Tunisia 37 tourists murdered on beach near marina

[rognvald]

Originally Posted by DeepFrz

You folks are so into navel gazing that you have completely missed the big picture. America has named both Cuba and Iran terrorist countries. How many countries since WW2 have Cuba and Iran bombed compared to how many countries America has bombed. How many regime changes have these countries perpetrated as compared to America. How have Cuba and Iran profited from making huge loans to countries knowing they could never pay the loan back and thus corrupted those governments. Britain is also complicit in some of this nonsense as well but to a lesser extent since WW2.

Now I ask, which are the terrorist countries?

Freeze,
Two questions: 1.)How dangerous would Cuba have been if we ignored
the Cuban missile crisis?
2.) How dangerous would Iran be if they had nuclear
weapons.
Your remarks are based upon conjecture since neither country had the ability to successfully launch a serious attack. However, I agree with your statement concerning America's involvement in unnecessary wars. Tunisia . . . o.k., I said it.

[rognvald]

" I say this……continue to quote back and forth different historian viewpoints on why the south wanted to succeed until you exhaust yourselves. The truth is. had they been successful in succeeding, their profits would’ve been granted through slavery. If you’d like to be proud about that, and carry on as though, to this day, you are somehow victimized because it didn’t turn out that way, than I realistically have no possible way of swaying your opinion." Gadagirl


Gada,
Slavery is a human institution. There is no group that exists today that has not had slavery in their past. The Persians, Greeks, Romans, Arabs, Europeans, African tribes, Indian tribes, North and South Americans, Polynesians, to name a few. Slavery continues today in full force in Africa--perhaps one of the greatest areas of slave trade in the world. The recent abduction of African school girls by Boko Haram is but a tip of the iceberg in a continent that is rife with this practice. It has been a part of warfare and commerce for millenia and has served a useful, profitable and practical purpose for the perpetrators. In fact, the original slave traders that brought Africans to the New World were, in fact, native Africans who captured the slaves and sold them to largely Arab,Dutch and Jewish traders. However, we must remember that slavery ,although a cruel practice, was not illegal. It was the prime source of labor that helped develop the Americas and it wasn't cheap. A young 20 year old male healthy slave could bring as much as $40,000. US dollars in today's market. George Washington, our first president, was the largest slaveholder in the United States. Jefferson was also a large plantation owner as well as many of our original founding fathers. So, was slavery an unjust human practice: yes. Was it illegal: no. But in a 21st Century whitewashed world, we want to punish, degradate and denigrate those who were involved in a legal practice and infer that they should have known that that same legal enterprise would be considered shameful to future generations. So, let's all feel good and forget the real facts and rewrite History to fit a hole that makes us feel proud to its opposition 150 years hence. Lincoln, who suspended Habeus Corpus, interned political foes in concentration camps, closed newspapers contrary to his cause, pursued a brutal slash and burn warfare against his opponents in the South and began the decimation of Native Americans with Civil War hardened generals Sherman, Sheridan, Howard, Crook and Miles who specialized in inhuman butchery, rape and pillage is History's(?) Great Emancipator who freed the American slaves because it was right and just . . . well I guess so if you said it.

[Island Time O25]

IMO the growth of terrorism worldwide is a reflection on our true prioritites as society. We really don't want to be bothered with nipping terrorism in the bud due to our fear of being thought of as un-PC (very few rare exceptions not withstanding but even those are usually pre-election or budget seeking ploys not really aimed at eradicating the problem on a large scale). Look at what is happening with the pedophiles lately. We do not wait for them to molest 50-100-1000 kids but we actively seek them out and get them early and often, mostly before they can even do damage to 1 kid, by faking them out with false ads, undercovers, etc.

To do away similarly with the terrorists we need a likewise approach - to go to the root of the problem (unlike pedophilia, where the root is the individual and his ideas/actions, terrorism is mostly born out of ideas so the roots of the terrorism problem are the idea generators and not simply individuals/followers bent on turning these ideas into action). But how many of us are ready to go into the so called "religious places" and root out the true culprits? Very few of us apparently as we were programmed last 40-50 years to PC view of all religions being benign and harmless but for a "few bad apples" among the temple going crowd. When in fact some of the so called "religions" are nothing but evil cults to be eradicated before they commit their "Jonestown" upon not only themselves (not a bad outcome) but mostly upon innocent bystanders. Sad but true.

