History Hidden In Government School

[PoliticalChic]

RadicalChic:
Not just an ignorant partisan hack.
A silly braggart too!!)

(Pssssst.....don't chase him away......havin' fun slappin' him around!)

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

Love a good historical discussion, like the ones I've had here with others. But like anyone who loves studying history, I despise ignorant partisan hacks like RadicalChic who try to use it only for crude partisan purposes, peppering their "contributions" with contemporary political insults. I usually post on history discusion boards, where Liberals and Conservatives respect and learn from each other. That is impossible with this childish woman.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Love a good historical discussion, like the ones I've had here with others. But like anyone who loves studying history, I despise ignorant partisan hacks like RadicalChic who try to use it only for crude partisan purposes, peppering their "contributions" with contemporary political insults. I usually post on history discusion boards, where Liberals and Conservatives respect and learn from each other. That is impossible with this childish woman.

Good to see you back....I was beginning to fear I'd have to find another piñata!!!

OK....let's get back to smackin' you around:

You so smart, and me so ignorant.....your word.......surely there must be SOME mistakes of mine that you can correct.....


OK.....you can't....which proves there aren't any.
Sooooo....why did you come on like there were?


Oooo....because I spanked you in a previous discussion.....and now, I've done it again.



BTW....you wrote "I usually post on history discusion (sic) boards, where Liberals and Conservatives respect and learn from each other. That is impossible with this childish woman."


Kind of destroys your credentials when you make spelling mistakes, huh?

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

No fear. This History Forum is a place I would like to attract serious people to, of all political persuasions. So if you insist on posting your partisan drivel here, and try to pass it off as genuine history, you will no longer get a free pass.

 

[PoliticalChic]

No fear. This History Forum is a place I would like to attract serious people to, of all political persuasions. So if you insist on posting your partisan drivel here, and try to pass it off as genuine history, you will no longer get a free pass.

If it's not 'genuine,' why are you unable to show it so?


Clearly you are simply one of those windbags who want's to suggest that he knows so much.....and in a very short time I have proven that you know nothing.


I love it! The truth in my posts affects you the way a paddle affects a ping-pong ball!

 

[Gdjjr]

Judeo-christian philosophy

The Sand Creek massacre (also known as the Chivington massacre, the battle of Sand Creek or the massacre of Cheyenne Indians) was a massacre of Cheyenne and Arapaho people by the U.S. Army in the American Indian Wars that occurred on November 29, 1864, when a 675-man force of the Third Colorado Cavalry[3] under the command of U.S. Army Colonel John Chivington attacked and destroyed a village of Cheyenne and Arapaho people in southeastern Colorado Territory,[4] killing and mutilating an estimated 150–500 Native Americans, about two-thirds of whom were women and children.[5] The location has been designated the Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site and is administered by the National Park Service. This was part of a series of events known as the Colorado War and was preceded by the Hungate massacre.[6]

Manifest Destiny, the only good Indian is a dead Indian. or how about this

The Thibodaux massacre was a racial attack mounted by white paramilitary groups in Thibodaux, Louisiana in November 1887. It followed a three-week strike during the critical harvest season by an estimated 10,000 workers against sugar cane plantations in four parishes: Lafourche, Terrebonne, St. Mary, and Assumption.

The strike was the largest in the industry and the first conducted by a formal labor organization, the Knights of Labor. At planters' requests, the state sent in militia to protect strikebreakers, and work resumed on some plantations. Black workers and their families were evicted from plantations in Lafourche and Terrebonne parishes and retreated to Thibodaux.

Tensions broke out in violence on November 23, 1887, and the local white paramilitary forces attacked black workers and their families in Thibodaux. Although the total number of casualties is unknown, at least 35 black people were killed in the next three days (more historians believe 50 were killed) and as many as 300 overall killed, wounded or missing,[2][3] making it one of the most violent labor disputes in U.S. history. Victims reportedly included elders, women and children. All those killed were African American.[4]

The massacre, and passage by white Democrats of discriminatory state legislation, including disenfranchisement of most blacks, ended the organizing of sugar workers for decades, until the 1940s. According to Eric Arnesen, "The defeated sugar workers returned to the plantations on their employers' terms."[3]


Or maybe

The United States detonated two nuclear weapons over the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki on August 6 and 9, 1945, respectively, with the consent of the United Kingdom, as required by the Quebec Agreement. The two bombings killed between 129,000 and 226,000 people, most of whom were civilians, and remain the first and only uses of nuclear weapons in armed conflict.

In the final year of World War II, the Allies prepared for a very costly invasion of the Japanese mainland. This undertaking was preceded by a conventional and firebombing campaign which devastated 67 Japanese cities. The war in Europe had concluded when Germany signed its instrument of surrender on May 8, 1945, and the Allies turned their full attention to the Pacific theater. The Allies called for the unconditional surrender of the Imperial Japanese armed forces in the Potsdam Declaration on July 26, 1945, the alternative being "prompt and utter destruction". Japan ignored the ultimatum and the war continued.

