MESO-Rx
Anabolic Steroids
Charlottesville, big drama.
- Thread starter x11
- Start date
Leancuisine
New Member
You mean antifa?
Assuming you're talking about the James Alex Fields Jr guy who was arrested? Pretty broad statement there.
False flags....... I think you were the one who posted on one of my threads saying "not everything is a conspiracy"
Assuming you're talking about the James Alex Fields Jr guy who was arrested? Pretty broad statement there.
False flags....... I think you were the one who posted on one of my threads saying "not everything is a conspiracy"
Leancuisine
New Member
I do not have reliable information about this. I am interested in seeing what you're thoughts are though.
I don't really care. I guess 19 people got injured, and 1 person got killed. That doesn't make much sense to me. How in the hell was someone able to injure 19 people, and then was able to get out of his car and leave without getting beaten to death by the crowd of people he ran into.
Weren't there 2 groups here? A white activist group, and then another group of people protesting them? Either way... protestors usually do their bidding at busy intersections where lots of traffic drive by. I'm surprised this doesn't happen more often.
I don't really care. I guess 19 people got injured, and 1 person got killed. That doesn't make much sense to me. How in the hell was someone able to injure 19 people, and then was able to get out of his car and leave without getting beaten to death by the crowd of people he ran into.
Weren't there 2 groups here? A white activist group, and then another group of people protesting them? Either way... protestors usually do their bidding at busy intersections where lots of traffic drive by. I'm surprised this doesn't happen more often.
Leancuisine
New Member
Are you drunk?
Anyways here's a video of it from some feminine douche bag.
Anyways here's a video of it from some feminine douche bag.
Leancuisine
New Member
Also the white supremacist group is trying to sue Charlottesville for violating first amendment rights.
Sounds like everyone involved in this shit is a cum munching, shit biting, dick licker.
Sounds like everyone involved in this shit is a cum munching, shit biting, dick licker.
@Leancuisine you like a good conspiracy.
Paranoia geeks be saying driver was kidnapped, drugged to incapacitation, placed into driver seat and the car was maneuvered into crowd by remote control.......because car windows tinted.
Paranoia geeks be saying driver was kidnapped, drugged to incapacitation, placed into driver seat and the car was maneuvered into crowd by remote control.......because car windows tinted.
Not true. There's pics through the widows as he's doing it, he's fully "awake"
Here's what happened. There are these fucktards in the world. Some think one way, some think 180° opposite. They don't mesh. The met. They clashed. Being fucktards, one of the fucktards lost his shit.
Being that this is the best GOTdam country, I'm glad that these fucktards have the ability to express their fucktards views. However, they both should be put down like all the other varmints we shoot for kicks.
Leancuisine
New Member
Got damn Rob, preach it brother!
15+ other people were injured during this rally. These injuries were unrelated to the car crash. If the guy didn't drive his car into the crowd, something else would have happened to kill a few people and injure a dozen.
tenpoundsleft
Member
The 1st Amendment is intended to let people express stupidity in public. These white supremacy clowns are no more or less odious than the BLM jackasses, or the pinko shitheads on campuses who need safe spaces and crap like that. Actually, maybe less unpleasant, they seem a lot better behaved in public than the black/pink thugs.
Good to give all idiots a soapbox so we can keep our distance. Otherwise those morons will lurk among us.
Leancuisine
New Member
Statues?
I always thought memorials were a waste of land. A few decades down the road someone is just going to vandalize it anyways....
tenpoundsleft
Member
Absolutely, on the statues. That's just the outcome of decades of revisionist history, painting the Civil War as pure good vs total evil, and ignoring that it was, like most wars, over power. The South had the right to secede, Lincoln just didn't like that idea.
And at least 4 out of every 100 males in the US died as a result. 620,000 male deaths, 2% of the population. And another 400K plus died of diseases related to the war. And this also gave birth to the overbearing federal government. Lincoln, not a good president.
But public school and pop culture teaches that it was about slavery.
The civil war was as much about slavery as the American revolution was about tea.
tenpoundsleft
Member
I'm regularly stunned by the otherwise educated people I meet who have swallowed that line, hook and sinker. Really, emancipation was the main goal? That's preposterous on its face.
Slavery was definitely a major factor in the cause of the war.
It is a primary reason in each states article of secession. There were other reasons.... but slavery was cited as a reason in those articles of secession.
It is a primary reason in each states article of secession. There were other reasons.... but slavery was cited as a reason in those articles of secession.
tenpoundsleft
Member
You're mixing issues - it's irrelevant *why* the South wanted to secede - the fact is that they absolutely had the *right* to do so.
The war was brought about because Lincoln thought himself above the Constitution - putting it simply. Just look at all his illegal actions - condoned or ignored because the winner writes the history. Doesn't make their spin the truth.
We might be on the same page, just semantics getting in the way.
