Three White Men Shoot Five BLM Protesters

[JustOneWay]

the confederate flag has transitioned into mostly a decoration celebrating a southern culture for the most part...

Very convenient that the southern culture washed away the blood on their hateful flag. Of course those of us who know the history won't forget.

Then again, both flags had different meanings. The southern culture did not want to kill their property....just use them in such a racist fashion to make more money.

The Nazi flag was way worse.

 

[Willtor]

I would agree with your statement...and my posts in all of the confederate threads a couple months back would back that up.

...however, my response in particular was to the other poster suggesting that a Confederate Flag is the same as a swastika. ...which is why I urged the other poster to study the changing history of each over time.

The confederate flag was symbol of an entity that wanted the right to own slaves, the swastika was a symbol of national socialists who hated Jews, capitalists, and communists. Over the last 100+ years, the confederate flag has transitioned into a symbol celebrating southern culture and southern pride for most people who fly it...as to where the swastika armbands mean pretty much the same thing today as they did back in 1930's Germany.

Thus my example where I mentioned that it's not uncommon for Black folks in the south to fly the confederate flags, but that you won't see any holocaust survivors wearing swastika armbands. Also, you can find many non-racists who have confederate belt-buckles/flags/etc... However, you won't really find anyone wearing a swastika who's doing so merely as a fashion piece.

The short version in a nutshell, the confederate flag has transitioned into mostly a decoration celebrating a southern culture for the most part...as to where the swastika is still an active symbol of a die-hard commitment to a particular nefarious cause...that's the big difference between the too.

That being said, I still think it's silly to unite under a flag of a fallen succession attempt...but felt it was fair to point out the two symbols are very different in that one has changed dramatically over the years, and the other has still kept its original meaning & cause.

That it has broadened its meaning, I agree. I don't think Lynyrd Skynyrd meant anything more than "southern pride" by it, nor that most of their fans intend racist sentiments. However, it retains its original meaning for a lot of people, both black and white, today. It's sometimes used alongside, or in substitution of, a noose when one of these threats of a black person is made. Practically-speaking, the only reason the same thing hasn't happened to the swastika is that the culture won't let anyone broaden its meaning. I would argue (and you may disagree) that if the swastika were used by some people as a symbol of German pride and heritage, inasmuch as there exists a substantial group that retains the original meaning, the first group is acting with willful ignorance.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Practically-speaking, the only reason the same thing hasn't happened to the swastika is that the culture won't let anyone broaden its meaning.

I think that's partly due to the varying circumstances combined with the magnitude of the atrocities that happened under each flag.

While both sets of events were horrid (and hopefully never repeated again), the circumstances were far more severe in the holocaust (and far more recent)

One flag represented the enslavement and mistreatment of ~450,000 people and a succession effort 150 years ago.

The other represented the systematic extermination of 10,000,000 people, and military invasion and occupation of nearly a dozen different sovereign nations 75 years ago.

As you mentioned, society and culture are what define something's 'acceptability'.
In a national survey in 2015 across all races, 57% of Americans had the opinion that the Confederate flag represented Southern pride rather than racism. A similar poll in 2000 had a nearly identical result of 59%.

I imagine, if you were to survey the same group of people about the Swastika flag, it'd be pretty much unanimous that the flag was a symbol of aryan white supremacy.

Obviously something had to have influenced public opinion that if over half of people though that it represented southern pride...I would imagine that it's probably due to the fact that they had encountered enough people flying it for non-racist reasons that the fear and shock value of it went away...however, you're unlikely to encounter anyone wearing a swastika that isn't a racist.

I would argue (and you may disagree) that if the swastika were used by some people as a symbol of German pride and heritage, inasmuch as there exists a substantial group that retains the original meaning, the first group is acting with willful ignorance.

I will partially agree and disagree (meet you in the middle )

Different set of circumstances I think. A closer comparison would be to compare the split between East & West Germany...and if people who preferred the East German culture wanted to show that by continuing to fly the East Germany flag even after the wall came down.

However, with the Swastika, that wasn't a case where two different parts of Germany were at civil war with vastly different styles and ways of life (that one might want to show pride in), it was a symbol of an oppressive regime and not necessarily a culture split.

 

[stamperben]

The confederate flag was symbol of an entity that wanted the right to own slaves, the swastika was a symbol of national socialists who hated Jews, capitalists, and communists. Over the last 100+ years, the confederate flag has transitioned into a symbol celebrating southern culture and southern pride for most people who fly it...as to where the swastika armbands mean pretty much the same thing today as they did back in 1930's Germany.

