# The Confederate battle flag.



## MannDude (Jun 27, 2015)

I figured I'd start a new thread so the thread regarding the United State's decision to allow gay marriages can proceed without being sidetracked by the discussion of the Confederate flag.

As most of you are aware, regardless where you're located in the world, one white individual entered a church filled with black people and opened fire, killing 9 people last week.

In his manifesto he claims he was motivated by the largely under reported black on white crime statistics in which a small portion of the population attribute to the majority of crime and murder and stated his interest in such grew after the Trayvon Martin case where a "white-hispanic" man shot and killed Trayvon Martin, a black teenager, in self defense. His manifesto in full can be read here for those interested: http://lastrhodesian.com/data/documents/rtf88.txt

So, what does this have to do with the confederate battle flag? Well, Dylann Roof was a racist adult who had photos of himself posing with the flag. As such the flag is now apparently equated to him and/or racism.

Keep in mind that this same flag flew over the state capitol building in South Carolina for years. It's literally a part of Mississippi's state flag. The flag can be seen everywhere, in the windows of college student's houses, to the back of trucks, to state issued licenses plates, to t-shirts, belt-buckles, anything and everything... the flag is there. But, this is changing.

eBay, Etsy, Wal-Mart, Amazon, Google and others have _banned _the sale of the flag claiming it's due to their policy of not promoting 'hate' or 'racism'. (Yet you can still buy Che Guevara t-shirts, Nazi memorabilia and replicas, etc) And now they are coming after southern monuments and statues that stand to honor the men and women, both white and black, who died during the American civil war. Southerns are proud, deep rooted people and the flag they display proudly represents that.

I'm from the north, you don't see the flag often up here, but you do occasionally. When I see someone rocking the flag I don't think they're a racist. I just think they're probably a good ol' country boy. If my car gets stuck in the ditch in the winter time due to the snow. I can go knock on their door and they'll probably be able to help pull me out. I never really equated the flag with racism even though I am aware of the American civil war.

So, anyhow, now they're calling for the flag to be removed. Monuments to be removed. The TV show, "The Dukes of Hazard" are having their merchandise pulled and the media seems to be doing a great job at poking a sleeping bear that is the American south.

Here's the thing though: Most flags are earned in ways that may make us look back and think it wasn't such a good thing. America is a young country, we came in and with brutal force wiped and relocated native people from their land. We fought wars, utilized slavery in the American south and later cheap / almost-slave-labor work from immigrants to build our railroads and early infrastructure. The entire country, black and white benefited from the exploit of our ancestors to rise to a world power in such a short time. So, by the logic of liberals, the NAACP, The Black Panthers, and white college liberal art majors who tweet to corporations in the name of 'justice'... will the American flag see the same fate? Of course not.

I don't see what the big damn deal is about the flag. I have no idea why it's been banned from sale from so many places. I do not see what the destruction and vandalism of statues and monuments honoring the dead do. The Vietnam war was brutal, would these people stoop so low as to go destroy war memorials in Washington DC? Where do you draw the line? These are people who fought and died for this country regardless if you believe in their cause, and they should be left alone.

ALSO:






L-O-fucking-L


----------



## drmike (Jun 27, 2015)

I wipe my ass with all of your flags.


----------



## DomainBop (Jun 27, 2015)

> So, anyhow, now they're calling for the flag to be removed. Monuments to be removed. The TV show, "The Dukes of Hazard" are having their merchandise pulled and the media seems to be doing a great job at poking a sleeping bear that is the American south.


Calling for the flag to be removed is an exercise of free speech and I have no problem with people calling for its removal.  I would however have a huge problem if the calls to remove the flag turned into legislation mandating the removal of the flag, and/or imposing penalties on people who chose to exercise their free speech and fly the Confederate flag or stick Confederate flag bumper stickers on their cars. 

 While I find the confederate flag and everything it represents offensive, I'm also a firm believer that in order to have free speech you need to allow others  to voice their opinions, no matter how offensive or unpopular those opinions may be.  Displaying the flag is an expression of free speech. The Supreme Court basically said the same thing in landmark free speech rulings like _National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie (1977)_, and _Brandenburg v. Ohio (1968).  _The Skokie case established the right for people/groups to express unpopular opinions that went against societal norms, and the Brandenberg case basically said the only time offensive speech like this should be banned is if the speech  is _“directed at inciting or producing imminent lawless action, and is likely to incite or produce such action.”_



> I don't see what the big damn deal is about the flag. I have no idea why it's been banned from sale from so many places.


Easy.  Making a symbolic highly publicized gesture like calling for the banning the Confederate flag is a hell of a lot easier than actually fixing the institutional racism that is prevalent in all regions of the country.  The politicians, major media outlets, and megaretailers calling for the banning of the flag and pulling product from their shelves gain a lot of free favorable publicity without really doing a damn thing to address the underlying problem.

TL;DR guns don't kill people, people kill people flags don't create racism, people create racism


----------



## MannDude (Jun 27, 2015)

DomainBop said:


> megaretailers calling for the banning of the flag and pulling product from their shelves gain a lot of free favorable publicity without really doing a damn thing to address the underlying problem.


I don't know, I'd rather have the money from the increase in flag sales when my competitors announced their ban... 



It's just a giant knee-jerk reaction in my opinion and as you mentioned, does not address anything substantial. Their efforts to ban the flag, to burn it, and to destroy and vandalize monuments puts more lives at risk than just leaving them be. It really is in my honest opinion that this is being agged on more than it would be normally by the media just to provoke more conflict.

As with other similar people, Dylann Roof was a drug user with apparent mental health issues. What he did was not caused by his flag. His gun. His t-shirt. His music. His TV shows. Not even his the brand underwear he wore. He woke up one morning and said, "Today is the day", and that decision was made by him and not by any material bought inanimate object.


----------



## k0nsl (Jun 27, 2015)

A little interesting side note is, that at the time, the 'Führer' of the NSPA [?] was a certain cretin called Frank Collin (born Joseph Cohen). This god awful "nazi" was jewish 






If memory serves me right, he was sent to jail for three years, having something to do with child molestation or something like that. I'm not sure. I read up on him a long time ago.

