This Is The Reality - Page 2

Any one that spouts lies straight from the pit of hell is evil. Your lie is the most vile of lies because it contradicts everything that is true about our history and our role in the world.

I would like to interject a few comments if I may. I wont bother commenting on the quote, as it is appears to not have a source. It could have been a janitor for all we know, but it does seem to adequately describe the ongoing view from some at the top.

'On the bright side however, we have done more to aid disaster victims and starving nations then any other nation.'
Are these really government funded, or private individuals and charitable organizations responsible? Perhaps a distinction is in order, between the US government and it's public citizens.

'Slavery was established by the colonial powers that established America. Did America not abolish slavery?'
Um, actually, no and no, and since I am a Civil War Living Historian, I feel I am qualified to comment directly on this. The Colonial Americans where utilizing a reprehensible institution that was already in place for hundreds of years, when specifying the European slavery practices over African peoples. One must remember that many cultures had slavery of one type or another. France abolished slavery officially in 1802, and England in 1772, on the strength of a court ruling by Chief Justice Mansfield. The Emancipation Proclamation was a brilliant move to cut off aid and support those two abolitionist countries were supplying to the Confederate government. Arguably, the reason for the WBTS was state's rights, as slavery was prevalent in the North as well. A few well-hidden piece of history: Slaves were only imported into Northern Harbors, and Jefferson attempted to write out slavery, but had to bow under pressure from the Slaver consortiums.

'Yes we did and doing so was a moral good. IT SAVED LIVES - it saved Japanese lives by the millions.'
Although it is said that 'The Bomb' saved millions of Japanese and American lives, because they avoided the need for an armed invasion of that country, does the end really justify the means?

'That means that our actions exceed in evil those that built concentration camps or those that used chemical weapons on their own people or those that killed millions.'
Apparently someone forgot the Asian-American concentration camps of WWII and the Reservation policies (forcing Indians onto land so worthless that no whites would want it), the DDT, Agent Orange, and other chemical agents cleared by the government, just to name a few. Are you aware of the Euthanasia practices, like the 'Black Stork' debacle in the 1910's, and of the Hoover administration, which Hitler adopted into his evil plans? America has a crap-load of closets jam packed to the top with skeletons. If you decide to take a good look into the darker aspects of the US, my friend, hold your faith tightly to your breast.

' [Mentally include language from Xris's second post, as I will not repeat that kind of language]'
Not to tread on your opinion Xris, but that isn't the proper way to debate, and to be frank, I find such language unacceptable.

'What do you have to say to that lefty?'
Could one really describe the founders of this Great Nation to have been conservative? Just a little food for thought, perhaps a nice thought provoking chocolate cake.

Okcirykid, I wouldn't mind seeing facts, figures, and/or the reasoning to support your opinion. I would suggest a percentile result though, particularly if you plan on quoting ancient wars and nations.

The quote appears to come from an article in the New York Times

Without a Doubt
By RON SUSKIND

Published: October 17, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/17/magazine/17BUSH.html?pagewanted=1&
adxnnl=0&adxnnlx=1110491791-wBzmbKveSdFibwgTK0ntLQ

referring to his "meeting with a senior adviser to Bush"

In the summer of 2002, after I had written an article in Esquire that the White House didn't like about Bush's former communications director, Karen Hughes, I had a meeting with a senior adviser to Bush. He expressed the White House's displeasure, and then he told me something that at the time I didn't fully comprehend -- but which I now believe gets to the very heart of the Bush presidency.

The aide said that guys like me were ''in what we call the reality-based community,'' which he defined as people who ''believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.'' I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. ''That's not the way the world really works anymore,'' he continued. ''We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.''

I agree with you - it could have been a janitor, lol. Pointless to comment on when we don't know who said it.

But you disagreed when I wrote: 'Slavery was established by the colonial powers that established America. Did America not abolish slavery?'

You responded: "Um, actually, no and no, and since I am a Civil War Living Historian"

How is that untrue? The Colonial Americans that 'where utilizing a reprehensible institution that was already in place for hundreds of years' were subjects of the British Crown. The official ruling government was England. They are the ones that clearly established slavery as an institution in the American states. BTW, to give my credentials I am a history major as well.

Furthermore, it was the American government that abolished slavery.

"as slavery was prevalent in the North as well"

No that is not true, all of the northern states were free states that had through their state constitution's abolished that reprehensible institution.

"Slaves were only imported into Northern Harbors"

Although it is true that slaves were imported through northern harbors, until the north abolished slavery, it is not true that they were only imported there. Harbors all through the south received slaves and had slave auction markets very close to the harbors.

"Although it is said that 'The Bomb' saved millions of Japanese and American lives, because they avoided the need for an armed invasion of that country, does the end really justify the means?"

