World War 3 escalates

[Lees]

Wow, your really living in denial. I was here in the 70s and saw it for myself. I didn't move here I was born here.

I guess you don't know who Bull Conner is or George Wallace fighting to deny entry to black people at University of Alabama. Or the Klan rallies or the "sundown towns" (which my town was one of). Or the church bombing...

So you say. And on a forum you can say anything. I don't believe you.

My point is that I have asked you specific questions about the topic which we have been discussing. And you refuse to answer. See post #(19) again.

You don't admit your error. And you refuse to answer my questions.

What does that prove? You're free to lie about anything. You're free to say anything. And everyone is supposed to believe you because 'you said it'.

I'm not afraid of your questions. Yet you can't answer mine. But I, and everyone else is supposed to believe you?

As I said...you're not Southern. You have yankee blood in your veins.

Lees

 

[Lanman87]

So you say. And on a forum you can say anything. I don't believe you.

My point is that I have asked you specific questions about the topic which we have been discussing. And you refuse to answer. See post #(19) again.

You don't admit your error. And you refuse to answer my questions.

What does that prove? You're free to lie about anything. You're free to say anything. And everyone is supposed to believe you because 'you said it'.

I'm not afraid of your questions. Yet you can't answer mine. But I, and everyone else is supposed to believe you?

As I said...you're not Southern. You have yankee blood in your veins.

Lees

Ok, Russia had a right to put missile's in Cuba and the USA had the right to put missiles in Turkey. The USA had the right to demand the missiles be removed. Russia has the right to invade the Ukraine and everyone else has a right to support the Ukraine against Russia.

The South had the right to secede and the North had the right to stop them. After all, each country has the right to do whatever they think is best for their country.

There, are you happy.

Lee surrendered the Army of Northern Virginia and all generals surrendered shortly thereafter. The fact that Jefferson Davis never signed anything doesn't matter. He was captured, indicted for treason and went to prison, then upon release on bail he skipped bail and went to Canada and didn't return until all Confederates were pardoned by Andrew Johnson on Christmas of 1868. Bascially, nobody cared what he did.

Now I've answered your questions.

Here are some questions for you.

Was segregation wrong?

Was "Sundown towns" wrong?

Was the 1963 bombing of the 16st Street Baptist church by the KKK that killed four girls a racist act?

Is the KKK a racist organization?

 

[Lees]

Ok, Russia had a right to put missile's in Cuba and the USA had the right to put missiles in Turkey. The USA had the right to demand the missiles be removed. Russia has the right to invade the Ukraine and everyone else has a right to support the Ukraine against Russia.

The South had the right to secede and the North had the right to stop them. After all, each country has the right to do whatever they think is best for their country.

There, are you happy.

Lee surrendered the Army of Northern Virginia and all generals surrendered shortly thereafter. The fact that Jefferson Davis never signed anything doesn't matter. He was captured, indicted for treason and went to prison, then upon release on bail he skipped bail and went to Canada and didn't return until all Confederates were pardoned by Andrew Johnson on Christmas of 1868. Bascially, nobody cared what he did.

Now I've answered your questions.

Here are some questions for you.

Was segregation wrong?

Was "Sundown towns" wrong?

Was the 1963 bombing of the 16st Street Baptist church by the KKK that killed four girls a racist act?

Is the KKK a racist organization?

Well, since Russia had a right to put missiles in Cuba, why wasn't that 'right' allowed to stand. You say the U.S. had a right to demand their removal. Why? What right did they have? In other words, your use of the word 'right' means nothing. Your position means nothing.

No, the North did not have the right to stop the Southern States from seceding. That right was determined by the Constitution. As I showed you, every State retained it's sovereignty as a State. The North did not have the 'right' to go to war to bring the Southern States back to the union which they left 'peacefully'.

No, I'm not happy. I am willing to continue our discussion to show how wrong and confused and delusioned you and others are.

