The Flag of Treason

cnm

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2013
Messages
31,534
Reaction score
12,970
Points
2,905
Location
Aotearoa
Because it was illegally occupied--AN ACT OF WAR!!!
Well, Crackers do have their own narrative which has nursed their grievances since they made the mistake of firing on an industrial superior out of misplaced arrogance. Pity about that.
 

Camp

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2013
Messages
26,605
Reaction score
6,092
Points
280
Some folks will fight and try to rewrite our Civil War forever. Confederacy lost. Time will never change that. The confederate flag is a lost cause.
So, why raise such a ridiculous fuss over it?

For the last 40+ years, it has mainly/generally been used as a symbol of The South. Even in pop culture and entertainment.
Because it has also been allowed to be used and branded as a symbol of hate and racism. Still is.
 

gipper

Libertarian/Anarchist
Joined
Jan 8, 2011
Messages
36,249
Reaction score
8,601
Points
1,330
Some folks will fight and try to rewrite our Civil War forever. Confederacy lost. Time will never change that. The confederate flag is a lost cause.
So, why raise such a ridiculous fuss over it?

For the last 40+ years, it has mainly/generally been used as a symbol of The South. Even in pop culture and entertainment.
Agreed. I never thought of the Confederate flag as a symbol of slavery, and I’m not a southern. However blacks may see it as such, and in America today they have become a protected class. So, if they want it expunged so be it. I don’t give a shit.
 

OKTexas

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
48,708
Reaction score
8,203
Points
2,070
Location
Near Magnolia, TX

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
125,813
Reaction score
19,630
Points
2,180
It wasn't an act of war, nimrod. Ft Sumter was SC territory. Firing on your own territory is not an act of war, period.
Title had passed to the US government.
"Title" means it's just a piece of property. Walmart is not a separate country. It's part of the state where I live. It has the same exact kind of "title" to the property it sits on as the federal government had with respect to Ft Sumter. It's part of South Carolina. Of course you will idiotically continue to post this already debunked claim because otherwise you will have to admit that the federal government made war on the State of South Carolina.
 

Mac-7

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2019
Messages
12,675
Reaction score
6,739
Points
995
It's almost as though treaties/agreements don't matter to Crackers when they become inconvenient..
I concede that the South fired the first shot that led to the full blown war

they fired on a federal fort in Charleston

but that does not change the fact that they had a right to leave the union
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
125,813
Reaction score
19,630
Points
2,180
Some folks will fight and try to rewrite our Civil War forever. Confederacy lost. Time will never change that. The confederate flag is a lost cause.
In other words, "might makes right," eh, you Stalinist douchebag?
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
125,813
Reaction score
19,630
Points
2,180
Because it was illegally occupied--AN ACT OF WAR!!!
Well, Crackers do have their own narrative which has nursed their grievances since they made the mistake of firing on an industrial superior out of misplaced arrogance. Pity about that.
That's not a "narrative," the leftwing standard of proof. It's a fact.
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
125,813
Reaction score
19,630
Points
2,180
It's almost as though treaties/agreements don't matter to Crackers when they become inconvenient..
I concede that the South fired the first shot that led to the full blown war

they fired on a federal fort in Charleston

but that does not change the fact that they had a right to leave the union
They fired on trespassers who refused to leave. Lincoln also sent a resupply ship that passed through SC waters. Both are acts of war.
 
Last edited:

RetiredGySgt

Diamond Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
47,001
Reaction score
8,909
Points
2,040
Location
North Carolina
It wasn't an act of war, nimrod. Ft Sumter was SC territory. Firing on your own territory is not an act of war, period.
Title had passed to the US government.
"Title" means it's just a piece of property. Walmart is not a separate country. It's part of the state where I live. It has the same exact kind of "title" to the property it sits on as the federal government had with respect to Ft Sumter. It's part of South Carolina. Of course you will idiotically continue to post this already debunked claim because otherwise you will have to admit that the federal government made war on the State of South Carolina.
Actually RETARD the US Government is different then the State and while it may allow some state laws to be enforced reserves the right to make it that FEDERAL law applies to that property, go ahead and go to a US Base and READ the sign posted before you enter.
 

Picaro

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
18,250
Reaction score
3,417
Points
290
Location
Texas
Why does our President support the racist, treasonous Confederate Flag?

Apparently the sloganeering machine at the DNC broke down on Monday and RW is reduced to recycling old bullshit yet again.
 

Picaro

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
18,250
Reaction score
3,417
Points
290
Location
Texas
N
LOL go fly your rainbow flag you gay faggot. As for the Confederate flag it is NOT treasonous as it does not exists anymore and all the confederates were pardoned. It is simply a historical flag of our past. Remind me do you support BLM in tearing down Washington's statue, Lincoln? Remind me again who is the traitor?
Not of "our past". Of the past. They lost.
We lost Vietnam ... can we still fly the American Flag?
We need monuments to Ho Chi Minh
Sure you do; we know you're not joking.
 

