Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

Mindflayer wrote: That's right, I Godwined this conversation.

It's the law...

Kann der Vogel der paridise fliegen sie ihre Nase

Sie alle die gleichen ICH wirklich denke, daß die Nazis sollte der Aufenthalt für Sie

Translation
It all being the same I really think the Nazis should stay out of it

Mindflayer wrote:Just so I am clear - is saying I am glad the Nazis lost a direct insult to my German friends?

That's right, I Godwined this conversation.

Are your German friends Nazis?

Darn you Mindflayer! Darn you all to Heck!

the history books are always written by the victors

gunderwood wrote:Are your German friends Nazis?

Another darn good point.

wylde007 wrote:Non-stop with you, ain't it?

His BELIEF is an insult to me and to Virginia.

Plea'se do'n't respond to any mo're of my post's until you lear'n how to pr'operly u'se apostrophe's.

So Sorry, I don't use apostrophe's properly and I don't spell very well either, but I admit my short comeings.
What I won't say is that it was alright for the German Army and Hitler's goon's to kill over 6 million Jew's and other's that did not fit his Master Race Profile. It seem's that you are ok with that.
Bill

That's exactly the opposite of what I'm saying. I am saying that the yankee regime IS EXACTLY THE SAME as Hitler's Germany.

Lincoln was a genocidal maniac bent on total annihilation of a people. Since he could kill every last one of them (he tried his darnedest) he conquered them, stole their land and subjected them to a neverending parade of indignities and humiliations.

Your comparison has absolutely no merit.

Well I suppose that I am not very well versed in the Past with things such as the Civil war nor do I wish to be, I believe in living in the present as I can do nothing about the past. Nor can you change the past altho I am sure you would like to.

Well I suppose that I am not very well versed in the Past with things such as the Civil war nor do I wish to be, I believe in living in the present as I can do nothing about the past. Nor can you change the past altho I am sure you would like to.

I believe in living in the present, too. But I do not wish to discount the teachings of history as simply "window dressing". They are a learning tool to be used to hopefully learn and grow from. The problem that I see is so many people wishing to discredit or disavow the truth about our history in heritage in the hopes that it will just "go away".

I can't change the past, for certain. But by learning from it perhaps I can have a hand in molding the future that I would like for myself and my heirs.

I am sure you would like nothing else than your own version of "utopia" for your family to live, grow and prosper, no? That's all I want for mine, and I do not believe that can be accomplished under the current regime.

By "regime" I do not mean Obama. He is a figurehead. The regime is the government, its many offices, agencies, officers and illegitimate legislations against our rights. Those rights were defined and determined to be inalienable and unusurpable by our founders.

All of that died in 1861 and now we deal with the ongoing fallout of our ancestors' inability to live together as neighbors, because one people wished to be left alone to govern themselves while another wished to exercise dominion over and demand tribute from them.

What we suffer today is a direct result of the failure of my (our?) people to successfully do against the uSA what the founders, thanks in no small part to the French Navy, were able to accomplish against the British Empire - self-determination.

Be well.

wylde007 wrote:
Lincoln was a genocidal maniac bent on total annihilation of a people. Since he could kill every last one of them (he tried his darnedest) he conquered them, stole their land and subjected them to a neverending parade of indignities and humiliations.
.

that's just not true....listen I'm not a pro-union, or pro-south guy, had family fought and die on both sides, I am a big civil war history buff though, not a big fan of Lincoln he started a trend to a larger centeral fed gov that we have today, but saying that he was a genocidal maniac is absurd and not true.....

the South and the north were terribly differnt place pre-civil war, the founders did our nation a disservice by not solving the slavery issue, while most agree that it would of ended at some time the fact that new lands were becoming states and if those states would allow slavery or not was bogging down congress.... it's such a stupid issue too, Why??? because the simple fact is most southrens DID NOT own slaves, the tragic truth of the civil war is a few hundred very rich southren's conviced for the most part a poor south to go to war over "changing our way of life" only the large land owners were at risk of losing their way of life, truth the war was much worse for poor white southren's which far outnumbered the rich land owners that owned the majority of slaves,

Lincoln wanted to preserve the union, he did break the law to do it but to him slavery was a non-issue it wasn't till the very end he changed his view on black people (his talks w/ fredick douglas were the casue of this). If Lincoln hadn't won the election not sure the war would of played out the way it did, that was the first step of dissent for the south they felt the election was not fair, also the south wanted more people in congress (the population count for house did not include slaves which angered many in the south) they felt that the larger factory owners had too much influnce in washington....

a lot of bad on both sides, way too much greed on both sides and yes the south did bear the cost and blame of the war. I still say it's a shame that so many poor white boys died for the richest southren's families and the land they owned....it's a tragic point in our history

The South went to war as a means of DEFENSE.

It could consequently be argued that Lee's foray into the north helped turn yankee sentiment against Dixie. Up until then their lands and homes had never been in the line of fire.

Rich agriculturalists did not coerce hundreds of thousands of Southron to go off to war. We wanted to be let alone to govern freely. War was the last thing we wanted.

It was brought to us and our men did the only honourable thing they could do when their land, homes, livelihoods and families were threatened by an invader - they took up arms to DEFEND those things which they held dear.