Lee surrendered 'only' the army of Northern Virginia. He didn't surrender the Confederacy. There were more armies in the South that continued the war. The idea of 'Appomattox' being the surrender of the Confederacy is just another lie by you and others, and believed by a host of others in America. They believe what they want. It's what they want to hear. It's what you want to hear.

The fact the Jeff Davis didn't sign or agree to any surrender means everything. It means the Confederacy never surrendered. No, no, no, Jefferson Davis did not skip bail. Where in the hell did you come up with that? Jefferson Davis was being promoted in the North to hang from a sour apple tree. Jefferson Davis was the most hated man in the north and they bragged how they would put him on trial to show before the world what they do to 'traitors'.

And all those brown nose high ended lawyers just chomped at the bit to be the ones to show how evil Jeff Davis was. Till they got the case. Till they started to review the legal aspects...the Constitution. And, guess what? They informed the President you had better leave this alone. You have your military victory. Leave this alone. Else it will be seen that it was the North that is responsible for the some 800,000 death's.

So all that boasting by the North was a lie. And when that lie was about to be presented to the American people, they balked. And instead they just went down, opened the cell door of Jefferson Davis and said,...go away. And he went to New Orleans where he spent the rest of his days. Just because he travelled to various places later means nothing. And was well received in most.

Hide the lie. Just like you want to continue to hide the lie. Just like America wants to believe the lie.

Oh...you have answered my questions you say. Then if Russia had the right to place missiles in Cuba, who is the U.S. to question that right? What is the basis for that supposed 'right'? Hypocrisy. It's ok if the U.S. says don't come near to my back door. But when Russia says the same with NATO and the U.S., then it's time for war. Hypocrisy.

As to your other questions, who says 'segregation' is wrong? Explain the 'Sundown Towns'. Explain the bombing of a church by the KKK. Yes the KKK is a racist organization. So what? Is the NAACP a racist organization? Please answer.

Lees

 

[Lanman87]

So, after reviewing this thread, it seems to me that we are talking about three different topics and they are jumbled together.

1. What prompted my response to the original post in this thread was the insinuation that it is NATO's fault that Russia attacked Ukraine. Basically, that NATO is the aggressor and Russia is the one defending their territory.

Specifically you asked this

Do you support the South's effort as you support the countries that broke away from Russia?

Lees

My answer is that the countries did not break away from Russia. When the Soviet Union broke apart Russia willingly let the Soviet States gain their independence. Lithuania was the first Soviet Republic to gain its independence when on, July 27th 1991, the Russian government recognized the independence of Lithuania. The other former soviet republics started gaining independence and being recognized by Russia as independent countries.

I simply pointed out that the North never recognized the independence of the South in the way that Russia recognized the independence of the former soviet states. Therefore, comparison to the American Civil war is not applicable.

Also, the question has one issue. You act as though the South is still trying to gain independence from the north. To my knowledge, there is no active political movement from the Southern States to try and gain independence from the North. There may be a few fringe groups calling for the Southern States to secede but there is no organized mainstream movement. 99.9% of people in the South are happy being part of the United States.

2. You question the legality of the Civil War. You indicated that believe that the South had the right to secede from the Union and the north's actions were illegal.

After doing some reading over the weekend, it is clear that before the civil war there was a difference of opinion about the legality of a state seceding from the Union. Lincoln and the Union acted without legal precedent as there was no specific clause in the Constitution or Supreme Court Ruling either allowing or forbidding secession.

If the South had won the war then it would be a moot point. Just as when the colonies won the war against England. If you win, you are a hero, if you lose, you are a traitor.

The issue was resolved in 1869 when the Supreme Court ruled that it is illegal for a state to Secede from the Union in Texas vs White.

And I apologize about saying Jefferson Davis skipped bail to go to Canada. He did go to Canada just after making bail. I got that part right. But was I didn't know was that he returned six months later to stand trial. A trial that never happened. It is clear that Davis had a very good lawyer.

It would have been interesting to see what would have happened had the southern states went to the supreme court to get a ruling on the right to secede before firing shots at Fort Sumter. Anyone can say "I have a constitutional right" but when there is a disagreement, the Supreme Court is who makes the call.

