Bulldoze the Jefferson memorial!

FYI

Here is a current Black man who defends Southern Heritage:
https://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=454092085907

Black slave owners in The South:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ef2_1336262149

 

Yea - we posted this up a few times in the threads - think back in the History one. Lincoln's EP seized the slaves of the states in rebellion against the Union. Maryland-Delaware-Missouri-Kentucky were not in rebellion, although their sympathies were pro-South, and Kentucky, without exercising a secession order, actually was admitted into the CSA.

As President, Lincoln could do nothing to eliminate slavery, however, once the South instituted hostilities against Federal property, seized it, and went to war against the Federal Union, Lincoln held that to be illegal, and used the War Powers Act to seize the slaves. All of the states of what were known as the Confederate States of America were, in fact, illegal, therefore, their original laws before the illegal idea of secession were introduced by them, remained in force. Those original laws held that slaves were, in fact, "property" and as "property" Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation in 1862, seizing the slaves form the illegal CSA states, two years before he faced an election, to deny the rebel states the use of those slaves in their war effort, and permit the Union armies to use them when they escaped into their lines, instead of sending them back to sure death. The Supreme Court and Congress never ruled on the Emancipation Proclamation, because it was done under the War Power Act of the Executive Branch - and the people of the North didn't object to it, obviously, because they re-elected President Lincoln to a second term - however, not as a member of the Republican Party.......

 

Lincoln held those states in the Federal Union by force of arms..............

 

This was about keeping public opinion in thise states. Some of the guerilla type raids and warfare that happened in and around the border states is interesting reading.

The threat these states might succeed to the Confederacy was very real and much more so in the early years of the war.

 

There are a lot of nuances I suppose one could say about the civil war that are very important. To overlook them one misses the substance of what actually went on and why. Yeah, Lincoln won as a candidate of the National Union Party. If not for Sherman's march to the sea and the burning of Atlanta, there was a very real possibility Lincoln would have lost.

 

Hypocrisy exposed! Murderous Marxist symbols allowed (t shirts, statues):

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/06/2...eam-while-last-century-worst-villains-spared/

And even excused: 'we weren't at war with communists'. So that makes it all right? Incredible.

 

Delaware and Maryland were too close to Washington, D.C. to have successfully seceded. At the start of the war, with Southern sympathizers stoning and shooting at arriving Federal troops, answering Lincoln's call for volunteers, having to change trains in Baltimore for Washington City, the mobs were harassing them. Lincoln sent Union General Benjamin Butler up there with order's to stop the harassment, even to burning Baltimore to the ground on his own if he felt it necessary. Butler than marched on the Maryland statehouse in Annapolis where he took control of the legislature and forced an Union supported, anti-secession bill through for the state at gunpoint, thus ended any possibility of Maryland becoming a member of the Southern confederacy. Only one major battle was fought on Maryland turf during the Civil War - a tie at Antietam (or Sharpsburg if you prefer). That ended Lee's first invasion of the North in 1862 and allowed Lincoln to call it a victory, and politically issue his Emancipation Proclamation. Missouri and Kentucky raids and border skirmishes occurred throughout the war, but the South was never able to sent sufficient forces to control either state, but there was enough Southern sentiment in Kentucky that they admitted it into the confederacy without a secession bill even being passed by Kentucky..........

 

What is this revisionist bull(*)(*)(*)(*)?

My father and uncle fought in real wars against communists.

And WTF is a statue of Lenin doing in the United States? Tear it down!

 

Well, I dont know about "Islamo-communist-fascist-nazi-reptilian-hispanic-homosexual-atheist-martian-black-hippie totalitarian commune" but its communism by evolution, not revolution. Marx believed it would be by revolution.

 

Try making some sense. Your gibberish is undecipherable.

 

What part of "We didn’t have a real war against communism" being revisionist bull(*)(*)(*)(*) didn't you get?

What part of real Americans fought in real wars against communists (the Korean War, Vietnam War, etc.) didn't you get?

What part of WTF is a statue of a communist mass murderer doing in the United States and tear it down didn't you get?

It's all in plain English, sir, and I'm sorry I agree with you that Amazon is being hypocritical.

 

No, the lady in the article said we didn't fight a war against communism, not me. She was using that as an excuse for allowing Marxist symbols in America.
I'm trying to figure out which side of the aisle you're on. You have an icon with Communists for Bernie Sanders. Are you a communist?

 

It was a breathtakingly ignorant excuse, wasn't it?

Nope - I'm a conservatarian (libertarian-conservative).

I'm just having fun with the candidacy of the Democrat who is honest enough to admit he's a socialist. That kind of candor amongst "progressives" is an exceptionally rare thing.

While I was messing with some Lefties about Sanders I stumbled across the CPUSA article in my signature exalting Sanders' "political revolution". It was too funny to let pass so I posted it for everyone to see. If you've got a moment, check it out. Comrade Bernie is sending tingles up Commie thighs.

 

Rule 11 thread closure

Shangrila
Moderator