White devils no longer in charge of museum tours, Chicago crime rate expected to drop

3,134 Views | 110 Replies | Last: 1 mo ago by Rawhide
Wangchung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
90sBear said:

cowboycwr said:

Redbrickbear said:

cowboycwr said:

Canada2017 said:

cowboycwr said:

Redbrickbear said:

cowboycwr said:

Redbrickbear said:

cowboycwr said:

Porteroso said:

Redbrickbear said:

Canada2017 said:

Can anyone imagine the outrage if ANY organization fired their staff for being black ?

Why is blatant discrimination against white people perfectly ok ?




I could tell you but I would probably get banned from this site for saying it.

Believe me, nobody gets banned for anything they say in this forum.
Exactly. I have seen some vile stuff posted here and it seems no one gets banned for it. I can only think of one poster banned for things said but they started getting very personal, attacking, etc. Now on the football (or other sports boards) it is a different story and people can and do get banned there for disagreeing about a current coach.
I have seen your pro-Unionist vile stuff on here and I don't think you should get banned.

Live and let live on the interweb froums my bro.
What have I said that was vile? Posting the truth?


Implying Lincoln (who killed 700,000 people) was a good person is vile.

Saying the North fought the war to free slaves is just a low IQ lie.
Lincoln killed zero people. That is truth. You may THINK otherwise but historians don't agree with you. So you are wrong and history proves it.

Saying the North fought the war to free slaves is the truth. Historians and history back me up.
chuckle

A good laugh with my morning coffee.



Thanks .




Sad that you find the truth to be funny...


Your misrepresentation of the truth is what's funny…or to be honest it's quite sad.


"My enemies pretend I am now carrying on this war for the sole purpose of abolition...If I could preserve the Union without freeing any slave I would do it." -Abraham Lincoln, Aug 15, 1864

"President Lincoln has told me time and again of his desire for the right to hold slaves to be fully recognized. This war is prosecuted for the Union, hence no question concerning slavery will arise." -Simon Cameron: Union Sec. of War 1861-1862

Lincoln's July 4th Message to Congress: "Finding this condition of things and believing it to be an imperative duty upon the incoming Executive to prevent, if possible, the consummation of such attempt to break the Federal Union, a choice of means to that end became indispensable...I sought only to hold the public places and property not already wrested from the Government and to collect the revenue, relying for the rest on time, discussion, and the ballot box." Lincoln in his speech was referring to the 40% federal sales tax on imports to Southern States under the Morrill Tariff Act of 1861.

[At the Hampton's Road conference with Stephens in 1864, he supported reunion and allow the courts to work out the issue of emancipation. Lincoln's obsession was with the Union - not slaves. Lincoln reportedly told the Confederate negotiators that Northern opinion was very much divided on the question of how these new laws would be enforced. Regarding the Emancipation Proclamation, Lincoln reportedly interpreted it as a war measure that would permanently affect only the 200,000 people who came under direct Army control during the War. Seward reportedly showed the Confederates a copy of the newly adopted Thirteenth Amendment, referred to this document also as a war measure only, and suggested that if they were to rejoin the Union they might be able to prevent its ratification. After further discussion, Lincoln suggested that the Southern states might "avoid, as far as possible, the evils of immediate emancipation" Lincoln also offered possible compensation for emancipation, naming the figure of $400,000,000 which he later proposed to Congress.]

"On the part of the North, this war was carried on, not to liberate the slaves, but by a Federal government that had always perverted and violated the Constitution, to keep the slaves in bondage; & was still willing to do so, if the slaveholders could be thereby induced to stay in the Union." -Lysander Spooner, Abolitionist

Historian Thomas Fleming wrote in A Disease in the Public Mind: A New Understanding of Why We Fought the Civil War. Radical Republican Congressional leaders "unanimously agreed that the integrity of the Union should be preserved, though it cost a million lives," the New York Times reported on Christmas Day 1860. Massachusetts governor John Albion declared, "We must conquer the South!" Pro-war Bostonians amassed in large crowds and urged the governor to "drive the ruffians (southerners) and their families into the Gulf of Mexico and the Negroes with them."

"I have said that the separation of the races is the only perfect preventive of amalgamation. I have no right to say all the members of the Republican party are in favor of this, nor to say that as a party they are in favor of it. There is nothing in their platform directly on the subject. But I can say a very large proportion of its members are for it, and that the chief plank in their platform is most favorable to that separation. Such separation, if ever effected, must be effected by their colonization overseas." -Abraham Lincoln

"Judge Douglas is especially horrified at the thought of the mixing blood by the white and black races: we are agreed for once---a thousand times agreed." - Abraham Lincoln

"I tell him [Fredrick Douglass] very frankly that I am not in favor of negro citizenship." - Abraham Lincoln

"Our republican system was meant for a homogeneous people. As long as blacks continue to live here with the whites they constitute a threat to the national life." -Abraham Lincoln

"I have no purpose or desire to introduce political and social equality between the white and black races." -Abraham Lincoln

"When Southern people tell us they are no more responsible for the origin of slavery than we, I acknowledge the fact...My first impulse would be if the slaves are freed...send them to Liberia." -Abraham Lincoln, 8/21/1858

[Just four days before his death, speaking to Gen. Benjamin Butler, Lincoln still pressed on with deportation as the only peaceable solution to America's race problem. "I can not believe that the South and North can live in peace, unless we can get rid of the negroes … I believe that it would be better to export them all to some fertile country."]

[When Lincoln did express a hatred of the expansion of the "peculiar institution" in the Lincoln Douglas debates he said nothing about the abolition ever of the south's current institution. By avoiding the issue of liberation, he could secure the support of non abolitionists and not risk losing the anti-slavery vote. One of the foundations of the Republican Party was free soil and labor opportunities for whites; the prevention of the expansion of slavery was one of the methods to accomplish this. Lincoln took it as his duty to hold to the party principles. Without such a strong corner stone to unit the party it would surely fall (Fonner, Free, 215-216). When elected to office Lincoln continued to use slavery as a political tool in an attempt to put an end to the secession crisis. On the eve of the crisis's climax Lincoln admitted that he was willing to give in to the most radical faction of Southern politicians along with their demands, such as ending Northern resistance to an internal slave trade. Lincoln made it a point to stress to the slave holding states that he had no intention of re-structuring race relations (Clinton & Silber, Divided, 78).
The real purpose for barring the expansion of slavery was to provide more land for the white settlers, not to improve the living conditions of savage subordinates. Armed with this idea of the isolation of slavery for the benefit of the white man Lincoln and his party billed themselves as "the only white mans party in the country." The National Era reported that many Americans opposed slavery. The reason that slavery was so strongly opposed by so many whites was due to its negative effects on free labor. There was little to no consideration for the well being or equality of the Negro (Fonner, Free, 265). Though Lincoln did believe that the Negro was a man, he knew that he was lesser man than whites. However even a lesser man was entitled to the basic natural rights of man, however he did believe that equality with whites was a natural right . He did proclaim that the Negro deserved a chance to better himself, but equality among his masters did not seem an attainable goal for the Negro (Fonner, Free, 290).
In 1862 at the White House Lincoln told a group of black leaders, including Fredrick Douglas, that though slavery was a great wrong inflicted on their people the black race would only suffer trying to live as equals in the superior white culture. Lincoln admitted that the Negro deserved a chance to prove themselves capable of bettering themselves. He thought it unlikely and and not desirable that they should do so here in America (McPherson, Battle, 508). Lincoln's solution was colonization. Central America was one of the selected territories. Through colonization the US could be freed of the inferior Negro in a sort of National enema.] -"Was Lincoln an Abolitionist?", Kelly Snell




Majority of historians agree it was about civil war.


https://psmag.com/education/of-course-the-civil-war-was-about-slavery-26265

Majority of historians agree it was about slavery.

https://www.nps.gov/liho/learn/historyculture/slavery-cause-civil-war.htm

And from that same link is Alexander Stevens (VP of the confederacy) saying it was all about slavery.

I could include 100 quotes from others, like you have done, to back up the fact it was about slavery to counter all the quotes you gave.

The articles of secession of the states also mentioned slavery more than they mentioned any other cause.

It was about slavery. The fact you can't accept that historians have proven that shows you are ignorant.








Did you read the article you linked?

"The North did not, however, go to war to dismantle slavery, as the South did to preserve it. The North fought to preserve the Union, a motivation that, over the course of the war, became inextricably tied to the question of what that Union would look like after the fighting was over would it be free or not?

This is the history on which McPherson's 90 percent to 95 percent of serious historians agree."

Nuh uh! Prove historians wrong! I'm reminded of the scene from Super Troopers 2 where the one Canadian cop was pretending not to know who Danny DeVito is in order to piss off his buddy.
bularry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Wangchung said:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/chicago-museum-fires-apos-mostly-150838189.html
this is one of the dumbest things I've ever read.


why use motivated volunteers who have the will and time to support the museum when you can hire a $25 high school grad that needs a job... gee I wonder which gives the best tour
Wangchung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
bularry said:

Wangchung said:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/chicago-museum-fires-apos-mostly-150838189.html
this is one of the dumbest things I've ever read.


why use motivated volunteers who have the will and time to support the museum when you can hire a $25 high school grad that needs a job... gee I wonder which gives the best tour
Yep.
Canada2017
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Malbec said:

So now the standard is... you're not wrong, as long as you don't say you're wrong. Brilliant.
Nothing new.

Been the same routine for years.
Thee University
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cowboycwr said:

Thee University said:

cowboycwr said:

Redbrickbear said:

cowboycwr said:

Redbrickbear said:

cowboycwr said:

Porteroso said:

Redbrickbear said:

Canada2017 said:

Can anyone imagine the outrage if ANY organization fired their staff for being black ?

Why is blatant discrimination against white people perfectly ok ?




I could tell you but I would probably get banned from this site for saying it.

Believe me, nobody gets banned for anything they say in this forum.
Exactly. I have seen some vile stuff posted here and it seems no one gets banned for it. I can only think of one poster banned for things said but they started getting very personal, attacking, etc. Now on the football (or other sports boards) it is a different story and people can and do get banned there for disagreeing about a current coach.
I have seen your pro-Unionist vile stuff on here and I don't think you should get banned.

Live and let live on the interweb froums my bro.
What have I said that was vile? Posting the truth?


Implying Lincoln (who killed 700,000 people) was a good person is vile.

Saying the North fought the war to free slaves is just a low IQ lie.
Lincoln killed zero people. That is truth. You may THINK otherwise but historians don't agree with you. So you are wrong and history proves it.

Saying the North fought the war to free slaves is the truth. Historians and history back me up.
Ape Lincoln did not fire a shot. He sentenced 600 to 700K to death. He did not have the balls to meet with the South to negotiate a peaceful resolution. History recorded it. History proves it.

The Northern Aggressors didn't free a single slave. History recorded it. History proves it.

Ape wanted to colonize ALL black former slaves to places like Liberia, Africa or other tropical regions. History recorded it.

Ape did not believe blacks should have the same social and political rights as white. History recorded it.

Ape opposed blacks having the right to vote, serve on juries, to hold office and to intermarry with whites.

We could go on and on with history lessons for you.

The only thing that washed away all of the Lincoln sins in the eyes of Yankees was a bullet from Booth's gun.


Yawn.

Prove the majority of historians wrong.
I have already done so.

I'm a historian. Prove me wrong.

What do you believe makes someone a historian? Somebody writes a book?

I think when you have letters written by those who were there and participated, newspaper accounts by writers with first hand knowledge of the actions taken, interviews with those who lived it you can make a fairly compelling case that Lincoln was a manufactured fraud.

Yet he still clings to the Great Emancipator title. Barely. His grip loosens every year. I predict his monuments will be torn down one day soon.
"Any people with contempt for their heritage have lost faith in themselves and no nation can long survive without pride in its traditions." - Sir Winston Churchill
Thee University
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Hell. I'm hereby claiming the title of Historian!

"Any people with contempt for their heritage have lost faith in themselves and no nation can long survive without pride in its traditions." - Sir Winston Churchill
cowboycwr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

Quote:

The majority of historians agree it was about civil war. Prove that wrong.

The links I have posted clearly state the cause of the civil war was slavery. That the civil war was about slavery. Yet you keep ignoring that and call me the idiot or say I don't have the ability to discern between the two.

Prove the professional historians wrong.

You post about the opinion of historians. Others have posted factual quotes that came straight from Lincoldn, events that actually happened and bills that actually passed.

You want to rely on what a few historians think instead of seeing the actual facts presented to you.

I guess it's true. We explain it to you, but we can't understand it for you.

Maybe idiot was too strong, but you're at least a clown.


Few??? The majority of them have reached that conclusion through their research, study and break down of the events.

It isn't opinions when they use the evidence to reach a conclusion.

First hand accounts are often wrong, taken out of context and missing the whole picture.

So again I challenge you to prove the vast majority of thousands and thousands of historians wrong.

Call me all the names you want but the challenge is up to you to prove those historians wrong. Apparently you could make a lot of money off of it since it would be groundbreaking work to prove an entire field of experts wrong.

So prove them wrong.
We've already proved it to you. You just choose not to listen.

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/08/23/know-called-civil-war-not-slavery/
No you haven't. Prove the majority of historians wrong. Then like I said you might want to publish those findings and make a killing since you would be proving an entire field of professionals wrong.
You know you're right. We haven't proved anything to you, because you don't want to acknowledge the truth. Nothing will be enough proof for you. You have been given quote after quote and facts after facts. You continue to ignore them all.

Lincoln himself could come to you, look you in the face and tell you that he didn't go to war to free the slaves and you still wouldn't believe him.


I know I'm and right and I have the majority of historians, truth and facts on my side.

You have quotes taken out of context.

Prove the historians wrong
It's already been proved. You just choose to stick your fingers in your ears and you hands over your eyes when it's presented to you.


Perhaps you need to tell the historians that. None of them have changed their minds because of some amateur internet posters.

Provide links showing the majority of historians agree with you because of your amateur findings.
Fact: Congress overwhelmingly passed the Corwin Amendment which would've given constitutional protections for slavery.
Fact: Lincoln himself supported the amendment
Fact: In 1862 wrote these words in a letter: "My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it..."

You should really take the loss and move on. Trying to base facts on opinion is backasswards.

Prove the majority of historians wrong and then post your link to them all saying they were wrong.
How about you prove them right. And FYI, their opinion isn't an actual fact.


Lol. So you think the majority of professionals are wrong?

Let me guess… you haven't gotten the vaccine yet either.
cowboycwr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
90sBear said:

cowboycwr said:

Redbrickbear said:

cowboycwr said:

Canada2017 said:

cowboycwr said:

Redbrickbear said:

cowboycwr said:

Redbrickbear said:

cowboycwr said:

Porteroso said:

Redbrickbear said:

Canada2017 said:

Uh Can anyone imagine the outrage if ANY organization fired their staff for being black ?