Sorry for the slight off-topic (although it is directly relevant to what @DomainBop posted).



DomainBop said:


> The Supreme Court basically said the same thing in landmark free speech rulings like _National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie (1977)_, and _Brandenburg v. Ohio (1968).  _The Skokie case established the right for people/groups to express unpopular opinions that went against societal norms [...]


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jun 27, 2015)

The reasoning is irrelevant.  The 'controversy' was drug up to be used as a blown out of proportion item intended to occupy media spotlights.  Meanwhile issues that have actual significance, such as the TPA fiasco, are proceeding merrily along without anyone paying them the slightest notice.

I always found the cries of 'racism' to be highly amusing considering how many black slave owners there were, or the fact that the African tribal chiefs were the ones to actually suggest slavery to the visiting colonists and merchants as a clever way to rid themselves of unwanted members of the tribe and help combat overpopulation.  Never mind the slaves from other races (including caucasians), and that slavery and racism are tangentially related at best.


----------



## joepie91 (Jun 27, 2015)

I find it very disturbing that "flag removal" is being applied to historically accurate materials, in particular. Whether they be games on the App Store, or educational textbooks.


----------



## clarity (Jun 27, 2015)

Being from Mississippi, I don't understand the reasoning behind the call for the removal of the flag. That flag does not represent what people think that it does. It was not created to symbolize slavery.

The flag exists because the South was being treated unfairly by the Northern States. They rebelled against it, and the flag was created. If you look back at the history of the U.S., the North was hoarding the wealth. The Southern states were carrying most of their loads in their mind, and the civil war brewed from that.

The thing that people seem to forget is that the slaves were not picked up from Africa by White people. The slaves were captured by their own people and sold to the U.S. in markets. If their people can take and sell them for cash, I am not sure that the Capitalist Americans did something so bad. Indentured servants filled the need before, but slaves were turned into property by their own people. Whether or not that was correct is another topic of discussion, but it was a business transaction started by Africans.

I am sure that this post will receive some backlash, but I am tired of people complaining about things that they don't really understand. America was fueled by Indentured Servants to start, and it quickly went to another market where things were cheaper. America was started by people who wanted more to begin with, and this is another example of that. Right or wrong, it is what fueled this country into what it is today.

if we want to be honest with ourselves, we are doing the same thing today with illegal immigrants. We pay them nothing and work them to the bone. it is just as bad, but no one is calling for the removal of the American flag. America is a greedy place!


----------



## telephone (Jun 27, 2015)

joepie91 said:


> I find it very disturbing that "flag removal" is being applied to historically accurate materials, in particular. Whether they be games on the App Store, or educational textbooks.


I agree. It's no different than digitally removing smoking from old media.


----------



## raindog308 (Jun 27, 2015)

Aldryic C said:


> I always found the cries of 'racism' to be highly amusing considering how many black slave owners there were, or the fact that the African tribal chiefs were the ones to actually suggest slavery to the visiting colonists and merchants as a clever way to rid themselves of unwanted members of the tribe and help combat overpopulation.


You can thank "Roots" for the modern view of slavery.  The scene in that movie is poor LeVar Burton walking through the jungle when men with ropes set upon him...

This did happen in small cases but the vast majority of slaves sold in Africa were Tribal Chief #1 defeating Tribal Chief #2 and selling his people for profit.  This however, does not fit the (pardon the pun) black and white verdict of history quite so neatly.

Tangentially, "Roots" was presented as fact when Haley later admitted large parts of it were plagiarized from an earlier novel and had to pay a settlement.


----------



## raindog308 (Jun 27, 2015)

telephone said:


> I agree. It's no different than digitally removing smoking from old media.


----------



## tonyg (Jun 27, 2015)

clarity said:


> That flag does not represent what people think that it does. It was not created to symbolize slavery.
> 
> I am sure that this post will receive some backlash, but I am tired of people complaining about things that they don't really understand.


Yes, you are the smartest person in the room...I get it.

Please see:

https://en.wikipedia...nerstone_Speech


Excerpt:


"the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and normal condition"


----------



## k0nsl (Jun 27, 2015)

Why does the links say "photoshop"? That's an authentic image (the first one), but as for the manipulated image, the man to the left, Nikolai Yezhov, was removed due to a fallout with Stalin, I forget exactly why, so Stalin simply had the censors retouch it so as to leave no trace of his "old comrade"   



raindog308 said:


>


----------



## tonyg (Jun 27, 2015)

Aldryic C said:


> the fact that the African tribal chiefs were the ones to actually suggest slavery to the visiting colonists



So you are presenting as fact that the Europeans had no concept of slavery and were talked into it by the Africans?


What does "visiting colonists" mean...like they were on vacation?


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jun 27, 2015)

Are you presenting as fact that you are ignorant enough to willfully misinterpret statements?


----------



## tonyg (Jun 27, 2015)

What did I misinterpret? Please do tell.


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jun 27, 2015)

Innocence does not follow ignorance.  You're trying to pick a fight, and have no clue whom you've stepped into the ring with.  Frankly, you're not capable of a challenge worth my time or effort in that regard.  If you have something insightful, by all means share.  If your best contribution is an immature jab, followed by childish denial, then perhaps it's best that you simply remain silent while the adults are talking.


----------



## tonyg (Jun 27, 2015)

Aldryic C said:


> You're trying to pick a fight, and have no clue whom you've stepped into the ring with.



Let me guess...you are also an expert in World History?

Apparently, you are an expert in just about everything.

You are quite the character.


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jun 27, 2015)

You're goddamn right.  Now run along and play so folks can get back to actual conversation.


----------



## tonyg (Jun 27, 2015)

Aldryic C said:


> You're goddamn right.  Now run along and play so folks can get back to actual conversation.


Wow, that sure is a departure from your "high and mighty" response from post #17.


