Posted on 02/25/2019 6:58:42 AM PST by Sir Napsalot
Eight players from the Ole Miss men's basketball team knelt during the national anthem before Saturday's home game against Georgia in response to a Confederacy rally near the arena.
Minutes before the game, both teams formed lines for the anthem. As "The Star-Spangled Banner" began, six Rebels players -- who appeared to be KJ Buffen, D.C. Davis, Brian Halums, Luis Rodriguez, Devontae Shuler and Bruce Stevens -- knelt one by one. Two more players -- appearing to be Breein Tyree and Franco Miller Jr. -- took a knee on the song's final line.
The game was being played while two pro-Confederacy groups organized a march onto the campus in Oxford, Mississippi.
"The majority of it was we saw one of our teammates doing it and we just didn't want him to be alone,'' Ole Miss scoring leader Tyree said after his team's 72-71 victory. "We're just tired of these hate groups coming to our school and portraying our campus like it's our actual university having these hate groups in our school."
(snip)
Ole Miss coach Kermit Davis said he wasn't aware beforehand that players were going to kneel.
"This was all about the hate groups that came to our community to try to spread racism and bigotry," Davis said. "It's created a lot of tension for our campus. Our players made an emotional decision to show these people they're not welcome on our campus, and we respect our players' freedom and ability to choose that.''
(Excerpt) Read more at espn.com ...
And you ignore the fact that Lincoln made his intent clear in his letter to Governor Pickens and continue with your propaganda of calling it a "war fleet".
Then you keep repeating the propaganda that a peaceful convention for a state to leave the Union which it voluntarily joined, is "rebellion."
Rebellion is defined as "open, armed, and usually unsuccessful defiance of or resistance to an established government." That isn't propaganda, that's an accurate description of the Southern actions. Especially the unsuccessful part.
No, the facts show no such thing at all.
On the contrary, speeches and writings of the time make it clear. Your propaganda to the contrary notwithstanding.
As i've told you many times, the South's reasons for seceding are *IRRELEVANT* to why Abraham Lincoln deliberately launched a war to stop them.
How can the reasons why the South started the war be irrelevant? Or *IRRELEVANT*. Your choice.
The Declaration of Independence does not specify any threshold which must be met for a state to exercise the right of independence beyond the desire of the people to want independence.
No, but the Declaration of Independence gave the reasons why one people wanted to dissolve the political bands that connected them with another. Likewise four of the rebel states issued their own Declarations of the Causes of Secession. And slavery is the most prominently mentioned point. The continuously identify themselves as slave states, first and foremost.
"Consent of the Governed", is the sole requirement, and when a government no longer has the "consent of the governed", it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it" for any D@mned reason that suits their fancy.
They certainly have that right, within the provisions of the Constitution or through rebellion. The South chose rebellion and they blew it. Badly.
So once again, I reject your effort to *FOCUS* the cause of the war on the people who just wanted to leave.
Of course you do. You prefer to *FOCUS* attention away from those who started the war. Fits your propaganda much better.
Clearly you are putting words into his mouth.
Texas v White was like Obamacare. The law was clear, but the court was not going to follow it. They simply refused to do the right thing because it would cause too much upheaval for them to do the right thing.
And once again you resort to your propaganda.
I'm going to use Lincoln's own words here.
"Just because you call a tail a "leg", doesn't make it so. "
I don't give a flying f*** what Lincoln called his fleet of warships with orders to attack. The actual fact is that they were a fleet of warships, with orders to attack.
His putting it into a letter that they were a "supply" mission, is just battleground preparation for the propaganda war he was already waging against the South.
Rest assured, the Northern public was told repeatedly that it was a "supply" mission, and little if anything was ever said about it being cannon bristling warships with orders to use all the force at their disposal to place men and supplies into that fortress.
Very likely if anyone identified it as a "War" fleet, they were arrested so they couldn't inform the Northern public contrary to what Lincoln was trying to portray.
I have no interest in reading any further of the rest of your spiel. You are not amenable to objective facts, and you will simply continue trying to cover up reality because you don't like sunlight being shined on these events.
Warships are not "supply" mission. Warships are "war" mission.
"Star of the West" wasn't even a "supply" mission. It too was a covert war mission, and that little tidbit has been covered up.
His own words in speaking to Federal Prosecutors are clear enough. His subsequent actions later are also clear enough.
But the North won. So if you are disrespecting the flag of the victors over the Confederacy, are you not then celebrating the Confederacy?
