[quote]2busy wrote:
.[/quote]
win!
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]bluebrasil wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]bluebrasil wrote:
…Scotland…has not been ruled by any other nation - ever…
[/quote]
Huh?[/quote]
My knowledge only goes back 2000 years but I’m pretty sure I’m right.
The Romans tried and failed. I live very close to the Gask line that beans mentioned. It was a temporary defensive line which the Romans then gave up and retreated from
The Vikings didn’t invade at all
The English tried and failed a few times
The Germans didn’t try at all
If however, you think that England currently rules Scotland you would be wrong. Great Britain is a Union of 3 countries, and is not synonymous with England.
[/quote]
OK, parse it however you want.
(Not necessarily referring to the present)[/quote]
Thanks. And yes I am just being a dick but technically North America was originally invaded and colonised by people from what we now call Russia. Then was invaded and colonised by the Vikings, then Cabot, Columbus, De Vespucci, the French and the British.
Scotland was a mixture of Irish, Scandinavians, English, etc
I hear that the Portugese are the people with the least genetic diversity
But don’t get mad, I’m just having a laugh
Funny how they attack the Confederate flag because somehow it lead to the radicalization of Storm, yet do nothing in regards to the two radicalized Muslims who attacked the cartoon event in Garland, Texas. What if the 2 gunmen had made it into the building? What do you suppose would have been the reaction? Closing the Islamic Community Center of Phoenix? Blaming the victims?
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Funny how they attack the Confederate flag because somehow it lead to the radicalization of Storm, yet do nothing in regards to the two radicalized Muslims who attacked the cartoon event in Garland, Texas. What if the 2 gunmen had made it into the building? What do you suppose would have been the reaction? Closing the Islamic Community Center of Phoenix? Blaming the victims?[/quote]
That is a very good point.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Funny how they attack the Confederate flag because…[/quote]
That is a very good point.[/quote]
No more Confederate Cakes at Wal-Mart.
But on the bright side, you can still get an ISIS cake at Wal-Mart.
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Funny how they attack the Confederate flag because…[/quote]
That is a very good point.[/quote]
No more Confederate Cakes at Wal-Mart.
But on the bright side, you can still get an ISIS cake at Wal-Mart.
[/quote]
That can’t be real… But then again, I can’t imagine any deli worker at Wal-Mart having the ability to read Arabic. It would be interesting to see if they would do a “Hands Up Don’t Shoot, Kill the Po-Po” cake.
50/50 they would
[quote]NorCal916 wrote:
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Funny how they attack the Confederate flag because…[/quote]
That is a very good point.[/quote]
No more Confederate Cakes at Wal-Mart.
But on the bright side, you can still get an ISIS cake at Wal-Mart.
[/quote]
That can’t be real… But then again, I can’t imagine any deli worker at Wal-Mart having the ability to read Arabic. It would be interesting to see if they would do a “Hands Up Don’t Shoot, Kill the Po-Po” cake.
50/50 they would
[/quote]
No, it’s real. It was on the news today mocking Wal-Mart.
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]NorCal916 wrote:
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Funny how they attack the Confederate flag because…[/quote]
That is a very good point.[/quote]
No more Confederate Cakes at Wal-Mart.
But on the bright side, you can still get an ISIS cake at Wal-Mart.
[/quote]
That can’t be real… But then again, I can’t imagine any deli worker at Wal-Mart having the ability to read Arabic. It would be interesting to see if they would do a “Hands Up Don’t Shoot, Kill the Po-Po” cake.
50/50 they would
[/quote]
No, it’s real. It was on the news today mocking Wal-Mart.
[/quote]
Great. Now I have to make my own confederate flag cakes. This situation is out of control.
[quote]OldOgre wrote:
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]NorCal916 wrote:
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Funny how they attack the Confederate flag because…[/quote]
That is a very good point.[/quote]
No more Confederate Cakes at Wal-Mart.
But on the bright side, you can still get an ISIS cake at Wal-Mart.
[/quote]
That can’t be real… But then again, I can’t imagine any deli worker at Wal-Mart having the ability to read Arabic. It would be interesting to see if they would do a “Hands Up Don’t Shoot, Kill the Po-Po” cake.
50/50 they would
[/quote]
No, it’s real. It was on the news today mocking Wal-Mart.
[/quote]
Great. Now I have to make my own confederate flag cakes. This situation is out of control. [/quote]
I believe the gay activists missed the ISIS reaction to our SC ruling. It was reported that they threw suspected homosexuals off buildings head-first.
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Funny how they attack the Confederate flag because somehow it lead to the radicalization of Storm, yet do nothing in regards to the two radicalized Muslims who attacked the cartoon event in Garland, Texas. What if the 2 gunmen had made it into the building? What do you suppose would have been the reaction? Closing the Islamic Community Center of Phoenix? Blaming the victims?[/quote]
I wonder how many of the flag haters have a che guevara shirt?