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jun 27, 2015)

Seriously.  If you have an actual problem with me, that's too bad for you.  If you have legitimate questions you'd like an answer to?  You're welcome to PM me.  But I'm bored of enabling your offtopic public self-embarrassment for the evening, so _*hattip*._


----------



## tonyg (Jun 27, 2015)

Ok.


----------



## drmike (Jun 28, 2015)

clarity said:


> If you look back at the history of the U.S., the North was hoarding the wealth. The Southern states were carrying most of their loads in their mind
> 
> if we want to be honest with ourselves, we are doing the same thing today with illegal immigrants. We pay them nothing and work them to the bone. it is just as bad, but no one is calling for the removal of the American flag. America is a greedy place!


The North hasn't changed one bit all of these years.  It's the banking / Wall Street cabal still concentrated in mighty old New York.

How long would the North last if the South stopped feeding it?  One season?  Two maybe?

Greed indeed is what ills this country.  Greed and exploitation.  



tonyg said:


> Excerpt:
> 
> "the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and normal condition"


Sounds identical to what one nation state says routinely in this very day about Goyim, that is every other race and human other than their "chosen" people.  Yet for all this abundant racism and strong language that Goyim are to bow and serve this group, there are little to no discussions at large about this vile racism in the modern day in an infant of a nation.

Slavery has existed for much of history and you'd be hard pressed to find a non slave owning or enslaved group.

Eradicating slavery should have always been a priority of civilized people.   Then again, life in the United States and earlier territories even under bondage was likely superior to living conditions in Africa where the neighbors raided primitive villages and raped the women and enslaved the children and men.  Clearer in the this brave new world who was the danger was since it was color coded.  In merry old Africa the enemy looked like the man in the mirror. 

Doesn't justify a thing.  Lazy bastard slave owners should have done their own farming.  Following this annoying wealthy group stopping the slave practice, their assets should have been seized and divided among the slaves, if we were being fair.    Unsure why the BS story told well intentioned North didn't force such.  Seems in hindsight more like they bought themselves a big new voting block and that was emphasis of the slavery being outlawed.


----------



## drmike (Jun 28, 2015)

tonyg said:


> So you are presenting as fact that the Europeans had no concept of slavery and were talked into it by the Africans?
> 
> 
> What does "visiting colonists" mean...like they were on vacation?


Slaves came to America mostly from the Carribean where where they had been slaves for many years.

I'm sure someone will cry racism, but one only need to look to the filthy Jewish merchants who have had quite the appetite for slavery and monopolizing the trade going way back in history.  Many ships bearing the names of people who clearly were from such group.

Importation of Africans as slaves directly to the United States was allegedly outlawed back around 1808.  For the years thereafter slaves came from the Islands, Central America and South America.

White looking folks surely were floating around ports in Africa.  They weren't folks from the colonies though.  They were mainly from Europe.


----------



## raindog308 (Jun 28, 2015)

drmike said:


> Sounds identical to what one nation state says routinely in this very day about Goyim, that is every other race and human other than their "chosen" people.  Yet for all this abundant racism and strong language that Goyim are to bow and serve this group, there are little to no discussions at large about this vile racism in the modern day in an infant of a nation.


Just when I think you're reasonable you veer off into crazy anti-Semitism. WTF?

Have you ever met a Jew or known an Israeli? You seem to have very paranoid, Protocols of the Elders of Zion-level conspiracy theories about them. The cultural views of the Jews I know (both thoroughly Americanized Jews and my Orthodox friends in Israel) are 180 degrees from the nonsense you're spouting here.

The Jews do not seek to enslave the world. They are not puppet masters over global banking. They do not meet in Prague cemeteries at night to plot taking over the world. They do view their relationship with God as different than those of gentiles (though not as different as you'd think), but then so do Christians and Muslims. It's a purely a religious thing and it is a nearly unique contrast to other missionizing faiths - in other words, they're not into forced conversions and it baffles me why you would think that's bad.

We just spent the last century demonstrating that as populations go, they are one of the most vulnerable on the planet. There are a hell of a lot less Jews in 2015 than there were in 1915 thanks to evil fantasies you're trying to spread.



drmike said:


> Slaves came to America mostly from the Carribean where where they had been slaves for many years.


No, they mostly came from Africa - the Middle Passage.



drmike said:


> I'm sure someone will cry racism, but one only need to look to the filthy Jewish merchants who have had quite the appetite for slavery and monopolizing the trade going way back in history.  Many ships bearing the names of people who clearly were from such group.


This is absurdly untrue. "Jewish merchants" were not running the slave trade. British, Portugese, Arabs, and later Southern Americans were.



drmike said:


> Importation of Africans as slaves directly to the United States was allegedly outlawed back around 1808.  For the years thereafter slaves came from the Islands, Central America and South America.


No. Importing slaves really *was* outlawed in 1808 - no allegedly about it. The Constitution said it couldn't be done before that and as soon as that limit expired, Congress voted for the ban.

The same year, the British declared there would be no more Atlantic slave trading and while it took them a while to get the ships together to enforce it (given their other problems at the time, like Napolean) eventually they did enforce it, even though there was no international law about this. There was some slave-running after that but in the main the population of slaves in the North America was self-sustaining.


----------



## k0nsl (Jun 28, 2015)

@raindog308

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ut7I75Q_-zA

You can have a look at what Dr. Tony Martin has to say about it. I'm sure he's more of an authority on the subject than any of us. If not convinced after that, well, buy the book King Leopold's Ghost which tells the grisly truth about the jewish involvement in this filthy trade.


----------



## raindog308 (Jun 28, 2015)

k0nsl said:


> You can have a look at what Dr. Tony Martin has to say about it.


"A subject that has eluded most of us in Higher Learning Institutions."

Translation: crackpot.


----------



## k0nsl (Jun 28, 2015)

His speech begins at 10:12. If this is "crackpot" to you, well, it ought to be so very simple for you to refute what he says, point by point. Yes?

I can list a number of books which deals with the same theme as well, apart from the one I already listed (which is extensive enough).

