Everything I said was accurate.
Ever hear of freedom of speech? That includes the freedom to make fun of 55 year-olds who have sex with 9 year-old "wives." Mohammed was an evil man, but beyond that in America we USED TO have the freedom to make movies without the permission of the Muslim community.
The sentence was the result of a plea bargain between lawyers for Mark Bassely Youssef and federal prosecutors. Youssef admitted in open court that he had used several false names in violation of his probation order and obtained a driver's license under a false name. He was on probation for a bank fraud case.
So you will make bigoted assumptions of them without understanding their culture and reasoning.
It most certainly is cultural imperialism to assume that because something offends your western sensibility it should offend everones.
You don't understand what the world revisionism means. Nobody is claiming that the holocaust didn't happen, just that people of another culture might not relate a uniform with it. What do you think they were thinking? "Gosh genocide is cool, I want to get married in this uniform to show just how cool it was." Or could they perhaps have other reason for wanting to do it?
What about it?
Yep.Because there is in the west, power in proclaiming yourself offended.
...and there's the spin... such a FAIL...http://www.history.com/topics/american-civil-war/crittenden-compromise
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/06/what-this-cruel-war-was-over/396482/
http://www.salon.com/2013/03/16/the_south_still_lies_about_the_civil_war/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_Cause_of_the_Confederacy#Contemporary_historians
It's not "liberal news spinning". It's the consensus view among modern historians, and the evidence is hugely visible throughout their own words.
Or just read this one speech:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornerstone_Speech#The_.27Cornerstone.27
The new Constitution has put at rest forever all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institutions—African slavery as it exists among us—the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson, in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the "rock upon which the old Union would split." He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact. But whether he fully comprehended the great truth upon which that rock stood and stands, may be doubted. The prevailing ideas entertained by him and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old Constitution were, that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with; but the general opinion of the men of that day was, that, somehow or other, in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away... Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the idea of a Government built upon it—when the "storm came and the wind blew, it fell."
Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and normal condition.
. . . look with confidence to the ultimate universal acknowledgement of the truths upon which our system rests? It is the first government ever instituted upon the principles in strict conformity to nature, and the ordination of Providence, in furnishing the materials of human society. Many governments have been founded upon the principle of the subordination and serfdom of certain classes of the same race; such were and are in violation of the laws of nature. Our system commits no such violation of nature's laws.
No, I'm sorry, but this is just plain historical revisionism. You might as well claim that the Nazis went to war because Poland was looking at them funny! That's just not what happened! The civil war was largely about slavery. Not entirely, but white supremacy and the role of african-americans as subservient played a huge role. As historian William C. Davis put it:
To the old Union they had said that the Federal power had no authority to interfere with slavery issues in a state. To their new nation they would declare that the state had no power to interfere with a federal protection of slavery. Of all the many testimonials to the fact that slavery, and not states’ rights, really lay at the heart of their movement, this was the most eloquent of all.
Apparently it "gets you" (meaning some other posters) quite a ways, such as ingratiating themselves with other people who similarly do not know the history.Winepress777 said:The war began as a struggle to preserve the Union, not a struggle to free the slaves
But you can stick with your 'revisionist' history and subsequent spins to say otherwise, whatever that will get you
The president of the United States and Hillary Clinton orchestrated a campaign to lie to the American people and blame the video, not terrorism, on the attack. Hillary vowed to get the man responsible and suddenly he's arrested. Why wasn't he arrested a week earlier? Or a week later? He was arrested because this administration lied to its citizens and Obama wanted to show the Muslim world he would not tolerate those who would slander the "prophet."Seriously, where are you getting this from?
I don't think anyone has ever denied that the attack at Benghazi was committed by terrorists.The president of the United States and Hillary Clinton orchestrated a campaign to lie to the American people and blame the video, not terrorism, on the attack. Hillary vowed to get the man responsible and suddenly he's arrested. Why wasn't he arrested a week earlier? Or a week later? He was arrested because this administration lied to its citizens and Obama wanted to show the Muslim world he would not tolerate those who would slander the "prophet."
Is lying to Congress a lesser felony than lying to your parole officer? Nobody ever said Youssef was innocent of any wrongdoing, but he was specifically targeted because of the Obama/Clinton lie. Hillary promised to get the man who made the internet video, and they did.
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." Barrack ObamaPretty soon it will be illegal to say anything untoward (speak the truth) about Islam. You know, it's not good to speak the truth. It exposes people and makes them angry, and we can't have that.
Citation?"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." Barrack Obama
The president of the United States and Hillary Clinton orchestrated a campaign to lie to the American people and blame the video, not terrorism, on the attack. Hillary vowed to get the man responsible and suddenly he's arrested. Why wasn't he arrested a week earlier? Or a week later?
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." Barrack Obama
...and there's the spin... such a FAIL...
Here's a good one though, just google "the civil war", and without even clicking on the link, here is the first result on the web search I copied just for you...
Slavery in the United States - CivilWar Trust
www.civilwar.org/…y/civil-war-overview/slavery.html
The outbreak of the Civil War forever changed the future of the American nation. The war began as a struggle to preserve the Union, not a struggle to free the slaves ...
But you can stick with your 'revisionist' history and subsequent spins to say otherwise, whatever that will get you
Indeed, the swastika had a lot of different meanings throughout history.And the swastika may just mean German culture to some germans.
Believe that and I will show you my ocean beach property in Nevada ..... Its for sale if you are interested ...
Everything I said was accurate.
Ever hear of freedom of speech? That includes the freedom to make fun of 55 year-olds who have sex with 9 year-old "wives." Mohammed was an evil man, but beyond that in America we USED TO have the freedom to make movies without the permission of the Muslim community.
Not known to be so. His brother apparently had relations with some slave woman, although I don't think anyone has said she was 9 years old!Was President TJ an evil man?
How many of them are considered to be the chief prophet of the only true God?I don't know if Mohammad was evil but his description do fit that of an alpha male. Not only that but his supposed robbing of caravans to finance the spread of his religious crusade kind of reminded me of the truck hijackings (robberies) La Cosa Nostra--the American mafia used to carry out. And Mohammad had a lot of women lovers--which reminded me of alpha males in La Cosa Nostra, as well.
...and there's the spin... such a FAIL...
Okay. So why did the union need preserving in the first place? Do you see what the problem is here?Here's a good one though, just google "the civil war", and without even clicking on the link, here is the first result on the web search I copied just for you...
Slavery in the United States - CivilWar Trust
www.civilwar.org/…y/civil-war-overview/slavery.html
The outbreak of the Civil War forever changed the future of the American nation. The war began as a struggle to preserve the Union, not a struggle to free the slaves ...
Not known to be so. His brother apparently had relations with some slave woman, although I don't think anyone has said she was 9 years old!
None of this is relevant. The origins of the war are not what a veterans' monument is commemorating. It's the sacrifice of the men, and it's well-known that preserving slavery was the farthest thing from the minds of the footsoldiers who volunteered on both sides of the war.Spin? There are pages upon pages of quotes from major figures in the Confederacy and influential people in the south in that Atlantic article, offered with very little spin whatsoever. One of the sources is just a straightly-delivered speech from the vice president of the confederacy!
Okay. So why did the union need preserving in the first place? Do you see what the problem is here?