3. The third topic is the southern culture. You said you don't believe I'm from and live in Alabama, which I very much am and do.

My contention is that Alabama (The south in general and much of the United States to a lessor extent) had a racist past as part of our culture. And that we need to let tha part of our culture die, instead of holding on to it like it is a good thing.

You seemed to take offense at that remark. All I can say is that I ashamed that the people of my state tried to bar someone from a State University based on skin color. had "whites only" restaurants and restrooms, and put attack dogs and fire hoses on people walking down the street in order to try and get equal treatment under the law. I'm ashamed that my home county had KKK rallies on the courthouse square and had a sign instructing "N@@gers" to leave before it got dark. BTW-the last KKK meeting I can find on record in the town I grew up in is 2007.

I stand by my remark. Forced segregation and racism has no place in our society. Neither does hate for Jews or Muslims or Athiest. All human beings are created in God's image and worthy of respect. That doesn't mean we have to agree with everyone or promote other people views. However, we should all be treated with dignity and respect.

All of us, no matter our skin color or nationality, are capable of hate, racism, and prejudice.

 

[Lees]

@Lanman87 concerning post #(24)

No, the latest confusion is based upon your misguided use of the term 'right'. Which is, everyone has the right to do anything, which means it means nothing.

The breakup of the Soviet Union was due to years of fighting during the era known as the 'Cold War'. Russia did not 'willingly' let any countries go. It's economy was collapsing. It's military was weak after years of fighting the U.S. in Afghanistan. It simply was too economically, militarily, and politically, weak to resist. That weakness was displayed in it's failed attempt to kidnap Gorbachev in an attempt to stop the former Soviet States from leaving.

Though circumstances surrounding the independence of the Soviet States and the Secession of the Southern States are different, one thing remains the same. A state seeks independence from it's former unity with a larger union. With Russia, once it became strong again, it has always moved to get back those former states. With the U.S., it went to war immediately to get back those Southern States. So, the comparison is applicable.

You have answered my original question to you in that you do not support the South's effort of secession yet you do support the independence of the former Soviet States. Which to me is inconsistent, but typical yankee thinking. And, as has been displayed, your view is based upon the historical lies about the South's secession, as fabricated and taught by the North.

Fringe groups have a way of growing. Abolitionists were a 'fringe group' in the North.

I have showed you that Article 10 of the Constitution gave any State the right to secede. That is specific in allowing for secession. Which means Lincoln and the North illegally went to war against the South. A Supreme Court decision on secession wouldn't have mattered. The North was already ignoring the Constitution. Look at their response to the Dred Scott decision.

No, it's not a moot point. When union is settled by war and not by agreement, the point is never settled. It will always return.

Texas vs. White was in 1869, during the Reconstruction era, where the North played games with the Constitution and all laws. Texas was only a Military district at that time, as other Southern States were also. Sometimes the North said we were in the Union, and sometimes they said we were not part of the Union. Depended on what they wanted.

Concerning Jeff Davis, you are wrong again. It was the North's lawyers who withdrew after studying their case against Davis as a traitor fearing the outcome. President Johnson then decided to offer Davis a pardon. Davis refused as that would be an acknowledgement of guilt. He wanted his day in court. A year later another special counsel was appointed the case to try Davis. He too withdrew after studying the matter. It wasn't Davis lawyer, it was that Davis was right and was not a traitor. It was that the North didn't want that publicised before the world as it was going to be the 'trial of the century'. So with some more fancy footwork, they just let Davis go.

As I said, I don't believe you. Your roots are yankee or black. Are you black? As to further questions on 'race' I will not answer as it will just get the thread locked out or me banned.

Lees

 

[Lanman87]

No, it's not a moot point. When union is settled by war and not by agreement, the point is never settled. It will always return.

Who in 2024 doesn't agree that the Southern States are part of the United States?

If there is another civil war in the USA it will not be the North against the South. It will be Rural versus Urban. It will be the big cities against the rest of the country.

You have answered my original question to you in that you do not support the South's effort of secession

Who is making an effort to secede in 2024?