[rognvald]

Originally Posted by Island Time O25

IMO the growth of terrorism worldwide is a reflection on our true prioritites as society. We really don't want to be bothered with nipping terrorism in the bud due to our fear of being thought of as un-PC (very few rare exceptions not withstanding but even those are usually pre-election or budget seeking ploys not really aimed at eradicating the problem on a large scale). Look at what is happening with the pedophiles lately. We do not wait for them to molest 50-100-1000 kids but we actively seek them out and get them early and often, mostly before they can even do damage to 1 kid, by faking them out with false ads, undercovers, etc.

To do away similarly with the terrorists we need a likewise approach - to go to the root of the problem (unlike pedophilia, where the root is the individual and his ideas/actions, terrorism is mostly born out of ideas so the roots of the terrorism problem are the idea generators and not simply individuals/followers bent on turning these ideas into action). But how many of us are ready to go into the so called "religious places" and root out the true culprits? Very few of us apparently as we were programmed last 40-50 years to PC view of all religions being benign and harmless but for a "few bad apples" among the temple going crowd. When in fact some of the so called "religions" are nothing but evil cults to be eradicated before they commit their "Jonestown" upon not only themselves (not a bad outcome) but mostly upon innocent bystanders. Sad but true.

IslandTime,
I'll be the first to stand in line for Big Brother. Let's eradicate all personal freedoms and personal liberty and institute another government agency: The President's office for the Safety of the American People. We can place spies in selected locations throughout individual communities in areas as diverse as schools, parks, small and large businesses, restaurants, shopping malls, etc. We can train a highly sensitive corp of agents much like the high caliber of people we see in Homeland Security to actively and passively protect innocent Americans against any and all real or perceived threats . . . among them terrorists, atheists, environmental activists, unfriendly neighbors, questionable Ma and Pa's, errant and misbehaving kids, detractors of president Lincoln--the Great Emancipator and ,of course, the pedophiles you mention above. We need to get people in line. The safety of the American people is at stake. I ,for one, will pledge my support and will vow not to promote any incendiary ideas that inflame CF contributors and carefully weigh all posts with an eye to "Safety of the American People" . . . . . but, on second thought . . . . . . . . Good luck and good sailing, Comrade Rognvald--professor of Tunisian History post 1800, Karl Marx University

[tropicalescape]

Originally Posted by rognvald

" I say this……continue to quote back and forth different historian viewpoints on why the south wanted to succeed until you exhaust yourselves. The truth is. had they been successful in succeeding, their profits would’ve been granted through slavery. If you’d like to be proud about that, and carry on as though, to this day, you are somehow victimized because it didn’t turn out that way, than I realistically have no possible way of swaying your opinion." Gadagirl


Gada,
Slavery is a human institution. There is no group that exists today that has not had slavery in their past. The Persians, Greeks, Romans, Arabs, Europeans, African tribes, Indian tribes, North and South Americans, Polynesians, to name a few. Slavery continues today in full force in Africa--perhaps one of the greatest areas of slave trade in the world. The recent abduction of African school girls by Boko Haram is but a tip of the iceberg in a continent that is rife with this practice. It has been a part of warfare and commerce for millenia and has served a useful, profitable and practical purpose for the perpetrators. In fact, the original slave traders that brought Africans to the New World were, in fact, native Africans who captured the slaves and sold them to largely Arab,Dutch and Jewish traders. However, we must remember that slavery ,although a cruel practice, was not illegal. It was the prime source of labor that helped develop the Americas and it wasn't cheap. A young 20 year old male healthy slave could bring as much as $40,000. US dollars in today's market. George Washington, our first president, was the largest slaveholder in the United States. Jefferson was also a large plantation owner as well as many of our original founding fathers. So, was slavery an unjust human practice: yes. Was it illegal: no. But in a 21st Century whitewashed world, we want to punish, degradate and denigrate those who were involved in a legal practice and infer that they should have known that that same legal enterprise would be considered shameful to future generations. So, let's all feel good and forget the real facts and rewrite History to fit a hole that makes us feel proud to its opposition 150 years hence. Lincoln, who suspended Habeus Corpus, interned political foes in concentration camps, closed newspapers contrary to his cause, pursued a brutal slash and burn warfare against his opponents in the South and began the decimation of Native Americans with Civil War hardened generals Sherman, Sheridan, Howard, Crook and Miles who specialized in inhuman butchery, rape and pillage is History's(?) Great Emancipator who freed the American slaves because it was right and just . . . well I guess so if you said it.

