Father and son charged with murder of Georgia jogger.

It doesn't represent slavery to the person flying it.

And as you well know, the Civil War was about many other things in addition to slavery.

 

No I quoted the other side who clearly said the war wasn’t over slavery.

The confederates within nearly every major speech, including the cornerstone speech you just cherrypicked from, as well as within the secession documents made clear that the CAUSE for secession is that the north willfully and intentionally violated the constitution even after being ordered to cease and desist by the Supreme Court TWICE. To provide EVIDENCE of that claim they then reference slavery.

Slavery was the catalyst but it was not the CAUSE. the cause was the unrelenting violation of the constitution by the northern states and their proxy the federal government who breached contract in regards to the constitution.

 

That’s patently absurd. What you’re essentially arguing is that party A can violate the contract and agreement at will and with immunity but party B is still obligated to follow the contract.

That is preposterous. You CANNOT refuse to uphold your obligation under a contract and then demand through threat of violence that the other party continue to uphold their obligations under the same contract. There’s not a court in the HISTORY of the worold who would rule in your favor outside of a kangaroo court.

Moreover once you’re guilty of breach of contract, the contract which gave authority ceases to exist and as such all lands which had been handed over to the federal government cedes back to the state from whence it came since the federal government derives its authority from the very contract they were in breach of. That wasn’t us property, Ft Sumter was confederate property.

 

Well you got to that conclusion MUCH faster than I thought you would.

You just described why we had the civil war.

What good does an amendment to the constitution do when the other side has already shown time and again that they won’t follow the constitution even when ordered to do so by the Supreme Court?

Look we can all agree that slavery was egregious and the fugitive slave clause should have been removed from the constitution.

However the precedent CANNOT be allowed to stand unchallenged that the federal government can simply declare a portion of the constitution to be immoral, they can refuse to uphold that portion of the constitution, they can ignore TWO direct orders of unconstitutionality from the SCOTUS, they can attempt to change the constitution without going through the constitutional process and without the consent of the governed and then violently oppress anyone who opposes them.

That is UNACCEPTABLE and must be met with the utmost and fiercest opposition up to and including warfare. That’s what my ancestors did. They stood up in defense of the constitution, in the face of certain death, against a tyrannical government who was violating that constitution at will and with immunity. They did so against ALL odds; outgunned, outsupplied, with little to no infrastructure and outnumbered nearly three to one. And they did it with much honor, sacrifice and blood spilled.

Those confederate men and women are the only reason we still have a constitution today as they made violating the constitution far too costly. They should be honored for that sacrifice. Not vilified.

 

I believe Jefferson Davis said it best, “I would rather leave the union with the constitution than to remain in the union without it.”

 

I just call it stalking and murder. The father is a former cop. If anyone, he should know better. Racism runs deep in some areas.

 

It doesn't represent slavery. It represents the confederate states.

 

And why did you feel the need to state the obvious in reply to my post? Are you under the impression I support the Father and Son?

 

Which were formed to protect the institution of slavery

Oh...

 

The confederate battle flag has nothing to do with slavery. You just wish it did.

 

did these guys have a bunch of flags on the truck or is this just a deflection from the subject matter?

 

Why does it always seem to show up when issues of race are discussed?

 

I mentioned this early on that both parties were guilty of reacting in a way that most (9,999 out of 10,000) would respond, you generally don't follow someone around in a truck with firearms, and you generally don't charge at people in a truck with firearms. Its a perfect storm IMO.

What I find most frustrating is the obvious, the daily search for racism, the media is always searching high and low for some evidence of racism to perpetuate the agenda (white man bad), and occasionally they find one, (smollett was the most recent, but that backfired because he was so desperate to find evidence he created his own) before that it was Starbucks?

Media finds it a bonus if they find a situation where they can get people to pick sides first then slowly trickle some new evidence in to muddy the waters and get people pissed off at each other, if someone can't spot the pattern and the agenda in the media then they are ignoring the very obvious signs.

I've asked myself that question many times as well, why does the left always bring it up?
Where were the flags in this video I must have missed that part.

Duly noted: the left isn't very fond of American flags either, that seems to trigger them too.

 

I do not surmise to know your inner dialogue, you posted “By the way they didn’t want to kill the guy or they would have just shot him immediately. They didn’t shoot him until he tried to take someone’s gun away from them instead of just stop like he was asked to do.

And he wasn’t cornered lol he was on a road with woods on both sides. All he had to do was stop or keep running but his decision to try to take the man’s gun away cost him his life.”

I showed why he was under no obligation to stop and they were 100% in the wrong in this situation.

 

I have no idea.

 

No it is just a response to a mistaken post that claimed that flag represented slavery. Please proceed with the subject matter. I was deflecting nothing.

 

I understand, I wasn't accusing you of such, but the person you responded to. my bad for the confusion.

 

Watch this before you make up your mind about the shooting. It was 100% legal!

 

That wasn't my post. You are mistaken.

That black man did exactly what I would have done if I had been in his shoes. Except I carry.

 

You edited your post after I replied to it:
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-georgia-jogger.572204/page-8#post-1071679220

 

I repaired the previous posters mistake of having too many /quote tags in it.

Those words never came from me.

The Only portion of that post that is mine are the words about not everyone is built to run.

Get it right.

 

Ok, now that you identified the issue I understand.
They got captured without any stray formatting marks so I am sure you can see why someone would attribute those words to you.

 

if these two men left home without a gun that day, their lives would be much better off, and a jogger would still be alive

 

It's the purpose of the flag.
The traitor states fought for the right to keep owning black people. IE slavery.

 

Who started a war to keep ownership of black people.

Read all the secessionists papers. It was the top issue for some but in the top 5 issues for all.