You can still buy effigies of the worst murders in history, but the confederate flag is bad?
[quote]smh_23 wrote:
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
[quote]Mcincinatti wrote:
I am a huge supporter of “let the States decide”- where I don’t think I and other posters agree is here:
now that this is being debated, and the flags and other “symbols” might be removed, I am in full support. If the SC flag comes down, the State decided to do that. Simply because free citizens organized and put pressure on elected officials to do so doesn’t seem like ‘progressive revisionism’, it seems like smart organizing and affected change- i.e. a pretty damn democratic process. Don’t like officials deciding to take down these mementos? Don’t elect 'em next time[/quote]
I’m with you here insofar as it is a body of people who live in said state. One of the difficulties of being a smaller gov’t type is that–IF you are desirous of maintaining philosophical consistency–you must accept really crappy things happening if they don’t go the way you would like. This includes things like “if I were king I’d ban alll****” but having to accept that people in your state don’t like that. Or especially that people in another state don’t think that way.
That’s why we have elections. The democratic process takes effort and conscientious involvement. If people in S.C., Mississippi, or Georgia (they did in 2001) decide to take flags down great. If they don’t then I don’t think people who live anywhere else have the right to bitch. Or, perhaps bitch yes because we all have a right to speak our own minds about things that are important to us… but not the right to complain that “something should be done”.
It was, you just didn’t like the outcome. So I am in agreement with you as long as it’s people in those states deciding to bring them down. If it’s pressure from “outside” the people who live and vote in that area, then I don’t like it. Doesn’t matter whether the outcome is something I desire or not…the PROCESS must be respected and that includes–for me–letting an individual state’s voters decide what they want about issues in their own damn state.[/quote]
Here is where this falls apart: When someone says “that flag has no business flying on state property and here’s why” (the “here’s why” doesn’t ever get addressed, by the way – which says much), that person is simply making an argument about something stupid/smart that should be done/not done for various logical and evidence-based reasons. Nowhere in that argument does there exist an implicit “President Obama should personally remove all of the Confederate battle flags, declare martial law, build himself a throne with the skulls of Tea Party congressmen, and suspend elections indefinitely.”
Instead, what I and a few other posters have argued is that flight of that flag on public property is wrong and stupid. Similarly, I think it’s wrong and stupid for a parent to tell his son that the origin of his species lies in Xenu’s having brought his underlings to Teegeeack in a space-airplane, or that John F. Kennedy was killed by lizard overlords who now control the government, or that black people are criminal savages with violence in their DNA, or that white people are a monolithic oppressor class of racists. When I say that it would be wrong and stupid to raise a child this way (and that, therefore, it ought not to be done), I am not saying that I want the government to pass laws against it and then install listening devices in children’s bedroom for efficient enforcement of the new laws. I am simply saying that it is wrong and stupid, it shouldn’t be done, and anybody who does it is a tragic dunce. This is – all of it – very much worth communicating.
The simple fact is that a logical or evidential argument in favor of – or against – something does not hinge on its maker’s direct participation in that thing, or the zip code in which the argument was made. Both you and I have opinions about things that happen in other towns, other counties, other states, other countries. If the French pass a stupid law, and I can convincingly explain why it’s stupid, it is not a good objection to my argument to pretend that what I’m actually saying is that the U.S. should overthrow the French government and fix things itself. Perhaps what I’m saying instead is that, as a human who lives on a rock with a bunch of other humans, I want other humans to not be idiots, and I am perfectly in the right when I try to help them.
Or perhaps I’m all wrong. How about if the state of California voted to fly a flag bearing the Black Panther emblem before its state house, on public property? Would the attendant PWI thread be filled with things like, “All you outsiders don’t get to choose, it’s the state’s business.” No. It would be filled with “wow these people are fucking stupid,” and correctly so.
PS: This is about what’s been going on in the thread; for all I know, people elsewhere are making the arguments you talked about, and your post is a perfectly appropriate response to them.[/quote]
No, I pretty much agree with you. I was taking Mcincinatti’s response and then comparing that with the media/social media/facebook/activist shitstorm that I saw erupt coming primarily from people who don’t know what they’re talking about…or at least can’t articulate it but simply want something “done”. I’m not even talking about the public property argument you’ve put forth. I wasn’t commenting on anything particular to this thread–this forum is one of very few places I can get anything resembling an intellectual discussion on issues like this without it being degraded into “bigot!” “Nazi!” “cis-gendered oppressor!”. Make a bit more sense? Admittedly not a very articulated post on my part the first time.
