South Carolina Republican Movement

[FreeSouthCarolina]

Hello Y'all,

I would like to make a post here concerning the South Carolinian Republican movement of which I am supporting. Before I begin though this post has not been officially approved or endorsed by any of the SC Republican parties, just a post of my own will to inform the people of the Irish Republican movement of a similar one taking place in South Carolina.

The goal of our movement is ultimately an independent South Carolinian Republic that will serve the people of South Carolina instead of the politician wallets in Washington D.C.

This is a map of South Carolina and its 46 counties.
http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e339/Wehrmachtairsoft/sc-1.gif
(I apologize for the flamboyantly bright and ugly colors. I didn't make the map)

This has been the flag of South Carolina since the American Revolution.
[http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e339/Wehrmachtairsoft/SC-2.png
The original flag creator, SC Col. William Moultrie, chose a blue background that matched the color of SC uniforms at that time and a white crescent that was also on their uniforms. The Palmetto tree was added after Col. William Moultrie's victory at the battle of Sullivan's Island against the Brits, where a Palmetto log fort absorbed all of the British cannon balls. Its now our National(SC national) Tree.

We don't need secession from the U.S. Government because we are already independent. But we do need recognition of our Independence and the Occupying Federal forces to leave the state. We also need the withdrawl of the SC government from the Federal Government and vice versa.

SC was recognized as an independent nation as early on as the Treaty of Paris in 1780. It joined the United States back when the U.S. was very similar the current EU. Just because the Republic of Ireland is in the EU does not mean its not a country.

On December 20, 1860, South Carolina withdrew from the United States by a unanimous vote of 169-0. Our reason was the Federal Government had escalated to unheard of power, and suddenly had the right to determine the laws of the States.

These States followed in South Carolina's example on the following dates:
Mississippi January 9, 1861
Florida January 10, 1861
Alabama January 11, 1861
Georgia January 19, 1861
Louisiana January 26, 1861
Texas February 1, 1861

The Federal tyranny under Abraham Lincoln however refused to recognize our withdrawl and refused to withdraw Federal Troops from our territory and return the forts to the South Carolina Government. One of these forts was Fort Sumter in the harbor of Charleston, South Carolina. After several warnings to the Federal troops at Fort Sumter, South Carolina forces opened fire on Fort Sumter from on-shore batteries on April 12, 1861.

There were 4 more Southern States infuriated by the Federal Government's failure to withdraw and these are their names with their Secession dates:
Virginia April 17, 1861
Arkansas May 6, 1861
North Carolina May 20, 1861
Tennessee June 8, 1861

These states voted for secession but were unconstitutionally prevented from seceding by Federal Troops.
Missouri
Kentucky
Maryland
Delaware

Lincoln announced an invasion and for 4 bloody years, the Confederacy of Southern states fought off its Yankee invaders.

Several Horrifying war-crimes were committed by the Federal Forces, particularly under the command of War-criminal William T. Sherman. For more information see the following website link: http://genocideinsc.wordpress.com/

The Yankee Conquerers disbanded our elected Government and put in place their own hooligans to rule over us. While there was a unanimous vote to not be apart of the U.S., there was never a vote by South Carolina to reenter the U.S. Now in this modern age, with a Federal Government that has power that original Americans would have never heard of, the Secessionist movement has rapidly grown in the past few years. We hope for a fully recognized South Carolina by peaceful means within the next 20 years.

Here is a list of things we will be able to do with our South Carolina Government:
1. Decide the Abortion issue for ourselves instead of having some Judges in Washington D.C. determine if the lives of millions of future South Carolinians will be stripped before birth.

2. Determine where and when and if our South Carolinian Soldiers will be sent throughout the world instead of a single Federal Man determining that for us.

3. Secure our borders to protect the safety of South Carolinians and enforce our immigration processes.

4. Protect our Religious backgrounds without restrictions of prayer

5. Foster an economic boom with a consumption based tax or flat tax etc.

6. Return the responsibility of Education to the local level. Before the Federal intervention in Education, American Education statistics have dropped to the bottom of the charts. We will be able to provide a top notch education for the future generations of South Carolinians. An education also free of glorification of federal war criminals of the 1860's.

7. Ensure healthcare and employment for all South Carolinians. We have been blessed to live in a first world country and there is no excuse for unemployment or bad health.

8. Ensure the Right to bear arms, Right of free speech, free assembly, private property, etc. No longer will the Federal Government be able to "reinterpret" or rather screw with our rights.

Here are the links of the movement right now.
www.freescrepublic.com A website that centralizes SC independence among the organizations

www.youtube.com/redshirtarmy A very good Youtube channel with lots of videos with reasoning for independence

www.dixienet.org The official website for the League of the South, the largest advocator for Southern independence in General with several chapters within SC borders.

www.youtube.com/dixienetdotorg The youtube channel for the League of the South with newsclips about independence from American news stations

http://www.palmettopartisans.org/ A motorcycle organization in the defense of our state

http://www.christianexodus.com/ Another secessionist organization that believes that an independent South Carolina is one of the last options for American Christian Families

http://partisanpapers.blogspot.com/ "A pro-Liberty and State sovereignty, pro-South Carolina journal"

http://www.sclos.org/ South Carolinian League of the South website


As you can see our movement is very divided among several organizations. There have even been many other Independence parties that have failed. I think the situation is similar to the Irish Republican movement in that we have been divided and will ultimately have to unite to gain victory. Unlike the Irish Republican movement, at the present time, there are no paramilitary forces combatively fighting Federal forces or others for SC independence. I trust the South Carolinian people that we can unite and gain this peacefully, however I don't trust the Federal government with the same. I pray that it won't escalate to violence, and at the current time that seems likely.

I encourage you to read some of the sites, watch some of the videos, maybe even join one of the forums or something. I'd also like to hear from y'all about what you think about this. Maybe even some of your personal recommendations or advice. I look forward to the responses.

God Bless Y'all!

[quirk]

Is there much support for independence.

[Calv]

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=lj3iNxZ8Dww

do you know her?

[FreeSouthCarolina]

Is there much support for independence.

At the current time, without a centralized party nor any promotional material distribution. 20% of South Carolina said they supported independence. We expect that to go up above 50%. I think a lot of the people who don't support it would support it once they see it as realistically possible. And like I said that requires us to form a centralized party and begin a very large advertising campaign which you can expect to see within the next 8 months.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=lj3iNxZ8Dww

do you know her?
And no, I don't personally know Miss Teen South Carolina. I think she is the result of an Education system that is been tampered with by the Federal government, as well as a victim to mainstream "American" culture. I feel sorry for her though, because that is honestly a BS question she was given.

[ciaranxavier]

isnt the reason why they wouldnt join the states was because they wanted to continue using the blacks for slaves and what not????

[ciaranxavier]

8. Ensure the Right to bear arms, Right of free speech, free assembly, private property, etc. No longer will the Federal Government be able to "reinterpret" or rather screw with our rights.

i think half the problem in america is every citizens "right" to bear arms. it explains all their school shootings and extremely high weapons related crime rate. every citizen should have the right to take up arms in defence of their country but in normal day to day life one does not need a gun.

[CELTICGUERILLA]

isnt the reason why they wouldnt join the states was because they wanted to continue using the blacks for slaves and what not????

not complety true but they were on the confederate side of the american civil war. but question, from my knowledge california is the only state in the u.s that if by popular demand could actually leave, not saying d.c would let them but because they have the strongest economic situation, all other states would fail, just what i heard though.

to further on the question of s.c be a slave state and wanting it, i tottaly and uttrly disagree with any human not working under his own free will, but i agree with the south when they wanted to stay away from the union, ab lincoln is the godfather of american capitilism.

And anyways it is just not s.c, i believe all great empires fall and just like the turks and the prussians fell the u.s one day will finally be lead into revolution.

[Seabird]

As much as people try to place the race card out there as an excuse for the Civil War that is absolutely not true. South Carolina and other states fought for the right to self govern themselves without outside interference. They were not going to allow the north to dictate what they can and cannot do in the south. The north made it a race war, they were the ones that fed lie to the public enticing them to take up arms against the southern states. The history books are very distorted when it comes to the civil war.

[ciaranxavier]

the reason that they couldnt make to united states is because north and south america already exist HAHA. the race card is an issue. people were willing to die in order to continue using the blacks on their plantation. i hate people coming in and downplaying the race card when it was quite obviously an issue in the civil war.

[Seabird]

Ciaran that is incorrect, the north too had slaves. Abraham Lincoln had slaves at the time of his Gettysburg address so please learn the history. No one is downplaying anything, slaves were an issue but not the main or only issue.

[FreeSouthCarolina]

isnt the reason why they wouldnt join the states was because they wanted to continue using the blacks for slaves and what not????

First of all my state joined the Union a little after the American Revolution. What your trying to say is it LEFT because we wanted to continue slavery and thats not entirely true. Slaveowners were a vast minority in South Carolina, after all slaves were extremely expensive. They cost about as much as a sportscar does today. The lower class, middle class, and even lowerhigh class that didnt own slaves was already pushing to end slavery in South Carolina. Abolitionists were in the Confederate government and the South Carolinian government. We already had our antislavery people. However it was the FEDERAL government trying to tell us what we can and cannot do, they had done this several times but slavery was the last straw. In other words, when Slavery was going to be abolished in South Carolina, it was going to be South Carolinians abolishing it, not the Yankees abolishing it so they can hold that over our heads saying they were the greater good.

There are a few Black men already supporting South Carolinian independence, and when our advertising campaign starts our target audience is all South Carolinians of every Race Religion and Gender. I personally don't like to mention race at all because to me its not important.

[OCoinnigh]

They had slaves in the North too.

[FreeSouthCarolina]

not complety true but they were on the confederate side of the american civil war. but question, from my knowledge california is the only state in the u.s that if by popular demand could actually leave, not saying d.c would let them but because they have the strongest economic situation, all other states would fail, just what i heard though.

to further on the question of s.c be a slave state and wanting it, i tottaly and uttrly disagree with any human not working under his own free will, but i agree with the south when they wanted to stay away from the union, ab lincoln is the godfather of american capitilism.

And anyways it is just not s.c, i believe all great empires fall and just like the turks and the prussians fell the u.s one day will finally be lead into revolution.

We have evaluated this and determined that we are self sustainable. There is lots of industry in South Carolina now, and as long as the companies stay here we will have plenty of exports to sustain ourselves. Actually all BMW Z4s and X5s are manufactured right here in Greenville along with several of the components for the cars. Charleston is also one of the largest ports on the east coast if not the largest. There are lots of other facts, but those are some key ones.