Nobody has ever asked me to sign a petition or attend a meeting to promote secession.

There is no effort of secession in the south that know about. Maybe you can point me to a website promoting secession so I can see what they have to say.

I have showed you that Article 10 of the Constitution gave any State the right to secede.

That is your interpretation of Article 10. Not a legal interpretation by a court. Unless it is settled in court, your (or my) interpretation doesn't matter. It is just an opinion that may or may not be wrong.

Concerning Jeff Davis, you are wrong again. It was the North's lawyers who withdrew after studying their case against Davis as a traitor fearing the outcome.

Did you not read the link I posted? The reason the north "dropped the charges" so to speak is that Davis's lawyer did a very good job of making the yankee lawyers think they may lose the case. Ultimately, they decided it wasn't worth the risk and just wanted Jeff Davis to go away.

Though circumstances surrounding the independence of the Soviet States and the Secession of the Southern States are different, one thing remains the same. A state seeks independence from it's former unity with a larger union. With Russia, once it became strong again, it has always moved to get back those former states. With the U.S., it went to war immediately to get back those Southern States. So, the comparison is applicable.

Russia is breaking its agreements with Ukraine. The north never had an agreement with the south. As I said, if the North had agreed to independence for the Southern States then 30+ years later broke that agreement and attacked the south. I would be in favor of the Southern States defending against northern aggression. Just as I'm in favor of Ukraine defending itself against Russian aggression.

Apparently, you don't think breaking an agreement is a big deal.

As I said, I don't believe you. Your roots are yankee or black. Are you black?

I'm neither a yankee or black. I'm a proud citizen of the State of Alabama and my family has been here for at least four generations. I grew up on a farm in rural Alabama, about halfway between Birmingham and Huntsville. I attended one of the state universities, then moved to Tennessee for 10 years. 20 years ago I moved back to the Huntsville area and have lived here ever since. I have a sister in Birmingham and a sister in Atlanta. I'm a southern white man who has learned from the mistakes of his parents and grandparents generations.

However, I do believe that the courts and government has moved to far the other way with the intentions of overcoming racism. For instance, while I understand the reasoning behind Affirmative Action, I also believe that Affirmative Action discriminates against White and Asians. I believe that employers should be able to offer a job to the most qualified person. They should not have to meet an artificial "quota" of minorities. It is just as wrong to hire a black person over a more qualified white person as it is to hire a white person over a more qualified black person.

As to further questions on 'race' I will not answer as it will just get the thread locked out or me banned.

Why would you get banned for speaking the truth about what you believe concerning race?

You've danced around that subject in this entire thread. I'm actually curious of what you have to say.

 

[Lees]

@Lanman87 concerning post #(26)

The Southern States are part of the United States, but only by the bayonet. Not by agreement.

My question pertained to the South seceding before the War Between The States. As I said, you are against it. Just as you are against any State seceding from the U.S.

Concerning the 10th Amendment, the word 'delegated' means just what it says. They could have easily said 'surrendered', but they didn't because surrendered is not what they meant. The States when they came into the Union knew they were not surrendering any powers. They delegated some powers.

John Quincy Adams of Massachusetts said in1839, "To the people alone is there reserved as well the dissolving as the constituent power...we may admit the same right as vested in the people of every state in the Union...(i.e. that the act of secession follow a breach of contract and be answerable to conscience) have the people of each state in the Union a right to secede from the confederated Union itself. "

In Virginia's Ratification Statement, "We the delegates of the people of Virginia...make known that the powers granted under the constitution, being derived from the people of the United States, may be resumed by them, whenever the same shall be perverted to their injury or oppression."

U.S. District Attorney, William Rawle, under George Washington said, "The Union is an association of the people of Republics, its preservation is calculated to depend o the preservation of those republics...It depends on the State itself, to retain or abolish the principle of representation; because it depends on itself, whether it will continue a member of the Union. To deny this right, would be inconsistent with the principles on which all our political systems are founded..."

