It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

The Conferate Flag vs Colin Kaepernick

page: 3
4
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 03:14 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Meh, I'm proud of it all. It built the country and was rational for the time. Times change, as do values and priorities. No reason to waste time bemoaning SOP of 150 years ago.




posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 03:30 PM
link   
a reply to: uncommitted

The only ome hiding here is you, guy, and it's from facts.

Black males are statistically more likely to commit violent crime. Those caught in the act of committing that crime are more likely to be confronted with force than those who are not committing a violent crime.

The number of black males shot without any justifiable cause is, as I said, infinitesimal. No amount of twisting or bending or skewing changes the facts that one: the number of police/civilian contacts that result in any kind of force whatsoever us less than something like 3%. Of all contacts. Ever. And that's ANY kind of force, from deadly force to pain compliance. Two, the overwhelming majority of use of force incidents are not lethal. And three, and most importantly, that the overwhelming majority of those killed by law enforcement are armed and commit some sort of act that necessitates a response.

And nothing on cracked changes those facts. So are black males killed without cause? Yea, sometimes. As are whites. And Hispanics. And everybody. But trying to paint this as some sort of epidemic based on race? Fail on both accounts.

A neat little article that sums up the, again, fact that blacks are not being killed at some astronomical rate because of race. Blacks are more likely to be stopped and arrested, but not killed

mobile.nytimes.com...://www.go ogle.com/
edit on 13-9-2016 by Shamrock6 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 03:52 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

It has been stated here many times, and in other threads many times, and written about many times... the War of Northern Aggression was not just about slavery. No one in my family ever even owned slaves. I have researched my family tree from the first settler with my surname and as far back as the native records go. But I do have ancestors who fought and died in the War of Northern Aggression, as well as every other war we have entered into.

Just in case you didn't get that part... NONE OF MY ANCESTORS OWNED SLAVES.

But keep your ignorance... just try to keep it where you are. We don't want it.

TheRedneck



posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 04:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: eriktheawful


Quite proud of my southern heritage


No. You're proud of the part of your "southern heritage" that you deem laudable and you deny the rest of the "heritage" in order to do so.


Nope. I do not deny anything.

Except owning slaves. I've never done that.

Oh, too bad......neither did my ancestors here. They had a farm, quite a nice one too, that produced corn, along with live stock.

They did quite well for themselves......until the farm was razed to the ground by Union solders.

So.....want to tell me exactly what I have to be ashamed of as far as my family's heritage goes?

Oh wait....you're one of those that assume things about all southern people, that they must have all owned slaves, etc, etc, etc, etc.

Sorry. Simply not true.

Now I do have some heritage that was a bit dark on my mom's side the family. Horse thieves. Got themselves hanged for it. They left behind their Sioux wives, who's children later met up with some Swedes who'd traveled west in the late 1800's. Fortunately that horse thieving thing didn't get passed down.

They didn't own any slaves either.

What I find very laughable is the broad brush that people try to paint with.....and at how epic their fails are.



posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 04:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian

originally posted by: Bluntone22
Slavery ended over 150 years ago, get over it.


The popularity of Confederate flags is nothing BUT evidence of white southerners not "getting over it." Meanwhile, they continued to oppress the former slaves and their descendants for another century and again had to be forced by the rest of the country to stop that.

Jim Crow ring any bells? Segregation? Lynchings? KKK? Separate but equal? Brown v. Board of Education? Rosa Parks? MLK? Civil Rights Act of 1964? Voting Rights Act of 1965?

Any of that?



Most everything in that last paragraph was done by democrats. Yet blacks still vote democrat.
Apparently they managed to get over that.



posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 04:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: buster2010
a reply to: xstealth



Colin, has never known oppression in his life. It would be an insult to us of Confederate heritage for him to disrespect our flag too.

Like every southerner has lived a long hard life. If this were true then the southern states wouldn't be sucking up so much federal aid.


Your comment is racist and offensive.

The southern states have the highest percentage black population, which 40% now as of Sept 2016, take welfare - it pretty much explains it, and you know it.
www.statisticbrain.com...



posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 04:16 PM
link   
The civil war was not fought over slavery, Lincoln didn't invade the south because he wanted to free any slaves. The north had slaves at the same time.

Freeing the slaves was a political issue, because the north knew England was about to come aid the Confederacy and they knew if they turned the war definition to slavery, England would not help the Confederates with man power.

Go read a freaking book not written or ordained by the federal government.



posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 07:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: buster2010
a reply to: thinline



That flag is the utmost symbol against American Tyranny.


More like the utmost symbol of treason against America.


I thought liberals were supposed to be against all the Rah Rah 'Murica BS. When Bush was president, they were supposedly against imperialism, globalization, and blind nationalism. But look how the tides have shifted this past decade. Now when it comes to topics like the Confederate flag, Putin and Russia, Obama's drone strikes, and Hill's corporate-backed coup d'états in the Middle East, progressives are suddenly all about pride, patriotism, and spreading American democracy.