Thus my example where I mentioned that it's not uncommon for Black folks in the south to fly the confederate flags, but that you won't see any holocaust survivors wearing swastika armbands. Also, you can find many non-racists who have confederate belt-buckles/flags/etc... However, you won't really find anyone wearing a swastika who's doing so merely as a fashion piece.

What on earth do you think "Southern Culture and pride" is if not racist and a longing for the "good ol' days"? When was it that you actually lived in the south that you could glean just what it is you are stating? I'm telling you, as someone who actually lives in the south and has had interaction with these folks that you are nothing more than full of it with believing the lie that "Southern culture" isn't racist through and through to it's core.

Also, remember just what it was who the "house slaves" were.

The stars and bars rag is TOTALLY comparable to the swastika.

 

[Willtor]

I think that's partly due to the varying circumstances combined with the magnitude of the atrocities that happened under each flag.

While both sets of events were horrid (and hopefully never repeated again), the circumstances were far more severe in the holocaust (and far more recent)

One flag represented the enslavement and mistreatment of ~450,000 people and a succession effort 150 years ago.

The other represented the systematic extermination of 10,000,000 people, and military invasion and occupation of nearly a dozen different sovereign nations 75 years ago.

As you mentioned, society and culture are what define something's 'acceptability'.
In a national survey in 2015 across all races, 57% of Americans had the opinion that the Confederate flag represented Southern pride rather than racism. A similar poll in 2000 had a nearly identical result of 59%.

I imagine, if you were to survey the same group of people about the Swastika flag, it'd be pretty much unanimous that the flag was a symbol of aryan white supremacy.

Obviously something had to have influenced public opinion that if over half of people though that it represented southern pride...I would imagine that it's probably due to the fact that they had encountered enough people flying it for non-racist reasons that the fear and shock value of it went away...however, you're unlikely to encounter anyone wearing a swastika that isn't a racist.

I will partially agree and disagree (meet you in the middle )

Different set of circumstances I think. A closer comparison would be to compare the split between East & West Germany...and if people who preferred the East German culture wanted to show that by continuing to fly the East Germany flag even after the wall came down.

However, with the Swastika, that wasn't a case where two different parts of Germany were at civil war with vastly different styles and ways of life (that one might want to show pride in), it was a symbol of an oppressive regime and not necessarily a culture split.

The Confederate Flag is the symbol of an oppressive regime to a lot of people, just as the Swastika. Today, the Jewish community is reappearing across Germany. Imagine many Nazi leaders had been allowed to remain in power in Germany after WWII, and rehabilitated the Swastika as a symbol of German cultural identity. In 100 years, we might have Jews who fly the Swastika as a symbol of pride in their German culture. But a lot of other Jews would still find it offensive -- as a symbol of oppression.

It isn't the number of people who were oppressed. It's that the machine was formed in order to oppress (or prevent the cessation of oppression, in the case of the Confederacy) of a people group. In neither case was this some benevolent or neutral organization that got co-opted. Both flags were created to represent ideologies of oppression. And both are perceived as such, today, by large parts of the groups that were the targets of oppression. That one has been allowed to be semi-rehabilitated in certain circles is not at issue.

 

[nightflight]

What on earth do you think "Southern Culture and pride" is if not racist and a longing for the "good ol' days"? When was it that you actually lived in the south that you could glean just what it is you are stating? I'm telling you, as someone who actually lives in the south and has had interaction with these folks that you are nothing more than full of it with believing the lie that "Southern culture" isn't racist through and through to it's core.

Also, remember just what it was who the "house slaves" were.

The stars and bars rag is TOTALLY comparable to the swastika.

I'd hate what to hear you think of "American pride", lol

 

[JustOneWay]

I'd hate what to hear you think of "American pride", lol

Pride is one of the 7 deadly sins.

 

[allhart]

Read "Morals n Dogma" by Albert Pike.... The designer of world wars....

 

[smaneck]

That's why to this day, you'll still find some black guys who fly the confederate flag and have "southern pride"...but you'd be hard pressed to find any holocaust survivors wearing swastika armbands.

I teach at an HBCU here in Mississippi and I have never seen a black person fly the Confederate flag unless they had to because it is the State Flag. And it doesn't become the Stage Flag until the Civil Rights Movement. Very clear what it stood for.

 

[smaneck]

What on earth do you think "Southern Culture and pride" is if not racist and a longing for the "good ol' days"? When was it that you actually lived in the south that you could glean just what it is you are stating? I'm telling you, as someone who actually lives in the south and has had interaction with these folks that you are nothing more than full of it with believing the lie that "Southern culture" isn't racist through and through to it's core.