[OCoinnigh]

As much as people try to place the race card out there as an excuse for the Civil War that is absolutely not true. South Carolina and other states fought for the right to self govern themselves without outside interference. They were not going to allow the north to dictate what they can and cannot do in the south. The north made it a race war, they were the ones that fed lie to the public enticing them to take up arms against the southern states. The history books are very distorted when it comes to the civil war.

1 million (45.4% of all Union soldiers) were native-born Americans of British ancestry.

They didn't even trick the people in the North, they used immigrants to fight the war.

Americans have been held hostage ever since.

[Puddies]

Are these the people who want to move all of the fundamentalist christians to South Carolina with the intention of creating a theocracy?

[ciaranxavier]

First of all my state joined the Union a little after the American Revolution. What your trying to say is it LEFT because we wanted to continue slavery and thats not entirely true. Slaveowners were a vast minority in South Carolina, after all slaves were extremely expensive. They cost about as much as a sportscar does today. The lower class, middle class, and even lowerhigh class that didnt own slaves was already pushing to end slavery in South Carolina. Abolitionists were in the Confederate government and the South Carolinian government. We already had our antislavery people. However it was the FEDERAL government trying to tell us what we can and cannot do, they had done this several times but slavery was the last straw. In other words, when Slavery was going to be abolished in South Carolina, it was going to be South Carolinians abolishing it, not the Yankees abolishing it so they can hold that over our heads saying they were the greater good.

There are a few Black men already supporting South Carolinian independence, and when our advertising campaign starts our target audience is all South Carolinians of every Race Religion and Gender. I personally don't like to mention race at all because to me its not important.

thats why it was a question but i am right about the race card being an issue, thats all i ever said.

[John]

i think half the problem in america is every citizens "right" to bear arms. it explains all their school shootings and extremely high weapons related crime rate. every citizen should have the right to take up arms in defence of their country but in normal day to day life one does not need a gun.

I believe there was a recent study debunking that thought, if anything it is a hell of a deterrent to going postal. The number of readily available legal weapons does not equate to the number of deaths and/or injuries from them. I however completely agree that kids who cannot even legally drink a beer can access them is foolish beyond a doubt. Besides I justify the cache in my house to my wife by arguing the point with.."What if the militia had to be formed in one hour to defend against the deployment of Blackwater scum on our streets so that Dictator Bush can assume complete control?" :hmmm:

FreeSouthCarolina, has anyone completed a projected outcome for the finances needed? The port issue relies heavily on the other States still accepting goods through those ports and then of course all other transportation sectors willing also. First thought actually was disaster relief and where would it come from to rebuild infrastructures, civilian claims and let's not forget private business. Which leads me to the flat tax...I've read a few differing definitions on that and was wondering how you as a group of citizens define it? What shared duties is South Carolina responsible for to the federal government and/or a neighboring states? I've heard small groups in California and Vermont before too but first I heard of this was here. How long has this been getting kicked around for?

[BunyipDude]

Hello Y'all,
.. I think the situation is similar to the Irish Republican movement in that we have been divided and will ultimately have to unite to gain victory.

The Provisional IRA and the INLA fought to create a 32-county Democratic Socialist Republic of Ireland. Are you fight for a Democratic Socialist Republic of South Carolina? I take it, judging by some of your stated mission objectives (including your positions on taxation, abortion, etc.) that the answer would be "No". If so, I think you'll find that situations have absolutely nothing in common.

BTW, I'm from North Carolina. Do you think I should start a secessionist movement for my home state?

[ciaranxavier]

I believe there was a recent study debunking that thought, if anything it is a hell of a deterrent to going postal. The number of readily available legal weapons does not equate to the number of deaths and/or injuries from them. I however completely agree that kids who cannot even legally drink a beer can access them is foolish beyond a doubt. Besides I justify the cache in my house to my wife by arguing the point with.."What if the militia had to be formed in one hour to defend against the deployment of Blackwater scum on our streets so that Dictator Bush can assume complete control?" :hmmm:

FreeSouthCarolina, has anyone completed a projected outcome for the finances needed? The port issue relies heavily on the other States still accepting goods through those ports and then of course all other transportation sectors willing also. First thought actually was disaster relief and where would it come from to rebuild infrastructures, civilian claims and let's not forget private business. Which leads me to the flat tax...I've read a few differing definitions on that and was wondering how you as a group of citizens define it? What shared duties is South Carolina responsible for to the federal government and/or a neighboring states? I've heard small groups in California and Vermont before too but first I heard of this was here. How long has this been getting kicked around for?

i agree adults should have the right if the proper legislation is put in place, every bullet and gun accounted for and registered type stuff. and half the problem is these adults storing their guns in a closet and not a proper storage area.

[BunyipDude]

I believe there was a recent study debunking that thought, if anything it is a hell of a deterrent to going postal. The number of readily available legal weapons does not equate to the number of deaths and/or injuries from them.

I really wouldn't say that, personally. Obviously, other factors have to be taken into account, but it's far easier to kill somebody with a gun than any other means. Guns make crime easier. Please note this is coming from somebody who lives in the U.S. and owns guns.

[JPL]

I never realised such a movement existed, but it's interesting. I'll read up further.

[KillinSnakes]

I hope they would try and break off so we could crush the confedeRATs again.

[KillinSnakes]

Are these the people who want to move all of the fundamentalist christians to South Carolina with the intention of creating a theocracy?

good call lol

If you check out their basic demands and program, they're not all that dissimilar from other english speaking middle class colonial chuavinists, like the orange.

[Kat]

Is this thread for real???????

Please secede south carolina republican.. i dont wantcha in my country, i want a country where we make sure ALL our children have access to health care, shelter and enough food to eat, if that means payin taxes, well dangit I am happy to do so!



now here are some abe lincoln facts...

Abe lincoln was born in the backwooods of tennessee to strict baptist parents who were too poor to own slaves, he moved as a child to indiana and illinois where slavery was nearly unheard of, it was the frontier, where poor people who could not afford slaves went to make thier place in the world.

He married Mary Todd, whose family did own slaves, two of her brothers infact fought for the confederacy. Any slaves mary came into the marriage with were freed upon entering lincolns home, his first public anti slavery statement was this


At the age of 28, while serving in the Illinois General Assembly, Lincoln made one of his first public declarations against slavery.

March 3, 1837

The following protest was presented to the House, which was read and ordered to be spread on the journals, to wit:

"Resolutions upon the subject of domestic slavery having passed both branches of the General Assembly at its present session, the undersigned hereby protest against the passage of the same.

They believe that the institution of slavery is founded on both injustice and bad policy; but that the promulgation of abolition doctrines tends rather to increase than to abate its evils.

They believe that the Congress of the United States has no power, under the constitution, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the different States.

They believe that the Congress of the United States has the power, under the constitution, to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia; but that that power ought not to be exercised unless at the request of the people of said District.

The difference between these opinions and those contained in the said resolutions, is their reason for entering this protest."

Dan Stone,
A. Lincoln,
Representatives from the county of Sangamon

(I, 75)



Some twenty years before the civil war.

On July 22 2862 he gave the emancipation proclamation, which legally freed all slaves in america effective January 1 1963, this was 11 and a half months before he gave the gettysburg address on 19 november 1863. Even if he had owned slaves, they would have been free for nearly a year before this address was given.

The Civil war was indeed about slavery. The encroachment of slavery to the north was making earning a living too hard for those who were not born of wealth, that is why northerners objected. Seccessionist documents of the first four states who sesseded on the eve of lincolns inauguration actually state slavery is the reason for the succession


revisionist history helps no one, Americans kept black Slaves, It was wrong. Abraham Lincoln actually spoke out against it and was assasinated for his troubles. Racism is still rampant in the US against many ethnic groups, by minimising it we make it worse. And minimising this, by painting the civil war falsely as the war of northern aggression is racism pure and simple.

[Seabird]

Oops my bad he didn't own slaves his wife brought them with her into the marriage and I guess she tended to them. Bet they didn't work either and if they did, they did so for wages. Yeah right thats it. 11 months prior to his Gettysburg address slaves were freed yet he STILL owned his own. :hmmm: Slavery WAS NOT the main issue but a part of many issues tho some choose to believe differently. But then some think that Israel was in a water fight with Palestine because it was a bargaining issue in negotiations. :icon_lol:

[Kat]

Seabird, I dont want to start an argument here, In fact I wonder by your adamance if you are confusing Lincoln with Jefferson. Jefferson was an extensive slave owner. He liked to say that they would all be freed on his death, but he died so in debt that his slaves were sold by his family to help pay his creditors.

Lincoln owned no slaves at the time of the gettysburg address, nor is there any actual proof or widespread historical allusions, that Mary Todd brought them into the marriage. Her family owned them to be sure, there is no evidence that she nor her sister brought them from kentucky, beyond a ladies maid or two. who incidentally, would have been freed by law at age 18, staying after only out of free choice.This is because she settled with her husband in Springfield Illinois, In the only home Lincoln is ever known to have owned, which upon entering the union in 1776 article six of the constitution prohibited new slavery to be introduced to the state. it also provided for automatic freedom for slaves beyond the age of 21 for males and 18 for females, the only other place Lincoln Lived in his adult life is washington DC, where Slavery was also Illlegal. Lincoln was known for many things but slave owning was not one of them. and in Illinois, slave owning was never the norm among the wealthy. Free Servants were. Slave owners were consideraby rarer among the gentry in the frontier territories than in the established south. Though Lincoln did not have the political courage to fight for abolishion of slavery earlier in his political career, he certain faught vigourously against it's expansion throughout hes career. Please provide a link to some articles that allege Lincoln Kept slaves at the time of the gettysburg address. Seriously I have read a lot about Lincoln but I have not read antythi ng along the lines of what you are saying.

[Hildy]

Seabird & Kat, This debate has been going on for 130 years, unfortunately there is no simple answer. I believe you are both right! It just depends on your point of view.

So-was the war about slavery? Absolutely. If there had been no disagreement over the issue of slavery, the South would probably not have discerned a threat to its culture and the southern politicians would have been much less likely to seek "their right to secede." But was it only about slavery? No. It was also about the constitutional argument over whether or not a state had a right to leave the Union, and--of primary concern to most southern soldiers--the continuation of antebellum southern culture. Although the majority of Southerners had little interest in slaves, slavery was a primary interest of Southern politicians--and consequently the underlying cause of the South's desire to seek independence and state rights.

Causes of the Civil War: A Balanced Answer (http://members.tripod.com/~greatamericanhistory/gr02013.htm)

[Kat]

that is correct hildy. the politicians incited the war, as politicians do, by making it seem about the broader lifestyle as a whole, which to be honest would not have been changed one iota for most southerners... giving up slaves would not have affected them, nor changed thier southern existence in the least. in fact they may have found themselves better off.... but those who organised the secessions would have lost nearly everything, and did lose everything after all.

