Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 35

Thread: OT But still shows people are ignorant.

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,339

    Post imported post

    This exerpt is from an Everett Herald article in which this guy is comparing having a confederate flag painted on a car to having a gun hanging in a gun rack.

    When are people going to wake the hell up and realize that guns aren't scary?!?!?!

    http://tinyurl.com/8xbesb


    Code:
    Andy Hugel, owner of DreamWerks, an auto detailing shop in Snohomish, said Confederate flags on trucks and cars is a sad throwback to 1950s hot-rod culture.
    
    He said he begrudgingly painted the flag on a car for one customer in California several years ago.
    
    "That paint lasted about a month," he said. "It got keyed, it got paintballs thrown at it. People were really upset when they saw it."
    
    Now, Hugel refuses everyone who asks him to paint the design. 
    
    "My feeling is that these people should just grow up," he said. "It's like having a gun hanging in your back window. It's immature, and even a little scary."
    "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."

    "though I walk through the valley in the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for I know that you are by my side" Glock 23:40

  2. #2
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338

    Post imported post

    Again the ignorance of people, the confederate flag has nothing to do with racism but with cultural pride. A former president of NAACP, wears a confederate uniform and carries a confederate flag around his town in the south. Then to compare it to gun racks shows this guys ignorance takes another leap forward in my mind one thing has nothing to do with another. Another perfect example of how people follow the other sheep and don't do any reasoning for themselves.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Seattle-ish, Washington, USA
    Posts
    222

    Post imported post

    I have to disagree with Sudden Valley Gunner in part. The Confederate flag may not have anything to do with racism, but it is used by many hate groups as a symbol of their racist and intolerant beliefs. Certainly it is a cultural symbol to some, but the skinheads, hammerskins, Aryans, and others who use the Confederate flag as part of their symbols do not do so with any cultual significance -- in these cases it is used to represent racism. Period.

    It's often difficult to know what the Confederate flag means to somebody that displays it, unless you look beyond the flag itself. It seems that the further you get away from the south -- where it is a cultural symbol -- the more the flag is perceived as a racist statement.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    189

    Post imported post

    The Confederate flag may not have anything to do with racism, but it is used by many hate groups as a symbol of their racist and intolerant beliefs.
    So, because some hate mongering a--holes decided to appropriate the flag as their own racist symbol, that means those who are proud of it should just give it up? I understand why people think that, I just don't agree with their flawed logic. This is the same logic that gives us, "Well, criminals carry guns, therefore anyone with a gun is a criminal."

    Note that I'm not pointing my finger at you here, but rather the sheeple who make these wild leaps of assumption.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    2,546

    Post imported post

    sudden valley gunner wrote:
    Again the ignorance of people, the confederate flag has nothing to do with racism but with cultural pride. A former president of NAACP, wears a confederate uniform and carries a confederate flag around his town in the south. Then to compare it to gun racks shows this guys ignorance takes another leap forward in my mind one thing has nothing to do with another. Another perfect example of how people follow the other sheep and don't do any reasoning for themselves.
    Why are people carrying around the naval battle standard and not the actual flag? Why does the basis of the confederacy have nothing to do with "cultural pride" and everything to do with slave ownership?

    Claim what you want about state's rights and such, but make no mistake: The confederacy was about slaves, not states.
    "If we were to ever consider citizenship as the least bit matter of merit instead of birthright, imagine who should be selected as deserved representation of our democracy: someone who would risk their daily livelihood to cast an individually statistically insignificant vote, or those who wrap themselves in the flag against slightest slights." - agenthex

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Seattle-ish, Washington, USA
    Posts
    222

    Post imported post

    I agree, tricityguy. Hopefully you understood that I'm just pointing out it isn't always a cultural symbol. Yes, your comparison to people's attitudes on guns on point.

    We live in a society that more and more seems to want to label everything as bad, and then prohibit those things, which flys directly in the face of the individual freedoms our forefathers embraced when they founded this country. I fear for what our country will become in the next few decades if we continue in this direction.