These above quotes come from an article "A Theological and Political view of the Doctrine of Secession", p. 2-3. by Al Benson, Jr. in 1995.

I didn't say Jeff Davis didn't have a lawyer. And I'm sure he was a good lawyer. But it was the Norths own lawyers who abandoned the case for the reason I gave you. And later, Jeff Davis refused the parole because he wanted his day in court. The North didn't want it displayed before the whole world their guilt in the deaths of some 800,000 people. Jeff Davis was not a traitor. That lay at the feet of the North.

Every State had an agreement with the Union of States. Read again the quotes I gave you above. "the act of secession follow a breach of contract", "whenever the same (powers delegated) shall be perverted to their injury or oppression", So, yes, I think the North breaking its agreement with the Southern States was a big deal.

Yeah, yeah so you say. Again, you can say that till the cows come home. I don't believe you. If it is as you say, you're a traitor to your people.

There are plenty of threads here already where my views of race are given. Most of them are locked out. Shouldn't be hard to find. I will say this, race is a subject people want to talk about but only if in the end you agree with America's view of race.

Go ask @Lamb if what I said is not true. Perhaps she can show you the threads.

Lees

 

[Lanman87]

These above quotes come from an article "A Theological and Political view of the Doctrine of Secession", p. 2-3. by Al Benson, Jr. in 1995.

An article is not law, it is not judicial precedence. It is the opinion of the writer. Who, in this case, is a propaganda writer.

The Southern States are part of the United States, but only by the bayonet. Not by agreement.

Maybe not by your agreement. Let me know when a majority of people in the south agree with you.

Because of your refusal to talk about race I can only assume that you would welcome segregation, Jim Crow laws, and the rest of the mess that took place in the post WW2 America in particular, the American south. If I'm wrong then here is your chance to tell me that I'm wrong.

 

[Lees]

An article is not law, it is not judicial precedence. It is the opinion of the writer. Who, in this case, is a propaganda writer.



Maybe not by your agreement. Let me know when a majority of people in the south agree with you.

Because of your refusal to talk about race I can only assume that you would welcome segregation, Jim Crow laws, and the rest of the mess that took place in the post WW2 America in particular, the American south. If I'm wrong then here is your chance to tell me that I'm wrong.

No, the quotes are not the opinion of the writer. They are the quotes of the original sources. The only 'propaganda writer' here is you.

I don't need any majority to agree with me. The 4 bloody years of war and the military defeat of the South is proof that the U.S. is united only by the bayonet. Any who deny that, deny reality. But....I am not surprised.

Did you contact @Lamb on my past participation of the race questions? Why do you continue to bait me without that contact?

Assume whatever you like. Everyone else does. Oh gee, you are so bold when my hands are tied concerning the race question. Typical yankee bravery. Why didn't you answer my question. Is the NAACP a racist organization?

Lees

 

[Lees]

@Lamb

Has Lanman87 contacted you on my past participation on the 'race' questions? And if so, how do you respond?

Lees

 

[Lanman87]

No, the quotes are not the opinion of the writer. They are the quotes of the original sources. The only 'propaganda writer' here is you.

I don't need any majority to agree with me. The 4 bloody years of war and the military defeat of the South is proof that the U.S. is united only by the bayonet. Any who deny that, deny reality. But....I am not surprised.

Did you contact @Lamb on my past participation of the race questions? Why do you continue to bait me without that contact?

Assume whatever you like. Everyone else does. Oh gee, you are so bold when my hands are tied concerning the race question. Typical yankee bravery. Why didn't you answer my question. Is the NAACP a racist organization?

Lees

No, I didn't contact Lamb. I did search your post that you've made looking for references to what your position on race.

I am genuinely curious about what your positions are on the questions I've asked. If you don't fill comfortable answering in an open forum fill free to send me a direct message.

Also, would you mind telling me how old you are (approximately) and what state you live in?