 



raindog308 said:


> "A subject that has eluded most of us in Higher Learning Institutions."
> 
> Translation: crackpot.


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jun 28, 2015)

I'm tempted to judge the man by that phrase as well.  _"A subject that has eluded most of us in Higher Learning"_ is academic for "Nobody will be able to reproduce this research or find conclusive supporting evidence, but just take my word for it".

See, it's very easy to make a list of articles that support your viewpoint.  What's harder to do though, is not ignore the equally numerous texts that provide logic _against_ your belief.  And in the spirit of putting my money where my mouth is - I'd very much like a few titles from your list suh - should make for some interesting reading at the very least, will likely even learn a thing or two.


----------



## k0nsl (Jun 28, 2015)

Off hand, try locating any of the works by these jewish authors:


Lee Friedman

Wilfred Samuels _(__Jewish Colonists in Barbados (London: Purnell and Sons Ltd., 1936)_
Seymour B. Liebman _(New World Jewry: 1493-1825, Requiem for the Forgotten)_
Moshe Kahan
Arnold Wiznitzer
Ira Rosenwaike _(On the Edge of Greatness: A Portrait of American Jewry in the Early National Period)_
Herbert Ivan Bloom _(A study of Brazilian Jewish history 1623-1654)_
They all concur that jewish involvement in the slave trade was dominant, with rather blatant admissions. I can fill in with more later, when I'm done with my other tasks


----------



## drmike (Jun 28, 2015)

raindog308 said:


> Just when I think you're reasonable you veer off into crazy anti-Semitism. WTF?
> 
> 
> Have you ever met a Jew or known an Israeli?
> ...


Well here we go...

Why is anything said that is critical of a group of people who proclaim to be Jews automatically anti-Semitic?  Even if the matter is supported by facts from qualified researchers, historians and yes, even Jews themselves?????  I for the life of me do not understand why fringes of the Jew identity continue to paint everything with such broad brushes and lie about their role in history.  Right, there was no Jewish involvement in slavery for most of recorded history.  Is this the typical re-write of history by the victors?

As for have I known Jews, indeed, quite a few.  Very well known Jews nonetheless. People you'd likely recognize.  I prefer strict Hasidics though.

I don't think all Jews are bad.  No group, not even the dreaded Nazis were 100% bad.  But, can we go a century without the Jews causing many to scrutinize them for their actual then modern day conduct and treatment of others?  Slavery is but one massive sin of business interests created by many men proclaiming to be Jews via name, for all I know these men were in fact trashbins as their deeds do tell.  One only needs to look at the practice of slavery with the bedfellow of PROSTITUTION.   

White slavery has been a long time issue done to northern white women and children and often by well, guess who.  Ask the Polish in centuries past.  Ask the Ukrainians today.  At least 8000 slaves in the modern day in Israel and countless folks lured to Israel by shady human traffickers selling susceptible minds the rosy view of a better life (failing to mention tearing up their passport and selling them off to pimps in Israel).  Just 15k prostitutes estimated in Israel.  $2 billion dollar a year industry at least, with at least 1 million prostitute visits a month --- in a country of 8 million total citizens and who receives $3 billion in US aid a year...  Perhaps Israel should get its act together, yet again.

But my narrative would mean nothing if I didn't do this, references to some of what I just stated, from Israel publications:

http://www.timesofisrael.com/thousands-of-slaves-in-israel-global-study-finds/  (2013)

http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/hookers-in-the-holy-land-an-uncomfortable-history-in-israel/ (2013)



> ...There are a hell of a lot less Jews in 2015 than there were in 1915 thanks to evil fantasies you're trying to spread.


Why did you pick the year 1915?  Just an even 100 years I hope.   According to a pro-Jewish / pro-Israel site Jewish VIrtual Library which is operated by:

"The *American-Israeli Cooperative Enterprise* (AICE) was established in 1993 as a nonprofit and nonpartisan organization to strengthen the U.S.-Israel relationship by emphasizing the fundamentals of the alliance — the values our nations share."

... The Jewish headcount per interval was:

source: https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/jewpop.html


Year	Population
1880 7,800,000
1900 10,600,000
1922 14,400,000
1925 14,800,000
1939 16,728,000
1945 11,000,000
1950 11,297,000
1955 11,800,000
1960 12,079,000
1970 12,585,000
1980 12,819,000
1990 12,868,000
2000 12,900,000
2010 13,428,300
2014 13,900,000

The recorded numbers prior to WW2 sure are interesting jumps in population that never again has been happened. Some long term agenda to limit Jewish reproduction? Dealing with recent century population growth of single digits per decade.  Hitler-effect isn't causing that 70 years later.

Surely even people mistreated in a time of war rebound and continue to procreate, don't they? Especially as we just defined the Jews in Israel have quite the appetite for illicit intercourse with harlots.  I'd like to believe the low reproduction numbers are the outcome of higher education as we've seen in many first nation states in recent decades and which the Jews have been plagued by perhaps for hundreds of years.

In 1915 one can assume there were 14 million Jews.  In 2015, one can also assume there are 14 million Jews.

So... "There are a hell of a lot less Jews in 2015 than there were in 1915" <--- ==== wrong.

.... thanks to evil fantasies you're trying to spread. ....  <--- to which I say not even close and certainly not evil intentions.   Seems like you have missing Jews you need to account for or pick some other Census or we can dispute the numbers of this Pro-Israel group publishing such headcount.


----------



## k0nsl (Jun 28, 2015)

Well, good response @drmike. We get a little off topic here because of @raindog308, but I must assume he's referring to the holocaust which occurred in 1915 against the jews:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dda-0Q_XUhk

You have to understand that they have went through many holocausts. It's rather fascinating, really. But, ehm, that's another topic   

*PS:*

‘antisemite’: any thought or person that a Jew doesn't like, the word has lost it's meaning and effect thanks to people such as @raindog308  



drmike said:


> Well here we go...
> 
> Why is anything said that is critical of a group of people who proclaim to be Jews automatically anti-Semitic?  Even if the matter is supported by facts from qualified researchers, historians and yes, even Jews themselves?????  I for the life of me do not understand why fringes of the Jew identity continue to paint everything with such broad brushes and lie about their role in history.  Right, there was no Jewish involvement in slavery for most of recorded history.  Is this the typical re-write of history by the victors?
> 
> ...