**** From an article on the web ***
President Lincoln has been all but deified in America, with a god-like giant statue at a Parthenon-like memorial in Washington. Generations of school children have been indoctrinated with the story that “Honest Abe” Lincoln is a national hero who saved the Union and fought a noble war to end slavery, and that the “evil” Southern states seceded from the Union to protect slavery. This is the Yankee myth of history, written and promulgated by Northerners, and it is a complete falsity. It was produced and entrenched in the culture in large part to gloss over the terrible war crimes committed by Union soldiers in the War Between the States, as well as Lincoln’s violations of the law, his shredding of the Constitution, and other reprehensible acts. It has been very effective in keeping the average American ignorant of the real causes of the war, and the real nature, character and record of Lincoln. Let us look at some unpleasant facts.
In his first inaugural address, Lincoln stated clearly that (1) he had no legal authority to interfere with slavery where it existed, (2) that he had no inclination or intention to do so even if he had the legal authority, (3) that he would enforce the Fugitive Slave Act, returning runaway slaves escaping to the North to their masters in the South, and (4) that he fully supported the Thirteenth Amendment then being debated in Congress which would protect slavery in perpetuity and was irrevocable. He later famously stated, “Do not paint me with the Abolitionist brush.”
Although there was some opposition to slavery in the country, the government was willing to concede everything the South wanted regarding slavery to keep it in the Union. Given all these facts, the idea that the South seceded to protect slavery is as absurd as the idea that Lincoln fought the war to end slavery. Lincoln himself said in a famous letter after the war began that his sole purpose was to save the Union, and not to either save or end slavery; that if he could save the Union without freeing a single slave, he would. Nothing could be clearer.
For decades before the war, the South, through harsh tariffs, had been supplying about 85% of the country’s revenue, nearly all of which was being spent in the North to boost its economy, build manufacturing, infrastructure, railroads, canals, etc. With the passage of the 47% Morrill Tariff the final nail was in the coffin. The South did not secede to protect slavery, although certainly they wished to protect it; they seceded over a dispute about unfair taxation, an oppressive Federal government, and the right to separate from that oppression and be governed “by consent”, exactly the same issues over which the Founding Fathers fought the Revolutionary War. When a member of Lincoln’s cabinet suggested he let the South go in peace, Lincoln famously replied, “Let the South go? Where, then, would we get our revenue!” He then launched a brutal, empirical war to keep the free and sovereign states, by force of arms, in the Union they had created and voluntarily joined, and then voluntarily left. This began his reign of terror.
Lincoln was the greatest tyrant and despot in American history. In the first four months of his presidency, he created a complete military dictatorship, destroyed the Constitution, ended forever the constitutional republic which the Founding Fathers instituted, committed horrendous crimes against civilian citizens, and formed the tyrannical, overbearing and oppressive Federal government which the American people suffer under to this day. In his first four months, he
- Failed to call Congress into session after the South fired upon Fort Sumter, in direct violation of the Constitution.
- Called up an army of 75,000 men, bypassing the Congressional authority in direct violation of the Constitution.
- Unilaterally suspended the writ of habeas corpus, a function of Congress, violating the Constitution. This gave him the power, as he saw it, to arrest civilians without charge and imprison them indefinitely without trial—which he did.
- Ignored a Supreme Court order to restore the right of habeas corpus, thus violating the Constitution again and ignoring the Separation of Powers which the Founders put in place exactly for the purpose of preventing one man’s using tyrannical powers in the executive.
- When the Chief Justice forwarded a copy of the Supreme Court’s decision to Lincoln, he wrote out an order for the arrest of the Chief Justice and gave it to a U.S. Marshall for expedition, in violation of the Constitution.
- Unilaterally ordered a naval blockade of southern ports, an act of war, and a responsibility of Congress, in violation of the Constitution.
- Commandeered and closed over 300 newspapers in the North, because of editorials against his war policy and his illegal military invasion of the South. This clearly violated the First Amendment freedom of speech and press clauses.
- Sent in Army forces to destroy the printing presses and other machinery at those newspapers, in violation of the Constitution.
- Arrested the publishers, editors and owners of those newspapers, and imprisoned them without charge and without trial for the remainder of the war, all in direct violation of both the Constitution and the Supreme Court order aforementioned.
- Arrested and imprisoned, without charge or trial, another 15,000-20,000 U.S. citizens who dared to speak out against the war, his policies, or were suspected of anti-war feelings. (Relative to the population at the time, this would be equivalent to President G.W. Bush arresting and imprisoning roughly 150,000-200,000 Americans without trial for “disagreeing” with the Iraq war; can you imagine?)
- Sent the Army to arrest the entire legislature of Maryland to keep them from meeting legally, because they were debating a bill of secession; they were all imprisoned without charge or trial, in direct violation of the Constitution.
- Unilaterally created the state of West Virginia in direct violation of the Constitution.
- Sent 350,000 Northern men to their deaths to kill 350,000 Southern men in order to force the free and sovereign states of the South to remain in the Union they, the people, legally voted to peacefully withdraw from, all in order to continue the South’s revenue flow into the North.
Four months after Fort Sumter, when Lincoln finally called Congress back into session, no one dared oppose anything he wanted or speak out against him for fear of imprisonment, so completely had he entrenched his unilateral power and silenced his other many critics.
