Featured Most Evil Person in American History

Apparently Van does not realize the Americas includes North and South America and all the islands in the Caribbean!

Again Van, the only mention in the short article about slavery in the United States is THIS:

 

Van, you are simply in denial as the head doctors would say. You have lost the debate and continue to spin your wheels. I would also note that all the deniers are not in the South!

 

First, the "slave economy" was a failure. Second, as someone has already noted, only ~6% of the people in the South owned slaves. Third, the South was being shafted by the Yankees in tariffs. Fourth, the Yankees continued to shaft the South, black and white, for the next 100 years. Fifth, the South is being invaded again; caused by Mr. carrier! Sixth, you are as far off the mark as Van!

 

I believe you are incorrect in your comment on the slave economy. I do not have time to follow this with research, but will tomorrow. However here is a beginning on the success of the slave economy:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/01/0131_030203_jubilee2_2.html

If it was a failure then you are in essence saying the 6% were stupid to have slaves and even more stupid to push for more slave states. Not logical my friend.

 

Thanks Salty for the gratuitous insult.

Slavery was the cause of the civil war.

Old R, the deniers challenged that 3 million slaves in the south had been chained. I demonstrated that over 10 million slaves had been brought to America (the New World) in chains, thus many of the first generation slaves in the south had been brought in chains. For you to claim you could not comprehend me, and therefore mistakenly misrepresented my argument is simply another shuck and jive, as you run from the evidence in abundance, and shout, I won, I won, whoopee.

CTB, thanks for demonstrating your integrity.

 

Hi, Van. :wavey:

I don't know what you've read primarily because you refuse to post links to your sources.

That's laughable.

You are the one who has selectively quoted. You posted a partial quote from Lincoln which stated he opposed slavery, but you deliberately left out the next sentence from the same speech which said he would do whatever he could to preserve the Union, including leaving slavery alone, and you never managed to refute the quote I posted, and another by OR, showing Lincoln to believe the black man is inferior to the white.

I posted Georgia's Declaration of Secession which proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that slavery was not their primary concern, and you haven't been able to show otherwise.

That's your interpretation, accurate within its confines, but not accurate to the extend of being the only reason, as you want to claim. You are wrong.

From that aspect of the slave trade, I agree. But that isn't the segment of the slave trade you cited. You tried to show that there were 10 million slaves -- there weren't -- and that millions died in their slavery on the Southern plantations -- a lie.

You need to grow up and study all of history. Ever hear the term "waving the bloody shirt"? I suggest you swallow that pride and hubris in order to become teachable.

Your steadfast refusal to see the North as culpable, and that attitude as having stemmed from the earliest stirrings of socialism in this country, doesn't change that reality. You yammer, yammer, yammer about "the South seceded ... fired on Ft. Sumter ... 3 million slaves" but won't look beyond your nose at the rest of the truth.

All men are evil. That's the natural man. But if you think all were "heartless and cruel" you are being willfully ignorant.

And ... ? That disproves nothing I've said, but it does disprove your contention about illiteracy.

I truthfully don't know why I bother with someone who wants to hold to his ignorant prejudices. So I won't. Continue in them, brother, and God bless you.

 

I have no problem at all saying that slavery is stupid! Do you?

Just as I say those who support the slaughter of the unborn are stupid and worse.

 

And the organizations that do it.

 

I never said I could not comprehend you. You simply parrot the same nonsense. I used facts from a link you posted to show that your claim regarding slavery in the South:

Was totally false!

 

Folks, slavery was the cause of the civil war. Those who deny this fact offer nothing but shuck and jive.

Is it contested that the south seceded? Nope

Is it contested that the south seceded over the issue of preserving slavery? Nope.

What about the claim the issue was not slavery in the Georgia statement? " For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery." The deniers simply post blatant falsehoods.

What about primary concern? Weasel words. As I said, other issues were often raised, but the underlying issue is slavery. States Rights revolves around the right of states to continue slavery. Economy, its the slave economy at issue. On and on folks, shuck and jive to avoid the obvious truth, slavery caused the civil war.

Did I try to show there were 10 million slaves brought out of Africa in chains. Yes. Was any evidence shown that 10 million slaves were not brought out of Africa? No. The denier argument is a farce.

Was the north culpable? They wanted to end slavery. They wanted to preserve the Union as a non-slave state union. But the north did not secede and the north did not fire on Fort Sumter. Therefore the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans can be laid at the feet of the southern leaders who took us into war over slavery.

At the end of the day, all they have is shuck and jive. I have walked the fields of Gettysburg. I have visited the tomb of the Unknown soldier.

These deniers seem to have no idea what kind of man would castrate another. The slave owners were obscene butchers, rapists, and killers.
And the south wanted to continue the holocaust like monstrosity.

American history has many black marks, like Wounded Knee and the Jap Concentration Camps. Sitting on the kitchen counter in a home in California is a vase with paper flowers. It is colorful and pretty. It was made by elderly ladies at a church I attended occasionally. The rest of the story is that those elderly ladies leaned to make those paper flowers while in a concentration camp in California. But the treatment they received was nothing like the slave ships and slave forts, and slave auctions of the antebellum south. That dear friends is second darkest stain of all, after abortion.

 

Thanks for the kind words, Salty, and right now I don't have a good thread in mind for this segment of the forum, but I'm thinking of looking at the Vietnam War. Scary thought, huh?

 

I have listened to the "slavery was not the issue" arguments since childhood. Slavery was the issue, not the only issue but the primary issue.

1) The south had said it would secede if Lincoln was elected and he was.
2) In a master stroke of triangulation, Lincoln promised to preserve the Union. This was code for ending slavery.
3) The south attacked Fort Sumter, branding the south as the aggressors.

More than 200,000 young men died to continue slavery. What a waste. The leaders of this blood bath are among the most
evil leaders in American history.

 

An interesting side note to this discussion is the fact that President Franklin Pierce (p. 1854 - 1857) received a cost-cutting recommendation from his Secretary of War that all of the U.S. Army's coastal forts be handed over to the state militia of whatever state that fort happened to be located.

Had such a recommendation been approved, South Carolina's Fort Sumter would not have been a federally manned fort; instead it would have been under the control of the South Carolina militia.

Who was President Pierce's Secretary of War?

Jefferson Davis! :smilewinkgrin:

 

You are the one shucking and jiving on this thread. You have offered no real discussion only repeated your mantra:

It is an outright lie. to claim that "3 million slaves were beaten, chained, sexually abused, castrated, and murdered."

Yes and they had the right to secede but Lincoln on his own decided they did not and invaded the South. Your current president claims to be Lincolnesque. Now I know why!

Yes, and Van, you are like a child having a temper tantrum!

We posted historical fact!

States rights revolved around the Constitution.

No one denied that slaves were brought from Africa but the fact is that most went elsewhere in this hemisphere!

Yes

That is bull! Lincoln wanted to preserve the Union. The first race riots were in New York protesting the draft!

:sleep:

What in the world does your walking have to do with anything? I walked the decks of a ship. That doesn't make me John Paul Jones.

And you do?:tear: T

I suppose in another life you witnessed all this!:smilewinkgrin:

White eyes speak with forked tongue!

Jap is now considered a racist remark!

:tear:

The slave ships were Yankee. Slave forts? What are those? There were slave auctions!

Now post your mantra one more time Van!

 

PLEASE!! He posts that ninnyhammer nonsense often enough without encouragement.

:BangHead:

 

I am making it my mission in the time I have left to help folks like Van!:tonofbricks:

 

Folks, the nonsense continues unabated. Slavery caused the civil war, and nothing has been offered to contradict that conclusion. Other reasons have been cited, i.e. states rights or economics, but these disputes arose from the desire to preserve slavery and the slave labor economy.

Falsehoods presented by the deniers that slavery caused the civil war:
1) Lincoln did not want to end slavery. He did and several quotes demonstrated this fact.

2) The South secession statements did not indicate the primary cause of secession was over preserving slavery. They did and several quotes demonstrated this fact.

3) The south did not start the hostilities by firing on Fort Sumter. They did and several quotes documented they did on April 12, 1861.

So having nothing to offer, we get "ninny-hammer", "white eyes speak with forked tongue", "temper tantrum" and other efforts to insult and disparage. ROFLOL

 

The actual "start" of hostilities was when John Brown (a Union man) took the supply depot at Harper's Ferry.

It was the Union that started the conflicts by raising armed conflict to the Southern state's rights.

It was the Union that refused to release Fort Sumter and reinforced it rather than surrender it to the sovereign and separated government of South Carolina. The Confederate South Carolina had legal right to the fort, and the Union folks were typical stupid Yankee belligerent and defiant.

It was the Union that attacked the South and spent the vast majority fighting in the South.

It was the Union who started the war. All claims to the contrary are merely stupid Yankee belligerence and modification of the true history by liberal Yankee sympathizers.

The Union could easily have allowed the South to secede, withdraw their troops, and leave the South alone.

But no, they had to invade the sovereign confederate state of Virginia, over and over. They had to run up Look out Mountain, and scurry down the Mississippi to Vicksburg.

Who in Chattanooga hurt the Union first.

What Southern gentleman in Vicksburg would rather not have had the Union show up.

The North was ALWAYS the aggressors until Lee took the battle to the Yankee fields of Pennsylvania. Even then He had enough Southern Hospitality to keep the battle in the fields and hills.

He had enough character to realize he should have stayed home.

But not the Yankee's.

Sherman - That ugly Yankee took the battle to defenseless Godly women and children of the South for the sole purpose to demoralize them. But, all he did was light the fire of bitterness that the carpetbagging Yankee feed the flames with the support and approval of Yankee heathens that still are trying to this day to push wrong down the throats of tender Southern lasses.

The South was defending itself from the aggression by the blue bellied Yankee, and had the South been forward looking, it would never have joined the union in the first place.

Bunch of hot headed Yankees started the Revolutionary war, and the 1812 war, and the Southern gentlemen had to rescue them both times.

But leave it up to the sorry Yankee to demand the Southerners conform to their thinking.

Of course, the Yankee has such a long history of doing right, and holding the Yankee presidents accountable. NOT!

Look at the history of the US.

From the beginning, nearly every time the US has thrived it has been under the leadership of good Godly Southern gentlemen. The most corrupt leadership of the US has always been and includes to this day the Yankees.

From the beginning, nearly every major evil has fomented with the Yankee. The most viscous, ungodly, perverted have been Yankees.

Why if it weren't for the quality and high principled Southerner, God would have allowed the Yankees to be speaking French.