Why is blatant discrimination against white people perfectly ok ?




I could tell you but I would probably get banned from this site for saying it.

Believe me, nobody gets banned for anything they say in this forum.
Exactly. I have seen some vile stuff posted here and it seems no one gets banned for it. I can only think of one poster banned for things said but they started getting very personal, attacking, etc. Now on the football (or other sports boards) it is a different story and people can and do get banned there for disagreeing about a current coach.
I have seen your pro-Unionist vile stuff on here and I don't think you should get banned.

Live and let live on the interweb froums my bro.
What have I said that was vile? Posting the truth?


Implying Lincoln (who killed 700,000 people) was a good person is vile.

Saying the North fought the war to free slaves is just a low IQ lie.
Lincoln killed zero people. That is truth. You may THINK otherwise but historians don't agree with you. So you are wrong and history proves it.

Saying the North fought the war to free slaves is the truth. Historians and history back me up.
chuckle

A good laugh with my morning coffee.



Thanks .




Sad that you find the truth to be funny...


Your misrepresentation of the truth is what's funny…or to be honest it's quite sad.


"My enemies pretend I am now carrying on this war for the sole purpose of abolition...If I could preserve the Union without freeing any slave I would do it." -Abraham Lincoln, Aug 15, 1864

"President Lincoln has told me time and again of his desire for the right to hold slaves to be fully recognized. This war is prosecuted for the Union, hence no question concerning slavery will arise." -Simon Cameron: Union Sec. of War 1861-1862

Lincoln's July 4th Message to Congress: "Finding this condition of things and believing it to be an imperative duty upon the incoming Executive to prevent, if possible, the consummation of such attempt to break the Federal Union, a choice of means to that end became indispensable...I sought only to hold the public places and property not already wrested from the Government and to collect the revenue, relying for the rest on time, discussion, and the ballot box." Lincoln in his speech was referring to the 40% federal sales tax on imports to Southern States under the Morrill Tariff Act of 1861.

[At the Hampton's Road conference with Stephens in 1864, he supported reunion and allow the courts to work out the issue of emancipation. Lincoln's obsession was with the Union - not slaves. Lincoln reportedly told the Confederate negotiators that Northern opinion was very much divided on the question of how these new laws would be enforced. Regarding the Emancipation Proclamation, Lincoln reportedly interpreted it as a war measure that would permanently affect only the 200,000 people who came under direct Army control during the War. Seward reportedly showed the Confederates a copy of the newly adopted Thirteenth Amendment, referred to this document also as a war measure only, and suggested that if they were to rejoin the Union they might be able to prevent its ratification. After further discussion, Lincoln suggested that the Southern states might "avoid, as far as possible, the evils of immediate emancipation" Lincoln also offered possible compensation for emancipation, naming the figure of $400,000,000 which he later proposed to Congress.]

"On the part of the North, this war was carried on, not to liberate the slaves, but by a Federal government that had always perverted and violated the Constitution, to keep the slaves in bondage; & was still willing to do so, if the slaveholders could be thereby induced to stay in the Union." -Lysander Spooner, Abolitionist

Historian Thomas Fleming wrote in A Disease in the Public Mind: A New Understanding of Why We Fought the Civil War. Radical Republican Congressional leaders "unanimously agreed that the integrity of the Union should be preserved, though it cost a million lives," the New York Times reported on Christmas Day 1860. Massachusetts governor John Albion declared, "We must conquer the South!" Pro-war Bostonians amassed in large crowds and urged the governor to "drive the ruffians (southerners) and their families into the Gulf of Mexico and the Negroes with them."

"I have said that the separation of the races is the only perfect preventive of amalgamation. I have no right to say all the members of the Republican party are in favor of this, nor to say that as a party they are in favor of it. There is nothing in their platform directly on the subject. But I can say a very large proportion of its members are for it, and that the chief plank in their platform is most favorable to that separation. Such separation, if ever effected, must be effected by their colonization overseas." -Abraham Lincoln

"Judge Douglas is especially horrified at the thought of the mixing blood by the white and black races: we are agreed for once---a thousand times agreed." - Abraham Lincoln

"I tell him [Fredrick Douglass] very frankly that I am not in favor of negro citizenship." - Abraham Lincoln

"Our republican system was meant for a homogeneous people. As long as blacks continue to live here with the whites they constitute a threat to the national life." -Abraham Lincoln

"I have no purpose or desire to introduce political and social equality between the white and black races." -Abraham Lincoln

"When Southern people tell us they are no more responsible for the origin of slavery than we, I acknowledge the fact...My first impulse would be if the slaves are freed...send them to Liberia." -Abraham Lincoln, 8/21/1858

[Just four days before his death, speaking to Gen. Benjamin Butler, Lincoln still pressed on with deportation as the only peaceable solution to America's race problem. "I can not believe that the South and North can live in peace, unless we can get rid of the negroes … I believe that it would be better to export them all to some fertile country."]

[When Lincoln did express a hatred of the expansion of the "peculiar institution" in the Lincoln Douglas debates he said nothing about the abolition ever of the south's current institution. By avoiding the issue of liberation, he could secure the support of non abolitionists and not risk losing the anti-slavery vote. One of the foundations of the Republican Party was free soil and labor opportunities for whites; the prevention of the expansion of slavery was one of the methods to accomplish this. Lincoln took it as his duty to hold to the party principles. Without such a strong corner stone to unit the party it would surely fall (Fonner, Free, 215-216). When elected to office Lincoln continued to use slavery as a political tool in an attempt to put an end to the secession crisis. On the eve of the crisis's climax Lincoln admitted that he was willing to give in to the most radical faction of Southern politicians along with their demands, such as ending Northern resistance to an internal slave trade. Lincoln made it a point to stress to the slave holding states that he had no intention of re-structuring race relations (Clinton & Silber, Divided, 78).
The real purpose for barring the expansion of slavery was to provide more land for the white settlers, not to improve the living conditions of savage subordinates. Armed with this idea of the isolation of slavery for the benefit of the white man Lincoln and his party billed themselves as "the only white mans party in the country." The National Era reported that many Americans opposed slavery. The reason that slavery was so strongly opposed by so many whites was due to its negative effects on free labor. There was little to no consideration for the well being or equality of the Negro (Fonner, Free, 265). Though Lincoln did believe that the Negro was a man, he knew that he was lesser man than whites. However even a lesser man was entitled to the basic natural rights of man, however he did believe that equality with whites was a natural right . He did proclaim that the Negro deserved a chance to better himself, but equality among his masters did not seem an attainable goal for the Negro (Fonner, Free, 290).
In 1862 at the White House Lincoln told a group of black leaders, including Fredrick Douglas, that though slavery was a great wrong inflicted on their people the black race would only suffer trying to live as equals in the superior white culture. Lincoln admitted that the Negro deserved a chance to prove themselves capable of bettering themselves. He thought it unlikely and and not desirable that they should do so here in America (McPherson, Battle, 508). Lincoln's solution was colonization. Central America was one of the selected territories. Through colonization the US could be freed of the inferior Negro in a sort of National enema.] -"Was Lincoln an Abolitionist?", Kelly Snell




Majority of historians agree it was about civil war.


https://psmag.com/education/of-course-the-civil-war-was-about-slavery-26265

Majority of historians agree it was about slavery.

https://www.nps.gov/liho/learn/historyculture/slavery-cause-civil-war.htm

And from that same link is Alexander Stevens (VP of the confederacy) saying it was all about slavery.

