of Asia, the Himalayas and chains of mountains that continue to south east Asia.

There is no archeological record of swastika style emblems in china or Mongolia, the later being the primary source of Asian genetic traces in North America.

I am a history major, and these independent development is a fascination of mine. Pyramids in the Americas with no connection to Egypt. Mound structures in the US are similar to some found in other parts of the world, all post Bering land bridge. Copper use (first metal worked by man) developing in North America separate from the middle east, the real mystery is why the use of copper slowed and stone (flint) weapons maintained predominant use.

Identical smelting technologies developed in central and south America to early metal working in the fertile crescent.

I admit that other cultures impacted the Native Americans, Chinese, Japanese, Polynesian, all predate Columbus. But there is a reason for the commonality of the swastika in ancient cultures. It is a simple bird representation, among others. There were no Hindus in the Ukraine, or neolithic England, so cultural dissimulation does not fit the archeological record.

While some Native American cultures did indeed create pictographs, not all did. Nor did all cultures use a swastika style symbol for the Thunderbird.

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to fucktoyprincess)
Profile   Post #: 88
RE: First it was press one for english, now.... - 3/1/2014 4:57:01 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess



Oh my. Yes, isn't this the point that many of us have been trying to make. That regardless of the origin of a symbol that if TODAY it means something hateful and racist then that's what it means. You yourself are admitting that the confederate flag TODAY (and for at least the past 60+ years) is a racist/hateful symbol. I have only been talking about what symbols mean TODAY. (I still disagree with your timeline about the symbology of hate in the confederate flag, but I'll take 1950 if that's what you want to agree to.) It still means that TODAY, a confederate flag cannot be viewed solely as a symbol of "Southern pride", but has to necessarily take it account its association with racism.

And that is what brings us to this in 2014:

http://www.ajc.com/news/news/ole-miss-stuggling-to-stay-ahead-of-its-past/ndYjt/

Are you honestly going to tell me the flag was on this particular stature as a symbol of "Southern Pride" and had ZERO to do with racism? Not to mention is it not clear from this that the message being sent to blacks is "you don't belong here, you should all be slaves". Are you honestly saying that this flag is completely benign and that the young white man who placed it there was just welcoming all students, of whatever background, to the South with some good old Southern charm???



Uh, did you miss the point that the majority of southern Americans hated the way the KKK and other groups used the flag, or was that lost on you?

Are you aware that in some countries the US flag is a symbol of racism and oppression?

Are you aware that there are people in the US, born in the US, descended from people born in the US, who consider the US flag a symbol of genocide and elimination of cultures?

Contrary to what many want to believe, southerners are not racist as a culture. The racist elements in the south are a very small minority. The KKK is growing in the Northern States and fading in the south, are you aware of that?

Now if you were to believe Hollywood, the majority of southerners are illiterate, racists, wife beating, beer drinking, inbred and incapable of getting anything past a mid high school education. Southern born men marry first cousins, go to family reunions to meet girls, and all that other bullshit.

Jeff Foxworthy made a fortune playing that up, remember?

You know, kinda like that cliche' that all Hispanics in the US speak with an accent, are gardeners and maids, the younger ones are thugs and gang members. African Americans from inner cities are drug addicts, drug dealers, thieves, gang members, etc.

How many minority comedians make people laugh playing up that crap?

And all of those are Americans describing Americans.

Now, do you really want to keep stereo typing the south past and present as racist?

Now lets see, according to your profile you are in Manhattan.

Lets see, would you like me to go into detail of what many people in the south think of people from there?

Right off the top of my head, stuck up, money hungry, self centered, better than anyone else, you know, the basic Hollywood characterization. The difference is that many southerners see it as true, why?

And please remember, the US flag has a hell of a lot longer history of racial oppression than the confederate flag ever did.

The US army eliminated a number of native american cultures, and where they stopped the Bureau of Indian affairs took over. Native American children were taken from their parents, placed in a boarding school, forbidden from wearing traditional clothes, hairstyles, even speaking their language. To enforce these rules, enlightened non-racist teachers, beat students to the point of bleeding, locked them in rooms for up to days, forced to go without eating, and other equally heinous tortures, punishment is too light a word. This practice began in the 1800's and ended after 1928, officially. The last BIA boarding school closed in the early sixties.

All this was done in the name of Americanization. Wonderful term, coined by a little known American, a guy named George Washington, or I should say, he was the little known American that came up with the idea.

Do you know the man's name who convinced Thomas Jefferson from striking a sentence in the Declaration of independence that stated men of color were equal? A little known man named Samuel Adams.

He said it was for "future generations to deal with."

But yet slavery and racism is a southern thing.