 

[Gdjjr]

Clearly you are simply one of those windbags who want's to suggest that he knows so much.....and in a very short time I have proven that you know nothing.

You're intellectually dishonest. That doesn't offer opportunity to a lot of credibility.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Judeo-christian philosophy

The Sand Creek massacre (also known as the Chivington massacre, the battle of Sand Creek or the massacre of Cheyenne Indians) was a massacre of Cheyenne and Arapaho people by the U.S. Army in the American Indian Wars that occurred on November 29, 1864, when a 675-man force of the Third Colorado Cavalry[3] under the command of U.S. Army Colonel John Chivington attacked and destroyed a village of Cheyenne and Arapaho people in southeastern Colorado Territory,[4] killing and mutilating an estimated 150–500 Native Americans, about two-thirds of whom were women and children.[5] The location has been designated the Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site and is administered by the National Park Service. This was part of a series of events known as the Colorado War and was preceded by the Hungate massacre.[6]

Manifest Destiny, the only good Indian is a dead Indian. or how about this

The Thibodaux massacre was a racial attack mounted by white paramilitary groups in Thibodaux, Louisiana in November 1887. It followed a three-week strike during the critical harvest season by an estimated 10,000 workers against sugar cane plantations in four parishes: Lafourche, Terrebonne, St. Mary, and Assumption.

The strike was the largest in the industry and the first conducted by a formal labor organization, the Knights of Labor. At planters' requests, the state sent in militia to protect strikebreakers, and work resumed on some plantations. Black workers and their families were evicted from plantations in Lafourche and Terrebonne parishes and retreated to Thibodaux.

Tensions broke out in violence on November 23, 1887, and the local white paramilitary forces attacked black workers and their families in Thibodaux. Although the total number of casualties is unknown, at least 35 black people were killed in the next three days (more historians believe 50 were killed) and as many as 300 overall killed, wounded or missing,[2][3] making it one of the most violent labor disputes in U.S. history. Victims reportedly included elders, women and children. All those killed were African American.[4]

The massacre, and passage by white Democrats of discriminatory state legislation, including disenfranchisement of most blacks, ended the organizing of sugar workers for decades, until the 1940s. According to Eric Arnesen, "The defeated sugar workers returned to the plantations on their employers' terms."[3]


Or maybe

The United States detonated two nuclear weapons over the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki on August 6 and 9, 1945, respectively, with the consent of the United Kingdom, as required by the Quebec Agreement. The two bombings killed between 129,000 and 226,000 people, most of whom were civilians, and remain the first and only uses of nuclear weapons in armed conflict.

In the final year of World War II, the Allies prepared for a very costly invasion of the Japanese mainland. This undertaking was preceded by a conventional and firebombing campaign which devastated 67 Japanese cities. The war in Europe had concluded when Germany signed its instrument of surrender on May 8, 1945, and the Allies turned their full attention to the Pacific theater. The Allies called for the unconditional surrender of the Imperial Japanese armed forces in the Potsdam Declaration on July 26, 1945, the alternative being "prompt and utter destruction". Japan ignored the ultimatum and the war continued.

I can obviate that entire post is one, brief, sentence:

Let not the perfect be the enemy of the good.



As you may be.....'slow'....in understanding the reference, let me spoon-feed it to you: your bigotry and bias prevents you from understanding that there would be no western civilization sans the Judeo-Christian faith.

Western civilization was built on two ideas:
God created every human in His image
......and human beings are able to investigate and make rational conclusions about the world.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Clearly you are simply one of those windbags who want's to suggest that he knows so much.....and in a very short time I have proven that you know nothing.

You're intellectually dishonest. That doesn't offer opportunity to a lot of credibility.

You're lying

If I were as you state....

....you wouldn't be trying so hard to refute what I post.


In time you will come to understand that I am never wrong.

 

[Gdjjr]

.and human beings are able to investigate and make rational conclusions about the world.

Hyper-partisans are intellectually dishonest and don't make rational anything, much less decisions.

 

[Gdjjr]

In time you will come to understand that I am never wrong.

You may never be wrong IN WHAT YOU POST- but, your posts are partisan making them serve an objective which is not being objective which is either; badly misinformed, sadly uninformed, or intellectually dishonest- because none of those attributes are all encompassing (as in a look at all evidence) to render a conclusion- your intelligence leads me to believe, after looking at all your posts for evidence, that you are intellectually dishonest.

 

[PoliticalChic]

In time you will come to understand that I am never wrong.

You may never be wrong IN WHAT YOU POST- but, your posts are partisan making them serve an objective which is not being objective which is either; badly misinformed, sadly uninformed, or intellectually dishonest- because none of those attributes are all encompassing (as in a look at all evidence) to render a conclusion- your intelligence leads me to believe, after looking at all your posts for evidence, that you are intellectually dishonest.

Look up the work 'partisan.'


It isn't a pejorative.

 

[Gdjjr]

Look up the work 'partisan.'

I'm not using it a pejorative- I'm stating a fact.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Look up the work 'partisan.'

I'm not using it a pejorative- I'm stating a fact.

Then, it's a compliment.


Much thanks.