All things being equal one side or the other , what gets stuck in my mind is the "treason part" of the civil war..( my ancestors fought on the side of the "just and true cause" by the way..)

[rognvald]

Originally Posted by tropicalescape

All things being equal one side or the other , what gets stuck in my mind is the "treason part" of the civil war..( my ancestors fought on the side of the "just and true cause" by the way..)

Escape,
Remember these famous lines written in our Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.-

Treason?

[Island Time O25]

Originally Posted by rognvald

IslandTime,
I'll be the first to stand in line for Big Brother. Let's eradicate all personal freedoms and personal liberty and institute another government agency: The President's office for the Safety of the American People. We can place spies in selected locations throughout individual communities in areas as diverse as schools, parks, small and large businesses, restaurants, shopping malls, etc. We can train a highly sensitive corp of agents much like the high caliber of people we see in Homeland Security to actively and passively protect innocent Americans against any and all real or perceived threats . . . among them terrorists, atheists, environmental activists, unfriendly neighbors, questionable Ma and Pa's, errant and misbehaving kids, detractors of president Lincoln--the Great Emancipator and ,of course, the pedophiles you mention above. We need to get people in line. The safety of the American people is at stake. I ,for one, will pledge my support and will vow not to promote any incendiary ideas that inflame CF contributors and carefully weigh all posts with an eye to "Safety of the American People" . . . . . but, on second thought . . . . . . . . Good luck and good sailing, Comrade Rognvald--professor of Tunisian History post 1800, Karl Marx University

Huh?

Oh, reading your sarcasm I would guess you'd be against Truman dropping the Big One on Japan. After all what can be a bigger gov't intrusion than that? Tough problems require tough solutions. Unfortunately in our PC times even self-thought conservatives such as yourself forget that and equate solving a problem with "big government" involvement.

[rognvald]

Originally Posted by Island Time O25

Huh?

Oh, reading your sarcasm I would guess you'd be against Truman dropping the Big One on Japan. After all what can be a bigger gov't intrusion than that? Tough problems require tough solutions. Unfortunately in our PC times even self-thought conservatives such as yourself forget that and equate solving a problem with "big government" involvement.

IslandTime,
I hope you have taken this with good humor and tongue and cheek. But, to answer your question: One cannot equate the destruction/erosion of personal liberties guaranteed in our Constitution and Bill of Rights( as mentioned in my previous post) with a decision made by "big government" in WWII to drop the bomb on Japan. It is a non sequitur since the decision was made by the executive branch(President) who was duly elected by the American people and within the limits of the Constitution and his office. If we lived under Fascism, then it would certainly would be the case since a leader would be by design-de facto. However, historically, I was not opposed to dropping the bomb on Japan since we were engaged in total war and military intelligence knew that based upon the fierce defense of Iwo Jima by Japanese troops in the South Pacific that an attack on mainland Japan could involve another year and the countless loss of American lives. So,unfortunately, our federal system under the control of "Big Government" has become so perverted from the original intent of our founding fathers that it is barely recognizable. With its bloated, dysfunctional payrolls of incompetent political appointees to the blatant interference and intrusion by the Federal government abridging and nullifying the rights of states guaranteed in our Constitution to our perverse destiny of being the policeman of the world as our nation is going broke is a sad litany of negatives that define a government and system out of control. When we elect unqualified officials based upon personality, gender, ethnicity rather than solid proven credentials, we have, so to speak, hired an appointed harbormaster to cross the Atlantic. And, as the population of the United States continues down a path of illiteracy and declining national educational standards, what do you expect from future voters and politicians? So, if you're a fan of "Big Government" by today's standards, you place the power of a growing uneducated electorate in the hands of incompetent elected officials. Remember the lines of Thomas Jefferson: Without an intelligent electorate, Democracy is doomed to fail. I hope that makes sense. Good luck and good sailing.