However it is a useful question to ask, could they have possibly convinced those young southern men to fight a war only for slaves they would not likely ever be in the financial situation to own? probably not.

much like an isreali illegally settling in an oasis in the desert at the behest of his governement is much more likely to be done if it be for a larger cause than securing water from the palestinians for commercial purposes, effectively inpoverishing the whole of the palestinian people, If it instead done to save isreal for the isrealites, people woulkd not have to feel bad about thievery. It is also why even though the isrealis feel they have the right to all the land in the area, the pretty much the only land they settle illegally has access to water, which is quite valuable and rare in a desert. I dont know why you wished to bring that up again seabird, I would have thought enough time had passed for you to no longer feel the need to attack me randomly every chance you got.

But nonetheless, you have, and coinciudentally It is a useful lesson in the ways of most wars, they are often connected to issues other than the ones people think they are fighting for.

This does not change the fact that there is no real evidence that abe lincoln EVER owned a slave and that it is pure fabrication that he owned them at the time of the gettysburg address.

nor does it change the fact that the south would not have seceeded from the united states had slavery not been an issue. It does not reflect poorly on the southern people but it does reflect poorly on her politicians, slave owners who were willing to stop at nothing, not even hundreds of thousands of men dead to keep thier slaves.

[Hildy]

Lets not forget, however, that Lincoln was a political opportunist and even though he did not own slaves, does not mean that his title of the "Great Emancipator" left him free of racism. His every political move was based on a strategy for saving the "union"......if saving the union meant emancipating the slaves that is what he would do. But, as evidenced in many of his writings, if he could have "deported" the lot of them, he would have sent them all back to Africa!

Previous scholars downplayed or outright ignored Lincoln's commitment to colonizing African Americans outside the country, which he advocated widely throughout his entire political career, a position he shared with his political hero, Henry Clay. This was no fleeting notion. Lincoln's commitment to the idea of deporting black Americans is mentioned in numerous prewar speeches, two State of the Union addresses, several Cabinet meetings, and in a notorious meeting with African American leaders at the White House, at which he urged them to encourage their followers to leave the country.

I also believe, that he was definitely a racist, especially by today's standards, i.e.,

Americans often regard racism in 18th century America as a given, but the truth is that there have always been people in America who were not racist. Abraham Lincoln, however, was not one of them. And neither was Mary Todd Lincoln, whose Southern family had owned slaves. As an Illinois legislator, and later as a congressman and political leader, Lincoln opposed the abolitionists, rigorously supported enforcement of the brutal and mean-spirited Fugitive Slave Law, and was in favor of forcefully removing all African American people from the United States. Furthermore, Lincoln explicitly endorsed the State of Illinois' laws barring African Americans from voting, serving on juries, holding office, or intermarrying with "white" Americans. According to his confidants he regularly used the word "nigger" in private conversation and sometimes in speeches (this author apologizes for using the offensive "N" word here, but it is the author's intent not to cloak the reader from the intense reality underlying the truth that Abe Lincoln was a bone-deep racist).

Lincoln did not decide to make the emancipation of slaves a central issue in the Civil War until the North was nearly defeated. What is generally neglected in the average person's understanding of the causes of the Civil War is the exceedingly legalistic conflict that erupted over the legal doctrine called "nullification." It is far easier to get people excited over the War by telling them that it was fought to free slaves, than by telling them the truth that it was started because the states' politicians thought that they could nullify federal legislation within their states' borders, and the Federal Government claimed that they could not. Like the idea that the Revolution was fought to save Americans from "taxation without representation," the conflict over nullification reads like an attorney's manual. Due to Lincoln's assassination by a racist Confederate supporter, he gains the upper hand when it comes to public sympathy, because no matter how foul anyone might be, the decent majority are offended by the murder of a human life. This is why later attempts by so-called "anarchists," (members of a 19th century extremist ideology that was born out of middle-class reaction to the totalitarian practices of states), to topple oppressive regimes by assassinating their leaders, all failed. Because by murdering people, all they generated was sympathy for the targets.


The fact that Lincoln did not want to free slaves does not mean that the liberation of people is not a significant issue; but if America were truly founded for the purpose of liberating human beings, the slaves would have been emancipated in 1776. In fact, the English did liberate their slaves in 1772, and slaves from all over the colonies deserted their masters for port cities, because if they could make landfall in England they would be emancipated by the Royal Government. Rather than increase the desire among white Americans to liberate their slaves, this had the ugly side-effect of causing resentment against the British for causing American slaves to desert their American masters. Abraham Lincoln is the favorite President of the United States for many people, but only because what they know of him is false. It is a disservice to America for her people not to know the truth, because without truth, there can be no justice.

The
DARK SIDE of Abe Lincoln (http://www.worldfreeinternet.net/news/nws198.htm)

[Seabird]

By george Hildy you've done it again. Good post:eusa_clap: So even though Lincoln didn't own slaves he was a deep rooted racist. Hmmm 6 of one and a half a dozen of another. I stand corrected.:icon_lol: What a good man, he didn't own any and desired to ship the African Americans to a country they know nothing about. :hmmm:


http://www.greatdreams.com/lincoln.htm

Lincoln said: "I have no purpose to introduce political and social equality between the white and black races. There is a physical difference between the two, which, in my judgment, will probably forever forbid their living together upon the footing of perfect equality; and inasmuch as it becomes a necessity that there must be a difference, I ... am in favor of the race to which I belong having the superior position."

He also said, "My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves, I would do it; and if I could do it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that.."

What a good man he was!:whip:

[Kat]

Jesus christ ladies dont get all foamy at the mouthy now, Hildy you do realise that link grossly mischaracterizes the time of Lincoln and the nature of his job as a politician? It also grossly mischaractorises the climate at the time.

Of course he could not be seen as the champion of the black man, do you think for a moment a champion of the black man would have been elected president of the US in the 1860s? Lord, I highly doubt the champion of the black man could be elected in the US even today. I dont doubt he used the N word all the time, in public and in private, I dont even doubt he was racist by todays standards, In fact that is pretty clear by his records. I dont excuse his racist statements, but i recognise that those statements earned him the trust and votes of people who never would have allowed him the power to make a change otherwise. The beauty of the US political system is one CAN make it better if they work at it and go about it the right way,

Now by the standards of the time he was quite couragous. And the nature of his long term goals REQUIRED him to appeal to the average racist in order to get elected. Perhaps he really did believe blacks were inferior sorts of people, but somehow, i dont think that someone who felt that way would have even taken part in the lincoln douglas debates, nor would a true racist have consistently voted against and publicly championed first the expansion of slavery than later in his carreer as his power grew, the practice itself.

It is true, like Roosevelt, another President with an amazingly positive legacy in the US, he appears moderate on the issues he ended up changing the country with forever earlier in his career, and in retrospect, it can muddy the waters as to whether or not thaty was thier goal all along, but make no mistake, Abe Lincoln was against slavery from the very beginning of his life. He believed what ANY person with even a drop of Irish blood in them should believe, that no man can own another man. EVER. and He did something every single american should be proud of.

He was criticised by the abolitionists, and radical advocates for blacks for not being abolitionist enough, but the fact is those who criticized were not the ones who abolished slavery were they? No they were not, Abe Lincoln was. By speaking the language of the time and the place, he sidled around and got things done. And he STARTED the long process of shaking some sense into americans. a process that is clearly not complete yet.



Seabird the quote you left is a funny one when ya think about it....

He also said, "My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves, I would do it; and if I could do it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that.."


hmm, funny but the union was not in jeopardy save the Issue of slavery, was it? could it be politicians pandered even then? Thankfully some seem to have pandered with morals behind thier actions.

[FreeSouthCarolina]

Ok, Let me tackle a bunch of posts here at once. They certainly have piled up on me. I apologize about that.

Are these the people who want to move all of the fundamentalist christians to South Carolina with the intention of creating a theocracy?
That is Christian Exodus. One of the groups I listed but not one of the groups I particularly support. Just like how in the Irish Republican movement there are varying political spectrums ie. everyone is not a communist but some are etc., not all of us in the South Carolinian Republican movement want a theocracy but the vast majority of us want a Government that does contain some important Christian values. In general though just about all of us want what the people of South Carolina wants, even if South Carolina decides it will legalize Abortion, we want it to be by the will of South Carolina and not some Supreme Court Justices 2 states north in Washington D.C. Does that make sense?

i think half the problem in america is every citizens "right" to bear arms. it explains all their school shootings and extremely high weapons related crime rate. every citizen should have the right to take up arms in defence of their country but in normal day to day life one does not need a gun.
You mention school shootings. Well no matter where your at in the U.S. its illegal for minors(under 18) to own a firearm. Its also illegal for them to possess one under the age of 17 or so without Adult supervision. So school shootings are illegal in the first place so thats how well that gun control is working out. There are several hunters/collectors and other hobbyists that use guns in a positive way. There are also target shooters as a competitive sport. Guns can be a very positive activity. The key is for proper guneducation. The reason why there are so many murders is because our culture has set it up so that guns are for killing someone. Some of our culture even encourages murder. When you have some time, try listening to lyrics of some "Gangsta Rap". This is the musical inspiration for MUCH of the gang activity and murders within the Union of American States. Whats sad is, that African American children grow up listening to this in the back of their mother's car etc. from a very early age. Aside from that, much of the arms that are used by gangs or school shootings are illegal without hard to get permits anyway. When you outlaw guns, the law abiding citizens will give them up. But the criminals will always be able to get them just like how they get drugs and other illegal substances.


FreeSouthCarolina, has anyone completed a projected outcome for the finances needed? The port issue relies heavily on the other States still accepting goods through those ports and then of course all other transportation sectors willing also. First thought actually was disaster relief and where would it come from to rebuild infrastructures, civilian claims and let's not forget private business. Which leads me to the flat tax...I've read a few differing definitions on that and was wondering how you as a group of citizens define it? What shared duties is South Carolina responsible for to the federal government and/or a neighboring states? I've heard small groups in California and Vermont before too but first I heard of this was here. How long has this been getting kicked around for?
As of yet, as you can see there is no unified political party. A secession event is coming up within the next month. There will be lots of stuff accomplished at this event if not the formation of the Party itself. I'll post another post within the coming days on all the taxes and disaster relief etc. as that is alot of information. But this has been getting kicked around for a little less then a decade, but it has grown from a few people to the tens of thousands in the very recent.

good call lol

If you check out their basic demands and program, they're not all that dissimilar from other english speaking middle class colonial chuavinists, like the orange.
??? What on earth are you talking about?!