The bomb was not an end but another means such as invasion of Japan was a means. Those were the two options and the former saved far more lives than the latter thus it was a moral good.

"Not to tread on your opinion Xris, but that isn't the proper way to debate, and to be frank, I find such language unacceptable."

Amazing you find that language unacceptable and not the vile lies that motivated that language unacceptable. The world truly is upside down. And I am not apologetic for using that kind of language - someone says something that evil to my face and their problem wont be my language but my Irish temper.

"Could one really describe the founders of this Great Nation to have been conservative? Just a little food for thought, perhaps a nice thought provoking chocolate cake. "

The founders were what was called classical liberals (limited government with individual rights of life, liberty, and property). A modern conservative is one that believes in conserving classical liberalism so the simple answer to your question is yes.

quote:

---

Okcirykid, I wouldn't mind seeing facts, figures, and/or the reasoning to support your opinion. I would suggest a percentile result though, particularly if you plan on quoting ancient wars and nations.

---

I made a statement. I didn't bother to defend it with a bunch of facts, it was just that, a statement of opinion. One that really can't be proven right or wrong because body counts in history are uncertain, especially concerning the indians. But it goes to reason that we have been the most powerful nation (economically and militarilly in the last century) So it would not be so impossible to believe that we committed the greatest crimes and the greatest acts of charity, simply because we could. But the point being, it is strange that we are so much of both, that was my point, not that we were evil.

The source is Tompain.com who's office is in Washington, they inturn collect news from other sources, including the NY Times.

quote:

---

Any one that spouts lies straight from the pit of hell is evil. Your lie is the most vile of lies because it contradicts everything that is true about our history and our role in the world.

---

Who's quoting lies from hell?

Xris – In the 1800 census, there are just over 18,000 slaves listed in New England alone. Most northern states either contained gradual emancipation language, or did not address it at all.

1780 – Massachusetts passes legislation that guarantees freedoms, but does not abolish slavery plainly until the phrase 'Equality under the law shall not be denied or abridged because of sex, race, color, creed or national origin.' is later added (in 1783?) Pennsylvania adopts gradual emancipation, freeing slaves born after 1780 upon their 28th birthday.
1784 - Connecticut and Rhode Island pass gradual emancipation laws. Connecticut later prohibits residents from participating in slave trade in 1788, again in questionable language, and does not prohibit slavery until 1848. Newport RI remained the largest import site in the country.
1799 - New York passes gradual emancipation law. Slavery is completely abolished 1827
1804 - New Jersey passes gradual emancipation law.
1851 - Ohio Constitution adds 'There shall be no slavery in this state; nor involuntary servitude, unless for the punishment of crime.'

7 out of some 22 certainly is not the entire North.

With the advent of the Confederate Constitution, the only southern importation port, Charleston, SC, was affectively closed to outside slave trade, as the Confederate Constitution banned the importation of slaves into the southern states. This did not include the interstate transportation trade within the CSA, and may be the cause of some confusion. Please refer to Section Four, Part One, of the CSA Constitution. Not until the 13th Amendment did the importations of people, and the entire institution end. If you can direct me towards conflicting information, please do so, although I do find slavery of any kind to be reprehensible, revised history is an evil in and of itself. It is part of these revisionist history practices that have mislead some into thinking the entire north was free of slavery.

And concerning the Bomb, you didn't grow up during the cold war. *hums the tune 'Duck and Cover'*

'Amazing you find that language unacceptable and not the vile lies that motivated that language unacceptable.'
What you responded to are opinions, the language you used is unacceptable to me.

You had originally written that as slavery was prevalent in the North at the time of the Civil War - this is clearly not true as your own dates reveal.

Regarding southern ports it is not true that Charleston was the only port - in fact there was a port in Virginia that was just outside Washington DC that up until the Civil War was bringing slaves into the country - I've seen a picture of it. Now once the war started I am sure that it was practically impossible to continue the import of slaves into southern ports as the northern navy had blockaded their ports, which is probably the most essential reason why the North won the war. But that is not what you said.

"And concerning the Bomb, you didn't grow up during the cold war. *hums the tune 'Duck and Cover'* "

I sure did - I was 20 when the Cold War ended. We even had duck and cover practice in elementary school.

"What you responded to are opinions, the language you used is unacceptable to me."

Yes and what Hitler said was also opinion. Just because someone spouts ignorant and vile opinions does not mean I am required to be polite. In fact I think it is immoral and cowardly to refuse to strongly oppose such disgusting opinions. There is a point where someone can go to far.

quote:

---

Just because someone spouts ignorant and vile opinions does not mean I am required to be polite.

---

I agree - And I won't be polite either.

quote:

---

Any one that spouts lies straight from the pit of hell is evil. Your lie is the most vile of lies because it contradicts everything that is true about our history and our role in the world.

---

I hope Xris that you continue to disbelieve those voices you hear coming from hell - and you might want to seek help.

Thank you Xris, I have just found references to the VA port, which certainly was not the largest. And the port at NY imported even after the state abolished slavery. As to no slavery in the north, again you are mistaken. Census records for states in the north include slaves right up until the 13th Amendment, regardless of that states requirements. I am not including those listed as 'servants'. Gen. Sherman, the man who has been said to be the 'death of chivalry in war', owned slaves, and refused to give them up until the 13th Amendment abolished that evil institution for once and for all. Gen. Lee however, did not own any persons himself.

Are you aware that a disproportionate number of southern blacks owned slaves? One black planter, named William Ellison, owned over a hundred slaves who were, by reputation, the worst fed and the worst clothed in his part of South Carolina. I would suggest you examine your curriculum, with that Revised History agenda in mind.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
--
'Yes and what Hitler said was also opinion. Just because someone spouts ignorant and vile opinions does not mean I am required to be polite. In fact I think it is immoral and cowardly to refuse to strongly oppose such disgusting opinions. There is a point where someone can go to far.'

And I have stated my opinion, in that your language was 'unacceptable to me'. One need not resort to the foul, to voice one's opinions strongly. Indeed, I find those that resort to the more base words found in the English language, in most cases, lack the mental ability to communicate eloquently. From your other posts, you appear to be a very intelligent person, and you have made your points known strongly, without resorting to foul language. When I am upset, I can swear with the best of them, but one of the beauties of a forum such as this one, is that you can walk away, and collect yourself and your thoughts.

I was raised never to use foul language in the presence of women, so I do not use such language online, since you can never really tell who is reading your material. And that is the reasoning behind 'My Opinion' and comment on your use of language. Besides, you will always retain credibility if you utilize proper language. I am trying to help you Xris, get over it already.

So you are saying that people were allowed to own slaves in states that had abolished slavery? You will have to provide some historical proof for me to substantiate that claim.

Yes I was aware that blacks owned slaves in the south - PBS recently had a special on it - was quite interesting.
______

As I said, his comments were so gross and vile that my Irish temper got the better of me. However, your points are all well taken!

quote:

---

As I said, his comments were so gross and vile

---

We are all human - we loose our temper. The proper thing is to say you're sorry.

To say that my statement was gross and vile does not make it so.

quote:

---

Our country has done the most good in this world. Our country has also done the most evil. Strange that is.

---

"Our country has done the most good in this world" Is that vile?

"Our country has also done the most evil." If our country has done nothing wrong - I would say that statement is wrong, that would be like calling Jesus evil. But our country has done a lot of things wrong. Add to that the technology of the 20th century - you can do a lot of damage. It is possible that maybe we have not done the most evil, but if not, I'm sure we're a close second. To deny that is to just close your eyes and pretend it all away. You can dissagree, but to call it vile and gross lies told from hell. Aren't you exagerating just a little bit. You can't just throw language around like that without providing some supporting evidence. Was it my statement that made you so angry? or is it your way of denying the truth when you're faced with it?

"Strange Isn't It" The final point of my statement, are such questions vile or gross, lies spouted from hell, etc. Is it wrong to question, or are we not free to do that. Isn't that what America is all about, or maybe not your America. In your America we would all be patriotic to whatever our country deems is right against the whole world if possible. This is what made Japan attact the world, this is what made Germany attact the world. But not America. We won't attact the world without cause, the American people will not stand for it. That's what America is all about, that's what it means to be American. You are given the freedom to question your government because that is what you are supposed to do when your government does things wrong. Your government will do things wrong. POWER CORRUPTS, and if you had served in the military, you would know that, you would see it first hand. Fortunately, even in the miltary we have rights, there it is the chain of command.

It is strange that we are both good and evil, but it is possible because we are a free nation.

quote:

---

quote: a Bush adviser told reporter Ron Suskind last fall? The adviser dismissed journalists as part of the "reality-based community" and bragged: "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality...we'll act again, creating other new realities..."



From TomPain.com

---

Now Xris - now that we have gone a hundred miles from the original post - lets get back to it.

Actually, only four Northern states, Ohio Massachusetts, New York, and Connecticut outlawed slavery all together before 1860, the others held either gradual emancipation that did not abolish slavery, or questionable language that could be interpreted and twisted enough to allow the owning of a person. In some cases, these laws were just ignored by the citizens.

Well, enough of that, perhaps we should carry on that discussion in Email

You forgot Vermont and the gradual emancipation laws led to eventual abolition in most cases and made slavery extremely rare until the full impact of the law kicked in. Some of the language was questionable because of the New England practice of sending children of to apprenticeships.