THE BEST article about the shootings in Charleston and the Confederate Flag. I think she has it right. I can only hope that if something like this happened in my place of worship, I would be this great. The reactions of the families at the bail hearing of the shooter are inspiring. They are Christianity at it’s best. Honestly, I really liked her conclusions about the flag as well. Really nice.
Two Miracles in Charleston - Peggy Noonan
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
No, I pretty much agree with you. I was taking Mcincinatti’s response and then comparing that with the media/social media/facebook/activist shitstorm that I saw erupt coming primarily from people who don’t know what they’re talking about…or at least can’t articulate it but simply want something “done”. I’m not even talking about the public property argument you’ve put forth. I wasn’t commenting on anything particular to this thread–this forum is one of very few places I can get anything resembling an intellectual discussion on issues like this without it being degraded into “bigot!” “Nazi!” “cis-gendered oppressor!”. Make a bit more sense? Admittedly not a very articulated post on my part the first time.[/quote]
Oh yeah, makes perfect sense. I wasn’t really arguing against you so much as I was reiterating my position. Anyway, I know the type you’re talking about: in one breath they will call for a ban on ALL – public and private alike – flight of CSA colors. In the next, they will wax poetic about the 1A protection of flag burning.
Note that these people aren’t just liberals, though. Even here in this very thread we have many people confused about the difference between, for example, a flag flying on state property and a guy in a Che tee.
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Funny how they attack the Confederate flag because somehow it lead to the radicalization of Storm, yet do nothing in regards to the two radicalized Muslims who attacked the cartoon event in Garland, Texas. What if the 2 gunmen had made it into the building? What do you suppose would have been the reaction? Closing the Islamic Community Center of Phoenix? Blaming the victims?[/quote]
I wonder how many of the flag haters have a che guevara shirt?
You can still buy effigies of the worst murders in history, but the confederate flag is bad?[/quote]
I’m not disagreeing with you but want to point out you can’t look for logic in these situations. It’s just the way our culture is. Low information and very reactionary. When I was in college I’d wonder how many anti-weed harlots had a bottle of whiskey in their house. And think “you can still buy a substance that ruins lives and kills people, but the natural flowers of a plant is bad?”
Che Guevara shirts are widespread b/c it’s a cool looking head shot and it evokes a feeling of standing up to oppression. No one knows shit about Cuban history b/c why would they? Confederate flags don’t sell at Walmart b/c Walmart made a business decision. The Confederate flag = support for traitors and slavers message has been successfully transmitted into the national conscience.
I don’t think Walmart was taking a heroic stand removing the Confederate flag from its stores. I think they understand they are one of the biggest distributors of consumer products in the country and are thus constantly under heavy scrutiny. Some execs at Walmart had some analysts run a few sensitivity analyses and projected it would be more profitable to remove the flag than to keep it. B/c they understand our culture is reactionary and doesn’t operate on logic and high amounts of quality information.
[quote]smh_23 wrote:
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
No, I pretty much agree with you. I was taking Mcincinatti’s response and then comparing that with the media/social media/facebook/activist shitstorm that I saw erupt coming primarily from people who don’t know what they’re talking about…or at least can’t articulate it but simply want something “done”. I’m not even talking about the public property argument you’ve put forth. I wasn’t commenting on anything particular to this thread–this forum is one of very few places I can get anything resembling an intellectual discussion on issues like this without it being degraded into “bigot!” “Nazi!” “cis-gendered oppressor!”. Make a bit more sense? Admittedly not a very articulated post on my part the first time.[/quote]
Oh yeah, makes perfect sense. I wasn’t really arguing against you so much as I was reiterating my position. Anyway, I know the type you’re talking about: in one breath they will call for a ban on ALL – public and private alike – flight of CSA colors. In the next, they will wax poetic about the 1A protection of flag burning.
Note that these people aren’t just liberals, though. Even here in this very thread we have many people confused about the difference between, for example, a flag flying on state property and a guy in a Che tee.[/quote]
I quite agree. Its frustrating to no end. I remember a few days ago I shared one of those silly memes on libertarian party…elephant said “how dare they ban soda and guns! Let’s ban drugs and marriage equality” donkey said “how dare they ban drugs and marriage equality, lets ban soda and guns :-)” porcupine said “stop banning things! WTF”
Obvious point is obvious right? Not a detailed rational argument but I think we can all kind of agree on the political point being made…
Anyway, one of my oldest friends sees this, comments about how great it is, proceeds to share it…and then not 3 hours later shares a story on how we need mandatory gun insurance and “I don’t understsnd how anybody could want a gun. I hate guns”.
I wanted to beat him. There was much wailing an gnashing of teeth. People do not have the slightest fucking clue about how to be consistent.