Why dont you find out about the Dewolf family of Rhode Island? Or the Brown family of Providence, you know, the family that donated enough money to the Rhode Island College to get it renamed to Brown.

Or the northern banks that listed slaves as livestock, avoiding the term altogether...

But slavery and racism is a southern thing.

And people in the northern states wonder why they are not trusted in the south, treated as outsiders, and generally despised?

A hell of a lot of Old Money Northern families made their fortunes in the slave trade, running that wonderful trading route to Europe, then South to Africa for a load of cargo, then to the Caribbean or Savannah GA or Charleston SC, then carrying cotton to northern mills.

Give you three guesses what that African cargo was...

But slavery is a southern thing...

Ever heard the term Hypocrite? Revisionist history? I have been accused of that a lot, but the people doing the accusing seem to want to ignore some facts that tarnish the north.

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to fucktoyprincess)
Profile   Post #: 89
RE: First it was press one for english, now.... - 3/1/2014 6:28:04 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

quote:


Court rules school can ban American flag shirts to avoid racial strife

A federal court ruled Thursday that a northern California high school did not violate the constitutional rights of its students when school officials made them turn their American flag T-shirts inside out on Cinco de Mayo or be sent home due to fears of racial violence.

The three-judge panel unanimously decided the officials’ need to protect the safety of their students outweighed the students’ freedom of expression rights.

Administrators at Live Oak High School, in the San Jose suburb of Morgan Hill, feared the American-flag shirts would enflame Latino students celebrating the Mexican holiday, and ordered the students to either turn the shirts inside out or go home for the day.
Source


Okay let me see if I have this straight, Hispanics can where the Flag of Mexico to school but American kids cant wear the US flag because it might cause a fucking incident?

This is fucking bullshit.

And this is supposed to prevent racial strife?

First of all, Cinco De Mayo isnt a fucking US holiday, has nothing to do with the US, and honestly, if you want to celebrate it, may I suggest you haul your ass back to Mexico?

I have a better idea. Instead of Americans bending over backwards to keep the Hispanics happy on their holidays, how bout we ban anything featuring the flag of Mexico from our schools permanently?

This is the United States, not North Mexico.

Pretty obviously, the shirts were worn not as a matter of course, but deliberately to stick it to Cinco de Mayo.

Racially motivated, and the school landed on the side of prevention. The Court called it.

Had the shirts been a regular feature, different story. But still not "unconstitutional." Schools mandate uniforms, after all -- which I don't favor, but clearly also not "unconstitutional."

You don't have to like it.

Your rant is a change of subject, not an argument against.



The kids had the shirts but kept them folded up only to wear for Cenco de Mayo? Get real.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 90
RE: First it was press one for english, now.... - 3/1/2014 9:43:22 PM   
thishereboi


Posts: 14463
Joined: 6/19/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess


Name me one confederate state that didn't have slaves??

Name one of the original 13 colonies that didn't have slaves.

ED cause I can't type with a broken finger.



I want to know why no one ever mentions the people over in Africa who were rounding them up and selling them off like they were cattle. I guess they get a pass because it wasn't racism that motivated the majority, it was pure old fashioned greed.

_____________________________

"Sweetie, you're wasting your gum" .. Albert


This here is the boi formerly known as orfunboi


(in reply to Hillwilliam)
Profile   Post #: 91
RE: First it was press one for english, now.... - 3/1/2014 10:07:47 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess


Name me one confederate state that didn't have slaves??

Name one of the original 13 colonies that didn't have slaves.

ED cause I can't type with a broken finger.



I want to know why no one ever mentions the people over in Africa who were rounding them up and selling them off like they were cattle. I guess they get a pass because it wasn't racism that motivated the majority, it was pure old fashioned greed.

And a way to get rid of enemies.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to thishereboi)
Profile   Post #: 92
RE: First it was press one for english, now.... - 3/1/2014 10:17:09 PM   
thishereboi


Posts: 14463
Joined: 6/19/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess


Name me one confederate state that didn't have slaves??

Name one of the original 13 colonies that didn't have slaves.

ED cause I can't type with a broken finger.



I want to know why no one ever mentions the people over in Africa who were rounding them up and selling them off like they were cattle. I guess they get a pass because it wasn't racism that motivated the majority, it was pure old fashioned greed.

And a way to get rid of enemies.


That too.

_____________________________

"Sweetie, you're wasting your gum" .. Albert


This here is the boi formerly known as orfunboi


(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 93
RE: First it was press one for english, now.... - 3/1/2014 10:45:29 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline 		Boi, admittedly you and I rarely agree on an issue, and I am afraid that I have to point out your flaws here.

1) The Africans that were doing that were black and not from the southern US. Thus they have no part in the problem of slavery in the US.