I could include 100 quotes from others, like you have done, to back up the fact it was about slavery to counter all the quotes you gave.

The articles of secession of the states also mentioned slavery more than they mentioned any other cause.

It was about slavery. The fact you can't accept that historians have proven that shows you are ignorant.








Did you read the article you linked?

"The North did not, however, go to war to dismantle slavery, as the South did to preserve it. The North fought to preserve the Union, a motivation that, over the course of the war, became inextricably tied to the question of what that Union would look like after the fighting was over would it be free or not?

This is the history on which McPherson's 90 percent to 95 percent of serious historians agree."

The title of the article is "Of course the Civil War Was About Slavery" but the point it is trying to make is that the southern states seceded largely due to slavery, and not simply "states rights". I have seen no one on this thread make that argument. However it states clearly (as noted above) that the north went to war to preserve the union, not to end slavery.


And I have never said the north went to war about slavery. I have said the war was about slavery. That the south left to protect their racist institution. That the war was about slavery.

Then everyone has said all this bs about it wasn't about slavery.

The north went to war with one goal and by the end of the war had a new one.

The war was about slavery.
cowboycwr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Thee University said:

cowboycwr said:

Thee University said:

cowboycwr said:

Redbrickbear said:

cowboycwr said:

Redbrickbear said:

cowboycwr said:

Porteroso said:

Redbrickbear said:

Canada2017 said:

Can anyone imagine the outrage if ANY organization fired their staff for being black ?

Why is blatant discrimination against white people perfectly ok ?




I could tell you but I would probably get banned from this site for saying it.

Believe me, nobody gets banned for anything they say in this forum.
Exactly. I have seen some vile stuff posted here and it seems no one gets banned for it. I can only think of one poster banned for things said but they started getting very personal, attacking, etc. Now on the football (or other sports boards) it is a different story and people can and do get banned there for disagreeing about a current coach.
I have seen your pro-Unionist vile stuff on here and I don't think you should get banned.

Live and let live on the interweb froums my bro.
What have I said that was vile? Posting the truth?


Implying Lincoln (who killed 700,000 people) was a good person is vile.

Saying the North fought the war to free slaves is just a low IQ lie.
Lincoln killed zero people. That is truth. You may THINK otherwise but historians don't agree with you. So you are wrong and history proves it.

Saying the North fought the war to free slaves is the truth. Historians and history back me up.
Ape Lincoln did not fire a shot. He sentenced 600 to 700K to death. He did not have the balls to meet with the South to negotiate a peaceful resolution. History recorded it. History proves it.

The Northern Aggressors didn't free a single slave. History recorded it. History proves it.

Ape wanted to colonize ALL black former slaves to places like Liberia, Africa or other tropical regions. History recorded it.

Ape did not believe blacks should have the same social and political rights as white. History recorded it.

Ape opposed blacks having the right to vote, serve on juries, to hold office and to intermarry with whites.

We could go on and on with history lessons for you.

The only thing that washed away all of the Lincoln sins in the eyes of Yankees was a bullet from Booth's gun.


Yawn.

Prove the majority of historians wrong.
I have already done so.

I'm a historian. Prove me wrong.

What do you believe makes someone a historian? Somebody writes a book?

I think when you have letters written by those who were there and participated, newspaper accounts by writers with first hand knowledge of the actions taken, interviews with those who lived it you can make a fairly compelling case that Lincoln was a manufactured fraud.

Yet he still clings to the Great Emancipator title. Barely. His grip loosens every year. I predict his monuments will be torn down one day soon.


You are an amateur.
Rawhide
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

Quote:

The majority of historians agree it was about civil war. Prove that wrong.

The links I have posted clearly state the cause of the civil war was slavery. That the civil war was about slavery. Yet you keep ignoring that and call me the idiot or say I don't have the ability to discern between the two.

Prove the professional historians wrong.

You post about the opinion of historians. Others have posted factual quotes that came straight from Lincoldn, events that actually happened and bills that actually passed.

You want to rely on what a few historians think instead of seeing the actual facts presented to you.

I guess it's true. We explain it to you, but we can't understand it for you.

Maybe idiot was too strong, but you're at least a clown.


Few??? The majority of them have reached that conclusion through their research, study and break down of the events.

It isn't opinions when they use the evidence to reach a conclusion.

First hand accounts are often wrong, taken out of context and missing the whole picture.

So again I challenge you to prove the vast majority of thousands and thousands of historians wrong.

Call me all the names you want but the challenge is up to you to prove those historians wrong. Apparently you could make a lot of money off of it since it would be groundbreaking work to prove an entire field of experts wrong.

So prove them wrong.
We've already proved it to you. You just choose not to listen.

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/08/23/know-called-civil-war-not-slavery/
No you haven't. Prove the majority of historians wrong. Then like I said you might want to publish those findings and make a killing since you would be proving an entire field of professionals wrong.
You know you're right. We haven't proved anything to you, because you don't want to acknowledge the truth. Nothing will be enough proof for you. You have been given quote after quote and facts after facts. You continue to ignore them all.

Lincoln himself could come to you, look you in the face and tell you that he didn't go to war to free the slaves and you still wouldn't believe him.


I know I'm and right and I have the majority of historians, truth and facts on my side.

You have quotes taken out of context.

Prove the historians wrong
It's already been proved. You just choose to stick your fingers in your ears and you hands over your eyes when it's presented to you.


Perhaps you need to tell the historians that. None of them have changed their minds because of some amateur internet posters.

Provide links showing the majority of historians agree with you because of your amateur findings.
Fact: Congress overwhelmingly passed the Corwin Amendment which would've given constitutional protections for slavery.
Fact: Lincoln himself supported the amendment
Fact: In 1862 wrote these words in a letter: "My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it..."

You should really take the loss and move on. Trying to base facts on opinion is backasswards.

Prove the majority of historians wrong and then post your link to them all saying they were wrong.
How about you prove them right. And FYI, their opinion isn't an actual fact.


Lol. So you think the majority of professionals are wrong?

Let me guess… you haven't gotten the vaccine yet either.
Prove them right with actual facts and not trying to present their opinion as fact.

And what the hell does this conversation have to do with the vaccine?
cowboycwr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

Quote:

The majority of historians agree it was about civil war. Prove that wrong.

The links I have posted clearly state the cause of the civil war was slavery. That the civil war was about slavery. Yet you keep ignoring that and call me the idiot or say I don't have the ability to discern between the two.

Prove the professional historians wrong.

You post about the opinion of historians. Others have posted factual quotes that came straight from Lincoldn, events that actually happened and bills that actually passed.

You want to rely on what a few historians think instead of seeing the actual facts presented to you.

I guess it's true. We explain it to you, but we can't understand it for you.

Maybe idiot was too strong, but you're at least a clown.


Few??? The majority of them have reached that conclusion through their research, study and break down of the events.

It isn't opinions when they use the evidence to reach a conclusion.

First hand accounts are often wrong, taken out of context and missing the whole picture.

So again I challenge you to prove the vast majority of thousands and thousands of historians wrong.

Call me all the names you want but the challenge is up to you to prove those historians wrong. Apparently you could make a lot of money off of it since it would be groundbreaking work to prove an entire field of experts wrong.

So prove them wrong.
We've already proved it to you. You just choose not to listen.

