Posted on 10/02/2021 2:19:06 AM PDT by knighthawk
Exactly. 4 million slaves escaped, and yet there is only one picture.
In this case the pictures were taken after the escape.
The best lies carry a kernel of truth. They call the January 6 walk through the capitol building an "Insurrection!" and they have a few teeny tiny examples of "violence" to prove it was an insurrection.
Is this view the truth, or is this tiny bit of truth being used to protect a huge lie?
Might as well cite CNN. The British press is in many ways more liberal than the American press.
The article talks about two polls. This recent one is Trump voter vs. Biden voter. The one this spring was Democrats vs. Republicans. The other comparison was Red states vs. Blue states. I think all the comparisons are fair. Non-voters don’t matter and Independents are included in two of the comparisons.
You do understand that the British press today is even worse than the Corporate media in the US as far as being Woke, Gaia worshipping, self loathing Global Socialists right?
This is who you are siding with.
It’s hilarious watching BroJoeK trying to project his obsessiveness, delusion and fragile mental state onto others.
This is America. Communists need to be exterminated, not pushed aside.
Fixed it.
"fragile mental state" pretty well defines poor FLT-bird.
Sad.
And yet, DiogenesLamp himself is happy to cite the British press or British authors whenever they can be used to serve his purposes.
As I said. Obsessed.
Poor Fella.
What about the British press during the CW? They were still stung after losing their colonies and then failing to get them back. Don’t you think they had more than a few hidden motives for wanting the country to fall apart?
Thank you for proving the CW was about slavery.
Is this view the truth, or is this tiny bit of truth being used to protect a huge lie?
From your own post, "4 million slaves escaped".
That’s a faulty analogy. Slavery had more supporters and more passionate supporters in 1860 than it had in 1830 or 1800. It had only grown stronger and the assumption was that if the slaveowners got their way it would only get stronger still, and even if it were to be done away with it would only be replaced by slavery under another name. To support the Confederacy and to oppose all measures to weaken slavery was to support slavery.
They have twisted themselves into the most convoluted verbal gymnastics over this to others avoiding the question completely because they know the answer. No. The South would not have ended slavery. Heck, they would have been free to expand further west like they had wanted to.
Well first of all, this is a "You're another" fallacy. (Tu quoque fallacy.)
And secondly, I don't think you can find any examples of me citing the modern British press on anything. The 1862 example of which you are thinking is self evidently true on the face of it.
"The principle is not that a human being cannot justly own another, but that he cannot own him unless he is loyal to the United States."
In the same manner that the Trump Presidency was about "Russian Collusion" and "Racism."
Lies, told and repeated endlessly by the enemy which had the greater megaphone.
The Civil war was about Rich, Powerful, corrupt men who controlled Washington DC and calling anyone who threatened their power an "Insurrectionist".
Exactly like what we have today with the same Rich, Powerful, corrupt men who control Washington DC still doing it now.
I think it is a fairly accurate analogy. When people label someone their "enemy", they always characterize their motives as evil.
You are saying I am a "defender of slavery". This is like saying that Alan Dershowitz loves flag burners because he is willing to defend them for burning a flag.
Does Alan Dershowitz love flag burners? I would think he does not.
I am defending law. The laws of that time protected slavery. To defend the law is to defend slavery if people want to see it that way, and clearly this is how you want to see it.
To support the Confederacy and to oppose all measures to weaken slavery was to support slavery.
Because there is no other possible explanation.
And this is why I said:
Anyone who refuses to take the vaccine is "anti-science" and they want other people to get sick. There is no other explanation.
I didn't say "evil" or "enemy."
This is like saying that Alan Dershowitz loves flag burners because he is willing to defend them for burning a flag.
It is like saying Planned Parenthood supports abortion because it supports rights to abortion. In other words it's true.
Or if there's corruption and I say, I don't agree with it personally, but I don't think anything should be done about it, I could be considered to be a supporter or defender of corruption.
I didn't say "love." I said "defend." There's a difference.
I am defending law. The laws of that time protected slavery.
Laws can be changed. One can defend the laws, but also want them to be changed. To attack everyone who hopes to change the laws is to defend the abuses that they are challenging.
woodpusher: "At this point, I was not even aware of the existence of this thread.I had stated nothing on the thread, nor does it appear anybody quoted me saying anything. BroJoeBidenK merely has cognitive issues.
Only in BroJoeBidenK's head, was I here among his imaginary friends and adverseries, being "quoted.""
Naw, you're just driving yourself nuts here for no good reason.
I was just documenting that you have cognitive issues.
Your quote from my #206 was extremely selective, as is your norm. A more complete quote may counteract your cognitive issues enough for you to see that you falsely attributed a quote to me.
[DiogenesLamp #208 to FLT-bird #205] begins,To: FLT-birdThey were against the spread of slavery to the western territories.
DiogenesLamp was quoting FLT-bird #205.
[BroJoeBidenK #228 to DiogenesLamp #208]
DL quoting woodpusher: "They were against the spread of slavery to the western territories."At this point, I was not even aware of the existence of this thread. I had stated nothing on the thread, nor does it appear anybody quoted me saying anything. BroJoeBidenK merely has cognitive issues. Only in BroJoeBidenK's head, was I here among his imaginary friends and adverseries, being "quoted."
Due to your Biden syndrome, in your confusion you imagined that DiogenesLamp had "quoted" woodpusher. As I had not participated on the thread in any way, nor had I even been cited or referenced by anyone, there is no good reason why anything on the thread was attributed to me as a "quote." There was nothing of mine on the thread to confuse with someone else.
Free Republic's traditional posting guidelines say: if I mention you in my post, then I should include your name in my address line.It's a "rule" that oldtimers like wardaddy well know, but often chose to ignore.
That's why you were addressed.
Do try to not make believe that you were doing me a courtesy, pinging me to your misbegotten wrongly attributed "quote." BroJoeBidenK, your excuse making is on a par with Jen Psaki. Come to think of it, are you two related?
Another old tradition is due diligence before posting. Our conversation is on another thread where you established that Abraham Lincoln, Ulysses S. Grant, and Roy P. Basler were all Lost Causers. For some reason, you left that conversation abruptly after I was called a Lost Causer for a post I made, and I documented I had used the words of Ulysses S. Grant from a report to President Andrew Johnson, December 18, 1865. Ulysses S. Grant, a Lost Causer. Who knew?
Remember Biden got 87 million votes
There is a right and proper method of doing that. That is what should have been done but wasn't.
To attack everyone who hopes to change the laws is to defend the abuses that they are challenging.
I would suppose that is true, but I thought you were talking about me. I can't recall ever attacking everyone who hopes to change the law except for the Judge in Massachusetts that abolished slavery by creatively "interpreting" the law to mean something it was never intended to mean when it was created.
I consider legal trickery bad whenever it is used, even if it accomplishes a worthy goal.
We should not countenance lies in our legal system.
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.