I would say the NAACP has held racist positions. I've already stated that I think affirmative action is reverse racism. I believe many in the current black leadership are to quick to cry racism when anything bad happens to a minority. Sometimes people do bad things to others, not because of race, but because they are evil people in general. I am also against critical race theory. Mainly because it teaches that racism can be overcome with political action. Racism is a heart issue and laws can't change the heart. A Political movement will not cure racism. The only true solution is the Gospel of Christ guiding our hearts to love one another.

I would like to know what you would like to see happen, being that the southern states are nothing more the occupied territory to you.

 

[Lees]

No, I didn't contact Lamb. I did search your post that you've made looking for references to what your position on race.

I am genuinely curious about what your positions are on the questions I've asked. If you don't fill comfortable answering in an open forum fill free to send me a direct message.

Also, would you mind telling me how old you are (approximately) and what state you live in?

I would say the NAACP has held racist positions. I've already stated that I think affirmative action is reverse racism. I believe many in the current black leadership are to quick to cry racism when anything bad happens to a minority. Sometimes people do bad things to others, not because of race, but because they are evil people in general. I am also against critical race theory. Mainly because it teaches that racism can be overcome with political action. Racism is a heart issue and laws can't change the heart. A Political movement will not cure racism. The only true solution is the Gospel of Christ guiding our hearts to love one another.

I would like to know what you would like to see happen, being that the southern states are nothing more the occupied territory to you.

You say you searched my posts. What did you find? And where?

You can be curious all you like. Get @Lamb to allow me to fulfill your curiosity. If you're really still curious, you didn't find any of my previous posts. In other words...you're lying.

Why is my age and the State I live in important?

I didn't ask if the NAACP had some racist positions. I asked if the NAACP is a racist organization? Is it or not?

Get @Lamb to give me the freedom to talk about the solution, and I will answer. My hands at this time are tied.

Lees

 

[Lamb]

No, the quotes are not the opinion of the writer. They are the quotes of the original sources. The only 'propaganda writer' here is you.

I don't need any majority to agree with me. The 4 bloody years of war and the military defeat of the South is proof that the U.S. is united only by the bayonet. Any who deny that, deny reality. But....I am not surprised.

Did you contact @Lamb on my past participation of the race questions? Why do you continue to bait me without that contact?

Assume whatever you like. Everyone else does. Oh gee, you are so bold when my hands are tied concerning the race question. Typical yankee bravery. Why didn't you answer my question. Is the NAACP a racist organization?

Lees

@Lanman87 @Lees believes that whites are above blacks...which is racism and is not allowed to be promoted here on the site.

So @Lees, please stop tagging me. Racism is not going to be promoted.

 

[Lanman87]

You say you searched my posts. What did you find? And where?

You can be curious all you like. Get @Lamb to allow me to fulfill your curiosity. If you're really still curious, you didn't find any of my previous posts. In other words...you're lying.

Why is my age and the State I live in important?

I didn't ask if the NAACP had some racist positions. I asked if the NAACP is a racist organization? Is it or not?

Get @Lamb to give me the freedom to talk about the solution, and I will answer. My hands at this time are tied.

Lees

Wow, you really like calling me a liar.

The reason I want to know your age and where you live is that our age and culture have a bearing on our worldview.

I'm in my mid 50's and was born, raised, and live in Alabama. I was a child in the 70's during the latter half of the height of the civil rights movement. I lived in a county that was 98% white. I didn't attend school with any black people (or any other minority) until I went to college. There was no Jewish community, Asian community, Islamic community and very few Catholics. We were all white, protestant (mostly Baptist), and mostly lower middle class working people (My dad worked for a trucking company).

I don't know enough about the NAACP to comment on if they are a racist organization. I do believe legislation pushed by the NAACP and liberals to attempt to overcome racism went to far and were actually racism against whites and other races as well. Many of those policies and laws have either expired or been struck down by the courts. For instance, the courts ruled that colleges couldn't use race to determine admission to college. This does away with affirmative action in Universities because they can no longer set a quota for the number of blacks that must be admitted.

I didn't spend a lot of time reading your other post. I did see that you said Christianity should be actively taught in Public Schools and that you are not anti-Jewish. You also have an issue with the American Flag being displayed in churches. You also believe that diversity is a bad thing and that God intended for the races to be separate.