Also, remember just what it was who the "house slaves" were.

The stars and bars rag is TOTALLY comparable to the swastika.

This

And let's keep in mind it only became state flags during the Civil Rights Movement. For some of us that was in our own lifetime.

 

[NightHawkeye]

I teach at an HBCU here in Mississippi and I have never seen a black person fly the Confederate flag unless they had to because it is the State Flag. And it doesn't become the Stage Flag until the Civil Rights Movement. Very clear what it stood for.

Incorrect ... and very misleading.

The only thing that has happened with the state flag in the past century is that the judiciary attempted to unilaterally outlaw it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Mississippi

The flag of the state of Mississippi was first adopted by the U.S. state of Mississippi in April 1894, replacing the flag that had been adopted in 1861.
...
In 2000, the Supreme Court of Mississippi ruled that the state legislature in 1906 had repealed the adoption of the state flag in 1894. What was considered to be the official state flag was only so through custom or tradition during the previous 94 years. The flag was officially readopted on April 17, 2001.​

 

[smaneck]

I've lived in the South for the last twenty five years and I can say I have met one Southerner whose love of the Confederate flag and promotion of what he called "Southern nationalism" did not seem to be grounded in racism. I knew it wasn't because he was married to a Pakistani wife and his children, who were adopted from India, were much darker than most African-Americans. I suspect however, he was very much an exception.

 

[Vylo]

I teach at an HBCU here in Mississippi and I have never seen a black person fly the Confederate flag unless they had to because it is the State Flag. And it doesn't become the Stage Flag until the Civil Rights Movement. Very clear what it stood for.

That flag was adopted in 1894. The timing is conspicuous but not due to the civil rights movement.

 

[smaneck]

That flag was adopted in 1894. The timing is conspicuous but not due to the civil rights movement.

Jim Crow in other words. I mixed it up with the Georgia flag.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

What on earth do you think "Southern Culture and pride" is if not racist and a longing for the "good ol' days"? When was it that you actually lived in the south that you could glean just what it is you are stating? I'm telling you, as someone who actually lives in the south and has had interaction with these folks that you are nothing more than full of it with believing the lie that "Southern culture" isn't racist through and through to it's core.

Also, remember just what it was who the "house slaves" were.

The stars and bars rag is TOTALLY comparable to the swastika.

Most of my mom's side of the family lives in the south...and there are definite cultural differences (aside from views on race relations) that separate them from areas in the north.

You walk around in an area of Tennessee, it's a different culture than if you were walking around a city in New York or Vermont.

My uncle who lives in Tennessee has items with confederate flags on them...and a black wife...yeah, pretty sure he's not owning that stuff for racial reasons.

I don't doubt that there's racists who still live in the south, and that many of them have confederate flag...however, because our anecdotal experiences are different, you get to say that I'm "full of it"

As I stated before, I've verbalized my opinion that uniting under a flag of a fallen succession effort is silly...however, your assertion that "everyone who has a confederate flag is a racist, and you're full of it if you think otherwise" is just as silly.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I've lived in the South for the last twenty five years and I can say I have met one Southerner whose love of the Confederate flag and promotion of what he called "Southern nationalism" did not seem to be grounded in racism. I knew it wasn't because he was married to a Pakistani wife and his children, who were adopted from India, were much darker than most African-Americans. I suspect however, he was very much an exception.

It depends on which area of "the south" you're in...

It's a very large region with varying demographics.

People speak of "the South" as if it's a single-minded monolith.

 

[stamperben]

It depends on which area of "the south" you're in...

It's a very large region with varying demographics.

People speak of "the South" as if it's a single-minded monolith.

Tennessee, where you mom's folks are from, is a far different place than Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana and southeast Texas. So you're right, the demographics ARE varied.

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

(Yeah, and to me a Confederate flag is the same as a swastika.)

I could just as easily say "to me the Koran is the same as Mein Kampf". What does that prove?

What on earth do you think "Southern Culture and pride" is if not racist and a longing for the "good ol' days"?

I know there's more to Southern culture than nostalgia; it's a living thing.

When was it that you actually lived in the south that you could glean just what it is you are stating? I'm telling you, as someone who actually lives in the south and has had interaction with these folks that you are nothing more than full of it with believing the lie that "Southern culture" isn't racist through and through to it's core.

OK, we get it, you don't like their culture. Does that mean that all cultures aren't equal after all? They're probably not enamored with yours either.

I've lived in the South for the last twenty five years and I can say I have met one Southerner whose love of the Confederate flag and promotion of what he called "Southern nationalism" did not seem to be grounded in racism. I knew it wasn't because he was married to a Pakistani wife and his children, who were adopted from India, were much darker than most African-Americans. I suspect however, he was very much an exception.

Ok, apparently that's what guy's gotta do to prove to you that he isn't racist. Marry a Pakistani woman and adopt children from India.

 

[stamperben]

I know there's more to Southern culture than nostalgia; it's a living thing.

OK, we get it, you don't like their culture. Does that mean that all cultures aren't equal after all? They're probably not enamored with yours either.

We're not talking about sitting on the porch sipping sweet tea.

 

[Sistrin]

Again no one equated Christianity with radical Islam. The equivalency is between Christian terrorists and Muslim terrorists.

Oh, please. That comparison is made constantly, either directly or by inference. From the New York Times, quote:

"Even as politicians and those in Congress pump up public fears at the supposed threat of refugees fleeing Syria, every day in America people -- mostly white men -- are walking into movie theaters, restaurants, churches, grade schools and health care centers armed to the teeth, determined to take as many people out as they can."

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/01/opinion/the-children-left-behind-after-mass-shootings.html?_r=0

Again, the situation in Colorado had yet to be resolved and the term Christian Terrorist was already being tossed about as if those using it had any idea of who or what the shooter was. But someone reported he was white, therefore he had to be a Christian.

The white man narrative is used to promote a political agenda. A white guy with a gun must be a Christian murdering in accordance with his faith, as you intimate here:

Well, he is right about one thing. It is what Christians have been doing since 312 A.D.

But the truth, as I will highlight below, is most often quite a different matter. It just takes some work to identify and expose the pattern of reporting typically associated with shootings in this country of any kind. Have you ever heard of Jiverly Wong? No? Wong was the shooter in a 2009 event which occurred in Binghamton, New York. He killed 13 people. His motive was later revealed as anger in response to someone "disrespecting his English skills." Wong was an immigrant from Vietnam.

Source: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/cri...-shows-insight-paranoid-mind-article-1.360182

2009 was the same year as Nidal Hassan murdered 13 US Army soldiers at Ft. Hood, an attack which, until two days ago, had been listed by the administration as workplace violence. However both Wong and Hassan were later portrayed as sympathetic characters by the media at large. Hassan because he was Muslim, and Wong because the story could possibly be used against the NYPD. That trend continues through the California shootings, with idiotic rationalizations being applied in attempts to deflect from the Islamic terrorist conclusion. Quote:

"Struggling to offer an alternative explanation for the obvious conclusion of terrorism, CNN’s Erin Burnett on Thursday wondered if one of the killers from Wednesday’s rampage snapped as a result of “postpartum psychosis.” This was after two former FBI agents explained to Burnett just how Tashfeen Malik was radicalized."

"Despite this, the CNN anchor wondered, “I just have to ask you, could there be something else, anything else, that could have explained her involvement? Something like a postpartum psychosis?”

Source: http://tammybruce.com/2015/12/moonb...ardino-massacre-was-postpartum-psychosis.html

Postpartum psychosis. All while the shooter in Colorado was made to represent not only all of Christianity in America, but the Tea Party, the Pro-life movement, and the Republican Party at large.

This is the very denigration of Christianity coupled with the defense of Islam by subterfuge of which I have spoken before, based upon continual efforts to equate Christianity with Islamic terrorism. It is a narrative well established by the liberal/progressive press and members of the blogosphere. For example, quote:

"A Planned Parenthood clinic in eastern Wisconsin was bombed Sunday night. There were no injuries and the damage appears to be minimal. Police report a small, homemade explosive device was used in the bombing.

Currently, authorities have identified no suspects in the Grand Chute, Wisconsin, bombing. However, many suspect that a Christian extremist, or a Christian extremist group, is behind this act of terrorism."

Source: http://www.examiner.com/article/christian-terrorism-planned-parenthood-clinic-bombed-wisconsin

These are the canards Christians are continually having to defend themselves from. The police have no suspects, but of course it must be the work of Christian terrorist because the Huffington Post said so.

Given the history of Christian terrorism against clinics and doctors that provide abortions, can you blame them?

If there actually was any history of Christian terrorism against abortion clinics, you might have a point.