General Response to Kat:
I could argue about this for literally days straight. Sometimes it feels like I have. The issue here at the present is exactly that, the present. The morality of the whole war or the issue of Slavery is no longer a current issue for South Carolina. We deffinately don't want slaves and we don't want segregation or racism etc. I can tell you that from being apart of the movement. We have African American people supporting the movement right now. We are deffinately a multiracial movement. But all that is irrelevant. I'll answer your question and some others about taxes in a later post, hang tight.
If you have an interest though Kat check out these videos. I think they will open your perspective just a little wider.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvAttqWQxV4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHYVIpajIAM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDp95haV6Dw
(just a few of the good examples ;))

Alright, Long post sorry about the wait.
God Bless Y'all God Bless South Carolina and most importantly God bless Ireland!

[ciaranxavier]

Ok, Let me tackle a bunch of posts here at once. They certainly have piled up on me. I apologize about that.


That is Christian Exodus. One of the groups I listed but not one of the groups I particularly support. Just like how in the Irish Republican movement there are varying political spectrums ie. everyone is not a communist but some are etc., not all of us in the South Carolinian Republican movement want a theocracy but the vast majority of us want a Government that does contain some important Christian values. In general though just about all of us want what the people of South Carolina wants, even if South Carolina decides it will legalize Abortion, we want it to be by the will of South Carolina and not some Supreme Court Justices 2 states north in Washington D.C. Does that make sense?


You mention school shootings. Well no matter where your at in the U.S. its illegal for minors(under 18) to own a firearm. Its also illegal for them to possess one under the age of 17 or so without Adult supervision. So school shootings are illegal in the first place so thats how well that gun control is working out. There are several hunters/collectors and other hobbyists that use guns in a positive way. There are also target shooters as a competitive sport. Guns can be a very positive activity. The key is for proper guneducation. The reason why there are so many murders is because our culture has set it up so that guns are for killing someone. Some of our culture even encourages murder. When you have some time, try listening to lyrics of some "Gangsta Rap". This is the musical inspiration for MUCH of the gang activity and murders within the Union of American States. Whats sad is, that African American children grow up listening to this in the back of their mother's car etc. from a very early age. Aside from that, much of the arms that are used by gangs or school shootings are illegal without hard to get permits anyway. When you outlaw guns, the law abiding citizens will give them up. But the criminals will always be able to get them just like how they get drugs and other illegal substances.


As of yet, as you can see there is no unified political party. A secession event is coming up within the next month. There will be lots of stuff accomplished at this event if not the formation of the Party itself. I'll post another post within the coming days on all the taxes and disaster relief etc. as that is alot of information. But this has been getting kicked around for a little less then a decade, but it has grown from a few people to the tens of thousands in the very recent.


??? What on earth are you talking about?!

General Response to Kat:
I could argue about this for literally days straight. Sometimes it feels like I have. The issue here at the present is exactly that, the present. The morality of the whole war or the issue of Slavery is no longer a current issue for South Carolina. We deffinately don't want slaves and we don't want segregation or racism etc. I can tell you that from being apart of the movement. We have African American people supporting the movement right now. We are deffinately a multiracial movement. But all that is irrelevant. I'll answer your question and some others about taxes in a later post, hang tight.
If you have an interest though Kat check out these videos. I think they will open your perspective just a little wider.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvAttqWQxV4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHYVIpajIAM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDp95haV6Dw
(just a few of the good examples ;))

Alright, Long post sorry about the wait.
God Bless Y'all God Bless South Carolina and most importantly God bless Ireland!

when you address mine read my further posts.

[Kat]

Free South Carolina, I wish you luck in your endeavor and I hope you find your way to your anti tax valhalla and have a nice life in the lovely country of South Carolina...

I hope that the fact that South carolina currently recieves 1.35 cents from the federal coffers of every dollar it pays in to the country you dont wish to belong to does not affect your plans too much. Suddenly having to make do without the kindness of strangers like me giving you handouts, will leave you with much less money so the going might be difficult , but you with your bootstraps and good ole pioneerin spirit will survive i am sure.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/266.html


frankly, myself being from one of the states that supports your sorry welfare asses, and gets back LESS than we pay in, i will be happy to spend my taxes on another state that needs it more. Or appreciates it more, hell even MY state could use some of it. Whatever the case may be, it will leave all those other states that coddle you with the extra money to take the kids out for ice cream.

what happens when the country of south carolina does not agree internally? will Myrtle beach or fort sumpter secede and become the COUNTRIES of Myrtle Beach and Fort Sumpter? It is a slippery slope indeed Southie, But on the bright side, it may someday be possible for your offspring to become the prime minister of 194 south elm street apartment number 2c


:punk: yall are such rebels dotcha know!

[ciaranxavier]

Free South Carolina, I wish you luck in your endeavor and I hope you find your way to your anti tax valhalla and have a nice life in the lovely country of South Carolina...

I hope that the fact that South carolina currently recieves 1.35 cents from the federal coffers of every dollar it pays in to the country you dont wish to belong to does not affect your plans too much. Suddenly having to make do without the kindness of strangers like me giving you handouts, will leave you with much less money so the going might be difficult , but you with your bootstraps and good ole pioneerin spirit will survive i am sure.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/266.html


frankly, myself being from one of the states that supports your sorry welfare asses, and gets back LESS than we pay in, i will be happy to spend my taxes on another state that needs it more. Or appreciates it more, hell even MY state could use some of it. Whatever the case may be, it will leave all those other states that coddle you with the extra money to take the kids out for ice cream.

what happens when the country of south carolina does not agree internally? will Myrtle beach or fort sumpter secede and become the COUNTRIES of Myrtle Beach and Fort Sumpter? It is a slippery slope indeed Southie, But on the bright side, it may someday be possible for your offspring to become the prime minister of 194 south elm street apartment number 2c


:punk: yall are such rebels dotcha know!

shes right this is just like the quebec issue. its inconceivable to think of a country called south carolina.

[Kat]

I dont know that it is inconceivable, there are smaller countries than south carolina all over the world, and i think it would be very nice to have the Jareds and the Calvins and the Southies together living in rebel harmony in thier own perfect country with thier heritage and history intact....


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHYVIpajIAM
So Southie, since it is history and the rebel flag did not originally mean a war for slavery or a symbol for most who fly it of white supremacy... that means it is okay? Because Calvin (whose opinion is likely a big minority even in the country of south carolina) is not offended, no other blacks have the right to be? I had better find a planter to put an orange banner in my porch then, it is my history... And you know my neighbor is a Jew, I am sure she would looooove a german to bring her a swastica Flag for her flagpole, it is her history after all. Seabird, I have been wondering what to get you for christmas this year, how would you like a replica of the standard of General Sheridans regiment for your living room? mebbe one of them nice blankets? No offense to you Southie but I dont share your opinion on the rebel flag, i dont find it a harmless peice of history, partly because here in the north it is exclusively flown by white supremecists, and i imagine even in the south there are those to whom it symbolises that very thing....And partly because there are black people i respect very much who are greatly offended by it. I myself, am greatly offended by the butchers apron and many other symbols of british oppression, whether they were designed to oppress the Irish or not, so I can absolutely understand my black friends' point of view on this one.

[Seabird]

Ahh Kat I forgot to welcome you to the board. . . Welcome:)

I am not sure how I feel about this new move so I will hold my judgement until later. Some points I wanted to share with you on yer post.

Taxes paid by your state not only go to SC but to every state that has federal programs. this is to include your own. On a quick financial look, with SC being a coastal state, if they were to become a separate country they could indeed support themselves, remember that they will no longer pay taxes to the US but to their own country. Their import and exports will bring in huge dividends. So I feel they will be quite successful taking care of the state.


As for the confederate flag. . . many fly the American flag a true sign of oppression and a major insult to many Native Americans! Listen to Guantanamo on Barry Kerrs CD, our flag is call the flag of lies, should we take it down from the mast?:hmmm:

[Hildy]

Jesus christ ladies dont get all foamy at the mouthy now, Hildy you do realise that link grossly mischaracterizes the time of Lincoln and the nature of his job as a politician? It also grossly mischaractorises the climate at the time.



Oh, get off it kat, you love the drama! You create drama where there is none!:eusa_dance: But, no matter how hard you try, you will never be an expert authority on EVERYTHING! Quite frankly, I think the person who wrote this article is much more qualified in his statements than you are! Not to say that everything should be assimilated in balance, no matter what the source. However, you weren't there, nor I, so its all subject to interpretation.

As far as a "South Carolina Republic" that's ridiculous, there is no chance of that happening.

Cheers!

[FreeSouthCarolina]

shes right this is just like the quebec issue. its inconceivable to think of a country called south carolina.
We are bigger than both Ireland and Switzerland(not put together), we have more per capita income than Italy, and we have more people than Lithuania. On top of that, we started as a country after seperating from Britian and before we joined the United States, and we became a country again in 1860. If its inconceivable then why has it happened before? There may have been people in Ireland who said an independent Irish nation was inconcievable, after all they were facing down the strongest nation at that time.

As far as a "South Carolina Republic" that's ridiculous, there is no chance of that happening.
20% of South Carolinians support secession at the present time. Once our people have been educated what secession is and why we need it that 20% will grow. We are at fetal stages at the moment and already have 1/5 of 4,000,000 people supporting us.

Kat:
No matter my attempt to try and cut off the historical debate obviously you are determined to make that impossible. So here we go.

You see, if you look at my original posts I didnt bring race into it. I even stated early on that I prefer not to mention it and/or consider it. But it seems as usual a foreigner tries to put divisions(racial) on the South Carolinian people. South Carolinians will not be divided. Race is only an issue because foreigners like you confuse the populace.

It was your Abraham Lincoln who specifically made it about slavery(Emancipation Proclamation). Its people like you's fault that Confederate banners have anything to do with race/religion/heritage. It was people like you's fault that spilled so much hatred all over our reputation.

I am not a racist, but since apparently you are lighting this thing up with Racial stuff, obviously race plays an important role in your life and decisions. So does that not fit the deffinition of racism?

You even mention the fact that in the North it is flown as a symbol of racism. Do you think we sent Southerners up there to fly the flag as a racist symbol? I think its more logical to assume that those are Northerners flying those flags as racist symbols and racists themselves.

You go even FURTHER to make comparisons between the Confederate Millitary forces (assuming your talking about the battle flag itself) and the NSDAP Government of 1930s-40s Germany. You are comparing the Political banner of a political party and later the government of Germany with the armed forces of the Confederate States of America. You are comparing the death of 6,000,000+ human beings with the Millitary force of a Nation? First of all those comparisons are incompatible and no comparision can be drawn from your accusations. So let me spare you of your misinformity and assume your talking about one of the 3 National flags of the Confederacy.

Now you are comparing the Government of the C.S.A. with the Government of NSDAP Germany. You are comparing the policies of NSDAP Germany including the execution of 6,000,000+ human beings with the enslavement of a percentage of African Americans inhabiting the borders of the C.S.A. Thats more realistic, but not much more.

Obviously the Slave owners weren't killing their slaves, keep in mind that they were worth more than a modern day sports car. Also keep in mind that Slave Owners were a vast minority, not all of us were that rich. Also keep in mind that there were an estimated 200,000 free blacks within C.S.A borders. So the slave owners weren't keeping them BECAUSE they were black, they were keeping them because they were lazy or didnt want to pay worker's wages and the slave trade in that area had originated in Africa.

On top of that "Slave Shacks" or various other housing used to house the slaves, although presented as nearworthless housing, was usually pretty much the same as Average(not incredibly rich like plantation owners and charlestonians) South Carolinian homes. Sometimes on some of the richer plantations, Slave housing quality was actually higher than average South Carolinian homes. Even though slave owners were a vast minority, among the slave owners an even smaller minority ever used physical discipline unless the slave's offense was very severe.

Now also lets remember that the Confederate States were certainly not the only entity that participated in this horrible act. Slavery was legal in the whole of the United States (Both North and South) until the 1820's or so when the North did not have a need for it anymore, while the early colonists had set the South up as dependent on Slavery for some parts of its economy. England of course also had it legal, the Netherlands had it legal, Spain had it legal, France had it legal, and among African tribes slavery was an outcome of tribal warfare before European men even got there.

So if you want to compare the Confederate States to NSDAP Germany then go ahead an compare all those other countries to NSDAP Germany as well. Heck, you can regard Andrew Jackson as a forerunner to Hitler in the aspect of genocide. After all, I have lived on the North American continent since my birth (minus one year that I lived in Germany) and I have NEVER seen a 100% or even a 50% or 25% Native American. I haven't even seen one on the Cherokee Indian reservation. How many Jews do you see in Germany? It looks like both of them accomplished their criminal goals to a pretty full extent doesnt it? Andrew Jackson operated under a Federal flag.

If you dare to say that I condone the practice of slavery, you march foward in lies. It was a very bad practice and I regret that it ever reached the shores of South Carolina. Comparing it though to the Holocaust is sickening.

Your respected Black friends you mentioned are offended, I can't blame them. The reason why they are offended is because sadly they have been misinformed by the Yankee version of the history. They most likely have never gone to research the secession on their own, and I don't blame them. They probably have busy lives and they can't go beyond their byassed history classes. It also doesn't help when those Yankee morons you were talking about who fly the flag for racist reasons, are waving that flag in their face.

So you want us to let some propaganda walk over the memory of our ancestors because some Yankee morons are waving Confederate flags in the face of your black friends? You want us to take down our flags because retarded redneck organizations like the Klan and NSM have tainted the very banner that Southerners stood united under regardless of race or nationality? I think your chasing after the wrong people. If you care about some African Americans being offended by the flag, which I do as well, then perhaps try my aproach and try to teach them more about the struggle so they can make their own decision on the issue and then fight against the organizations that give the flags a bad name. You obviously don't care about people being offended if your trying to make us conform to a bunch of lies and racist yankees.

God bless y'all

[BunyipDude]

You mention school shootings. Well no matter where your at in the U.S. its illegal for minors(under 18) to own a firearm. Its also illegal for them to possess one under the age of 17 or so without Adult supervision. So school shootings are illegal in the first place so thats how well that gun control is working out. There are several hunters/collectors and other hobbyists that use guns in a positive way. There are also target shooters as a competitive sport. Guns can be a very positive activity. The key is for proper guneducation. The reason why there are so many murders is because our culture has set it up so that guns are for killing someone. Some of our culture even encourages murder. When you have some time, try listening to lyrics of some "Gangsta Rap". This is the musical inspiration for MUCH of the gang activity and murders within the Union of American States. Whats sad is, that African American children grow up listening to this in the back of their mother's car etc. from a very early age. Aside from that, much of the arms that are used by gangs or school shootings are illegal without hard to get permits anyway. When you outlaw guns, the law abiding citizens will give them up. But the criminals will always be able to get them just like how they get drugs and other illegal substances.

Let's think about this...yes, those kids may not be legally allowed to own guns if they are under 18, but does that mean they can't get them easily by exploiting problems with gun laws? Illegal origin and illegal sales are two different things. The guns that are used in 99% of all shootings in America are weapons that are purchased legally at gun stores and then make their way into the hands of criminals or minors (like school shooters). The Columbine shooters used a pair of shotguns and a TEC-9. The shotguns were purchased by the girlfriend of one of them (who was 18), and the TEC-9 had been legally purchased but was resold to them. That's called a "straw purchase", and it's a very common way for criminals to get ahold of guns. If some sort of registration scheme existed that ensured guns could not be re-distributed between anyone without going through an FFL and a National Database first, we would most likely not have this problem.

Northern Ireland is also a very good example of how America's gun laws can be used to acquire weapons illegally. The Provisional IRA imported large quantities of Armalite (AR-15s and AR-18s) assault rifles into Ireland by having its sympathizers purchase them legally at gun stores, and then they were smuggled to Ireland by boat and sometimes by plane. If American gun laws hadn't permitted the easy sale of such weapons, it is entirely possible that the Provos would never have had any Armalites, and they wouldn't have become its symbolic weapon. The Provos also got ahold of Barrett M82 .50-caliber rifles the same way.

I must emphasize that I am not against guns, which I own myself. As a North Carolinian, I was raised to respect them. I do not, however, believe it is true that the proliferation of guns in America has no effect on our crime (and murder) rates. If guns are easily available, it is a safe bet that more criminals will have access to them, and America's problems are proof of this.

As far as the "gangsta rap" thing goes, the problems with gun homicides have existed for many decades, since before there was any gangster rap (which only became a cultural phenomenon in the 1990s). I do not think you can legitimately blame gun violence upon entertainment of any sort, and especially not a type that doesn't predate the current problems.


Your respected Black friends you mentioned are offended, I can't blame them. The reason why they are offended is because sadly they have been misinformed by the Yankee version of the history. They most likely have never gone to research the secession on their own, and I don't blame them. They probably have busy lives and they can't go beyond their byassed history classes. It also doesn't help when those Yankee morons you were talking about who fly the flag for racist reasons, are waving that flag in their face.

Actually, now that you mention it...I'm taking History-131 (survey of U.S. history up to 1865, it's a requirement I have to fulfill), and my professor is a pretty interesting guy. He's emphasized precisely what you've mentioned...that slave-owners in the Southern states were indeed a very tiny minority and that many of them didn't want to harm their slaves too much because they were expensive and worth more in healthy, working condition. Please note that I go to a liberal arts college up in Maine.

So you see, not all "Yankee" history classes are biased. Most U.S. History professors I've had do not demonize the Confederacy, nor portray the Northern in the most flattering terms. Until you have been to every school and evaluated precisely what they teach, I don't think you should stereotype all "Yankees" as buying into the bull**** misrepresentations of Confederate history that you claim are responsible for people not wanting the South to secede.

[KillinSnakes]

what happens when the country of south carolina does not agree internally? will Myrtle beach or fort sumpter secede and become the COUNTRIES of Myrtle Beach and Fort Sumpter? It is a slippery slope indeed Southie, But on the bright side, it may someday be possible for your offspring to become the prime minister of 194 south elm street apartment number 2c


:punk: yall are such rebels dotcha know!

That's more true than you'd think. During the Civil War the Confederates had a serious problem with territories breaking off, some staying with the Union, some saying they'd do their own thing. It was a problem throughout a large part of the Confederacy, and by comparison, only one Union state was plagued by seccesionist gueriallas, missouri.

[FreeSouthCarolina]

what happens when the country of south carolina does not agree internally? will Myrtle beach or fort sumpter secede and become the COUNTRIES of Myrtle Beach and Fort Sumpter? It is a slippery slope indeed Southie, But on the bright side, it may someday be possible for your offspring to become the prime minister of 194 south elm street apartment number 2c


:punk: yall are such rebels dotcha know!

Well first of all Fort Sumter is a few brick walls out on an Island in Charleston Harbor that tourists pay money to sail out to touch the walls and sail back. Its a historical landmark and no inhabinents. So I don't think we have to worry about it. As for Myrtle Beach, its probably 5% South Carolinian 95% tourist at least in the Summertime. You just named 2 basically Continentally famous things about my state. To be honest I don't think you have ever been to South Carolina and you obviously don't know much about us. South Carolinian beliefs are very similar no matter where you go. There are pockets of Liberals and such but most of those are actually migrants from the North that would probably just move if we seceded.

With your logic though, why don't we take the U.S. military and take over the whole world and unite it as a planet. I mean we are already the 4th Biggest country on the planet in landmass, lets make us the whole freaking thing. We can have planet elections even.

[Hildy]

GOOD IDEA FreeSouthCarolina!:eusa_clap: You must be a proponent of the Bilderberg Propaganda Machine and their Secret Agenda to rule the planet, where the plutocrats can run it and NATO can police it......you'd probably be up for all of that!:D

[ciaranxavier]

Well first of all Fort Sumter is a few brick walls out on an Island in Charleston Harbor that tourists pay money to sail out to touch the walls and sail back. Its a historical landmark and no inhabinents. So I don't think we have to worry about it. As for Myrtle Beach, its probably 5% South Carolinian 95% tourist at least in the Summertime. You just named 2 basically Continentally famous things about my state. To be honest I don't think you have ever been to South Carolina and you obviously don't know much about us. South Carolinian beliefs are very similar no matter where you go. There are pockets of Liberals and such but most of those are actually migrants from the North that would probably just move if we seceded.

With your logic though, why don't we take the U.S. military and take over the whole world and unite it as a planet. I mean we are already the 4th Biggest country on the planet in landmass, lets make us the whole freaking thing. We can have planet elections even.

thats what your states famous for some bricks and a beach hehe.

[OCoinnigh]

This has noithing to do with Ireland

[Kat]

Southie Said:

20% of South Carolinians support secession at the present time. Once our people have been educated what secession is and why we need it that 20% will grow. We are at fetal stages at the moment and already have 1/5 of 4,000,000 people supporting us.


Kat Answers... perhaps you havent been getting my point, i wish you well in your secession this time. You see this time, it is not worth tearing our country up further, because this time, you no longer own people. I understand that the north is guilty of slavery too, and the south cannot take all the blame for the ownership of people But fighting to make the ownership of people against the law, is a worthwhile fight in my opinion.

Southie Said:
No matter my attempt to try and cut off the historical debate obviously you are determined to make that impossible. So here we go.
You see, if you look at my original posts I didnt bring race into it. I even stated early on that I prefer not to mention it and/or consider it.




Kat answers:
I am sure you dont want to mention or consider the race issue. Americans as a whole dont, so why would south carolinians want to either. Americans also dont like to consider the the trail of tears, or the burning of witches. Or the slaughter of Irish labor on the railroads and sweatshops. I dont suppose Germans want to consider the nazis either. I am sure that decent nice british people dont want to consider the famine or the centuries of oppression . None of that is very fun to consider at all.

But the fact is americans ARE RACIST... But, this issue, The secession of the confederate states, it is not necessarily about race, In fact it is just coincidence that most of the southern slaves were of the african race, cause the Irish were enslaved at times too... as were many other ethnicities,

I dont think it is coincidence that in many ways blacks are judged unfairly today, because thier very presence in this countryis a daily reminder of the fact that we owned them at one point. because i think that in some ways society cant yet fathom that holding them in bondage was not right. But racism is a topic for another day.

it is actually your own discomfort with the racial aspect that comes through when you felt you had, in order to prove your case, to bring a black man into it. See! you said to us! your black friend Calvin is proud to fly the stars and bars, and look hes black so this cant be about blacks can it? Well I agree with you southie it is not necessarilly about blacks at all, it is about SLAVERY, about OWNING PEOPLE. Yes I said it, it is about OWNING people. The stars and bars exists ONLY because the south was angry enough over the nerve of them yankee carpet baggers trying to poke thier noses into ONE aspect of southern life, that they decided to form thier own country, it was not high taxation, it was not marriage regulation, it was not business tarrifs..... IT WAS OWNING PEOPLE. It does not matter really that most southerners did not own people. The ones who fomented the secession did own people, and they built the secession to save thier way of life. Not to save the way of life for the middle class non slave owning freemen of any race... I am sorry that that is not what those brave non slave owning men thought they were fighting for, but that issue is the reason that secssion happened and the reason that the stars and bars exists, whether you like to think about it or even consider it or not.





Southie Said:

But it seems as usual a foreigner tries to put divisions(racial) on the South Carolinian people. South Carolinians will not be divided. Race is only an issue because foreigners like you confuse the populace.

It was your Abraham Lincoln who specifically made it about slavery(Emancipation Proclamation). Its people like you's fault that Confederate banners have anything to do with race/religion/heritage. It was people like you's fault that spilled so much hatred all over our reputation.

I am not a racist, but since apparently you are lighting this thing up with Racial stuff, obviously race plays an important role in your life and decisions. So does that not fit the deffinition of racism?

You even mention the fact that in the North it is flown as a symbol of racism. Do you think we sent Southerners up there to fly the flag as a racist symbol? I think its more logical to assume that those are Northerners flying those flags as racist symbols and racists themselves.

You go even FURTHER to make comparisons between the Confederate Millitary forces (assuming your talking about the battle flag itself) and the NSDAP Government of 1930s-40s Germany. You are comparing the Political banner of a political party and later the government of Germany with the armed forces of the Confederate States of America. You are comparing the death of 6,000,000+ human beings with the Millitary force of a Nation? First of all those comparisons are incompatible and no comparision can be drawn from your accusations. So let me spare you of your misinformity and assume your talking about one of the 3 National flags of the Confederacy.

Now you are comparing the Government of the C.S.A. with the Government of NSDAP Germany. You are comparing the policies of NSDAP Germany including the execution of 6,000,000+ human beings with the enslavement of a percentage of African Americans inhabiting the borders of the C.S.A. Thats more realistic, but not much more.

Obviously the Slave owners weren't killing their slaves, keep in mind that they were worth more than a modern day sports car. Also keep in mind that Slave Owners were a vast minority, not all of us were that rich. Also keep in mind that there were an estimated 200,000 free blacks within C.S.A borders. So the slave owners weren't keeping them BECAUSE they were black, they were keeping them because they were lazy or didnt want to pay worker's wages and the slave trade in that area had originated in Africa.

On top of that "Slave Shacks" or various other housing used to house the slaves, although presented as nearworthless housing, was usually pretty much the same as Average(not incredibly rich like plantation owners and charlestonians) South Carolinian homes. Sometimes on some of the richer plantations, Slave housing quality was actually higher than average South Carolinian homes. Even though slave owners were a vast minority, among the slave owners an even smaller minority ever used physical discipline unless the slave's offense was very severe.

Now also lets remember that the Confederate States were certainly not the only entity that participated in this horrible act. Slavery was legal in the whole of the United States (Both North and South) until the 1820's or so when the North did not have a need for it anymore, while the early colonists had set the South up as dependent on Slavery for some parts of its economy. England of course also had it legal, the Netherlands had it legal, Spain had it legal, France had it legal, and among African tribes slavery was an outcome of tribal warfare before European men even got there.

So if you want to compare the Confederate States to NSDAP Germany then go ahead an compare all those other countries to NSDAP Germany as well. Heck, you can regard Andrew Jackson as a forerunner to Hitler in the aspect of genocide. After all, I have lived on the North American continent since my birth (minus one year that I lived in Germany) and I have NEVER seen a 100% or even a 50% or 25% Native American. I haven't even seen one on the Cherokee Indian reservation. How many Jews do you see in Germany? It looks like both of them accomplished their criminal goals to a pretty full extent doesnt it? Andrew Jackson operated under a Federal flag.

If you dare to say that I condone the practice of slavery, you march foward in lies. It was a very bad practice and I regret that it ever reached the shores of South Carolina. Comparing it though to the Holocaust is sickening.

Your respected Black friends you mentioned are offended, I can't blame them. The reason why they are offended is because sadly they have been misinformed by the Yankee version of the history. They most likely have never gone to research the secession on their own, and I don't blame them. They probably have busy lives and they can't go beyond their byassed history classes. It also doesn't help when those Yankee morons you were talking about who fly the flag for racist reasons, are waving that flag in their face.

God bless y'all

my what an impassioned speech you have given me here southie thanks for your education in the matter of slavery and southern race relations and german nazi history. Perhaps I was not clear, I was not comparing slave owners to hitler, i was actually comparing the swastica, a synbol for oppression of a people to the stars and bars, symbol to the oppression of a people, not comparing the oppressions themselves.

But really with my foreign ignorance,I just did not know that south carolina was populated only by benign, non racist whites and black people like Calvin who are proud of thier part in confederate history, perhaps i was mistaken in thinking events like the protest of GIMONGOUS proportion about the Jena 6 (which incidentally had busloads of attendees from, you guessed it... the country of south carolina, where the races are one and united) meant that not all black people in the south (and in the north, not only southerners are racist) were happy and proud and living in harmony with thier confederate neighbors. But you are right I am like you said a foreigner, so it is likely i misunderstood the cultural significance of THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE SAYING.. ENOUGH!

BOY WAS I STUPID! I will tell my black friends TOMORROW that i know the truth now, and it came straight from the mouth of a REAL LIVE CONFEDERATE! Like you said southie, It is me who right up until this very moment was racist, I was completely ignorant in the ways of slavery.


You see, though I knew that slaves were a costly commodity, I never even knew that a black man was worth MORE in todays dollars than a fancy sports car!!!!!!!!!!! WOW now thats worth!!!


And you see, even though i am aware that some "slave shacks" very decent by the standard of the time, the thing is, I was wrong to think even a castle is insufficent when you are forbidding a human to leave on his own free will. When you BUY a MAN and force him to work, and delude yourself into thinking you have the right to SELL HIS CHILDREN OR HIS WIFE for the price in todays dollars of a fancy sports car. Until I talked to you, I thought it did not make up for that even if you provided him with a mansion, But now I realise a decent working class house is the price that makes that okay.

It is also sad that ignorant yank, foreigners like me dont recognise the fact that you took care of your possessions so well. That most of the time if they worked hard enough, they were not whipped. And when they were it was not hard enough to interfere with thier worth as a possession. Cause though some were rich enough to own hundreds and hundreds of fancy sports cars,. they damn sure treated em all like gold.

It is also sad that ignorant yanks like me failed to recognise that it is all africas fault that a small portion of society bought african slaves, cause they only bought em cause they were for sale right?

And I officially apoligise for all my yankee brethren who rigged the southern economy so that it could only be run by slavery while rigging the northern portion of the colonies to no longer need it, that was unfair. I also apoligise for my yankee brethren who confuse the stars and bars with a symbol of racism. And I will direct my anger in the future at the racist yanks who turned it into a symbol of racism, where it was formerly just a symbol of a war that had nothing to do with racism. A symbol of of courageous and non racist people who decided that since the governemnt of thier country was showing signs that they might not approve of the ownership of people, they did not want to be in that country. So they formed thier own. And made a nice flag.


Southie said:

So you want us to let some propaganda walk over the memory of our ancestors because some Yankee morons are waving Confederate flags in the face of your black friends? You want us to take down our flags because retarded redneck organizations like the Klan and NSM have tainted the very banner that Southerners stood united under regardless of race or nationality? I think your chasing after the wrong people. If you care about some African Americans being offended by the flag, which I do as well, then perhaps try my aproach and try to teach them more about the struggle so they can make their own decision on the issue and then fight against the organizations that give the flags a bad name. You obviously don't care about people being offended if your trying to make us conform to a bunch of lies and racist yankees.


God forbid I let some propaganda tarnish your ancestors' good name... why dont you ask your firend Calvin what his ancestral name IS? You see probably has no ancestral name to tarnish, because even if his ancestors were lucky enough to be a freeman in south carolina while slavery was legal, And even if his ancestors prospered nough to own slaves themselves,, he probably was descended form a slave at one time, and as such he is not named for his forefathers, but his foreowners, your ancestors. I wonder how he might feel about not having an ancestral name to tarnish?

I WILL try to teach my black friends that racism is just black propaghanda, silly nonsense we aggressive yanks believe. I REALLY REALLY will! Now that I Know the truth and that i realize my heads just been filled with racist yank lies this whole time!

I just hope my friends dont slap me across the face for my troubles...

[OCoinnigh]

Whats wrong with being racist? I'm racist, I think the Irish are the greatest people in the world! If you could gather all the Irish from around the world into one spot we could probably rule the world.

[Seabird]

Kat,

perhaps you havent been getting my point, i wish you well in your secession this time. You see this time, it is not worth tearing our country up further, because this time, you no longer own people. I understand that the north is guilty of slavery too, and the south cannot take all the blame for the ownership of people But fighting to make the ownership of people against the law, is a worthwhile fight in my opinion.

Your point is not a fact but a very biased opinion that cannot be substantiated. The slavery issue was the final straw that broke the camels back, the true issue was the right for southern people to self determine their own destiny. Slaves were owned by the north and south if the south was fighting for their right to ownership what the hell were yous fighting for??? The Civil War did not tear a country apart just the north and south the rest were out killing Native Americans.


But the fact is americans ARE RACIST

Are you a racist Kat? Sterotyping aren't ya!!

cause the Irish were enslaved at times too... as were many other ethnicities,

Care to substantiate this with facts instead of your opinion.

I dont think it is coincidence that in many ways blacks are judged unfairly today, because thier very presence in this countryis a daily reminder of the fact that we owned them at one point. because i think that in some ways society cant yet fathom that holding them in bondage was not right. But racism is a topic for another day.


We owned nothing, I have never in my life owned a slave nor my father. Obviously you have, you stated "We". When I look at a black person, I do not think of what was, to be honest I don't think anything, why should I? In the course of my day I pass a ton of different faces none stick out flooding me with 100/200 year old history. Your whole paragragh IMO is ludicrous.


The rest of yer snide remarks I won't even comment on. You know I have come to believe that when you are over yer head in a debate you resort to babbling out bullsh**. Your post is condescending, his name is not southie, he did not sign on as southie but FreeSouthCarolina. How about gain alittle decency and try being nice oh holy one.

[FreeSouthCarolina]

Kat, I'd like to continue this in Private messages, but to keep this on topic I'd also like to change this conversation back into a thread for South Carolinian Independence. Thanks:) .

[Kat]

Kat,



Your point is not a fact but a very biased opinion that cannot be substantiated. The slavery issue was the final straw that broke the camels back, the true issue was the right for southern people to self determine their own destiny. Slaves were owned by the north and south if the south was fighting for their right to ownership what the hell were yous fighting for??? The Civil War did not tear a country apart just the north and south the rest were out killing Native Americans.



Seabird firstly i was not talking to you, but I will repeat for you, the issue that was on the table, the issue they were not aable to determine thier own destiny on was slavery, thats the only one. Though i was never Illegal it was becoming a hotly debated civil rights issue, and was quickly taking hold. the yankees never were trying to rule the south on ANY OTHER ISSUE.

my earlier words:
But the fact is americans ARE RACIST
Seabird
Are you a racist Kat? Sterotyping aren't ya!!

I try not to be. I am embarrassed to say It is sometimes a conscious effort. I have tended to dislike people based on racial stereotyoes before i get to know them, like i cant say I like brits I meet right off the bat. We all are, and we should all try not to be.



My Earlier Words:
Cause the Irish were enslaved at times too... as were many other ethnicities,
Seabird:
Care to substantiate this with facts instead of your opinion.


It is not really my opinion that the Irish race has been enslaved. It is actually factual, I feel no need to prove it, likely your great or great grandsomeone came here, passage paid as an indentured servant. Not to mention the rest of the Irish slaves all over the british colonies. And in Ireland.

My Earlier Words:
I dont think it is coincidence that in many ways blacks are judged unfairly today, because thier very presence in this countryis a daily reminder of the fact that we owned them at one point. because i think that in some ways society cant yet fathom that holding them in bondage was not right. But racism is a topic for another day.
Seabird:
We owned nothing, I have never in my life owned a slave nor my father. Obviously you have, you stated "We". When I look at a black person, I do not think of what was, to be honest I don't think anything, why should I? In the course of my day I pass a ton of different faces none stick out flooding me with 100/200 year old history. Your whole paragragh IMO is ludicrouis.


When i used the term me, It was pretty clear I was speaking of WE americans, my people came here long after the war of northern aggression.



Seabird:
The rest of yer snide remarks I won't even comment on. You know I have come to believe that when you are over yer head in a debate you resort to babbling out bullsh**. Your post is condescending, his name is not southie, he did not sign on as southie but FreeSouthCarolina. How about gain alittle decency and try being nice oh holy one.


I actually think you are way more condescending than me even. And incidentally I also dont think you are correct. If you dont like my arguments you dont have to address me, And I dont really think i am over my head here, I am no expert seabird, I just like history. The civil war was about slavery it would not have happened but for that issue. that is the issue the south felt they were not able to govern themselves on, i am not losing this debate.

[Seabird]

Kat,

As for the confederate flag. . . many fly the American flag a true sign of oppression and a major insult to many Native Americans! Listen to Guantanamo on Barry Kerrs CD, our flag is call the flag of lies, should we take it down from the mast?

You failed to answer my question from an early post, would you care to do so now?

Kat slavery was the final straw in a list of other issues, the north made it a major issue to paint the south in a bad light. Why would our men go out to fight when they had no slaves, they were owned by the rich only and the south had more poor people than they did rich. Do you honestly see these men going to die for the rich plantation owner?? Not no but hell no, use common sense, they were not going to be told what to do by the north, a damn yank, a yankee doodle dandy.

[Kat]

Fair enough seabird... what other directives had the north issued? What other subjects were actually the REAL catalysts that caused the wee straw of slavery to break the camels back as it were, what is the ACTUAL reason that caused the south to want to form a new country?

If I am labouring under falsehoods, I certainly would be interested in hearing the "truth"

[Hildy]

Well Kat, you never cease to amaze me.......have you been drinking?

http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j134/erinferriter/catdrinking.gif

Or are you just being the drama queeeeen!

http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j134/erinferriter/A8312E-md-b.jpg

Seabird, you know better than to bother and try to debate her and her psycho-babble....... she's a master of this old saying

.....If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, then baffle them with bull****"!

http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j134/erinferriter/cattail.gif


http://i148.photobucket.com/albums/s6/hildydonovan/rotf.gif

http://i148.photobucket.com/albums/s6/hildydonovan/rotfl.gif

http://i148.photobucket.com/albums/s6/hildydonovan/hysterical.gif

[Kat]

[QUOTE=Seabird;19922]Kat,



You failed to answer my question from an early post, would you care to do so now?

Originally Posted by Seabird
As for the confederate flag. . . many fly the American flag a true sign of oppression and a major insult to many Native Americans! Listen to Guantanamo on Barry Kerrs CD, our flag is call the flag of lies, should we take it down from the mast?
You failed to answer my question from an early post, would you care to do so now?



And to be honest, I am not terribly proud of the american flag myself these days, we are torturing prisoners in iraq like we tortured the native americans and the african americans. we are "dissapearing" people and depriving our citizens of thier rites to privacy. And onle selectively granting health care and allowing our children to be homeless. and nobody seems to care.



oh and thanks hildy, you are very nice too. my question was an honest one, not meant to be dramatic.

[Hildy]

kat, fair enough......just thought it was time for a wee bit of levity. I know you are serious in your beliefs, but so is seabird and freesouthcarolina....this is a debate no one will win!

Cheers, Hildy

[Seabird]

Kat,

I am truly tired now and must get up early, I will answer yer post tomorrow. Promise. Have a good night!

[OCoinnigh]

slavery causing the civil war is ridiculous, it was about money, all wars are about money. you're stupid kat, no matter how long your posts are. I had family on both sides in the US. ItS always about money. So you can keep your liberal bullsh*t politics to yourself. People here aren't as brainwashed as your are. I don't depend on a TV show for history lessons. Why don't you read what General Grant said about the carpet baggers. the rich elite love war, they get to sell the army boots, guns, clothes, hats, cannons, bullets, whatever you can think of.
GET EDUCATED
quite reading books some American JEW published and get facts.
Americans are killers, just ask the Iraqis, they've killed 700,000 of them. Thats what the government that supposedly free'd the slaves is doing know.
THEY WERE KILLERS THEN, AND NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!

[Kat]

wow, I am a little stunned here.... seriously. on a thread where someone has just announced to the whole world that slavery was not as bad as we have been trained to think it was because people paid as much as a fancy car for the privilige of owning a person, so they would not hurt them unless they really got out of line, and you are calling ME stupid?

[OCoinnigh]

Yes, how can you defend a government full of murderers. I'll never believe the US government ever did anything for a good cause.
700,000 Iraqis murdered with your tax money. Do you believe them when the tell you that they are just protecting America, they are liars.

[Kat]

[
first of all, abraham lincoln did not put us in Iraq, and I am as anti Iraq and anti George Bush as they come, no self respecting liberal would have the time of day for that mans horific policies. there are precious few things the US government has done that were truly worthy of what we have the potential to be as a country. One of those things that americans CAN be proud of is that once, we said we do not allow for the ownership of people in this country any longer.

[Hildy]

OCoinnigh,

Well this will be a first, but I won't stand by and let you lamblast Kat on this thread with such a ridiculous rant. I may not agree with her at times, but kat is FAR from stupid, mo chara.....and quite frankly, I'm stunned as well!

Who the heck do you think you are that you can categorize a whole nation as killers and murderers, you eejit! Do you honestly think that just because Bush got us into a war that every american is in agreement with that? Of course not!

However, even though the majority of the country does not believe in that war, and the majority of americans want us out of there, we are still there, so we need to support our troops! Who, by the way, are also in danger.....we are being killed over there as well......and until they are safe, we need to support them....NOT THE DAMNED WAR! A true Republican would stand by his comrades in arms as a true American should stand by their troops! We need to work through our elected officials to get our troops home as soon as possible and get us out of there. Most americans disapprove of the war, based on:

CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll. Oct. 12-14, 2007. N=1,212 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.

"Do you favor or oppose the U.S. war in Iraq?"

10/12-14/07 34% are in Favor, 65% Oppose 2% are Unsure



Polling Report (http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm)


So you see, OCoinnigh, you are very wrong! You don't even live in America to make that assumption and you have no facts to back up a statement like that......I'm very disappointed in your remarks. Which have nothing whatsoever to do with this thread. We were discussing a multitude of things having to do with seccession, racism, civil war, etc., and you throw in this gob****e about americans being killers and the Iraqi war???? Go pick on somebody else, in the appropriate thread, we don't want to hear it!

Of course money is an underlying factor in everything, but it had little to do with the civil war.....the Civil War was about slavery AND the right of seccession and independence, i.e.,

So-was the war about slavery? Absolutely. If there had been no disagreement over the issue of slavery, the South would probably not have discerned a threat to its culture and the southern politicians would have been much less likely to seek "their right to secede." But was it only about slavery? No. It was also about the constitutional argument over whether or not a state had a right to leave the Union, and--of primary concern to most southern soldiers--the continuation of antebellum southern culture. Although the majority of Southerners had little interest in slaves, slavery was a primary interest of Southern politicians--and consequently the underlying cause of the South's desire to seek independence and state rights.



Talk about being brainwashed! Take your venomous accusations and lies out of here and educate yerself before you make such statements. We are all Republicans here, try to act like one!

Cheers, Hildy

[Joseph Pariah]

What's the SCRM's position on American Indian sovereignty?

[FreeSouthCarolina]

What's the SCRM's position on American Indian sovereignty?
Well, I don't think that we really have a position on that as an organization. The reason being is that there aren't really any Native American in South Carolina anymore. Of course there probably are a few but I have never seen one. To my knowledge there aren't any Native American Reservations in South Carolina. I was also informed (possibly misinformed) that the Cherokee Reservation in North Carolina is independent. If there are enough Native Americans in a region to justify sovereignty my personal stance would always be to grant it to them if they choose it. I apologize for not having a real direct answer, but that would be more of an issue for North Carolina as they do have reservations there.

[Kat]

Well snap my suspenders and send me to the laundromat! I think Hildy just stuck up for me!

Cheers, Hildy.





Really, no Reservations in south carolina? that surprises me, I did not know there were any states that did not have any...


I would not think even if there were, In a secession, on a reservation, native sovereinty could be messed with, reservations are not US land, therefore non transferable to the seceeded country. I think if the country of south carolina were to try and override that sovereingty, they would have a large problem on thier hands.

[Seabird]

whoa what got into Hildy!! Are you and Kat drinking together to bring this on? OMG do you need me to rush you to the hospital? Are you delirious?:icon_lol: Only joking ya'll.

Kat,

what other directives had the north issued? What other subjects were actually the REAL catalysts that caused the wee straw of slavery to break the camels back as it were, what is the ACTUAL reason that caused the south to want to form a new country?

The issue of slaves was part of the picture but it was more deep rooted than what you seem to think. The state of South Carolina was not going to allow the north to issue demands and commands to them. They wanted the liberty the Declaration of Independence gave them to govern themselves, have power to make their own decisions for the people fo SC, liberty to have representation in the federal government. At this time the north had applied a hefty tarriffs on all imported goods, remember SC is a coastal state so this hurt the people and in their eyes the north reaped the rewards. The north had the popular majority thus it was a constant threat of them being able to rule over the south. This became a major issue, they were not going to allow them to come in and change their way of life.

When the issue of slavery came up it caused an explosion. The south was mainly agriculture and in the north textiles and manufacturing. How convenient it was for the north to want to end slavery when it did not affect them as it did the south. Even though it was wrong, it was at that time the way of life for some of the plantaion owners in SC, they felt the north was trying to tear away their current way of life. Once again it was the final straw, they were not gonna to allow a bunch of yankees to determine the rules for the SC so they seceded from the Union.

So you see Kat it was about the right to determine their own destiny without outside interference.

[Seabird]

FSC,

I believe the Catawba have a rez in SC and part of NC.

All Native land is federal land under federal laws UNLESS they are totally self supporting. There are a few Nations that are totally free of any federal aide; they are then **considered to be a sovereign Nation. SC could not force them off their land without war and they could not force them to follow SC rules/laws. Guess they would be a country inside a country.

** Even though they are a Nation they still are under the federal laws and guidelines. They are still on federal land until they win in court to be recognized as an independent country.

[ciaranxavier]

OCoinnigh,

Well this will be a first, but I won't stand by and let you lamblast Kat on this thread with such a ridiculous rant. I may not agree with her at times, but kat is FAR from stupid, mo chara.....and quite frankly, I'm stunned as well!

Who the heck do you think you are that you can categorize a whole nation as killers and murderers, you eejit! Do you honestly think that just because Bush got us into a war that every american is in agreement with that? Of course not!

However, even though the majority of the country does not believe in that war, and the majority of americans want us out of there, we are still there, so we need to support our troops! Who, by the way, are also in danger.....we are being killed over there as well......and until they are safe, we need to support them....NOT THE DAMNED WAR! A true Republican would stand by his comrades in arms as a true American should stand by their troops! We need to work through our elected officials to get our troops home as soon as possible and get us out of there. Most americans disapprove of the war, based on:

CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll. Oct. 12-14, 2007. N=1,212 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.

"Do you favor or oppose the U.S. war in Iraq?"

10/12-14/07 34% are in Favor, 65% Oppose 2% are Unsure



Polling Report (http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm)


So you see, OCoinnigh, you are very wrong! You don't even live in America to make that assumption and you have no facts to back up a statement like that......I'm very disappointed in your remarks. Which have nothing whatsoever to do with this thread. We were discussing a multitude of things having to do with seccession, racism, civil war, etc., and you throw in this gob****e about americans being killers and the Iraqi war???? Go pick on somebody else, in the appropriate thread, we don't want to hear it!

Of course money is an underlying factor in everything, but it had little to do with the civil war.....the Civil War was about slavery AND the right of seccession and independence, i.e.,





Talk about being brainwashed! Take your venomous accusations and lies out of here and educate yerself before you make such statements. We are all Republicans here, try to act like one!

Cheers, Hildy


if your facts are right then why do you guys keep voting in the reason your in the war????

[Kat]

whoa what got into Hildy!! Are you and Kat drinking together to bring this on? OMG do you need me to rush you to the hospital? Are you delirious?:icon_lol: Only joking ya'll.

Kat,



The issue of slaves was part of the picture but it was more deep rooted than what you seem to think. The state of South Carolina was not going to allow the north to issue demands and commands to them. They wanted the liberty the Declaration of Independence gave them to govern themselves, have power to make their own decisions for the people fo SC, liberty to have representation in the federal government. At this time the north had applied a hefty tarriffs on all imported goods, remember SC is a coastal state so this hurt the people and in their eyes the north reaped the rewards. The north had the popular majority thus it was a constant threat of them being able to rule over the south. This became a major issue, they were not going to allow them to come in and change their way of life.

When the issue of slavery came up it caused an explosion. The south was mainly agriculture and in the north textiles and manufacturing. How convenient it was for the north to want to end slavery when it did not affect them as it did the south. Even though it was wrong, it was at that time the way of life for some of the plantaion owners in SC, they felt the north was trying to tear away their current way of life. Once again it was the final straw, they were not gonna to allow a bunch of yankees to determine the rules for the SC so they seceded from the Union.

So you see Kat it was about the right to determine their own destiny without outside interference.








Seabird,

About the Tarriffs... the great majority of the US population was coastal at the time, they yankee easterners suffered those tarrifs too, with nary a complaint, they were not tarrifs against the southern people, they were tarriffs against the brits. And also they were designed to protect US industry which was was in turn HELPING southern businesses, It was after all, the north who purchased southern cotton to create textiles. And grain for liquor, and liquor itself. those tarrifs were seen as positive by the south until talk of secession began. The only people who did not see them as positive I would imagine were the importers of goods. And perhaps the plantation owners who might have been able to afford ornate, impractical european furniture, the latest european couture and exotic spices to eat, but they could afford the tarrifs. Middle class agrarian southerners were not buying gowns from paris. And were not affected by the tarrifs at all, save a bottle of fancy liquor or a yard of ribbon now and then. The Tarrifs were accepted in the south before the secession, and again after the war, and they lead to a 100 and change year trade surplus. for the US. Perhaps we could use some tarrifs again these days? the US economy might benefit from that shot in the arm.

I am sayin this respectfully,not to try and change your mind, but just as food for thought, These same economic points were bandied about the upper class circles just decades later when child labour became the issue of the day, and again when sweatshops got regulated. And yet again when workers won the fourty hour work week. And still today every time it is suggested that american companies be responsible to determine the citizenship of its workers. Or allow for unionisation. Or be forced to pay a higher minimum wage

Think of how great it would have been for the textile and industrial sector in the north to have factories full of Slaves. Slavery would have benifitted the richest northerners as much or more as it did the south. And it did, until the lower classes began making things difficult for the factory owners, and politicians began to see that perhaps there needed to be jobs for non slaves, and began to think maybe this was a moral or human rights issue.... Probably not because they were good people..probably just because they needed votes.


In all of those later issues the argument against them was essentially the argument the south used to justify slavery... it will irreparably damage the american way of life if we cannot hire 12 year olds to work in our coal mines, or lock women into our shirtwaist companies and burn them to death, or force our employees to work 70 hours a week...


The things is, nearly all those things were outlawed, and the american way of life only got better every time.

The north was not trying to tear away the current way of life for any but the 5% of people owners... the 95% of non owners of people would have benefited. And the 5% of owners, likely would have landed on thier feet and found some other way to exploit the rest of us, they always do.

[Mellows1922]

GET EDUCATED
quite reading books some American JEW published and get facts.
Americans are killers, just ask the Iraqis,

While I'm very inclined to jump to Kats defence here, I won't, she's more than capable of wrapping you up pretty quickly, but I do have to ask was your above post deliberatly ironic ?

You called Kat stupid right before you wrote that so I'll assume it was.

What is a wrong with Jew published books by the way ? Do they all say the same thing ? How do you know if it's Jew published ? Does it have a big star on the spine ? I've heard some of them are pretty clever and disguise their writings ? That's probably covered in the Jew conspiracy though isn't it ?

Does the site not have a policy on blatant racist muck like this ? I know there has been a serious influx of right wing numptys of late but most of them have managed to keep the hate off the boil.

What is quite reading by the way ? Is it quiet reading, like not moving your lips ?

[ciaranxavier]

slavery causing the civil war is ridiculous, it was about money, all wars are about money. you're stupid kat, no matter how long your posts are. I had family on both sides in the US. ItS always about money. So you can keep your liberal bullsh*t politics to yourself. People here aren't as brainwashed as your are. I don't depend on a TV show for history lessons. Why don't you read what General Grant said about the carpet baggers. the rich elite love war, they get to sell the army boots, guns, clothes, hats, cannons, bullets, whatever you can think of.
GET EDUCATED
quite reading books some American JEW published and get facts.
Americans are killers, just ask the Iraqis, they've killed 700,000 of them. Thats what the government that supposedly free'd the slaves is doing know.
THEY WERE KILLERS THEN, AND NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!

i think we all know who the stupid one is here..... and i dont know but this type of stuff belongs on a neo nazi page. american jews lol. isnt a jew a jew and why cant they write books as well as everyone else?

[OCoinnigh]

In 1862, in the heat of the Civil War, General Ulysses S. Grant initiated one of the most blatant official episodes of anti-Semitism in 19th-century American history. In December of that year, Grant issued his infamous General Order No. 11, which expelled all Jews from Kentucky, Tennessee and Mississippi:

The Jews, as a class violating every regulation of trade established by the Treasury Department and also department orders, are hereby expelled from the department [the "Department of the Tennessee," an administrative district of the Union Army of occupation composed of Kentucky, Tennessee and Mississippi] within twenty-four hours from the receipt of this order.

Post commanders will see to it that all of this class of people be furnished passes and required to leave, and any one returning after such notification will be arrested and held in confinement until an opportunity occu