You are now denying that you wrote in this thread that America not honoring their treaties with the Indians was no big deal?
Re-read what you wrote.
“You are now denying that you wrote in this thread that America not honoring their treaties with the Indians was no big deal?”
I never said it was no big deal. There you go again saying I said something I never said. Why don’t you actually deal with what is posted rather than making things up that no one has posted?
I posted, for instance, the following:
“False. 1) They all agreed to recognize the seizures after the fact in various treaties. Thus, they have no claim.”
Notice that in no way is anything like the claim you made about what I posted.
And when you inferred or implied I said this: So treaties forced upon a country being exterminated are righteous? I responded with:
“No, and I never said that, but a treaty is a treaty.”
Do you see that? So, I wrote that “a treaty is a treaty” and yet here you are saying I said, “You are now denying that you wrote in this thread that America not honoring their treaties with the Indians was no big deal?” You’re making things up out of thin air and that is not an intellectually honest way to do this.
“Re-read what you wrote.”
No, you re-read it. All you’ll see is that I said the treaties are essentially null and void (”At times it did, but all of that became essentially null and void with the tacit agreement of all the parties involved. That wasnt the situation in 1095.”) That is not the law, but this is the effect ultimately.
I’m going to go ahead and assume - until shown otherwise - that you’ll just make up more things I never, ever said.