----------



## raindog308 (Jun 28, 2015)

drmike said:


> Why is anything said that is critical of a group of people who proclaim to be Jews automatically anti-Semitic?


Um, that "group of people" is by your own numbers 8,000,000 people and you paint them with one broad brush:

"Sounds identical to what one nation state says routinely in this very day about Goyim, that is every other race and human other than their "chosen" people. Yet for all this abundant racism and strong language that Goyim are to bow and serve this group, there are little to no discussions at large about this vile racism in the modern day in an infant of a nation."

Gee, I can't imagine what "one nation state" you are referring to. If you are painting Israelis and/or Jews as


racist
people who think the rest of the world are to "bow and serve"
infantile
"defined" as having "quite the appetite for illicit intercourse with harlots"
Then yeah, i'm going to call you out as an anti-Semite.


drmike said:


> But, can we go a century without the Jews causing many to scrutinize them for their actual then modern day conduct and treatment of others?  Slavery is but one massive sin of business interests created by many men proclaiming to be Jews via name, for all I know these men were in fact trashbins as their deeds do tell.  One only needs to look at the practice of slavery with the bedfellow of PROSTITUTION.


I can easily go a century or three without "scrutinizing" Jews or passing judgment on their religion. What "massive sin of business interests" are you referring to? Is it the international banking conspiracy, or do I need to go read the Protocols of the Elders of Zion to learn the "real truth"...?

The Jewish people are one of the most relentlessly harassed nations on the Earth. The idea that they are some kind of sex-crazed power brokers is noxious nonsense straight out of Julius Streicher's newspapers.



drmike said:


> At least 8000 slaves in the modern day in Israel and countless folks lured to Israel by shady human traffickers selling susceptible minds the rosy view of a better life (failing to mention tearing up their passport and selling them off to pimps in Israel).  Just 15k prostitutes estimated in Israel.  $2 billion dollar a year industry at least, with at least 1 million prostitute visits a month --- in a country of 8 million total citizens and who receives $3 billion in US aid a year...  Perhaps Israel should get its act together, yet again.


I have no ideas if your numbers are accurate, but let's see here...15000 prostitutes in a country of 8,000,000. So .2% of the population. In the Phillippines? 800,000 out of a population of 98 million. .8%. Four times those bestial Israelis! Where is your fury?

Literally the first other country I checked.

On this you judge an entire ethnicity and religion? The notion that Jews are sexual sadists comes from Medieval anti-Semitic legends, later amplified by the Nazis.

And "yet again" what? I'd taken the moral record of Israel - a country beset four times by wars not of its choosing and facing unrelenting hostility from most of the world (thanks to ideas like yours) - against many others'.



drmike said:


> Why did you pick the year 1915?  Just an even 100 years I hope.


Yes.


drmike said:


> Especially as we just defined the Jews in Israel have quite the appetite for illicit intercourse with harlots.


You really just cannot hear yourself, can you?


k0nsl said:


> ‘antisemite’: any thought or person that a Jew doesn't like


Wow. Yeah, you're right, there is no anti-Semitism, it was all just invented by the Jews. It was just one of their clever plots.
Isn't it time for one of you - or both? - to start in on holocaust denial?


----------



## k0nsl (Jun 28, 2015)

Another source for perusal, albeit not a book. I won't give them any "clicks", hence the archive.is link:

History of Dutch Jews Role in Slavery Is Bluntly Depicted

/me waits for a hail of "annie-semite"-yells


----------



## MannDude (Jun 28, 2015)

So, back on topic:

Even _NASCAR_ is wanting to ban the flag.

NASCAR.


----------



## k0nsl (Jun 30, 2015)




----------



## MannDude (Jun 30, 2015)

@k0nsl, some actually already hate that flag too... Or at least it may seem that way...













Even Dwayne Michael Carter (Lil' Wayne) had some good flag stomping fun.


----------



## AuroraZero (Jun 30, 2015)

You know I am speechless coming from the background I do, and being through what I have for this country's people I am utterly speechless. That blatant disrespect for the American flag just makes me want to vomit until I die, literaly.

Now I know precisely why I want to move to the middle of a forest and set up a cabin and stay there alone. I just don't know what more to say to the disrespect that has been done not only to me, but to my brother and sisters before me. The ones that have fought to make it possible for us to able to continue the fight. I am not so sure we have a place, not only in this country, but in this world anymore.


----------



## Vega (Jun 30, 2015)

I still see no issue with it, tbh, and I am glad to see that this country for once is doing something right imo


----------



## tonyg (Jun 30, 2015)

The Confederate flag (or any other flag for that matter) is not going to be banned from being flown by private citizens.

The issue at stake is displaying the Confederate flag in government or public institutions.

The First Ammendment protects individuals to express their views and if flying the Confederate or any other flag floats their boat so be it. Hell, you can fly the Nazi flag if you wish.

Please, stick with the facts.

Edit: One of the things that makes the US great is that it allows for dissent.

So if you get pissed off at the US government and you wish to burn, sit, stomp or crap on the flag you can do so without fear of ending up in jail. You are protected by the Constitution.


----------



## texteditor (Jun 30, 2015)

MannDude said:


> I don't see what the big damn deal is about the flag. I have no idea why it's been banned from sale from so many places. I do not see what the destruction and vandalism of statues and monuments honoring the dead do.



Racist implications aside, flying the flag of a failed secession 150 years after the fact is weird and fucked up


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jul 1, 2015)

Say what you will about the South.. but nobody retires and moves north.


----------



## MannDude (Jul 1, 2015)

texteditor said:


> Racist implications aside, flying the flag of a failed secession 150 years after the fact is weird and fucked up


No racist implications made, I am not certain where you got that from my previous short response. I guess nowadays everyone is a racist until proven liberal not racist. 