    Charles

  7. #7
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338

    Post imported post

    Tawnos wrote:
    sudden valley gunner wrote:
    Again the ignorance of people, the confederate flag has nothing to do with racism but with cultural pride. A former president of NAACP, wears a confederate uniform and carries a confederate flag around his town in the south. Then to compare it to gun racks shows this guys ignorance takes another leap forward in my mind one thing has nothing to do with another. Another perfect example of how people follow the other sheep and don't do any reasoning for themselves.
    Why are people carrying around the naval battle standard and not the actual flag? Why does the basis of the confederacy have nothing to do with "cultural pride" and everything to do with slave ownership?

    Claim what you want about state's rights and such, but make no mistake: The confederacy was about slaves, not states.
    You are mistaken confederacy wasn't about slavery and neither was the civil war.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kitsap Co., Washington, USA
    Posts
    332

    Post imported post

    sudden valley gunner wrote:
    Tawnos wrote:
    sudden valley gunner wrote:
    Again the ignorance of people, the confederate flag has nothing to do with racism but with cultural pride. A former president of NAACP, wears a confederate uniform and carries a confederate flag around his town in the south. Then to compare it to gun racks shows this guys ignorance takes another leap forward in my mind one thing has nothing to do with another. Another perfect example of how people follow the other sheep and don't do any reasoning for themselves.
    Why are people carrying around the naval battle standard and not the actual flag? Why does the basis of the confederacy have nothing to do with "cultural pride" and everything to do with slave ownership?

    Claim what you want about state's rights and such, but make no mistake: The confederacy was about slaves, not states.
    You are mistaken confederacy wasn't about slavery and neither was the civil war.
    Bingo.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    2,546

    Post imported post

    sudden valley gunner wrote:
    Tawnos wrote:
    sudden valley gunner wrote:
    Again the ignorance of people, the confederate flag has nothing to do with racism but with cultural pride. A former president of NAACP, wears a confederate uniform and carries a confederate flag around his town in the south. Then to compare it to gun racks shows this guys ignorance takes another leap forward in my mind one thing has nothing to do with another. Another perfect example of how people follow the other sheep and don't do any reasoning for themselves.
    Why are people carrying around the naval battle standard and not the actual flag? Why does the basis of the confederacy have nothing to do with "cultural pride" and everything to do with slave ownership?

    Claim what you want about state's rights and such, but make no mistake: The confederacy was about slaves, not states.
    You are mistaken confederacy wasn't about slavery and neither was the civil war.
    Are you just arguing the point without analysis, or do you really believe that. Yes, there were a lot of things at stake there, but look at the bigger picture: the Confederation's Constitution.

    I'll start at the top and work down, since you seem unlikely to read it without me doing it here, outlining how the Confederacy, in many ways, strengthened the Federal government and made slave ownership set in legal "stone":
    Article I
    Section 2: The CSA removed the ability for a State to decide who is a person in the state eligible to vote. It instead consolidated that power with the federal government.

    Section 4: Consolidates the power from section 2 such that States lack the power to choose who may represent them and how.

    Section 7: Gives the President line-item veto power. This makes the Federal government able to more carefully control those laws voted on by the state, as the Federal government gains the power to veto partial measures with the same restrictions of overturning a veto as today.

    Section 9 (3): They didn't even remove the right of the federal government to suspend Habeus Corpus!

    Section 9 (4): NO law may be passed that bans slave ownership.

    Section 9 (6): Congress (federal government again) gains the power to levy taxes on inter-state trade.

    Article 2: nothing of interest, really

    Article 3:
    Section 2 (2):States aren't allowed to work things out between themselves, the Federal government still remains the arbiter of inter-state justice.

    Article 4:
    Section 1: The federal government still mandates that each state honor each other state's court rulings. States are not allowed to independently rule on issues.

    Section 2 (1): Slaves are property that may be brought anywhere. It's federally mandated that states allow the free trafficking of slaves without interference.

    Section 2 (3): Slaves are not legally allowed to flee to non-slave areas. They are to be returned (no Dred Scott here).

    Section 3 (3): All new states added to the CSA are "slave" states.

    Section 3 (4): The federal government may still send federal troops into states.