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/08/23/know-called-civil-war-not-slavery/
No you haven't. Prove the majority of historians wrong. Then like I said you might want to publish those findings and make a killing since you would be proving an entire field of professionals wrong.
You know you're right. We haven't proved anything to you, because you don't want to acknowledge the truth. Nothing will be enough proof for you. You have been given quote after quote and facts after facts. You continue to ignore them all.

Lincoln himself could come to you, look you in the face and tell you that he didn't go to war to free the slaves and you still wouldn't believe him.


I know I'm and right and I have the majority of historians, truth and facts on my side.

You have quotes taken out of context.

Prove the historians wrong
It's already been proved. You just choose to stick your fingers in your ears and you hands over your eyes when it's presented to you.


Perhaps you need to tell the historians that. None of them have changed their minds because of some amateur internet posters.

Provide links showing the majority of historians agree with you because of your amateur findings.
Fact: Congress overwhelmingly passed the Corwin Amendment which would've given constitutional protections for slavery.
Fact: Lincoln himself supported the amendment
Fact: In 1862 wrote these words in a letter: "My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it..."

You should really take the loss and move on. Trying to base facts on opinion is backasswards.

Prove the majority of historians wrong and then post your link to them all saying they were wrong.
How about you prove them right. And FYI, their opinion isn't an actual fact.


Lol. So you think the majority of professionals are wrong?

Let me guess… you haven't gotten the vaccine yet either.
Prove them right with actual facts and not trying to present their opinion as fact.

And what the hell does this conversation have to do with the vaccine?


Because the majority of professionals say it is good, safe, effective. And you problem dismiss them because of one random quote made by a doctor that goes against that point.

I have proven them right.

Thee University
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cowboycwr said:

Thee University said:

cowboycwr said:

Thee University said:

cowboycwr said:

Redbrickbear said:

cowboycwr said:

Redbrickbear said:

cowboycwr said:

Porteroso said:

Redbrickbear said:

Canada2017 said:

Can anyone imagine the outrage if ANY organization fired their staff for being black ?

Why is blatant discrimination against white people perfectly ok ?




I could tell you but I would probably get banned from this site for saying it.

Believe me, nobody gets banned for anything they say in this forum.
Exactly. I have seen some vile stuff posted here and it seems no one gets banned for it. I can only think of one poster banned for things said but they started getting very personal, attacking, etc. Now on the football (or other sports boards) it is a different story and people can and do get banned there for disagreeing about a current coach.
I have seen your pro-Unionist vile stuff on here and I don't think you should get banned.

Live and let live on the interweb froums my bro.
What have I said that was vile? Posting the truth?


Implying Lincoln (who killed 700,000 people) was a good person is vile.

Saying the North fought the war to free slaves is just a low IQ lie.
Lincoln killed zero people. That is truth. You may THINK otherwise but historians don't agree with you. So you are wrong and history proves it.

Saying the North fought the war to free slaves is the truth. Historians and history back me up.
Ape Lincoln did not fire a shot. He sentenced 600 to 700K to death. He did not have the balls to meet with the South to negotiate a peaceful resolution. History recorded it. History proves it.

The Northern Aggressors didn't free a single slave. History recorded it. History proves it.

Ape wanted to colonize ALL black former slaves to places like Liberia, Africa or other tropical regions. History recorded it.

Ape did not believe blacks should have the same social and political rights as white. History recorded it.

Ape opposed blacks having the right to vote, serve on juries, to hold office and to intermarry with whites.

We could go on and on with history lessons for you.

The only thing that washed away all of the Lincoln sins in the eyes of Yankees was a bullet from Booth's gun.


Yawn.

Prove the majority of historians wrong.
I have already done so.

I'm a historian. Prove me wrong.

What do you believe makes someone a historian? Somebody writes a book?

I think when you have letters written by those who were there and participated, newspaper accounts by writers with first hand knowledge of the actions taken, interviews with those who lived it you can make a fairly compelling case that Lincoln was a manufactured fraud.

Yet he still clings to the Great Emancipator title. Barely. His grip loosens every year. I predict his monuments will be torn down one day soon.


You are an amateur.
You can't and won't prove jack squat. The War of Northern Aggression was proven by your supposed historians.

"Any people with contempt for their heritage have lost faith in themselves and no nation can long survive without pride in its traditions." - Sir Winston Churchill
Rawhide
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

Quote:

The majority of historians agree it was about civil war. Prove that wrong.

The links I have posted clearly state the cause of the civil war was slavery. That the civil war was about slavery. Yet you keep ignoring that and call me the idiot or say I don't have the ability to discern between the two.

Prove the professional historians wrong.

You post about the opinion of historians. Others have posted factual quotes that came straight from Lincoldn, events that actually happened and bills that actually passed.

You want to rely on what a few historians think instead of seeing the actual facts presented to you.

I guess it's true. We explain it to you, but we can't understand it for you.

Maybe idiot was too strong, but you're at least a clown.


Few??? The majority of them have reached that conclusion through their research, study and break down of the events.

It isn't opinions when they use the evidence to reach a conclusion.

First hand accounts are often wrong, taken out of context and missing the whole picture.

So again I challenge you to prove the vast majority of thousands and thousands of historians wrong.

Call me all the names you want but the challenge is up to you to prove those historians wrong. Apparently you could make a lot of money off of it since it would be groundbreaking work to prove an entire field of experts wrong.

So prove them wrong.
We've already proved it to you. You just choose not to listen.

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/08/23/know-called-civil-war-not-slavery/
No you haven't. Prove the majority of historians wrong. Then like I said you might want to publish those findings and make a killing since you would be proving an entire field of professionals wrong.
You know you're right. We haven't proved anything to you, because you don't want to acknowledge the truth. Nothing will be enough proof for you. You have been given quote after quote and facts after facts. You continue to ignore them all.

Lincoln himself could come to you, look you in the face and tell you that he didn't go to war to free the slaves and you still wouldn't believe him.


I know I'm and right and I have the majority of historians, truth and facts on my side.

You have quotes taken out of context.

Prove the historians wrong
It's already been proved. You just choose to stick your fingers in your ears and you hands over your eyes when it's presented to you.


Perhaps you need to tell the historians that. None of them have changed their minds because of some amateur internet posters.

Provide links showing the majority of historians agree with you because of your amateur findings.
Fact: Congress overwhelmingly passed the Corwin Amendment which would've given constitutional protections for slavery.
Fact: Lincoln himself supported the amendment
Fact: In 1862 wrote these words in a letter: "My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it..."

You should really take the loss and move on. Trying to base facts on opinion is backasswards.

Prove the majority of historians wrong and then post your link to them all saying they were wrong.
How about you prove them right. And FYI, their opinion isn't an actual fact.


Lol. So you think the majority of professionals are wrong?

Let me guess… you haven't gotten the vaccine yet either.
Prove them right with actual facts and not trying to present their opinion as fact.

And what the hell does this conversation have to do with the vaccine?


Because the majority of professionals say it is good, safe, effective. And you problem dismiss them because of one random quote made by a doctor that goes against that point.

I have proven them right.


You have not proven anything right.

If some doctor who hasn't practiced medicine in a long time, is no longer currently active in the field and hasn't seen a patient in God knows how long, a doctor who hasn't stepped foot in hospital in years tried to tell me not to get the vax, I probably wouldn't listen to him so much. You know, since he's not there in the middle of it right now, or yesterday and won't be there tomorrow.

You're trying to compare the opinions of "historians" that weren't even alive during the civil war against the actual facts, first hand accounts and statements by the very people that were there, in the trenches, fighting to keep the Union together.