But only if opposed. Had they been allowed to land supplies and leave, allowing the status quo to continue then who knows what would have happened?
Indeed they are, since we see them in context. All you offer concerning his alleged remarks to the prosecutors is one sentence which may or may not be in context. That and your opinions.
Still trying to wiggle off the hook, eh? As has been pointed out by me numerous times, there was nobody in the whole mess that believed they wouldn't be opposed. All of Lincoln's cabinet (except one) said it would start a war. Anderson said it would start a war.
All of these opinions were fundamental acknowledgment that opposition was going to occur. Lincoln also knew they would be opposed, or else why send warships and men?
This "opposed" business is just more battlespace preparation for the propaganda war he was waging. It allows people to pretend that he was being reasonable.
Had they been allowed to land supplies and leave, allowing the status quo to continue then who knows what would have happened?
Interestingly enough, Lincoln discussed this very possibility with his cabinet, and many of them thought it would have been the worst result they could have had. It would have made them look foolish, and in the meantime the South could have strengthened it's trade ties with Europe.
Yes, if they had simply let supplies in, it likely would have worked out to their benefit in the long run, but then again, Lincoln still had the Pensacola plan going for starting the war, so it would have probably made no difference.
Lincoln's rich buddies back in New York had to have a war no matter what. It was the only way they could protect their financial interests.
Lincoln would have tried something else, like threatening their shipping or trying to collect tariffs or something.
You are a big girl. If I found it, I'm pretty sure you could find it too, if you but put forth sufficient effort. I will say it did take me quite a bit longer than I expected to find the entire conversation, but I eventually found it.
Statements against interest generally carry more weight in court. Statements in favor of interest are less trustworthy.
You might think so because of my boyish innocence, encyclopedic (but not bookish) knowledge, generous spirit, even temperament, and fun-loving - yet approachable - personality. I like to take walks.
Yet, I do have a stern sense of justice. I am strongly opposed to judges that vote to kill babies; legislators that vote to kill babies; and executives that support killing babies.
So, no it is not just the feral judiciary.
“Or so Chief Justice Chase ruled in the Texas v. White decision.”
Victor’s Justice.
Your contempt for the judiciary is duly noted.
No, I think so because your attitude towards the judiciary has been demonstrated on several occasions. Contempt for the third branch of government is something you share with your hero, Jeff Davis.
Yet, I do have a stern sense of justice. I am strongly opposed to judges that vote to kill babies; legislators that vote to kill babies; and executives that support killing babies.
Plus any judge whose rulings you disagree with.
Incorrect. All but I believe two members of Lincoln's cabinet approved the relief effort.
Interestingly enough, Lincoln discussed this very possibility with his cabinet, and many of them thought it would have been the worst result they could have had. It would have made them look foolish, and in the meantime the South could have strengthened it's trade ties with Europe.
Gee, I thought you just said that the whole cabinet was against Lincoln's actions. Having problems keeping your stories straight?
You say that like it's something bad.
If you think I'm wrong to criticize Roe, or Kelo, or Sebelius then say so.
“Duly noted.”
Ut oh. I may have said too much.
I hope there is not a secret court ex parte meeting happening right now that will result in a no-knock warrant, the shooting death of my dog, and a 99-year confinement in solitary before trial.
Having been raised a Catholic, I figure that every time these clowns take a knee during the anthem etc, WE should praise them for praying but please wait till the anthem is over and we ALL may just join you.
Once the Libs figure prayer is involved, this foolishness will end.
These Socialist/Communist types that ‘HATE’ this country so much they show it every day....
Let’s move them to a country of OUR choice and let them learn first hand what they get for ‘dissing’ the Flag and/or leading POLS in a public forum.
Close enough to what I said that it isn't worth the trouble to go look. Of course you are still calling a fleet of five warships and three tug boats a "relief" effort, and of course you are ignoring the fact that the "Star of the West" was a covert troop carrying operation, which makes it a belligerent mission too.
Gee, I thought you just said that the whole cabinet was against Lincoln's actions. Having problems keeping your stories straight?
They were against it before they were for it. Lincoln made it clear that he was going to do it, so his staff fell in line. It's when they thought he was asking them for their actual opinions that they came out against it. Once they realized he wanted "Yes men" answers, they gave them to him.
But you knew that, and you just wanted to waste both of our times making a trivial dig because you've got nothing better to throw.
Pray tell, how do you feel about Roe v Wade?
Are you saying that is another case of victor's vengeance, issued by a biased court under the sway of Lincoln and his minions?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.