    And the summary, which was already written well:

    Overall, the CSA constitution does not radically alter the federal system that was set up under the United States constitution. It is thus very debatable as to whether the CSA was a significantly more pro-"states' rights" country (as supporters claim) in any meaningful sense. At least three states rights are explicitly taken away- the freedom of states to grant voting rights to non-citizens, the freedom of states to outlaw slavery within their borders, and the freedom of states to trade freely with each other.

    States only gain four minor rights under the Confederate system- the power to enter into treaties with other states to regulate waterways, the power to tax foreign and domestic ships that use their waterways, the power to impeach federally-appointed state officials, and the power to distribute "bills of credit." When people champion the cause of reclaiming state power from the feds, are matters like these at the tops of their lists of priorities?

    As previously noted, the CSA constitution does not modify many of the most controversial (from a states' rights perspective) clauses of the American constitution, including the "Supremacy" clause (6-1-3), the "Commerce" clause (1-8-3) and the "Necessary and Proper" clause (1-8-18). Nor does the CSA take away the federal government's right to suspend habeus corpus or "suppress insurrections."

    As far as slave-owning rights go, however, the document is much more effective. Indeed, CSA constitution seems to barely stop short of making owning slaves mandatory. Four different clauses entrench the legality of slavery in a number of different ways, and together they virtually guarantee that any sort of future anti-slave law or policy will be unconstitutional. People can claim the Civil War was "not about slavery" until the cows come home, but the fact remains that anyone who fought for the Confederacy was fighting for a country in which a universal right to own slaves was one of the most entrenched laws of the land.

    In the end, however, many of the most interesting changes introduced in the CSA constitution have nothing to do with federalism or slavery at all. The President's term limit and line-item veto, along with the various fiscal restraints, and the ability of cabinet members to answer questions on the floor of Congress are all innovative, neutral ideals whose merits may still be worth pondering today.

    With that said, how can you honestly claim that slavery wasn't the issue of the day? Can you provide any counter analysis based on the wording of their own "law of the land" that shows they were really concerned about State's rights, and not about the right to own slaves? As stated in the above quote, in the third paragraph, "the CSA constitution does not modify many of the most controversial (from a states' rights perspective) clauses of the American constitution." This is telling, and damning evidence.

    Plus you ignored htat most people who wave a "confederate" flag are actually waving the Confederate Naval Jack, not the CSA flag. Why wave a battle standard if you're proud of history, why not the actual country flag?
    "If we were to ever consider citizenship as the least bit matter of merit instead of birthright, imagine who should be selected as deserved representation of our democracy: someone who would risk their daily livelihood to cast an individually statistically insignificant vote, or those who wrap themselves in the flag against slightest slights." - agenthex

  10. #10
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338

    Post imported post

    I didn't say slavery wasn't an issue, but the civil war was about preserving the union, not about eliminating slavery. 5 pro slavery states stayed with the union and fought the confederacy. The emancipation proclamation wasn't issued until well after a yearsince the war had started it was a way to try to cripple the southern economy. People often have the mistaken veiw that all white land owners were slave owners in the south and this is far from true only a minorty in the south owned slaves.Their were also large population of free black men in the south.Slavery is wrong in my opinion, and I also detest racism, but I detest the distorted facts we are taught in school and by propaganda more. Its the same with guns. Fear mongers make guns a symbol of violence and make it something to fear and hate.They have done the same thing with the union Jack , not all people who were for the confederacy were slave owners or racists. They just didn't want to be clumped in the same group as the north. And now you got this yahoo trying to link to non-related but volatile issue together in a typical brainwashed fashion.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  11. #11
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338

    Post imported post


    "What I would most desire would be the separation of the white and black races."

    Spoken at Springfield, Illinois on July 17th, 1858; from ABRAHAM LINCOLN: COMPLETE WORKS, 1894, Vol. 1, page 273


    "I will say, then, that I AM NOT NOR HAVE EVER BEEN in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the black and white races---that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters
    or jurors of African Americanes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with White people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the White and black races which will ever FORBID the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together, there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I, as much as any other man, am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the White race."