2) The fact that northern owned ships happened to get their cargoes of slaves from these individuals also did not matter, you see they were from the North, and thus had no part in the issue of slavery in the southern US.

3) The fact that these African chiefs and kings raided the villages of their own people as well as others both friends and enemies alike to gather individuals who were to be sold to slave traders also has no bearing.

You see these Africans were trying to give their friends and kin folk a better life in the United States. So what if it meant that these people would be in a state of life long servitude, that was beside the point. These lucky Africans would be far away from those tropical diseases that killed indiscriminately. Nor would they be subjected to the environmental extremes that also killed there fellow tribe members.

Finally these people sold into slavery did it gladly to make their kings and chiefs richer, not to mention the guns that were supplied for hunting food, never used to fight against tribes without guns, that would be unfair.

Sorry boi, your argument is invalid.

I need to get away from this, my sarcasm drive is running on overload.

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to thishereboi)
Profile   Post #: 94
RE: First it was press one for english, now.... - 3/1/2014 11:09:07 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Boi, admittedly you and I rarely agree on an issue, and I am afraid that I have to point out your flaws here.

1) The Africans that were doing that were black and not from the southern US. Thus they have no part in the problem of slavery in the US.

2) The fact that northern owned ships happened to get their cargoes of slaves from these individuals also did not matter, you see they were from the North, and thus had no part in the issue of slavery in the southern US.

3) The fact that these African chiefs and kings raided the villages of their own people as well as others both friends and enemies alike to gather individuals who were to be sold to slave traders also has no bearing.

You see these Africans were trying to give their friends and kin folk a better life in the United States. So what if it meant that these people would be in a state of life long servitude, that was beside the point. These lucky Africans would be far away from those tropical diseases that killed indiscriminately. Nor would they be subjected to the environmental extremes that also killed there fellow tribe members.

Finally these people sold into slavery did it gladly to make their kings and chiefs richer, not to mention the guns that were supplied for hunting food, never used to fight against tribes without guns, that would be unfair.

Sorry boi, your argument is invalid.

I need to get away from this, my sarcasm drive is running on overload.

Yes it is, but it is so much fun.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 95
RE: First it was press one for english, now.... - 3/1/2014 11:51:12 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

quote:


Court rules school can ban American flag shirts to avoid racial strife

A federal court ruled Thursday that a northern California high school did not violate the constitutional rights of its students when school officials made them turn their American flag T-shirts inside out on Cinco de Mayo or be sent home due to fears of racial violence.

The three-judge panel unanimously decided the officials’ need to protect the safety of their students outweighed the students’ freedom of expression rights.

Administrators at Live Oak High School, in the San Jose suburb of Morgan Hill, feared the American-flag shirts would enflame Latino students celebrating the Mexican holiday, and ordered the students to either turn the shirts inside out or go home for the day.
Source


Okay let me see if I have this straight, Hispanics can where the Flag of Mexico to school but American kids cant wear the US flag because it might cause a fucking incident?

This is fucking bullshit.

And this is supposed to prevent racial strife?

First of all, Cinco De Mayo isnt a fucking US holiday, has nothing to do with the US, and honestly, if you want to celebrate it, may I suggest you haul your ass back to Mexico?

I have a better idea. Instead of Americans bending over backwards to keep the Hispanics happy on their holidays, how bout we ban anything featuring the flag of Mexico from our schools permanently?

This is the United States, not North Mexico.

Pretty obviously, the shirts were worn not as a matter of course, but deliberately to stick it to Cinco de Mayo.

Racially motivated, and the school landed on the side of prevention. The Court called it.

Had the shirts been a regular feature, different story. But still not "unconstitutional." Schools mandate uniforms, after all -- which I don't favor, but clearly also not "unconstitutional."

You don't have to like it.

Your rant is a change of subject, not an argument against.



The kids had the shirts but kept them folded up only to wear for Cenco de Mayo? Get real.

You get real. That's the point of the entire episode.

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 96
RE: First it was press one for english, now.... - 3/2/2014 4:27:21 AM   
chatterbox24


Posts: 2182
Joined: 1/22/2012
Status: offline 		Where do you get fear out of any of that? We were a nation of immigrants when The United States of America flag was made. I am Scottish, German, English and American Indian. That flag means to be quite the opposite as you imply it means to me and many others. Germans and Native americans didn't speak the same language in example. Nor was the culture similar.
As far as the original thread meaning, if those boys were taunted and being bigots toward other students then that's their bad, but somehow the report seems just the opposite. Sometimes people have to take a stand on something, especially if its something important to me. That flag should be honored by anyone wanting to live here. It is a symbol of a melting pot of different people, different colors, different cultures, just different people. It stands for the THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA for all people, not the DIVIDED STATES OF AMERICA.