[rognvald]

And, do you think these Americans know the location of Tunisia?

https://youtu.be/SRkFDcX_72c

[Group9]

Originally Posted by tropicalescape

All things being equal one side or the other , what gets stuck in my mind is the "treason part" of the civil war..( my ancestors fought on the side of the "just and true cause" by the way..)

My ancestors on my father's side fought in that treasonous war against England and in the "treasonous" war against the North. I guess which one was the "just and true cause" would be a matter of perspective.

But, I'm hoping that the British will have gotten over it if I ever visit there.

But, I find it perplexing that there were five slave holding states in the Union, that remained slave holding states, until several months after the end of the Civil War and the ratification of the 13th amendment. Many northerners, either don't know that, or just don't want to consider the ramifications of that
But, if the war was all about ending slavery, why didn't they just end it there first?

FYI: The 13th Amendment.
Passed by Congress on January 31, 1865, and ratified on December 6, 1865, the 13th amendment abolished slavery in the United States.
The 13th amendment, which formally abolished slavery in the United States, passed the Senate on April 8, 1864, and the House on January 31, 1865. On February 1, 1865, President Abraham Lincoln approved the Joint Resolution of Congress submitting the proposed amendment to the state legislatures. The necessary number of states ratified it by December 6, 1865. The 13th amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction."
In 1863 President Lincoln had issued the Emancipation Proclamation declaring “all persons held as slaves within any State, or designated part of a State, the people whereof shall then be in rebellion against the United States, shall be then, thenceforward, and forever free.” Nonetheless, the Emancipation Proclamation did not end slavery in the nation. Lincoln recognized that the Emancipation Proclamation would have to be followed by a constitutional amendment in order to guarantee the abolishment of slavery.
The 13th amendment was passed at the end of the Civil War before the Southern states had been restored to the Union and should have easily passed the Congress. Although the Senate passed it in April 1864, the House did not. At that point, Lincoln took an active role to ensure passage through congress. He insisted that passage of the 13th amendment be added to the Republican Party platform for the upcoming Presidential elections. His efforts met with success when the House passed the bill in January 1865 with a vote of 119–56.
With the adoption of the 13th amendment, the United States found a final constitutional solution to the issue of slavery. The 13th amendment, along with the 14th and 15th, is one of the trio of Civil War amendments that greatly expanded the civil rights of Americans.


Passed in Congress by a vote of 119-56? So almost a third of the northern states representatives in the House, thought it was a good idea to leave slavery as legal in the USA after supposedly fighting for four years to end it? How does that jive with the rewriting of history to make the Civil War only about slavery?

Our Documents - 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: Abolition of Slavery (1865)

[Group9]

Originally Posted by rognvald

And, do you think these Americans know the location of Tunisia?

https://youtu.be/SRkFDcX_72c

What business would let the stupidest people in the company, decide the direction they should take? And, what would be the likely outcome for any business that did that?

The USA's problem in a nutshell and the one fatal flaw in democracy--everyone gets to vote.

[tropicalescape]

Originally Posted by rognvald

Escape,
Remember these famous lines written in our Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.-

Treason?

"reduce them under absolute Despotism" I cant see where the Despotism was absolute..My personal belief is that the North had the ways and means to introduce modernaty and that the South (my people included) said something akin to "those fancy machines are nice and all but I like the fact that I can go out and just utter a word and "the sun will start shining" ,and if I feel like it I can go out back and take my pick of them women,my sons too! "Nothing like finding satisfaction" when the decent women that work so hard to make our house a home are having their "monthly calling".." No sir, yall just keep buying our cotton and we will process it the way we like"! To this the Yank would say "Well if you insist, I guess we will start buying our cotton in Egypt ! To this Johnny would comment "If youins are going to do that then I guess we will form our own country and we will call it "The CFSoAmerica" ..Then we know what happed after that..