Lincoln wanted to preserve the TAX BASE which was paying for northern industrial interests and development. The "union" was just the buzzword he chose to belay the truth.

In fact, many Southron wanted to preserve the CONSTITUTIONAL union as written, but Lincoln's radical republicans wanted more government, more authority and more tribute paid for the "privilege" of belonging to that union. The South knew this was a direct violation of our founders' designs and wanted out.

wylde007 wrote:That's exactly the opposite of what I'm saying. I am saying that the yankee regime IS EXACTLY THE SAME as Hitler's Germany.

Lincoln was a genocidal maniac bent on total annihilation of a people. Since he could kill every last one of them (he tried his darnedest) he conquered them, stole their land and subjected them to a neverending parade of indignities and humiliations.

Your comparison has absolutely no merit.

To be technical, Germany didn't start world war 2 (or WW1, but that's a different matter). Its invasion of Poland was a direct response to the habitual mistreatment of ethnic Germans by the Poles(similar to the Sudetenland event).

Britain, (followed by France several hours later) declared war on Germany, not the other way around. I know its fun for all to compare everyone to Nazis, but they usually don't fit into any historical context besides their own and are best left out of most discussions.

gunderwood wrote:

Mindflayer wrote:Just so I am clear - is saying I am glad the Nazis lost a direct insult to my German friends?

That's right, I Godwined this conversation.

Are your German friends Nazis?

No. Are all Southerners pro-Confederacy and/or pro-slavery?

Sorry, sometimes my arguments are meant to make people think beyond the first initial, obvious jab. I guess that and my sense of humor takes some time.

Oh, and jaywade - excellent write up.

wylde007 wrote:The South went to war as a means of DEFENSE.

Yes, a defense against the specific "state right" to own other human beings. The plantation owners, who ran Southern state governments, were explicitly clear about that.

It could consequently be argued that Lee's foray into the north helped turn yankee sentiment against Dixie. Up until then their lands and homes had never been in the line of fire.

Rich agriculturalists did not coerce hundreds of thousands of Southron to go off to war. We wanted to be let alone to govern freely. War was the last thing we wanted.

Poppycock. Rich plantation slaveowners did exactly that. Just about every poor white Southerner knew good and well that, despite their lower station, they were above every black person. Rich white Southerners perpetuated this mindset to keep "the masses" of other whites on their side, to preserve "their way of life." I'm glad it's gone forever, and that my black ancestors were freed, and if it took war to do it, then SO BE IT.

I believe you profess Christianity. What if you were the one being whipped at the hands of, say, Arab Muslims, and your wife or daughters being raped by them and nothing you could do about it? Not just some abstract white person--I mean you, Wylde, specifically, and yours. Wouldn't you want your freedom, too, by any means necessary? Wouldn't you view any symbol of that oppressive (in this fictional example, Arab Muslim) regime that allowed the whipping of your back and the raping of your wife/daughters as Evil Incarnate? Yes, you would, so don't lie and say you wouldn't. The Spanish felt that way about the Moors (hence the Inquisition) and still do today. I lived over there for two years, so I know.

That's how most black people in this country feel when they see the Confederate flag, and for those very same reasons.

It was brought to us and our men did the only honourable thing they could do when their land, homes, livelihoods and families were threatened by an invader - they took up arms to DEFEND those things which they held dear.

Naturally. Gotta keep those "N-words" in their place, right? That's why the KKK and many other similar vigilante groups, often supported by and even accompanied by the sherrifs, targeted blacks and those who supported their equal rights, eh? That's why we had the "black codes" enacted all throughout the South, doing among other things, making firearm ownership by blacks illegal (a major 2A violation), eh?

Don't believe me? The intro paragraph of the below link sums it up nicely.

http://www.constitution.org/2ll/2ndschol/11cd-reg.pdf

Lincoln wanted to preserve the TAX BASE which was paying for northern industrial interests and development. The "union" was just the buzzword he chose to belay the truth.

I'm sure that was a factor, probably a big one. Money, a tool of power, always is. He clearly would've preserved the Union without abolishing slavery if he could have. The record is indeed very clear on that.

In fact, many Southron wanted to preserve the CONSTITUTIONAL union as written, but Lincoln's radical republicans wanted more government, more authority and more tribute paid for the "privilege" of belonging to that union. The South knew this was a direct violation of our founders' designs and wanted out.

Yes, one of the flaws in our Constitution was that it allowed slavery to continue to exist. So, strictly speaking, you are correct. It took a very bloody war to fix that Constitutional flaw, because the record is also very clear that white Southerners, rich plantation owners especially, had absolutely NO intention of giving up their ownership of other humans. To deny this is insane. As clear as the record is on Lincoln's original willingness to keep the Union together without abolishing slavery, this too is equally clear.

And these are the reasons why I'm glad the South lost the Civil War.

I encourage you, someday, to read John Howard Griffin's landmark book, Black Like Me. Perhaps then you'll better understand why folks like me are glad the South lost.

And you will obviously never truly understand why folks like me cannot stand folks like you who are glad that we have all been hoodwinked into financial slavery by your putrid government.

You're no less a slave than your ancestors. It's just a different, "softer" slavery.

Ah, 's'ok, Wylde. I'm a disgrace to Virginia anyway, right?