    4th Lincoln-Douglas debate, September 18th, 1858; COLLECTED WORKS Vol. 3, pp. 145-146



    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    146

    Post imported post

    tricityguy wrote:
    The Confederate flag may not have anything to do with racism, but it is used by many hate groups as a symbol of their racist and intolerant beliefs.
    So, because some hate mongering a--holes decided to appropriate the flag as their own racist symbol, that means those who are proud of it should just give it up? I understand why people think that, I just don't agree with their flawed logic. This is the same logic that gives us, "Well, criminals carry guns, therefore anyone with a gun is a criminal."

    Note that I'm not pointing my finger at you here, but rather the sheeple who make these wild leaps of assumption.

    well isn't the nazi Swastika the same symbol used in various eastern cultures? Look what happened to that symbol.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastik...Asian_products

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    2,546

    Post imported post

    sudden valley gunner wrote:
    I didn't say slavery wasn't an issue, but the civil war was about preserving the union, not about eliminating slavery. 5 pro slavery states stayed with the union and fought the confederacy. The emancipation proclamation wasn't issued until well after a yearsince the war had started it was a way to try to cripple the southern economy. People often have the mistaken veiw that all white land owners were slave owners in the south and this is far from true only a minorty in the south owned slaves.Their were also large population of free black men in the south.Slavery is wrong in my opinion, and I also detest racism, but I detest the distorted facts we are taught in school and by propaganda more. Its the same with guns. Fear mongers make guns a symbol of violence and make it something to fear and hate.They have done the same thing with the union Jack , not all people who were for the confederacy were slave owners or racists. They just didn't want to be clumped in the same group as the north. And now you got this yahoo trying to link to non-related but volatile issue together in a typical brainwashed fashion.
    Do you even listen to/read yourself? Seriously...

    You started with a claim that "the confederate flag has nothing to do with racism but with cultural pride." I questioned this assertion, stating the very nature of the Confederacy was based on racial issues, specifically, that of maintaining ownerships of slaves as property, and not on the oft-claimed issue of "state's rights." Moreover, I asserted that if it were about cultural pride, people would be flying the confederate flag, not the naval jack. You have never answered the second assertion, and have only made a non-clashing (doesn't address what I've said) set of statements related to the first.

    First, regardless of if the emancipation proclamation was issued before, during, or after the war, it does not address nor have any relation to the issue of the Confederacy's basis and heavy ties to slave ownership.

    Second, I have made no claims that "white land owners were slave owners," this is a straw man you have just constructed and are attacking; it does not represent my position. Instead, I claim the form of government of the Confederacy was intrinsically tied to slave ownership.

    Finally, you have failed to address any of the above, which was based *entirely* on the content of the Confederacy's Constitution. Instead of addressing it, you rant about "some yahoo" and how it's associated with making guns a symbol of violence. If you are going to continue with this bout of illogic, please, I implore you, read the Confederate constitution, understand that I have no problem with cultural heritage, and realize that flying a naval battle standard does not uphold a cultural heritage. It shows support for warring against the union, for a misconceived notion of "state's rights" when those very rights weren't upheld with the proposed replacement.
    "If we were to ever consider citizenship as the least bit matter of merit instead of birthright, imagine who should be selected as deserved representation of our democracy: someone who would risk their daily livelihood to cast an individually statistically insignificant vote, or those who wrap themselves in the flag against slightest slights." - agenthex

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    4 hours south of HankT, ,
    Posts
    5,121

    Post imported post

    Thread locked much?

  15. #15
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338

    Post imported post

    Tawnos you are missing my point...I never said the confederates werent about keeping slavery....you must not have read the whole thing I stated....anyway I know african americans who are proud of the confederate flag it is a symbol of their culture. Abraham lincoln was a racist he no ideas of creating equals of other races, he didn't want to and stated that he had no legal case for freeing slaves, emancipation proclamation was soley intended for the basis of crushing southern economy. You need to google liberia, google Abraham lincoln, google the cause of the civil war, it wasn't about slavery. Slavery was an excuse. Politicians play the same game with us today, abortion, guns, immigration, national security, welfare, medicaid, american disabilities act....list is endless. The war was political in nature, not ethnic. The flag has been labled a rascist symbol today it wasn't that then.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  16. #16
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Olympia, WA, ,
    Posts
    3,201