Kidding aside, it's isn't uncommon for people to be proud of there heritage. Same reason Texans are proud of their past and will proudly display this with their use of flags. The south does the same. Since only 6% of people owned slaves in the south it seems that most people probably were not celebrating slavery and rather their independence, even if brief, from the north. Just seems the flag represents an independent _rebel like_ ideology more than it does anything else. But I don't know. I'm just a white guy so I am part of the problem I guess because hundreds of years ago a very small portion of America owned slaves.


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jul 1, 2015)

I have both Confederate and Soviet flags (along with my US service flag) hanging in my workshop.  I like having a mixed, rich heritage.

Though if a rebel flag automatically makes you racist, and a Soviet flag makes you communist (all are equal/etc)... do they cancel each other out?


----------



## MannDude (Jul 2, 2015)

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/07/01/activists-planned-to-burn-u-s-flag-in-nyc-park-when-they-showed-up-these-guys-were-waiting/



> “We’re here to f*** up tiny liberal punks,” a biker who refused to identify himself told TheBlaze.


My man.


----------



## mitgib (Jul 2, 2015)

I was a little surprised to learn the flag was never the flag of the CSA, only a battle flag used by the confederate Army.


----------



## tonyg (Jul 2, 2015)

MannDude said:


> “We’re here to f*** up tiny liberal punks,” a biker who refused to identify himself told TheBlaze.
> 
> My man.


I love the intimidation factor...fitting when discussing the Confederate battle flag and its history.


----------



## Jonathan (Jul 2, 2015)

texteditor said:


> Racist implications aside, flying the flag of a failed secession 150 years after the fact is weird and fucked up


Folks not from the South, and especially those outside the US generally don't understand it.  While sure some groups will use this flag for their weird and obnoxious "causes", to most it's indeed simply just used to show you're proud to be a southerner.  While all of America is split up into states, "the South" tends to be oft referred to as it's own being and the flag just goes along with that in a sense.

Really hard to explain 

EDIT: Just to insure nothing is confused, to me and most others the flag has nothing to do with racism but is purely a display of pride in being Southern, nothing more.


----------



## wlanboy (Jul 2, 2015)

The flag is the perfect distraction for the USA.

It is so much easier to talk about a flag and not about the reason that some thinks that it is ok to kill people.

Everyone is talking about the flag, some are talking about guns, ...

I regular visit the US and I do have some friends in NY/MA/DE and whenever I am talking to them they say that they are fed up with all the topics serving only to maintain a false morality.


----------



## MannDude (Jul 4, 2015)

tonyg said:


> I love the intimidation factor...fitting when discussing the Confederate battle flag and its history.


Burning the flag of any nation in front of a group of people who served in that country's military and fought for them is not a good idea... The reaction was very tame all things considered. The burning of the flag should be considered a violent act just as pissing on the grave at a veteran's cemetery should be. Regardless of your beliefs it is extremely disrespectful. There are a lot of things I disagree with in this country, and I am not a fan of our military presence world wide either. But if I went outside and started burning American flags I would be happy if all I got was a punch in the face.

This is some hilarious liberal group that no one can remember the name of that was trying to do something to 'get heard'. Their group and main cause is to 'disarm' the NYPD. Seriously. It's a group that thinks police officers in America's largest city should not have guns or weapons on them. Comically, after people started getting upset that Freddie Gray died in Baltimore police have stopped entering these horrible slum, ghetto crime ridden areas. The murder rate in the city has increased by 48%. 150 people have been murdered in that city alone this year. NYC would turn into Honduras as far as murder rates go in the course of a month if the NYPD was 'disarmed' like that group wants. That group is a joke.


----------



## HN-Matt (Jul 4, 2015)

I summon level 75 Man Ripping Nazi Flag From The Sound Of Music to spiritually merge with level 97 All Dukes Of Hazzard Car Jumps From Season 1-3 forming an _INVINCIBLE HYBRID IDEOLOGY _that cannot be metacritically relinquished either i) until the end of the 21st Century or ii) until flag sales begin to decline and capital flight becomes irreversible, whichever comes first.


----------



## Vega (Jul 4, 2015)

I cant say I am too offended by someone 'disgracing' the flag. I remember someone got mad because I refused to stand up and do the pledge of allegiance.


----------



## k0nsl (Jul 4, 2015)

I'm not even American and I feel pretty queasy at people such as yourself. You deserve to live a few years in Tunisia or Syria under the circumstances which prevail there at the time of writing this. Perhaps _*then*_ you could learn to appreciate America, or what's left of it anyway  :mellow:



Vega said:


> I cant say I am too offended by someone 'disgracing' the flag. I remember someone got mad because I refused to stand up and do the pledge of allegiance.


----------



## HN-Matt (Jul 4, 2015)

drmike said:


> Slavery has existed for much of history and you'd be hard pressed to find a non slave owning or enslaved group.
> 
> Eradicating slavery should have always been a priority of civilized people.


 I'm no historian and this was only gleaned from wikipedia, but I find it fascinating that Mexico 'officially outlawed' slavery in 1829 (_36 years prior to America_) and were basically punished with the annexation of Texas for it. If the American civil war was fought a few decades earlier (in political step with Mexico's abolition of slavery) it seems possible that Mexican Texas wouldn't have ever become part of America.



> Austin feared that [banning slavery] would cause widespread discontent and tried to suppress publication of it. Rumors of the new law quickly spread throughout the area and the colonists seemed on the brink of revolt. The governor of Coahuila y Tejas, Jose Maria Viesca, wrote to the president to explain the importance of slavery to the Texas economy, and the importance of the Texas economy to the development of the state. Texas was temporarily exempted from the rule.[36] On April 6, 1830, Mexican president Anastasio Bustamante ordered Texas to comply with the emancipation proclamation or face military intervention.[37] To circumvent the law, many Anglo colonists converted their slaves into indentured servants for life. Others simply called their slaves indentured servants without legally changing their status.[38] Slaveholders wishing to enter Mexico would force their slaves to sign contracts claiming that the slaves owed money and would work to pay the debt. The low wages the slave would receive made repayment impossible, and the debt would be inherited, even though no slave would receive wages until age eighteen.[39] This tactic was outlawed by an 1832 state law which prohibited worker contracts from lasting more than ten years.[40] A small number of slaves were imported illegally from the West Indies or Africa. The British consul estimated that in the 1830s approximately 500 slaves had been illegally imported into Texas.[41] By 1836, there were approximately 5,000 slaves in Texas.[42]


----------



## DomainBop (Jul 4, 2015)

> NYC would turn into Honduras as far as murder rates go in the course of a month if the NYPD was 'disarmed' like that group wants. That group is a joke.


The group that wants to disarm NYC cops is less of a joke than the group that wants to fire corrupt NYC cops.  Crime rates with 49,000 disarmed cops policing the streets would still be much lower than they would be if the NYC police force was reduced to less than 1,000 honest armed cops if the "fire the corrupt cops" group and their buddies at internal affairs got their way and got rid of all the corruption in the police department.   . 



> The flag is the perfect distraction for the USA.
> It is so much easier to talk about a flag and not about the reason...


 The "ban the confederate flag" bandwagon is a definite media distraction and really does nothing to address the underlying problems. Eliminating the flag is unlikely to have any meaningful effect on reducing racism or preventing the next massacre in this country.


The US corporate media has largely ignored the fact that racism is just as bad (and in many cases worse) in areas of the north where the Confederate flag has never flown as it is in the south.  From extremely segregated urban areas (metro Detroit, metro Washington DC are good examples) to racial/ethnic/religious profiling by police departments that target entire groups of people based solely on their race or religion. The NYPD is a perfect example of this with its racially targeted stop and frisk program (_which the courts ruled was unconstitutional_), and its surveillance of virtually every Muslim (and anyone who looked "middle eastern") in the city under Emperor Bloomberg and his  former police commissioner Ray Kelly (_as a side note: Kelly's biggest achievement as police commissioner was making a rape complaint against his son go awa_y).


----------



## HN-Matt (Jul 4, 2015)

raindog308 said:


> On this you judge an entire ethnicity and religion? The notion that Jews are sexual sadists comes from Medieval anti-Semitic legends, later amplified by the Nazis.


Oh calm down, they can't top de Sade.


----------



## Vega (Jul 4, 2015)

k0nsl said:


> I'm not even American and I feel pretty queasy at people such as yourself. You deserve to live a few years in Tunisia or Syria under the circumstances which prevail there at the time of writing this. Perhaps _*then*_ you could learn to appreciate America, or what's left of it anyway  :mellow:


I honestly cant appreciate a country that is so out of touch and broken as it is. Gay Marriage is what we're fighting over and a flag when we have freaking Is growing daily.

I am not proud to be amaerican lol

I do appreciate the work many soldiers who have died for my freedom and safety but I am not proud to be apart of this country and how ignorant we are as a people.


----------



## AuroraZero (Jul 4, 2015)

OKay I will say this one more time and only one more time.

*I may not agree with what you have to say or do, but I will defend to the death your right to say or do it. *

With that being said you could not give me a slave. You literally could not even give me money to take one. No man has the god given right to own another one. That is not the issue I have with any of this at all. I do not care if that flag meant that every person in the world would be enslaved to a cruel death for flying it, it should still be legal to fly it and no one should censor that. When I say no one I mean not Nascar, not State govt., not even God himself should censor that.

Yes I am a Christian and I do believe in God and in Christ, and I still feel this way. Also though people that do these things must be prepared to accept the consequenses of their actions. Just like if some one burned or disgraced a flag in my presence they would then earn themselves the reward of two broken arms and legs. I tend to take my symbols seriously. That one is one you do not piss with as my father, grandfather, and great grandfather all faught to keep that flag flying as a symbol of our freedom here.

Do not even think about disgracing it, or my god, or be willing to face the consequences of your actions. This country was founded on certain principles and people have forgotten them. I am beginning to think it is time they are remin ded of them again.

Okay enough of my blathering back to my solutide. Happy 4th to anyone and everyone that wants to have one.


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jul 4, 2015)

This country was founded by slave owners that wanted to stop paying tribute to the monarch across the pond.  If you *really* want to get pedantic with it, you could even say that this country was founded on the same principles that the flag burners are exercising - freedom from a governing body they believe to be corrupt.


----------



## AuroraZero (Jul 5, 2015)

I agree totally with you @Aldryic C'boas and as such I exercise my right to bust their arms and legs. I am not saying the system is perfect but if they do not like it then do something to change it. Burning the symbol people use for freedom is not the right thing to do in my book. Especially when you happen to live in said country, and enjoy the same freedom the symbol is suppose to stand for in the first place.

At least that is how I look at it. I am sure others see things differently, but then again that is one of things that makes America what it is today. The freedom to have your own insights and opinions, and they do not have to be like mine and no, we do not have to fight over them.


----------



## HN-Matt (Jul 5, 2015)

MannDude said:


> This is some hilarious liberal group that no one can remember the name of that was trying to do something to 'get heard'. Their group and main cause is to 'disarm' the NYPD. Seriously. It's a group that thinks police officers in America's largest city should not have guns or weapons on them. Comically, after people started getting upset that Freddie Gray died in Baltimore police have stopped entering these horrible slum, ghetto crime ridden areas. The murder rate in the city has increased by 48%. 150 people have been murdered in that city alone this year. NYC would turn into Honduras as far as murder rates go in the course of a month if the NYPD was 'disarmed' like that group wants. That group is a joke.





DomainBop said:


> The group that wants to disarm NYC cops is less of a joke than the group that wants to fire corrupt NYC cops.  Crime rates with 49,000 disarmed cops policing the streets would still be much lower than they would be if the NYC police force was reduced to less than 1,000 honest armed cops if the "fire the corrupt cops" group and their buddies at internal affairs got their way and got rid of all the corruption in the police department.   .


