Statue defaced as U.S. Confederate monument protests grow

[iReason]

2 hours ago, Lokie said:

Yeah but at that time we had an idiot of a King who like most politicians who came later never really gave the 'British Redcoats' the full backing of the empire with all its resources (never underestimate your enemy and all that) so you got off likely and eventually won the day.

 

I've read that them red coats made damn good targets. Of course we had your rivals the French helping us...

 

I worked for a crusty Brit on the islands for spell and we would get into it. He always complained that the colonials cheated by hiding and such.  I said; guerrilla war-fare bubba. He laughed.

 

The same way we got our clock cleaned in Viet-Nam...

[thaihome]

1 hour ago, Lokie said:

And if the CSA had won your civil war...? Dosn't seem they were traitors to their homeland, and their values, so is you a Dam Yankee?

 

If its a slave thing then half the Union families with power were running operations on the backs of slave labour, whether in bondage or on subsistence pay, don't really matter, still lived off the backs of those poor people, anyway back on track, as an outsider it seems strange that people want to remove statues that have been there over 100 years, like y'all in denial or something... Embrace your history, move on and make good

Most of the statues were erected two generations after the civil war and were not actually war memorials. They were erected as symbols of white supremacy during the Jim Crow era.  

 

This has been discussed in several threads on the subject. The issues is not the fact they are memorials to slave owners or civil war heroes.  To say that is nothing more then a diversion from the real issue.  The real issue is the 100+ year dominance  of the white supremacy movement under the guise of the "Lost Cause" that deprived blacks of their constitutional rights from 1877 to the present day. That is what those statues represent and why they should be taken down and moved the museums that educate and explain the Jim Crow era in US history.  

 

If these statues were indeed actual war memorials why would the current white supremacy movement and neo-Nazis be so opposed to their removal? Why would they care?

 

TH 

[12DrinkMore]

6 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

We have already seen children's books banned in the UK as they aren't considered politically correct.

 

Yes, it was a sad day when they stopped having golliwogs on jam jars.

 

The Black and White Minstrel show disappeared as well.

 

Still, the koran is widely accepted as a suitable text, in spite of its totally racist bias.

[12DrinkMore]

32 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

I've never heard of leftists burning books, and it's not happening now

 

Try communism.

 

In terms of book burning and prohibition of unsuitable texts they must be among the biggest bonfire lighters.

 

[goldenbrwn1]

1 hour ago, iReason said:

 

Perfect! 

 

That's all ya got?

You only asked for one.....?

[goldenbrwn1]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/aug/17/abraham-lincoln-monument-torched-in-chicago-an-abs/

 

Well it seems now that any kind of historical figure is now fair game to these delusional millennial kids. 

Edited August 18, 2017 by goldenbrwn1

[Jingthing]

The statue issue is a trap. The issue is trump's weird comfort with white supremacy / white nationalism / Nazis. Don't fall for the trap. The trumpists are trying to shift the discussion because they know that the majority of Americans don't want to remove the statues. The statue issue is really easy. Let LOCAL governments decide. Some will stay, some will go. Not really a big deal.

 

The white racist scum, the new KKK, the neo-Nazi, the alt right, that marched and murdered in Charlottesville were not members of the garden party historical preservation society.  Again, this is a cynical game by the trumpists. If anti-trumpists get sucked into it, that would just be stupid. 

 

Trumpists are playing the hardest of hard ball with their distort reality propaganda. They know they're sinking fast in the wake of the Nazis in Charlottesville and trump's obscene immoral un-American response to it. This is their game. Shift the topic to statues. It isn't about statues. 

Edited August 18, 2017 by Jingthing

[thaihome]

33 minutes ago, Lokie said:

Yeah but at that time we had an idiot of a King who like most politicians who came later never really gave the 'British Redcoats' the full backing of the empire with all its resources (never underestimate your enemy and all that) so you got off likely and eventually won the day.

Maybe this is the time to mention that English king was actually a German (though he was the first one actually born in England and spoke English) and most of the so called "red coats" were hessian conscripts  from Hanover?

 

It is well acknowledged in the US that the war would have never have been won without the timely support of the French navy (who England was at war with at the time). A sure case of luck and timing. 

 

Also worth noting that at least one of Sally Hemming's children by Thomas Jefferson was conceived and born while Jefferson was US ambassador to France (negotiating that assistance) during the Revolutionary War.  Jefferson agreed to free those children on their majority if Sally would return to the US with him as she was actually a free person in France and could have stayed there with her children. 

 

TH   

[Bruce404]

Let us remember that the Confederacy leaders honored by these statues (erected mostly in the Jim Crow era as a symbol of white supremacy over former slaves and their descendants), as well indeed as all Confederate troops, were traitors to the United States, having committed treason, defined by the Constitution as " ... levying war against them [U.S.A.], or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort" (https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleiii). 

 

Under Federal law, treason is a capital crime punishable by death (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_by_the_United_States_federal_government).  

 

So after the Civil War it was only by the mercy, wisdom, and attempt at reconciliation of the Federal Government that most all of them were not tried, found guilty, and executed.  

