Subject: BTW, I really wanna know what your arguments are on the Holocaust "not happening". That'd be interesting. Plus, I'd get to call you a dumbass, which I've been aching to do for some time now. |
Author:
Alih
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 18:43:31 05/16/01 Wed
In reply to:
Alihja
's message, "First things first" on 18:40:19 05/16/01 Wed
>Alright, before I believe ANY of this, I want hard
>facts, not unfounded assertions. Give me proof that
>documentation of this exists and I will then check it
>out. For example, who was the Chief Justice? (Hm, yeah
>I wonder why the Supreme Court ruled it
>unConstitutional; it was their CHIEF JUSTICE for
>crying out loud) What did he do to make Lincoln give
>out a warrant for his arrest? As for the voting thing,
>its not like the South isn't to blame for stuff like
>that either. In the Kansas territory years before,
>people from both South and North rushed to it. Popular
>sovreignty ruled; basically, whichever side had more
>(pro-slave and anti-slave) people decided if the
>territory was to become a slave or free state.
>Pro-slavery citizens of Missouri crossed over the
>border election day and VOTED. Kansas became
>pro-slavery and eventually massacres erupted. BTW,
>Maryland was an important state throughout the entire
>war, as it was next to the Union capital. If Maryland
>was lost, then D.C. stood a good chance of it too. How
>would we have faired then, eh? During the Civil War,
>Lincoln used habeus corpus to keep captured
>Confederate commanders in jail without release. It was
>a known fact that the Confederacy had better
>commanders than the Union, so Lincoln kept them from
>returning to the south. As for the people who
>committed "treason", who were these people? Most
>likely the Copperheads, northern Democrats who from
>the start wanted to let the South go its own way. And
>I think they must've done a little more than just say
>"Let the South go." Riots and movements that disrupted
>the peace most probably broke out. Lincoln's goal in
>this war, we mustn't forget, was to keep the country
>together. Therefore, he (and Congress) found it
>necessary to stretch their Constitutional powers. Only
>when the 54th regiment and other black regiments
>gathered and fought was when it became about slavery.
>And lets not forget Jefferson Davis. He had opposition
>too, you know. Georgia threatened to secede (not
>succeed) from the Confederacy! Many Confederate states
>refused to pay taxes. There was a lot of opposition to
>the war on BOTH sides.
>
>Unfortunately for you, I'm learning about the Civil
>War right now in History. My teacher, Mr. Hensen, is a
>Civil War buff. So, tell me what your other arguments
>are. I guarantee I can shoot each and every one of
>them out of the water.
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |