Page 3 of 3
Re: CNN.com commentary...Confederates were "terrorists"
Posted: Tue Apr 13, 2010 1:35 pm
by The Annoyed Man
I'm pretty fed up with the hard left's definitions of what does or does not constitute terrorism. Their willingness to apply the term to whatever they dislike or disagree with cheapens the term. It's like calling Bush Hitler. Even if you hated Bush, there is no way rational way you can compare him to Hitler. Over time, misuse of the term diminishes the true horror of the Third Reich; and that is the real sin, because it helps people to forget the lessons of that which should never be forgotten.
Now, being a racist might make you a despicable person, but it doesn't make you a terrorist unless you put that hatred into action. You gotta burn some crosses on somebody's lawn, or lynch someone for the color of their skin first, then you are a terrorist. But being called a terrorist for having thoughts which fall outside some hippie's approval range? Puh-leeze. And that standard cuts both ways. It's one thing to advocate for radical environmentalism (which is stupid, IMHO), but that doesn't make you a terrorist. It just makes you wrong. But when you put that radical environmentalism into action calculated to terrorize and destroy — such as throwing acid on peoples' cars, or burning down homes — then that is terrorism too, and it should be stamped out with extreme prejudice.
Re: CNN.com commentary...Confederates were "terrorists"
Posted: Tue Apr 13, 2010 1:38 pm
by joe817
Well done TAM! I totally agree! God Bless You!

Re: CNN.com commentary...Confederates were "terrorists"
Posted: Tue Apr 13, 2010 1:42 pm
by bayouhazard
If he said the Union troops were terrorists he could make a stronger point.
In any case, the war was not "about slavery" no matter how many times the repeat their Big Lie. For proof, look at the dates slavery was abolished in Maryland and other Yankee states and territories. Look at the undeniable fact that slavery was still legal in the North after the Emancipation Proclamation.
Re: CNN.com commentary...Confederates were "terrorists"
Posted: Tue Apr 13, 2010 1:45 pm
by frazzled
bayouhazard wrote:If he said the Union troops were terrorists he could make a stronger point.
In any case, the war was not "about slavery" no matter how many times the repeat their Big Lie. For proof, look at the dates slavery was abolished in Maryland and other Yankee states and territories. Look at the undeniable fact that slavery was still legal in the North after the Emancipation Proclamation.
Do you really wanna go there on a board about CHL carry?
The original state:
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/South_Car ... _Secession" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Texas version
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Texas_Dec ... _Secession" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I did only skimmed the Texas version because it would be depressing that our great state would do so, but the SC version mentions slavery
18 times. The bold sections are particularly telling.
The General Government, as the common agent, passed laws to carry into effect these stipulations of the States. For many years these laws were executed. But an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution. The States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa, have enacted laws which either nullify the Acts of Congress or render useless any attempt to execute them. In many of these States the fugitive is discharged from service or labor claimed, and in none of them has the State Government complied with the stipulation made in the Constitution. The State of New Jersey, at an early day, passed a law in conformity with her constitutional obligation; but the current of anti-slavery feeling has led her more recently to enact laws which render inoperative the remedies provided by her own law and by the laws of Congress. In the State of New York even the right of transit for a slave has been denied by her tribunals; and the States of Ohio and Iowa have refused to surrender to justice fugitives charged with murder, and with inciting servile insurrection in the State of Virginia. Thus the constituted compact has been deliberately broken and disregarded by the non-slaveholding States, and the consequence follows that South Carolina is released from her obligation.
The ends for which the Constitution was framed are declared by itself to be "to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity."
These ends it endeavored to accomplish by a Federal Government, in which each State was recognized as an equal, and had separate control over its own institutions. The right of property in slaves was recognized by giving to free persons distinct political rights, by giving them the right to represent, and burthening them with direct taxes for three-fifths of their slaves; by authorizing the importation of slaves for twenty years; and by stipulating for the rendition of fugitives from labor.
We affirm that these ends for which this Government was instituted have been defeated, and the Government itself has been made destructive of them by the action of the non-slaveholding States. Those States have assume the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic institutions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Constitution; they have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery; they have permitted open establishment among them of societies, whose avowed object is to disturb the peace and to eloign the property of the citizens of other States. They have encouraged and assisted thousands of our slaves to leave their homes; and those who remain, have been incited by emissaries, books and pictures to servile insurrection.
For twenty-five years this agitation has been steadily increasing, until it has now secured to its aid the power of the common Government. Observing the *forms* [emphasis in the original] of the Constitution, a sectional party has found within that Article establishing the Executive Department, the means of subverting the Constitution itself. A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery. He is to be entrusted with the administration of the common Government, because he has declared that that "Government cannot endure permanently half slave, half free," and that the public mind must rest in the belief that slavery is in the course of ultimate extinction.
Re: CNN.com commentary...Confederates were "terrorists"
Posted: Wed Apr 14, 2010 12:03 am
by VoiceofReason
drjoker
I don’t pay much attention to anything CNN says and I agree that to equate Confederate soldiers with terrorists is ridiculous. I have to point out though that Germany may have been a democracy up until Hitler took power but after that point it was definitely not. He had anyone that had opposed, or criticized him, killed.
I also disagree with the
propaganda “One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter”. Are “narco-terrorists” “freedom fighters”? Do you think CNN would call those that murder abortion doctors “freedom fighters”?
http://www.cnn.com/US/9810/24/doctor.killed.02/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Were those blacks that fought for the South terrorists?
Martin’s “logic” is so flawed and twisted it cannot even be considered logic.
Re: CNN.com commentary...Confederates were "terrorists"
Posted: Wed Apr 14, 2010 12:08 am
by VoiceofReason