 

The Civil War was about one thing, and one thing only -- slavery.  Not "states rights", not "preserving Southern culture and heritage", etc.  Slavery.

 

It is long overdue to stop honoring these traitors who tried to preserve slavery, and committed treason against the United States.

 

Their statues, as with the Confederate flags that flew over some statehouses well into the 21st Century, belong in museums so we do not forget why and when they were erected, and what they represented.  They do not deserve being looked up to in places of honor in public parks.  

[goldenbrwn1]

29 minutes ago, thaihome said:

It is well acknowledged in the US that the war would have never have been won without the timely support of the French navy (who England was at war with at the time). A sure case of luck and timing. 

I'm no history buff so please google and correct me if I'm wrong. But didn't the British and Royal Navy protect the new world colonists in the seven year war with the French and Austrians ? From which the rich mainly British colonial land owners didn't want to cough up some money for? And was that then the prelude to another English civil war? And yes the colonists did win by sheer luck. They were lucky the French hated the Brits so much, and if I might say so ....still bloody do! ? 

 

Off topic sorry.  I think this statue destruction of historical figures will soon be hitting Europe in a big way. ANTIFA is a global phenomenon.

 

My apologies I meant the war of independence not another English civil war.................?

Edited August 18, 2017 by goldenbrwn1

[Ruffian Dick]

I don't think that a statue of any historical figure are something that is issued randomly. Generally it's got to be someone who is worthy of veneration.

[ilostmypassword]

5 hours ago, Ruffian Dick said:

I don't think that a statue of any historical figure are something that is issued randomly. Generally it's got to be someone who is worthy of veneration.

You mean like Stalin, Hitler, and Mao?

[halloween]

14 hours ago, thaihome said:

It seems that certain posters have pretty much settled on two forms of debate.

False equivalency (as here) and whataboutism which will likely be in the response to this post.

?

TH 

ISIS considered those monuments abhorrent and offensive to their  line of reasoning, and have no consideration for the views of others.  Tell me why there is no equivalence to the PC brigade, who pursue their own dogma of destruction on what many consider an art form? Because they think they are doing "something good"?

[halloween]

6 hours ago, thaihome said:

Most of the statues were erected two generations after the civil war and were not actually war memorials. They were erected as symbols of white supremacy during the Jim Crow era.  

 

This has been discussed in several threads on the subject. The issues is not the fact they are memorials to slave owners or civil war heroes.  To say that is nothing more then a diversion from the real issue.  The real issue is the 100+ year dominance  of the white supremacy movement under the guise of the "Lost Cause" that deprived blacks of their constitutional rights from 1877 to the present day. That is what those statues represent and why they should be taken down and moved the museums that educate and explain the Jim Crow era in US history.  

 

If these statues were indeed actual war memorials why would the current white supremacy movement and neo-Nazis be so opposed to their removal? Why would they care?

 

TH 

You see them as symbols of one thing, the far right see them as symbols of another, so your answer is to destroy them. What about the rest of us, the quiet majority that consider them a nice bit of art that brighten up a dull streetscape? Who gave you the bloody right to ride roughshod without asking for our views on the subject?

[Skywalker69]

Chelsea Clinton 

[emoji818]@ChelseaClinton

The story of Lucifer-who rebelled against God-is part of many Christians' traditions. I've never been in a church with a Lucifer statue.

2:05 AM - Aug 18, 2017

[Orton Rd]

Will they do for the Lincoln memorial as well? Although not a slave owner he did represent owners in court to get run aways sent back, he is on record saying he was against mixed marriage and voting rights for blacks, and he did have a plan for after to war to ship ex slaves back to Africa, Lincoln was a racist no doubt about it. His only goal in the war was to preserve the Union and he said if he could do that without abolishing slavery he would.

Edited August 19, 2017 by Orton Rd

[Credo]

The statues are not being destroyed.   They are being moved .   Leaving them where they are at this point would endanger them.   

 

The Statues of Confederate leaders generally do not represent anything that is good.   People such as Washington, Jefferson and Lincoln had their faults, but their contribution to the country is considered to outweigh any bad that they may have committed.   

 

 

Edited August 19, 2017 by Credo

[ilostmypassword]

 

Trump loves Civil War Monuments so much that he actually creates history to justify building them:

 

"It's worth reconsidering only because of a New York Times report from November 2015 that says Donald Trump's Northern Virginia Trump National Golf Club features a plaque between the 14th and 15th holes honoring a Civil War battle at that precise spot. 

 

 

 

 

Credit: New York Times

 

Nice sentiment, small problem: there apparently was no such battle.

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/details-details-donald-trump-has-plaque-at-his-golf-course-commemorating-civil-war-battle-that-never-happened

[iReason]

1 hour ago, Orton Rd said:

Will they do for the Lincoln memorial as well?

 

No. He was not a traitor.