By the numbers: US police kill more in days than other countries do in years


----------



## HN-Matt (Jul 5, 2015)

re: sublimating nostalgia for the Confederate Army, to the extent that the flag is being claimed or marketed as a symbol of Southern pride, we can perceive reactions as being _cathected_. Not being from the USA, I don't really have strong feelings on the matter and wouldn't care to get argumentative about it. What I don't understand, though, is how those who are so inextricably or patriotically effected by the object can't perceive how there might be completely different kinds of cathexes at play in Others for whom the flag's history of representation is a glaring insult. The insular refusal to acknowledge that...

Otherwise, I don't know what all the hysteria is about as the flag will surely continue to survive in capitalist economy to the extent that the market demands its ongoing reappearance. If certain big names are relinquishing it, wouldn't that just mean more sales for the wagon circlers?


----------



## AuroraZero (Jul 5, 2015)

HN-Matt said:


> re: sublimating nostalgia for the vanquished Confederate Army, to the extent that the flag is being claimed as a symbol of Southern pride, I think we can perceive such reactions as being _cathected_ in a particular way. Not being from the USA, I don't really have strong feelings on the matter and wouldn't care to get argumentative about it. What I don't understand, though, is how those who are so inextricably or patriotically effected by the object can't perceive how there might be completely different kinds of cathexes at play in Others for whom the flag's history of representation is a glaring enemy. The defensive, insular refusal to acknowledge that seems strange to me.


I am conceeding that point easily, but none the less it does not give them the right to say it can not be flown. I do not care if it meant the destruction of this earth that flag can be flown. That is the thing I am saying and no one not even the President has the right to say it can not. There should be no pressures to take it down either. Not by anyone, not any where. That is all I am saying. It is not right and not what I was defending.


----------



## MannDude (Jul 5, 2015)

HN-Matt said:


> By the numbers: US police kill more in days than other countries do in years


Yes, however not every case is unjustified and I never take much merit when comparing statistics from vastly different countries or areas of the world regardless if the data supports or doesn't support my beliefs. Every place is culturally different to a degree.

While I do whole heartedly agree there needs to be some sort of police reform, it should be understood that if you _attack_ an officer, reach for an officers gun, reach for your own gun and/or try to kill a police officer to escape arrest that you may very well get killed yourself.

I didn't read every single one, but a good place to look is here: http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2015/jun/01/the-counted-police-killings-us-database#where you can expand each case to see race and cause of death. The random ones I clicked seemed more or less justified.

There are certainly some horrific cases where police have grossly misused their power. The New Mexico homeless man who was killed, luckily I do believe the officers involved in it are going to prison. There was also the cop in NC or SC, I forget which, the one who planted evidence after shooting the man in the back and it was all caught on tape. That cop should be hung in the city square. There are also some cases where the police did nothing wrong in my opinion and got caught up in a liberal media shit-storm of "HE WAS A GOOD BOY HE DID NOTHING WRONG!" when the one who died was a thug who questionably brought upon his own sudden death by his own actions.


----------



## HN-Matt (Jul 5, 2015)

MannDude said:


> Yes, however not every case is unjustified and I never take much merit when comparing statistics from vastly different countries or areas of the world regardless if the data supports or doesn't support my beliefs. Every place is culturally different to a degree.
> 
> While I do whole heartedly agree there needs to be some sort of police reform, it should be understood that if you _attack_ an officer, reach for an officers gun, reach for your own gun and/or try to kill a police officer to escape arrest that you may very well get killed yourself.
> 
> I didn't read every single one, but a good place to look is here: http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2015/jun/01/the-counted-police-killings-us-database#where you can expand each case to see race and cause of death. The random ones I clicked seemed more or less justified.


 I didn't read any of them. I linked to the article because I don't think British cops carry guns at all, which is what the Guardian was probably trying to emphasize. Somehow it seems to result in less police related killings... and presumably it works both ways. With the foreknowledge that police are unarmed, there may be a diminishing return on the thought of pulling guns on them to begin with. Murdering someone who was defenseless and unarmed doesn't usually go over very well regardless of who did it, cop or not.


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jul 5, 2015)

AuroraZero said:


> I agree totally with you @Aldryic C'boas and as such I exercise my right to bust their arms and legs. I am not saying the system is perfect but if they do not like it then do something to change it. Burning the symbol people use for freedom is not the right thing to do in my book. Especially when you happen to live in said country, and enjoy the same freedom the symbol is suppose to stand for in the first place.
> 
> At least that is how I look at it. I am sure others see things differently, but then again that is one of things that makes America what it is today. The freedom to have your own insights and opinions, and they do not have to be like mine and no, we do not have to fight over them.


Ah, but see, that's just it.  You *don't* have a right to assualt others in this country.  In fact, you're actually pissing on their "free speech" (using the phrase very loosely here to move things along). And while technically burning the US flag is a crime, it's a very minor one unless there are other charges to stack with it.  End of the day - beat down a flag burner, and you're looking at a good deal more jailtime than they are.  Ethically, they were expressing their opinion and you brought violence into the equation.

I don't condone flag burning at all.  As a veteran myself, I find it rather ridiculous that people would waste the time when there are far more productive and efficient ways of making your voice heard.  I don't feel that they're betraying my country, or disrespecting my service.  I served so that they could voice their dissent and opinion, whatever it may be.  My personal view on the subject lines up pretty close to The Carlin:  _"Flags are a symbol, and I leave symbols to the symbol-minded."_


----------



## k0nsl (Jul 27, 2015)

http://www.occidentaldissent.com/2015/07/26/confederate-graves-desecrated-in-van-buren-confederate-monument-vandalized-reidsville/
Desecrating graves...makes the blood boil, and I'm not even American.

I think the Americans need to resurrect Stonewall Jackson to get this mess mopped up once and for all:


----------



## HN-Matt (Jul 30, 2015)

http://www.rawstory.com/2015/07/hackers-turn-pro-confederate-facebook-group-into-celebration-of-obama-islam-and-lgbt-rights/


----------