[Island Time O25]

Originally Posted by rognvald

IslandTime,
I hope you have taken this with good humor and tongue and cheek. But, to answer your question: One cannot equate the destruction/erosion of personal liberties guaranteed in our Constitution and Bill of Rights( as mentioned in my previous post) with a decision made by "big government" in WWII to drop the bomb on Japan. It is a non sequitur since the decision was made by the executive branch(President) who was duly elected by the American people and within the limits of the Constitution and his office. If we lived under Fascism, then it would certainly would be the case since a leader would be by design-de facto. However, historically, I was not opposed to dropping the bomb on Japan since we were engaged in total war and military intelligence knew that based upon the fierce defense of Iwo Jima by Japanese troops in the South Pacific that an attack on mainland Japan could involve another year and the countless loss of American lives. So,unfortunately, our federal system under the control of "Big Government" has become so perverted from the original intent of our founding fathers that it is barely recognizable. With its bloated, dysfunctional payrolls of incompetent political appointees to the blatant interference and intrusion by the Federal government abridging and nullifying the rights of states guaranteed in our Constitution to our perverse destiny of being the policeman of the world as our nation is going broke is a sad litany of negatives that define a government and system out of control. When we elect unqualified officials based upon personality, gender, ethnicity rather than solid proven credentials, we have, so to speak, hired an appointed harbormaster to cross the Atlantic. And, as the population of the United States continues down a path of illiteracy and declining national educational standards, what do you expect from future voters and politicians? So, if you're a fan of "Big Government" by today's standards, you place the power of a growing uneducated electorate in the hands of incompetent elected officials. Remember the lines of Thomas Jefferson: Without an intelligent electorate, Democracy is doomed to fail. I hope that makes sense. Good luck and good sailing.

Funny but I agree with practically your whole post. And btw the "big gov't" started its march when Hamilton's ideas won over Jefferson's. And it's been bloating ever since.

But IMO you're mixing two different issues. Just like if a family is immediately threatened by outside intruders it's not the time to deal with an alcoholic and abusive head of this family. That can wait until after the intruders are dealt with. Although of course the temptation would be to deal with both issues at the same time if possible.

[Group9]

Originally Posted by tropicalescape

"reduce them under absolute Despotism" I cant see where the Despotism was absolute..My personal belief is that the North had the ways and means to introduce modernaty and that the South (my people included) said something akin to "those fancy machines are nice and all but I like the fact that I can go out and just utter a word and "the sun will start shining" ,and if I feel like it I can go out back and take my pick of them women,my sons too! "Nothing like finding satisfaction" when the decent women that work so hard to make our house a home are having their "monthly calling".." No sir, yall just keep buying our cotton and we will process it the way we like"! To this the Yank would say "Well if you insist, I guess we will start buying our cotton in Egypt ! To this Johnny would comment "If youins are going to do that then I guess we will form our own country and we will call it "The CFSoAmerica" ..Then we know what happed after that..

I think it's safe to say that England wasn't treating the colonies any worse in 1776 than the North was treating the South in 1860, or Louis XVI was treating the French citizens in 1789, or the Soviet Union was treating it's states and citizens in 1991.

But, wars are funny, especially civil wars, revolutions and insurrections, and it's not always easy to predict the spark that sets one off. Nobody likes change, but if there is one thing history has demonstrated over and over again, governments, nations, and countries come and go. And, I've never lived through a world upheaval to know (although my parents lived through one and grandparents lived through two) for sure what it feels like, but darn if what's going on these days around the world and in the USA, doesn't feel like some kind of change is coming in the air.

I guess we'll see.

[tropicalescape]

Originally Posted by Group9

I think it's safe to say that England wasn't treating the colonies any worse in 1776 than the North was treating the South in 1860, or Louis XVI was treating the French citizens in 1789, or the Soviet Union was treating it's states and citizens in 1991.

But, wars are funny, especially civil wars, revolutions and insurrections, and it's not always easy to predict the spark that sets one off. Nobody likes change, but if there is one thing history has demonstrated over and over again, governments, nations, and countries come and go. And, I've never lived through a world upheaval to know (although my parents lived through one and grandparents lived through two) for sure what it feels like, but darn if what's going on these days around the world and in the USA, doesn't feel like some kind of change is coming in the air.

I guess we'll see.

Total agreement..