Trust me, you're the rube here. You're trying to argue that the war was fought to free the slaves and nothing could be further from the truth. Lincoln's very own words contradict the BS narrative that you've bought into (hiook, line and sinker)

Now prove those historians are right with actual facts. Please show us where Lincoln said he was going to war to free the slaves. Show us where congress authorized the war to free the slaves.
Proud 1992 Alum
How long do you want to ignore this user?
You suck at arguing your point. Stating over and over that the majority of historians say . . . isn't an argument or proof of anything. You haven't even cited any evidence for that statement. Meanwhile, others have laid out a convincing case. Step it up or go away.
cowboycwr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Thee University said:

cowboycwr said:

Thee University said:

cowboycwr said:

Thee University said:

cowboycwr said:

Redbrickbear said:

cowboycwr said:

Redbrickbear said:

cowboycwr said:

Porteroso said:

Redbrickbear said:

Canada2017 said:

Can anyone imagine the outrage if ANY organization fired their staff for being black ?

Why is blatant discrimination against white people perfectly ok ?




I could tell you but I would probably get banned from this site for saying it.

Believe me, nobody gets banned for anything they say in this forum.
Exactly. I have seen some vile stuff posted here and it seems no one gets banned for it. I can only think of one poster banned for things said but they started getting very personal, attacking, etc. Now on the football (or other sports boards) it is a different story and people can and do get banned there for disagreeing about a current coach.
I have seen your pro-Unionist vile stuff on here and I don't think you should get banned.

Live and let live on the interweb froums my bro.
What have I said that was vile? Posting the truth?


Implying Lincoln (who killed 700,000 people) was a good person is vile.

Saying the North fought the war to free slaves is just a low IQ lie.
Lincoln killed zero people. That is truth. You may THINK otherwise but historians don't agree with you. So you are wrong and history proves it.

Saying the North fought the war to free slaves is the truth. Historians and history back me up.
Ape Lincoln did not fire a shot. He sentenced 600 to 700K to death. He did not have the balls to meet with the South to negotiate a peaceful resolution. History recorded it. History proves it.

The Northern Aggressors didn't free a single slave. History recorded it. History proves it.

Ape wanted to colonize ALL black former slaves to places like Liberia, Africa or other tropical regions. History recorded it.

Ape did not believe blacks should have the same social and political rights as white. History recorded it.

Ape opposed blacks having the right to vote, serve on juries, to hold office and to intermarry with whites.

We could go on and on with history lessons for you.

The only thing that washed away all of the Lincoln sins in the eyes of Yankees was a bullet from Booth's gun.


Yawn.

Prove the majority of historians wrong.
I have already done so.

I'm a historian. Prove me wrong.

What do you believe makes someone a historian? Somebody writes a book?

I think when you have letters written by those who were there and participated, newspaper accounts by writers with first hand knowledge of the actions taken, interviews with those who lived it you can make a fairly compelling case that Lincoln was a manufactured fraud.

Yet he still clings to the Great Emancipator title. Barely. His grip loosens every year. I predict his monuments will be torn down one day soon.


You are an amateur.
You can't and won't prove jack squat. The War of Northern Aggression was proven by your supposed historians.




I have. You keep choosing to ignore the professionals.
cowboycwr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

Quote:

The majority of historians agree it was about civil war. Prove that wrong.

The links I have posted clearly state the cause of the civil war was slavery. That the civil war was about slavery. Yet you keep ignoring that and call me the idiot or say I don't have the ability to discern between the two.

Prove the professional historians wrong.

You post about the opinion of historians. Others have posted factual quotes that came straight from Lincoldn, events that actually happened and bills that actually passed.

You want to rely on what a few historians think instead of seeing the actual facts presented to you.

I guess it's true. We explain it to you, but we can't understand it for you.

Maybe idiot was too strong, but you're at least a clown.


Few??? The majority of them have reached that conclusion through their research, study and break down of the events.

It isn't opinions when they use the evidence to reach a conclusion.

First hand accounts are often wrong, taken out of context and missing the whole picture.

So again I challenge you to prove the vast majority of thousands and thousands of historians wrong.

Call me all the names you want but the challenge is up to you to prove those historians wrong. Apparently you could make a lot of money off of it since it would be groundbreaking work to prove an entire field of experts wrong.

So prove them wrong.
We've already proved it to you. You just choose not to listen.

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/08/23/know-called-civil-war-not-slavery/
No you haven't. Prove the majority of historians wrong. Then like I said you might want to publish those findings and make a killing since you would be proving an entire field of professionals wrong.
You know you're right. We haven't proved anything to you, because you don't want to acknowledge the truth. Nothing will be enough proof for you. You have been given quote after quote and facts after facts. You continue to ignore them all.

Lincoln himself could come to you, look you in the face and tell you that he didn't go to war to free the slaves and you still wouldn't believe him.


I know I'm and right and I have the majority of historians, truth and facts on my side.

You have quotes taken out of context.

Prove the historians wrong
It's already been proved. You just choose to stick your fingers in your ears and you hands over your eyes when it's presented to you.


Perhaps you need to tell the historians that. None of them have changed their minds because of some amateur internet posters.

Provide links showing the majority of historians agree with you because of your amateur findings.
Fact: Congress overwhelmingly passed the Corwin Amendment which would've given constitutional protections for slavery.
Fact: Lincoln himself supported the amendment
Fact: In 1862 wrote these words in a letter: "My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it..."

You should really take the loss and move on. Trying to base facts on opinion is backasswards.

Prove the majority of historians wrong and then post your link to them all saying they were wrong.
How about you prove them right. And FYI, their opinion isn't an actual fact.


Lol. So you think the majority of professionals are wrong?

Let me guess… you haven't gotten the vaccine yet either.
Prove them right with actual facts and not trying to present their opinion as fact.

And what the hell does this conversation have to do with the vaccine?


Because the majority of professionals say it is good, safe, effective. And you problem dismiss them because of one random quote made by a doctor that goes against that point.

I have proven them right.


You have not proven anything right.

If some doctor who hasn't practiced medicine in a long time, is no longer currently active in the field and hasn't seen a patient in God knows how long, a doctor who hasn't stepped foot in hospital in years tried to tell me not to get the vax, I probably wouldn't listen to him so much. You know, since he's not there in the middle of it right now, or yesterday and won't be there tomorrow.

You're trying to compare the opinions of "historians" that weren't even alive during the civil war against the actual facts, first hand accounts and statements by the very people that were there, in the trenches, fighting to keep the Union together.

Trust me, you're the rube here. You're trying to argue that the war was fought to free the slaves and nothing could be further from the truth. Lincoln's very own words contradict the BS narrative that you've bought into (hiook, line and sinker)

Now prove those historians are right with actual facts. Please show us where Lincoln said he was going to war to free the slaves. Show us where congress authorized the war to free the slaves.


13th amendment.

I have proven my point. The war was about slavery. I have never said the North went to war because of slavery. You have taken what I said and twisted it to fit your own narrative.

The historians have proven it.

You choose to ignore it. Just like you choose to ignore the professionals on the vaccine.
cowboycwr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Proud 1992 Alum said:

You suck at arguing your point. Stating over and over that the majority of historians say . . . isn't an argument or proof of anything. You haven't even cited any evidence for that statement. Meanwhile, others have laid out a convincing case. Step it up or go away.


I have posted links to prove it. People have chosen not to read them.