Mac-7

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2019
Messages
12,675
Reaction score
6,739
Points
995
They fired an trespassers who refused to leave. Lincoln also sent a resupply ship that passed through SC waters. Both are acts of war.
But it was not very smart

the south carolina hotheads started a war that they eventually lost
 

Picaro

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
18,250
Reaction score
3,417
Points
290
Location
Texas
It wasn't an act of war, nimrod. Ft Sumter was SC territory. Firing on your own territory is not an act of war, period.
Title had passed to the US government.
"Title" means it's just a piece of property. Walmart is not a separate country. It's part of the state where I live. It has the same exact kind of "title" to the property it sits on as the federal government had with respect to Ft Sumter. It's part of South Carolina. Of course you will idiotically continue to post this already debunked claim because otherwise you will have to admit that the federal government made war on the State of South Carolina.
Actually RETARD the US Government is different then the State and while it may allow some state laws to be enforced reserves the right to make it that FEDERAL law applies to that property, go ahead and go to a US Base and READ the sign posted before you enter.
That 'property' was the state of South Carolina's; the fEds were allowed to use it. It reverted back to the state when it seceded, an act that was not illegal, and refusing to vacate it and then trying to use it to blockade the port was an act of war, by anybody's definition. Lincoln knew the response Buchanan got when he tried the same thing a few months earlier; Lincoln wanted to provoke a war and knew what the response to blockading the harbor would be.
 

Picaro

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
18,250
Reaction score
3,417
Points
290
Location
Texas
It wasn't an act of war, nimrod. Ft Sumter was SC territory. Firing on your own territory is not an act of war, period.
Title had passed to the US government.
"Title" means it's just a piece of property. Walmart is not a separate country. It's part of the state where I live. It has the same exact kind of "title" to the property it sits on as the federal government had with respect to Ft Sumter. It's part of South Carolina. Of course you will idiotically continue to post this already debunked claim because otherwise you will have to admit that the federal government made war on the State of South Carolina.
Actually RETARD the US Government is different then the State and while it may allow some state laws to be enforced reserves the right to make it that FEDERAL law applies to that property, go ahead and go to a US Base and READ the sign posted before you enter.
That 'property' was the state of South Carolina's; the fEds were allowed to use it. It reverted back to the state when it seceded, an act that was not illegal, and refusing to vacate it and then trying to use it to blockade the port was an act of war, by anybody's definition. Lincoln knew the response Buchanan got when he tried the same thing a few months earlier; Lincoln wanted to provoke a war and knew what the response to blockading the harbor would be.
Any time somebody can cite in the Constitution where it was illegal to secede, and the Federal govt. was granted the power to use military force against a state, feel free to post it. All we know for a fact is that power was specifically denied to the Federal govt. at the 1787 Convention, as per Madison's argument that resulted in just a such a clause being dropped from the schedule.
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
125,813
Reaction score
19,630
Points
2,180
It wasn't an act of war, nimrod. Ft Sumter was SC territory. Firing on your own territory is not an act of war, period.
Title had passed to the US government.
"Title" means it's just a piece of property. Walmart is not a separate country. It's part of the state where I live. It has the same exact kind of "title" to the property it sits on as the federal government had with respect to Ft Sumter. It's part of South Carolina. Of course you will idiotically continue to post this already debunked claim because otherwise you will have to admit that the federal government made war on the State of South Carolina.
Actually RETARD the US Government is different then the State and while it may allow some state laws to be enforced reserves the right to make it that FEDERAL law applies to that property, go ahead and go to a US Base and READ the sign posted before you enter.
Wrong, turd, the federal government cannot treat the property of Ft Sumter differnt than it can treat the property of any other state. The federal government cannot just nullify state laws.

Your claim is 100% bullshit.
 
Last edited:

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
125,813
Reaction score
19,630
Points
2,180
It wasn't an act of war, nimrod. Ft Sumter was SC territory. Firing on your own territory is not an act of war, period.
Title had passed to the US government.
"Title" means it's just a piece of property. Walmart is not a separate country. It's part of the state where I live. It has the same exact kind of "title" to the property it sits on as the federal government had with respect to Ft Sumter. It's part of South Carolina. Of course you will idiotically continue to post this already debunked claim because otherwise you will have to admit that the federal government made war on the State of South Carolina.
Actually RETARD the US Government is different then the State and while it may allow some state laws to be enforced reserves the right to make it that FEDERAL law applies to that property, go ahead and go to a US Base and READ the sign posted before you enter.
That 'property' was the state of South Carolina's; the fEds were allowed to use it. It reverted back to the state when it seceded, an act that was not illegal, and refusing to vacate it and then trying to use it to blockade the port was an act of war, by anybody's definition. Lincoln knew the response Buchanan got when he tried the same thing a few months earlier; Lincoln wanted to provoke a war and knew what the response to blockading the harbor would be.
The carpetbaggers in this forum are always trying to obscure the difference between property and territory. Ft Sumter was federal property. It was not federal territory any more than Cape Canaveral, Yellowstone Park or Vandenburg airforce base are federal territory. They simply can't admit that Lincoln committed an act of war and thereby started the Civil War.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top