When Hill gets elected and starts a new cycle of corporate wars for profit, these same people are gonna rally behind her cheering 'Murica 'Murica. Hilarious really.
edit on 13-9-2016 by Talorc because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 09:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Talorc

That's because what you're seeing is the moral core of people who act that way.

Everyone has morality. Morality is just following the morals that make up a person's moral core; everyone does that. The issue is what makes up that core? Honesty, integrity, compassion, fairness? For some maybe, but for others, like you describe, it's more along the lines of self-gratification.

It has been said you don't know a person until you've seen them at their worst. That's very true. It's easy to put on a facade when things go one's way. It's when things don't go their way, or sometimes when they believe they are invincible, that a person's true colors show through. That's when you realize that they care nothing about honesty, nothing about integrity, nothing about ending racism, nothing about anything except winning. That is their moral core: win at all cost, no matter what it takes or who gets hurt.

I've seen it happen many times in my life. Someone I knew and was starting to like and trust, suddenly showed themselves to be the opposite of what they claimed. Usually, life has a way of dealing with such people; they typically end up alone, bitter, and in pain. I don't enjoy it when it happens, but I don't spend a lot of time concerning myself about it either. Bed, made, lie.

TheRedneck



posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 09:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: xstealth
a reply to: reldra

I'm not embarrassed, I'm a member of the Sons of Confederate veterans, why should I be ashamed my grandfathers served their country?

The victors right the history, you only learned their version. It's not my fault you're brainwashed; so I'm not embarassed.

Are you ashamed that people have 'The Confederate Flag' all wrong?

That marketing stunt has always been pretty funny to me.



posted on Sep, 13 2016 @ 09:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: TheRedneck




MY FOREFATHERS FOUGHT AN INVADING ARMY AND DIED TO TRY AND DEFEND THEIR WAY OF LIFE, THEIR LIBERTY, AND THEIR SOVEREIGNTY! I AM PROUD OF WHO I AM!


Perfect example of cognitive dissonance. You're proud that your forefathers fought to preserve slavery and not at all bothered by the fact that your forefathers fought to preserve slavery.


Youre missing the point here. Slavery was LEGAL back then and was Not against the constitution either. So the southern states although holding slaves were in the legal right. Slavery was on the way out though due to technology being cheaper than keeping slaves.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 04:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6

Please don't feel the need to make so many excuses for police action, it doesn't become you.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 08:09 AM
link   
a reply to: uncommitted

Facts and statistics aren't excuses.

They're just inconvenient for folks like you.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 08:27 AM
link   




Virgil Caine is the name, and I served on the Danville train,
Til Stoneman's cavalry came and tore up the tracks again.
In the winter of '65, We were hungry, just barely alive.
By May tenth, Richmond had fell, it's a time I remember, oh so well,

The Night They Drove Old Dixie Down, when all the bells were ringing,
The Night They Drove Old Dixie Down, and all the people were singin'. They went,
Na, Na, Na, Na, Na, Na, Na, Na,
Na, Na, Na, Na, Na,
Na, Na, Na, Na,

Back with my wife in Tennessee, When one day she called to me,
Said "Virgil, quick, come and see, there goes the Robert E. Lee!"
Now I don't mind choppin' wood, and I don't care if the money's no good.
Ya take what ya need and ya leave the rest,
But they should never have taken the very best.

The Night They Drove Old Dixie Down, when all the bells were ringing,
The Night They Drove Old Dixie Down, and all the people were singin'. They went,
Na, Na, Na, Na, Na, Na, Na, Na,
Na, Na, Na, Na, Na,
Na, Na, Na, Na,

Like my father before me, I will work the land,
And like my brother above me, who took a rebel stand.
He was just eighteen, proud and brave,
But a Yankee laid him in his grave,
And I swear by the mud below my feet,
You can't raise a Caine back up when he's in defeat.

The Night They Drove Old Dixie Down, when all the bells were ringing,
The Night They Drove Old Dixie Down, and all the people were singin'. They went,
Na, Na, Na, Na, Na, Na, Na, Na,
Na, Na, Na, Na, Na,
Na, Na, Na, Na,

edit on 14-9-2016 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 09:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: uncommitted

Facts and statistics aren't excuses.

They're just inconvenient for folks like you.


Of course. So when I highlighted that statistically you are more likely to be killed if black based on black people versus white people you ignore it - too inconvenient.

Anyhow, if someone wants to make their point, constitutionally your country not only allows that but positively embraces that - much ado about nothing.



posted on Sep, 14 2016 @ 10:48 AM
link   
a reply to: uncommitted

Speaking of ignoring, you ignored literally everything in my previous comment and chose to get personal.

The fact that a young black male is statistically more likely to be killed by other black males is true. The fact that a young black male is more likely to be shot by police is also true and factual.

As is the fact that a young black male is statistically more likely to commit a violent crime, and to be shot while armed and committing some sort of act that necessitates an armed response.

The fact that an unarmed black male doing nothing but minding his own business is statistically more likely than any other race to be shot is not true and factual, nor is it the epidemic that you and others with the same agenda push.

Since you clearly need to have the last word here, and can't be bothered to address actual points but instead complain about me missing ONE point and then ignore all of mine, I'll bow out and let you feel like you've won.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join