I will stay and you cannot make me go away from behind your keyboard internet tough guy.

The majority of professionals have reached a conclusion and you and others choose to ignore it. Just like you do on the vaccine.
Rawhide
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

Rawhide said:

Quote:

The majority of historians agree it was about civil war. Prove that wrong.

The links I have posted clearly state the cause of the civil war was slavery. That the civil war was about slavery. Yet you keep ignoring that and call me the idiot or say I don't have the ability to discern between the two.

Prove the professional historians wrong.

You post about the opinion of historians. Others have posted factual quotes that came straight from Lincoldn, events that actually happened and bills that actually passed.

You want to rely on what a few historians think instead of seeing the actual facts presented to you.

I guess it's true. We explain it to you, but we can't understand it for you.

Maybe idiot was too strong, but you're at least a clown.


Few??? The majority of them have reached that conclusion through their research, study and break down of the events.

It isn't opinions when they use the evidence to reach a conclusion.

First hand accounts are often wrong, taken out of context and missing the whole picture.

So again I challenge you to prove the vast majority of thousands and thousands of historians wrong.

Call me all the names you want but the challenge is up to you to prove those historians wrong. Apparently you could make a lot of money off of it since it would be groundbreaking work to prove an entire field of experts wrong.

So prove them wrong.
We've already proved it to you. You just choose not to listen.

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/08/23/know-called-civil-war-not-slavery/
No you haven't. Prove the majority of historians wrong. Then like I said you might want to publish those findings and make a killing since you would be proving an entire field of professionals wrong.
You know you're right. We haven't proved anything to you, because you don't want to acknowledge the truth. Nothing will be enough proof for you. You have been given quote after quote and facts after facts. You continue to ignore them all.

Lincoln himself could come to you, look you in the face and tell you that he didn't go to war to free the slaves and you still wouldn't believe him.


I know I'm and right and I have the majority of historians, truth and facts on my side.

You have quotes taken out of context.

Prove the historians wrong
It's already been proved. You just choose to stick your fingers in your ears and you hands over your eyes when it's presented to you.


Perhaps you need to tell the historians that. None of them have changed their minds because of some amateur internet posters.

Provide links showing the majority of historians agree with you because of your amateur findings.
Fact: Congress overwhelmingly passed the Corwin Amendment which would've given constitutional protections for slavery.
Fact: Lincoln himself supported the amendment
Fact: In 1862 wrote these words in a letter: "My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it..."

You should really take the loss and move on. Trying to base facts on opinion is backasswards.

Prove the majority of historians wrong and then post your link to them all saying they were wrong.
How about you prove them right. And FYI, their opinion isn't an actual fact.


Lol. So you think the majority of professionals are wrong?

Let me guess… you haven't gotten the vaccine yet either.
Prove them right with actual facts and not trying to present their opinion as fact.

And what the hell does this conversation have to do with the vaccine?


Because the majority of professionals say it is good, safe, effective. And you problem dismiss them because of one random quote made by a doctor that goes against that point.

I have proven them right.


You have not proven anything right.

If some doctor who hasn't practiced medicine in a long time, is no longer currently active in the field and hasn't seen a patient in God knows how long, a doctor who hasn't stepped foot in hospital in years tried to tell me not to get the vax, I probably wouldn't listen to him so much. You know, since he's not there in the middle of it right now, or yesterday and won't be there tomorrow.

You're trying to compare the opinions of "historians" that weren't even alive during the civil war against the actual facts, first hand accounts and statements by the very people that were there, in the trenches, fighting to keep the Union together.

Trust me, you're the rube here. You're trying to argue that the war was fought to free the slaves and nothing could be further from the truth. Lincoln's very own words contradict the BS narrative that you've bought into (hiook, line and sinker)

Now prove those historians are right with actual facts. Please show us where Lincoln said he was going to war to free the slaves. Show us where congress authorized the war to free the slaves.


13th amendment.

I have proven my point. The war was about slavery. I have never said the North went to war because of slavery. You have taken what I said and twisted it to fit your own narrative.

The historians have proven it.

You choose to ignore it. Just like you choose to ignore the professionals on the vaccine.
Secession was about slavery. The war was about keeping the union together.

You choose to ignore Lincoln's actual statements about the war and you ignore the fact that congress passed the Corwin Amendment which would've given constitutional protections to slavery.

The historians have voiced their opinions. The facts have proven the point, which you ignore.

And just the recored, clown. I got the vaccine months ago.
Thee University
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cowboycwr said:


I have proven my point. The war was about slavery. I have never said the North went to war because of slavery. You have taken what I said and twisted it to fit your own narrative.

The historians have proven it.
Change your post to this:

The war was changed to be about slavery AFTER Ape Lincoln saw that his generals were losing, the Yankees were getting their @$$es handed to them, the Yankee civilians were tired of Ape sacrificing their husbands and sons and the South was going to secede and form an even superior country.

I am a historian and I have proven it.
"Any people with contempt for their heritage have lost faith in themselves and no nation can long survive without pride in its traditions." - Sir Winston Churchill
cowboycwr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Thee University said:

cowboycwr said:


I have proven my point. The war was about slavery. I have never said the North went to war because of slavery. You have taken what I said and twisted it to fit your own narrative.

The historians have proven it.
Change your post to this:

The war was changed to be about slavery AFTER Ape Lincoln saw that his generals were losing, the Yankees were getting their @$$es handed to them, the Yankee civilians were tired of Ape sacrificing their husbands and sons and the South was going to secede and form an even superior country.

I am a historian and I have proven it.


Post your credentials and how you have proven the majority of your colleagues wrong.
Oldbear83
How long do you want to ignore this user?
To both sides:

Please give it a rest.
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
Thee University
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cowboycwr said:

Thee University said:

cowboycwr said:


I have proven my point. The war was about slavery. I have never said the North went to war because of slavery. You have taken what I said and twisted it to fit your own narrative.

The historians have proven it.
Change your post to this:

The war was changed to be about slavery AFTER Ape Lincoln saw that his generals were losing, the Yankees were getting their @$$es handed to them, the Yankee civilians were tired of Ape sacrificing their husbands and sons and the South was going to secede and form an even superior country.

I am a historian and I have proven it.


Post your credentials and how you have proven the majority of your colleagues wrong.
My credentials? I don't need no stinking credentials on a sports bulletin board!!! Here we are all equal. Equally Mensa members.

I have no colleagues. I am several levels above all of the self-anointed historians. Common sense and proud Southern blood coarsing through my veins beats your Yankee @$$, limp-wristed pencil neck, Joe Biden loving, skirt wearing, race baiting, George Floyd worshipping, Adam Schiff clone, Nancy Pelosi errand boy, Chuck Schumer licking, Maxine Water's slave, Rachel Levine looking loser every time.
"Any people with contempt for their heritage have lost faith in themselves and no nation can long survive without pride in its traditions." - Sir Winston Churchill
Thee University
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Oldbear83 said:

To both sides:

Please give it a rest.
I can't. I'm writing a new book about the causes of the War of Northern Aggression. I'm studying the negative impact make believe historians have had on the Simple Jacks of the world.





"Any people with contempt for their heritage have lost faith in themselves and no nation can long survive without pride in its traditions." - Sir Winston Churchill
Oldbear83
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Thee: "I don't need no stinking credentials on a sports bulletin board!!! Here we are all equal. Equally Mensa members."