Say I had a friend and they were in fear for their life for what they believed, and I said come here, live here, we are a tolerant accepting people. They even practice a different religion or live a different way. They have a better life, with definitely a lot less fear of being killed over their own believes but they start getting comfortable here, and want to complain how we do things here, or complain about what has worked because they want to change all things to their liking now. I would find that friend unappreciative and disrespectful. Don't try to change the things that have worked, and made a nation people want to escape to, cause it just might happen. When you change things that work, sometimes they don't work anymore.

THe American flag is a symbol of freedom and respect for our nation and all people in it. Its a thing of beauty.
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML


quote:

ORIGINAL: chatterbox24

This is how we do it in these parts. They ban our children from wearing American flag attire, honoring our country? Well all the parents wear their American flag attire to the board meeting. My children regularly where items such as this and if it becomes a problem in the schools in our own nation to wear it that's crazy.

Amazing how insecure Americans become when ethnic pride is displayed while at the same time we pride ourselves on being a nation of immigrants. Freakin ironic. Are we all to blend in and become a homogeneous people? Or can we tolerate the Exceptionalism that makes America great and unique without nativist ranting? Over 70 non-English languages are spoken daily in NYC. Is that a cause for fear also? Should those languages be banned? Why are Americans so timid when encountering foreign cultures? Is it arrogance or is it weakness? Why the fear and anger?

We are the most powerful nation and the richest nation in the world. We attribute that to our openness as a nation of immigrants. Yet, we act panicky at the slightest hint of "otherness." Americans act like frightened children imo.



_____________________________

I am like a box of chocolates, you never know what variety you are going to get on any given day.

My crazy smells like jasmine, cloves and cat nip.

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 97
RE: First it was press one for english, now.... - 3/2/2014 6:48:50 AM   
thishereboi


Posts: 14463
Joined: 6/19/2008
Status: offline 		I though Colbert was supposed to be a very intelligent man and he is just figuring this out? Has he been out of the country for the last 20 years or doesn't he ever go out and look around him. While this country has come a long way from what it used to be, it still has a long way to go before we can start thinking we have gotten rid of it.

_____________________________

"Sweetie, you're wasting your gum" .. Albert


This here is the boi formerly known as orfunboi


(in reply to kalikshama)
Profile   Post #: 98
RE: First it was press one for english, now.... - 3/2/2014 6:51:37 AM   
thishereboi


Posts: 14463
Joined: 6/19/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Boi, admittedly you and I rarely agree on an issue, and I am afraid that I have to point out your flaws here.

1) The Africans that were doing that were black and not from the southern US. Thus they have no part in the problem of slavery in the US.

2) The fact that northern owned ships happened to get their cargoes of slaves from these individuals also did not matter, you see they were from the North, and thus had no part in the issue of slavery in the southern US.

3) The fact that these African chiefs and kings raided the villages of their own people as well as others both friends and enemies alike to gather individuals who were to be sold to slave traders also has no bearing.

You see these Africans were trying to give their friends and kin folk a better life in the United States. So what if it meant that these people would be in a state of life long servitude, that was beside the point. These lucky Africans would be far away from those tropical diseases that killed indiscriminately. Nor would they be subjected to the environmental extremes that also killed there fellow tribe members.

Finally these people sold into slavery did it gladly to make their kings and chiefs richer, not to mention the guns that were supplied for hunting food, never used to fight against tribes without guns, that would be unfair.

Sorry boi, your argument is invalid.

I need to get away from this, my sarcasm drive is running on overload.



This here boi humbly concedes the point to the gentleman from Texas. Carry on Sir, carry on.

_____________________________

"Sweetie, you're wasting your gum" .. Albert


This here is the boi formerly known as orfunboi


(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 99
RE: First it was press one for english, now.... - 3/2/2014 9:48:38 AM   
Hillwilliam


Posts: 19394
Joined: 8/27/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess


Name me one confederate state that didn't have slaves??

Name one of the original 13 colonies that didn't have slaves.

ED cause I can't type with a broken finger.

Per the census of 8/1790, Maine and Mass. had ea. zero slaves while Vermont erroneously recorded 16 wthat were it was later determined to be...free blacks simply recorded as slaves. That's 3 colonies...no slaves.

I said colonies not states.

There were no colonies in 1790. There were states.

Now, name one of the original 13 colonies that had no slaves.

Too many people see slavery as an exclusively southern thing. It wasn't.

_____________________________

Kinkier than a cheap garden hose.

Whoever said "Religion is the opiate of the masses" never heard Right Wing talk radio.

Don't blame me, I voted for Gary Johnson.

(in reply to MrRodgers)
Profile   Post #: 100
Page:   <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: First it was press one for english, now.... Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.156