Based on what Lamb has said, I'm going to leave this conversation. I don't know if you have the ability to send a direct message on this forum. If you can, and want to continue this conversation in private then fine. If you can't send a private message then have a good day.

 

[Lees]

Wow, you really like calling me a liar.

The reason I want to know your age and where you live is that our age and culture have a bearing on our worldview.

I'm in my mid 50's and was born, raised, and live in Alabama. I was a child in the 70's during the latter half of the height of the civil rights movement. I lived in a county that was 98% white. I didn't attend school with any black people (or any other minority) until I went to college. There was no Jewish community, Asian community, Islamic community and very few Catholics. We were all white, protestant (mostly Baptist), and mostly lower middle class working people (My dad worked for a trucking company).

I don't know enough about the NAACP to comment on if they are a racist organization. I do believe legislation pushed by the NAACP and liberals to attempt to overcome racism went to far and were actually racism against whites and other races as well. Many of those policies and laws have either expired or been struck down by the courts. For instance, the courts ruled that colleges couldn't use race to determine admission to college. This does away with affirmative action in Universities because they can no longer set a quota for the number of blacks that must be admitted.

I didn't spend a lot of time reading your other post. I did see that you said Christianity should be actively taught in Public Schools and that you are not anti-Jewish. You also have an issue with the American Flag being displayed in churches. You also believe that diversity is a bad thing and that God intended for the races to be separate.

Based on what Lamb has said, I'm going to leave this conversation. I don't know if you have the ability to send a direct message on this forum. If you can, and want to continue this conversation in private then fine. If you can't send a private message then have a good day.

Why do you seem to know so much about the KKK and not the NAACP? What makes you an expert on calling the KKK racist and not the NAACP? Why aren't you ashamed of NAACP as you are the KKK?

Racism against whites is 'racism'....correct? According to you, you hate racism. But apparently the only racism you hate is against blacks.

Lees

 

[Lanman87]

Why do you seem to know so much about the KKK and not the NAACP? What makes you an expert on calling the KKK racist and not the NAACP? Why aren't you ashamed of NAACP as you are the KKK?

Racism against whites is 'racism'....correct? According to you, you hate racism. But apparently the only racism you hate is against blacks.

Lees

Sigh,

you ignored what I said.

"I do believe legislation pushed by the NAACP and liberals to attempt to overcome racism went to far and were actually racism against whites and other races as well"

Are you not allowed to send direct messages in the private conversations on this site?

 

[Lees]

@Lanman87 @Lees believes that whites are above blacks...which is racism and is not allowed to be promoted here on the site.

So @Lees, please stop tagging me. Racism is not going to be promoted.

I only tagged you to prove to Lanman87 that I had reasons not to get into the race question. And that I was not afraid to answer him or give my views.

I will say your statement, 'Lees believes that whites are above blacks' is not the whole truth. You present it in a way that makes me look like the bad man. Because you don't allow the discussion, no real understanding can be gained.

Lees

 

[Lees]

Sigh,

you ignored what I said.

"I do believe legislation pushed by the NAACP and liberals to attempt to overcome racism went to far and were actually racism against whites and other races as well"

Are you not allowed to send direct messages in the private conversations on this site?

Then answer my questions. What makes you an expert on the KKK and not the NAACP?

Racism against whites is 'racism'...correct?

Lees

 

[Lanman87]

Then answer my questions. What makes you an expert on the KKK and not the NAACP?

Racism against whites is 'racism'...correct?

Lees

I never claimed to be an expert on either.

 

[Lees]

I never claimed to be an expert on either.

That is evident. That didn't stop you from claiming the Klan as racist.

You claimed the Klan was racist, which it is. Why isn't the NAACP racist? Do you know what the letters in NAACP stand for?

How about the NAAWP? Are they racist? Or the 'Black Lives Matter' movement, is that racist?

Or LULAC? is that racist? Do you know what those letters stand for.

Lees