I hear you, Thee. Why, ever since that Internet test assured me that I have a 300 IQ, just like my online bowling average, I have wondered why it's so hard to find my mental peers.

heh
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
cowboycwr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Thee University said:

cowboycwr said:

Thee University said:

cowboycwr said:


I have proven my point. The war was about slavery. I have never said the North went to war because of slavery. You have taken what I said and twisted it to fit your own narrative.

The historians have proven it.
Change your post to this:

The war was changed to be about slavery AFTER Ape Lincoln saw that his generals were losing, the Yankees were getting their @$$es handed to them, the Yankee civilians were tired of Ape sacrificing their husbands and sons and the South was going to secede and form an even superior country.

I am a historian and I have proven it.


Post your credentials and how you have proven the majority of your colleagues wrong.
My credentials? I don't need no stinking credentials on a sports bulletin board!!! Here we are all equal. Equally Mensa members.

I have no colleagues. I am several levels above all of the self-anointed historians. Common sense and proud Southern blood coarsing through my veins beats your Yankee @$$, limp-wristed pencil neck, Joe Biden loving, skirt wearing, race baiting, George Floyd worshipping, Adam Schiff clone, Nancy Pelosi errand boy, Chuck Schumer licking, Maxine Water's slave, Rachel Levine looking loser every time.


In other words you are an amateur and can't hang with the professionals.

I support none of what you mentioned.
cowboycwr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Those defending the south in the civil war remind me why the Republican Party I have supported for years is dead. Old white guys ardently supporting racist slave owners from 160 years ago, refusing to accept the war had a just outcome, was not a war of "northern aggression" and refusing to accept facts. But yet they cling to their beliefs while not understanding why more people don't vote for them.
Thee University
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cowboycwr said:

Those defending the south in the civil war remind me why the Republican Party I have supported for years is dead. Old white guys ardently supporting racist slave owners from 160 years ago, refusing to accept the war had a just outcome, was not a war of "northern aggression" and refusing to accept facts. But yet they cling to their beliefs while not understanding why more people don't vote for them.
You got me in the wrong group. I am a man of color who still, today, believe the Yankees would have lost without sitting on their fat @$$es on the docks enlisting the Irish and anyone with a heart beat to fight their sham of a war.

I do feel sorry for the race baiters/hustlers like yourself who have to keep the small campfire lit so that they can throw gasoline on it 160 years later in an attempt to fleece not only the South but gullible Yankees too. You are a tool for the Yanks.

I would be amazed that supposed educated men like yourself (maybe educated) can still cling to the lies typical of our corrupt government believing that it has your best interest at heart. But then I look around the nation and see the cast of incompetent nimrod politicians like Joe Biden has installed. This is when I realize people like you voted for and support today, that liberal, lost, agenda.

I know who you are. I know what you are attempting to do. You will never live to see it come to fruition.
"Any people with contempt for their heritage have lost faith in themselves and no nation can long survive without pride in its traditions." - Sir Winston Churchill
Canada2017
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cowboycwr said:

Those defending the south in the civil war remind me why the Republican Party I have supported for years is dead. Old white guys ardently supporting racist slave owners from 160 years ago, refusing to accept the war had a just outcome, was not a war of "northern aggression" and refusing to accept facts. But yet they cling to their beliefs while not understanding why more people don't vote for them.
Proof positive .

You are victorious once again .

Career stats ( including Bfans )


471 - 0


Rawhide
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cowboycwr said:

refusing to accept facts.
That's rich, coming from you; especially after actual facts that have been presented to you. You ignoring what Lincoln actually said. You choose to rely on the opinion of a few academic historians that weren't even there.

Proud 1992 Alum
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cowboycwr said:

Proud 1992 Alum said:

You suck at arguing your point. Stating over and over that the majority of historians say . . . isn't an argument or proof of anything. You haven't even cited any evidence for that statement. Meanwhile, others have laid out a convincing case. Step it up or go away.


I have posted links to prove it. People have chosen not to read them.

I will stay and you cannot make me go away from behind your keyboard internet tough guy.

The majority of professionals have reached a conclusion and you and others choose to ignore it. Just like you do on the vaccine.


I'm vaccinated dumba**.
Malbec
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A Civil War argument in a thread about art museum docents. That may be the most SE365 thing ever.
Rawhide
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Malbec said:

A Civil War argument in a thread about the firing of art museum docents for being white. That may be the most SE365 thing ever.
FIFY
cowboycwr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Thee University said:

cowboycwr said:

Those defending the south in the civil war remind me why the Republican Party I have supported for years is dead. Old white guys ardently supporting racist slave owners from 160 years ago, refusing to accept the war had a just outcome, was not a war of "northern aggression" and refusing to accept facts. But yet they cling to their beliefs while not understanding why more people don't vote for them.
You got me in the wrong group. I am a man of color who still, today, believe the Yankees would have lost without sitting on their fat @$$es on the docks enlisting the Irish and anyone with a heart beat to fight their sham of a war.

I do feel sorry for the race baiters/hustlers like yourself who have to keep the small campfire lit so that they can throw gasoline on it 160 years later in an attempt to fleece not only the South but gullible Yankees too. You are a tool for the Yanks.

I would be amazed that supposed educated men like yourself (maybe educated) can still cling to the lies typical of our corrupt government believing that it has your best interest at heart. But then I look around the nation and see the cast of incompetent nimrod politicians like Joe Biden has installed. This is when I realize people like you voted for and support today, that liberal, lost, agenda.

I know who you are. I know what you are attempting to do. You will never live to see it come to fruition.


Lol. You don't know a thing about me. I hate Biden.

You are a man of color and so ardently defend the people who kept your ancestors in chains? And you call me the uneducated one?

Sorry but the majority of professionals back me up. Prove them wrong, make millions doing it since you would be proving an entire field wrong, and get them all (southern and northern) to admit they were wrong.

My point still stands. You are the cause of the death of the Republican Party. You may not be white but you are talking just like the old white men want you to. Down to the hatred of Yankees. Pissing off half the country is not how you get them to vote for you. Look at Hillary. She upset so many people they voted against her because did her comments.

How you can call a war to free your people a sham shows how brain washed you are.
cowboycwr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Canada2017 said:

cowboycwr said:

Those defending the south in the civil war remind me why the Republican Party I have supported for years is dead. Old white guys ardently supporting racist slave owners from 160 years ago, refusing to accept the war had a just outcome, was not a war of "northern aggression" and refusing to accept facts. But yet they cling to their beliefs while not understanding why more people don't vote for them.
Proof positive .

You are victorious once again .

Career stats ( including Bfans )


471 - 0





Lol. You and I used to almost always be on the same side of arguments until this one. Not sure how I ever ended up on your bad list. Clearly you have me confused with someone else.
cowboycwr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Rawhide said:

cowboycwr said:

refusing to accept facts.
That's rich, coming from you; especially after actual facts that have been presented to you. You ignoring what Lincoln actually said. You choose to rely on the opinion of a few academic historians that weren't even there.




Because you aren't even arguing on the correct point I'm making. Every quote you have given isn't even close to what I have been arguing. You have been arguing about the start of the war, the reasons Lincoln got into the war, his original goals, etc.

When all I have stated is that the war was about slavery.

I have never said it was about slavery and only slavery. I have never said both sides started it about slavery (the south did).

And yes I will accept people who have studied the whole thing from all sides and angles over one person who saw one side and one angle.

But you won't. Probably just like you won't accept the vaccine works. Yeah I know you "claim" you got it but you don't strike me as someone who takes the word of the majority of professionals ever.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.