The Union army, under Generals Grant, Sherman, Sheridan and President Lincoln, committed active genocide against Southern civilians—this is difficult for some to believe, but it is explicit in their writings and dispatches at the time and indisputable in their actions. Tens of thousands of Southern men, women and children—civilians—white and black, slave and free alike—were shot, hanged, raped, imprisoned without trial, their homes, lands and possessions stolen, pillaged and burned, in one of the most horrific and brutal genocides ever inflicted upon a people anywhere; but the Yankee myth of history is silent in these well-documented matters. For an excellent expose of these war crimes and their terrible extent, see War Crimes Against Southern Civilians by Walter Brian Cisco.
Only after the Union had suffered two years of crushing defeats in battle did Lincoln resolve to “emancipate” the slaves, and only as a war measure, a military tactic, not for moral or humanitarian purposes. He admitted this, remarking, “We must change tactics or lose the game.” He was hoping, as his original draft of the document shows, that a slave uprising would occur, making it harder for Southerners to continue the war. His only interest in freeing the slaves was in forcing the South to remain in the Union. His Emancipation Proclamation was denounced by Northerners, Southerners and Europeans alike for its absurdity and hypocrisy; for, it only “freed” the slaves in the seceded states—where he could not reach them—and kept slavery intact in the North and the border states—where he could have freed them at once.
The Gettysburg Address, the most famous speech in American history, is an absurd piece of war rhetoric and a poetry of lies. We were not “engaged in a great Civil War, to see whether that nation, or any nation so conceived, can long endure.” The South was engaged in a War of Independence from a tyrannical North, and after having legally seceded, wished only “to be let alone.” The North was engaged in a war of empire, to keep the South involuntarily under its yoke. Government “of the people, by the people and for the people” would not have “perished from the earth” had the North lost the war; on the contrary, it perished in the United States when the North wonthe war; for, freely representative government, by consent of the governed, is exactly what the South was fighting for and exactly what Lincoln’s military victory destroyed.
The checks and balances of powers, the separation of powers, the constitutional constraints so carefully and deliberately put into place by the Founding Fathers, had all been destroyed in Lincoln’s first months. The Republic which the Founders gave us had been completely destroyed and a new nation-state was set up; one in which the free and sovereign States would afterward be only vassals and tributaries, slaves to an all-powerful, oppressive Federal government. This new nation-state is completely different in both nature and consequence to the original American Republic. One only has to look around today to see the end results and legacy of Lincoln’s war, his destruction of freedom, and his institution of despotic, centralized governmental power and tyranny.
In retrospect, it is a tragedy that John Wilkes Booth did not act four years earlier. Slavery would have ended naturally, as it has everywhere else (except in African and Arab states); the American Republic, liberty, and 700,000 lives would have been saved, and untold thousands of those young men would have lived to contribute their ingenuity, inventions, creativity and talents to the political, economic, literary, scientific and social legacy of our people. And the greatest despotic tyrant in American history would never have gained the foothold of power or been able to establish the oppressive and omnipotent Federal government we all suffer under today.
Last edited:
Lincoln was no angel, but he was an effective politician and leader.
The reason behind the war was the south deciding to succeed from the union, an act that they saw as a right of the constitution. The reason they wanted to succeed was by a large degree slavery.
The north was not at war to save the slaves, but the south was at war to keep them, among other things. The south saw all of the new western territories being declared as no slaves zones. They saw a strong abolitionist movement building in the north, and they saw the election of Lincoln and a majority of republicans as the final straw.
War crimes were committed by both sides, the north burnt the Shenandoah valley and razed Atlanta. The south had their atrocities at the fort Sumter prison camp.
Civil war historians estimate that about 50,000 civilians died during the war, and that one in 5 men of fighting age died in the south. 2% of the countries population dead.
There were a lot of dead southerners, and there was all sorts of raping and pillaging but not even close to some of the genocides seen around the world where the victims are counted in millions.
My point is, it would be false to say the civil war was not about slavery. It was about other things too, but mostly about slavery.
Its an interesting "what if" to think of how history would have panned out had the north just let the south succeed. I've heard arguments that slavery would have ended even sooner if we had not succeeded from British rule.
The reason behind the war was the south deciding to succeed from the union, an act that they saw as a right of the constitution. The reason they wanted to succeed was by a large degree slavery.
The north was not at war to save the slaves, but the south was at war to keep them, among other things. The south saw all of the new western territories being declared as no slaves zones. They saw a strong abolitionist movement building in the north, and they saw the election of Lincoln and a majority of republicans as the final straw.
War crimes were committed by both sides, the north burnt the Shenandoah valley and razed Atlanta. The south had their atrocities at the fort Sumter prison camp.
Civil war historians estimate that about 50,000 civilians died during the war, and that one in 5 men of fighting age died in the south. 2% of the countries population dead.
There were a lot of dead southerners, and there was all sorts of raping and pillaging but not even close to some of the genocides seen around the world where the victims are counted in millions.
My point is, it would be false to say the civil war was not about slavery. It was about other things too, but mostly about slavery.
Its an interesting "what if" to think of how history would have panned out had the north just let the south succeed. I've heard arguments that slavery would have ended even sooner if we had not succeeded from British rule.