Since 1990 a total of eleven people have been killed in relation to attacks against abortion clinics. Radical Islam killed twelve times that many in about an hour a few weeks ago in Paris, and bested that number just last week in California. Once again your attempt to equate Christianity with radical Islam is transparent. Christians do not promote the fire-bombing of abortion clinics and/or the murder of abortion doctors. Any who commit such acts go to prison, not to some eternal reward wrapped in the cloak of martyrdom surrounded by seventy-two virgins.

In addition your claim illustrates the standard desperation of many on the left to disparage Christianity on any and every occasion possible, particularly when considering the left defines a Christian as anyone who ever stepped into a church and a Christian terrorist as anyone who ever stepped into a church and at some later point picked up a gun. A few examples.

Scott Roeder, Eric Rudolph, and Jim David Adkisson are three names often tossed out by members of the American left as examples of Christian terrorist. Rudolph did once go to church, however in his own words:

"Many good people continue to send me money and books. Most of them have, of course, an agenda; mostly born-again Christians looking to save my soul. I suppose the assumption is made that because I'm in here I must be a 'sinner' in need of salvation, and they would be glad to sell me a ticket to heaven, hawking this salvation like peanuts at a ballgame. I do appreciate their charity, but I could really do without the condescension. They have been so nice I would hate to break it to them that I really prefer Nietzsche to the Bible."

Source: http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news...0709313&PID=6160939&SID=ihxl8t6as7010mgr014ak

Roeder was another anti-government, anti-abortion loner. But again he once went to church and then killed an abortion doctor he was labeled a Christian terrorist.

However, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council issued this statement following the murder:

"We are stunned at today's news. As Christians we pray and look toward the end of all violence and for the saving of souls, not the taking of human life. George Tiller was a man who we publicly sought to stop through legal and peaceful means. We strongly condemn the actions taken today by this vigilante killer and we pray for the Tiller family and for the nation that we might once again be a nation that values all human life, both born and unborn."

Source: "FRC Condemns the Murder of George Tiller". Family Research Council. May 31, 2009

Adkisson was no Christian. From his manifesto:

"I thought I'd do something good for this Country Kill Democrats til the cops kill me....Liberals are a pest like termites. Millions of them Each little bite contributes to the downfall of this great nation. The only way we can rid ourselves of this evil is to kill them in the streets. Kill them where they gather. I'd like to encourage other like minded people to do what I've done. If life aint worth living anymore don't just kill yourself. do something for your Country before you go. Go Kill Liberals."

Source: http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/knoxville-church-shooters-manifesto

Cite the New Testament chapter and verse which either supports or condones this level of hatred or justifies murdering people in the streets. Adkisson had far more in common with your standard ISIS member than any member of the First Baptist Church.

The first words out of this guys mouth when he was arrested was "no more body parts" a reference to that bogus video made against Planned Parenthood.

And the knife attack in London followed the words "This if for Syria." It is inarguable, his statement is proof positive the attack in London was carried out by a devout Muslim ardently practicing his faith in the name of Allah.

The 'idea' not the ideal, is that if there is no evidence that a Syrian is more likely to commit an act of terrorism here than an American there is no justification for excluding them.

There are no American Christian terrorist groups running around killing anyone. Zero. Those listed as operating in places like Africa are largely fighting Islamic groups, having adopted their tactics. Syria is a war zone overrun with Islamic jihad psychopaths. How many have to die at the hands of such before you give up this false narrative?

Again, 11 people killed in abortion related violence since 1990. For the week of November 28th through December 4th alone Islam has killed 445 people in 47 Jihad attacks. And you think there is something to equate.

Psst. We are not importing criminals and terrorists, we are importing refugees. It is your own prejudice which is labeling them 'criminals and terrorists.

ISIS has made it clear they will attempt to infiltrate the United States via exploitation of the refugee crises. Again, how many people have to die before the American left at large will embrace common sense and stop proselytizing for Islam?

Funny, I didn't see any proselytizing going on.

Really? And the Democrat Congressmen who went to grovel at the very mosque Nidal Hassan, as well as a number of the 9/11 terrorist along with Anwar al-Awlaki, worshiped? If you haven't seen any proselytizing it is because you don't want to.

Most of the people in the Middle East are white.

As if for one second the American left at large is going to classify Middle Eastern refugees as white. That isn't how the game is played. White males in America must be in a category of their own in order for all of the worlds ills to be blamed on them. Middle Eastern immigrants and refugees are going to be labeled as either Arab or Muslim in order to maintain the charge of Islamophobia each and every time someone questions Islam.

I will have to address the remainder of your post later.