[ilostmypassword]

2 hours ago, halloween said:

You see them as symbols of one thing, the far right see them as symbols of another, so your answer is to destroy them. What about the rest of us, the quiet majority that consider them a nice bit of art that brighten up a dull streetscape? Who gave you the bloody right to ride roughshod without asking for our views on the subject?

First of all, those statues aren't being destroyed; they're being moved. In the case cited here, it was vandalism and the perpetrators should be prosecuted.

[halloween]

1 minute ago, ilostmypassword said:

First of all, those statues aren't being destroyed; they're being moved. In the case cited here, it was vandalism and the perpetrators should be prosecuted.

Moved, removed, or destroyed? What place of display will be acceptable to the PC brigade, in a locked warehouse until your fad dies out, or a foundry to be melted down or crushed?

[ilostmypassword]

Just now, halloween said:

Moved, removed, or destroyed? What place of display will be acceptable to the PC brigade, in a locked warehouse until your fad dies out, or a foundry to be melted down or crushed?

Lots of states have stopped flying the confederate battle flag that was ostensibly flown over statehouses and state capitols as part of Southern history.  Why not remove statues as well?

[halloween]

Just now, ilostmypassword said:

Lots of states have stopped flying the confederate battle flag that was ostensibly flown over statehouses and state capitols as part of Southern history.  Why not remove statues as well?

Because many people enjoy having them where they are. Because they are not yours to decide the fate of. Because they represent much more than a pro-slavery stance.

[iReason]

3 hours ago, halloween said:

You see them as symbols of one thing, the far right see them as symbols of another, so your answer is to destroy them.

What about the rest of us, the quiet majority that consider them a nice bit of art that brighten up a dull streetscape?

 

They are monuments to glorify traitors.

 

Can't imagine how or why they would "brighten up a dull streetscape" for someone.

 

Kinda bizarre actually...

[iReason]

3 hours ago, halloween said:

ISIS considered those monuments abhorrent and offensive to their  line of reasoning, and have no consideration for the views of others. 

Tell me why there is no equivalence to the PC brigade, who pursue their own dogma of destruction on what many consider an art form?

Because they think they are doing "something good"?

 

Ahh, that didn't take long.

 

Invoke the preposterous "ISIS" non sequitur as some sort of equivalent.

 

Hysterical, hyperbolic nonsense.

[halloween]

2 minutes ago, iReason said:

 

They are monuments to glorify traitors.

 

Can't imagine how or why they would "brighten up a dull streetscape" for someone.

 

Kinda bizarre actually...

That you "Can't imagine" is indicative of a personal problem that I can't help you with. But you might want to consider that the people of 11+ states were opposed to federal premiership and would not consider those that fought on their side as "traitors". Should all those people be removed from history?

 

In Oz we have a lot of anti-war who would like war memorials removed, and they are occasionally defaced. How would you feel if that became the next fad of the rabid PC?

[ilostmypassword]

7 minutes ago, halloween said:

That you "Can't imagine" is indicative of a personal problem that I can't help you with. But you might want to consider that the people of 11+ states were opposed to federal premiership and would not consider those that fought on their side as "traitors". Should all those people be removed from history?

 

In Oz we have a lot of anti-war who would like war memorials removed, and they are occasionally defaced. How would you feel if that became the next fad of the rabid PC?

Removed from history? Statues are being removed, not history.

[halloween]

5 minutes ago, iReason said:

 

Ahh, that didn't take long.

 

Invoke the preposterous "ISIS" non sequitur as some sort of equivalent.

 

Hysterical, hyperbolic nonsense.

Why don't you try explaining why it is nonsense? How is blindly destroying what you don't like as part of some moral/religious crusade without any respect for the feelings of others any different to ISIS doing the same. Both parties are absolutely sure of the "correctness" of their view that any counter view must be labelled as racist, nazi, or simply ridiculous.

[VocalNeal]

10 hours ago, Lokie said:

Yeah but at that time we had an idiot of a King who like most politicians who came later never really gave the 'British Redcoats' the full backing of the empire with all its resources (never underestimate your enemy and all that) so you got off likely and eventually won the day.

At the time the sugar islands in the Caribbean were more valuable to Britain than the thirteen colonies. Yes the French helped the ,now, US but they were using the "any friend of my enemy..." thinking and they also wanted the sugar islands. The thirteen colonies were sacrificed to retain the sugar islands. Naval resources were kept in the Caribbean . 

Edited August 19, 2017 by VocalNeal

[iReason]

33 minutes ago, halloween said:

That you "Can't imagine" is indicative of a personal problem that I can't help you with.

But you might want to consider that the people of 11+ states were opposed to federal premiership and would not consider those that fought

on their side as "traitors".

Should all those people be removed from history?

In Oz we have a lot of anti-war who would like war memorials removed, and they are occasionally defaced.

How would you feel if that became the next fad of the rabid PC?

 

They were traitors to The United States. Period.

If you are fine with that in your country, then that is a personal problem that I can't help you with.

 

"How would you feel if that became the next fad of the rabid PC?"

More hysterical, hyperbolic gibberish.

 

 

 

Edited August 19, 2017 by iReason