    Post imported post

    Tomahawk wrote:
    Thread locked much?
    +1

  17. #17
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338

    Post imported post

    sorry

    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  18. #18
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338

    Post imported post

    sorry

    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    2,546

    Post imported post

    sv_libertarian wrote:
    Tomahawk wrote:
    Thread locked much?
    +1
    I'm going to have to just +1 as well :-\ I entered a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.
    "If we were to ever consider citizenship as the least bit matter of merit instead of birthright, imagine who should be selected as deserved representation of our democracy: someone who would risk their daily livelihood to cast an individually statistically insignificant vote, or those who wrap themselves in the flag against slightest slights." - agenthex

  20. #20
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338

    Post imported post

    tawnos .....wtf....check your p.m. and educate yourself below and I sent another linkin your p.m. oh next time don't be ajerk


    http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v13/v13n5p-4_Morgan.html
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  21. #21
    Lone Star Veteran
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Seattle-ish, Washington, USA
    Posts
    714

    Post imported post

    Tawnos wrote:
    I'll start at the top and work down..
    You missed one:

    "The importation of African Americanes of the African race from any foreign country other than the slaveholding States or Territories of the United States of America, is hereby forbidden; and Congress is required to pass such laws as shall effectually prevent the same."

    The CSA constitution seems to have made permanent the ban on international slave trade. Interesting...

  22. #22
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,964

    Post imported post

    joeroket wrote:
    This exerpt is from an Everett Herald article in which this guy is comparing having a confederate flag painted on a car to having a gun hanging in a gun rack.

    When are people going to wake the hell up and realize that guns aren't scary?!?!?!

    http://tinyurl.com/8xbesb


    Code:
    Andy Hugel, owner of DreamWerks, an auto detailing shop in Snohomish, said Confederate flags on trucks and cars is a sad throwback to 1950s hot-rod culture.
    
    He said he begrudgingly painted the flag on a car for one customer in California several years ago.
    
    "That paint lasted about a month," he said. "It got keyed, it got paintballs thrown at it. People were really upset when they saw it."
    
    Now, Hugel refuses everyone who asks him to paint the design. 
    
    "My feeling is that these people should just grow up," he said. "It's like having a gun hanging in your back window. It's immature, and even a little scary."
    This is a classic stereotypical twofer.

    Sorry the gun in the back of my truck scares you.





    Not.
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitableand let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come . PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  23. #23
    Founder's Club Member Hawkflyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    3,315

    Post imported post

    This is why I don't read the Washington Forum routinely.

    I would bet dimes to donuts that you people are not even arguing over the actual Confederate States flag, but instead the Battle flag. A lot of Northerners make that mistake. We in the south have to allow for the ignorance of northerners all the time. Of course we have had to do so for well over a hundred years now.
    "Research has shown that a 230 grain lead pellet placed just behind the ear at 850 FPS results in a permanent cure for violent criminal behavior."
    "If you are not getting Flak, you are not over the target"
    "186,000 Miles per second! ... Not just a good idea ... It's the law!"

  24. #24
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487

    Post imported post

    Well, hell, Hawkflyer. They aren't even arguing about that.

    When was the last time you saw a Northerner flying the Battle flag (square) or the Naval Jack (rectangular, light blue saltire)?

    No, they're debating a made-up symbol. The "Confederate Flag". Of nothing.

  25. #25
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338

    Post imported post

    Hawkflyer wrote:
    This is why I don't read the Washington Forum routinely.

    I would bet dimes to donuts that you people are not even arguing over the actual Confederate States flag, but instead the Battle flag. A lot of Northerners make that mistake. We in the south have to allow for the ignorance of northerners all the time. Of course we have had to do so for well over a hundred years now.
    You are correct , they arguing over the battle flag or navy jack. And I as a northerner must say that I stay open minded to all sides of the argument, and have concluded a different conclusion than most northerners after doing research about the civil war and the supposed flag of racism.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •