ADVERTISEMENT

Hurricanes kneeling in the NFL

I give a damn! You know white people died to free slaves too. Over 600k of them so spare me the revisionist history. Their blood did mean something. You act like slavery is only an black thing and it only happened in the US. If you live in the past, you'll stay in the past.

This is a b.s. revision. White people have never fought en masse for the freedom and rights of black folks. The north could not compete with the fckn free labor of the south is why they were fighting. The shyt was about economics and had not a damn thing to do with them caring about black folks so stop with the embellishments.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jabazz
Bro, please save that sht. I never wallow in self pity. I try to help people grow. I teach young people how to grow and understanding others. Love and unity. We live in a selfish azz world. Naw, those that judge are losers.

Self-pity is their narrative whenever you cite historical truth. They've been sold a perfect history lie in all their book to such an extent that they can neither accept nor acknowledge any of the crimes committed by this government and the people of the country during for hundreds of years. They'll acknowledge all other historical crimes/tragedies committed around the world but they continuously sweep slavery, jim crow, and racism under t he rug. Like the shyt was a weekend event. Fck flag and fck the forefathers 1000 times over. Fck that flag and fck the forefathers, they were all no different from Hitler as it pertains to Black folks. Ya'll expect us to honor some b*stards that didn't think we were human who condoned our torture and enslavement? Yeah ok.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jabazz
This is a b.s. revision. White people have never fought en masse for the freedom and rights of black folks. The north could not compete with the fckn free labor of the south is why they were fighting. The shyt was about economics and had not a damn thing to do with them caring about black folks so stop with the embellishments.
My ass you clown! You wouldn't know American history if it slapped you in the face. You're as bad as the Nazi's and KKK you call everyone to deflect you hypocrite.
 
My ass you clown! You wouldn't know American history if it slapped you in the face. You're as bad as the Nazi's and KKK you call everyone to deflect you hypocrite.

You are an azz if you think anyone's buying that bullshyt you're trying to pass as history. Foh, azzhole show me in any history book where it says the civil war was based on freedom and justice for slaves? Show me, jackazz.....Whites, especially at that time, didn't give a damn about justice for black people. They couldn't compete against fckn free labor was the problem. All of you b*stards are Nazi's. You blatantly disregard our lives and the serious nature of what black players are protesting under the guise of it being about some raggedy azz piece of cloth. The way all of you completely overlook the problem and only concern yourself with some perceived bullshyt disrespect is shameful and racist in itself. It's like our lives don't mean shyt but that flag, well now....
 
Lol, you can't be serious with this post? The flag don't represent the military. The Military is it's own. They do what the government tell them to do! Killing thousands of people overseas is fighting for me? You're naive. I have family members in the Military. I know people that was in the Military. They talk about how you're brainwashed and chipped. How they don't why their fighting the war their fighting. When was the last time this country needed defending? The system that I speak of will never end. That's why all the presidents spoke of a global world. Kennedy tried to kill that noise by getting rid of the CIA. They instead killed him. 911 produced What? A war with Iraq. What excuse they use? Bro you're sleep. You're too American to understand.
When was the last time this country needed defending? I am going take a wild guess and say September 11, 2001. Even if you dont consider that an invasion I am betting many folks feel we shouldnt have to wait for another country's military to invade us in order to realize or justify how important our military is to our freedom.
 
Last edited:
When was the last time this country needed defending? I am going take a wild guess and say September 11, 2001. Even if you dont consider that an invasion I am betting many folks feel that we shouldnt have to wait for a another country's military to invade us in order to realize or justify how important our military is to our freedom.
Lol, is the sun hot? That's how sure I'm about 911 being a inside job. You people are too American to understand. If white supremacy enslave blacks and took Indians land. You think the shadow government give a damn about You? They don't care who dies in these made up wars for the system agenda.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Azar
Lol, is the sun hot? That's how sure I'm about 911 being a inside job. You people are too American to understand. If white supremacy enslave blacks and took Indians land. You think the shadow government give a damn about You? They don't care who dies in these made up wars for the system agenda.
Say no more.....I know when to call it quits.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FlatlandCane
You are an azz if you think anyone's buying that bullshyt you're trying to pass as history. Foh, azzhole show me in any history book where it says the civil war was based on freedom and justice for slaves? Show me, jackazz.....Whites, especially at that time, didn't give a damn about justice for black people. They couldn't compete against fckn free labor was the problem. All of you b*stards are Nazi's. You blatantly disregard our lives and the serious nature of what black players are protesting under the guise of it being about some raggedy azz piece of cloth. The way all of you completely overlook the problem and only concern yourself with some perceived bullshyt disrespect is shameful and racist in itself. It's like our lives don't mean shyt but that flag, well now....
Literally every history book has it well documented the civil war was based on secession and states rights which was because of slavery dickface: had you ever paid any attention you'd know this you uneducated dumbass!
 
Lol, is the sun hot? That's how sure I'm about 911 being a inside job. You people are too American to understand. If white supremacy enslave blacks and took Indians land. You think the shadow government give a damn about You? They don't care who dies in these made up wars for the system agenda.
According to you...

9/11 was an inside job
Kennedy was an inside job
Jews were never enslaved
The holocaust never happened
China is the cause of hurricanes and earthquakes

What else did Imiss?
 
According to you...

9/11 was an inside job
Kennedy was an inside job
Jews were never enslaved
The holocaust never happened
China is the cause of hurricanes and earthquakes

What else did Imiss?
Accepting the truth is sometimes very difficult for those who can't cope. Making up your own story might make you feel better but it doesn't mean it's true.

Seriously though some of the people need to go see a shrink because how can you come to these conclusions when there's actual facts and proven science which dictate they're incorrect. Unbelievable
 
Literally every history book has it well documented the civil war was based on secession and states rights which was because of slavery dickface: had you ever paid any attention you'd know this you uneducated dumbass!

Your little insults make you sound more ignorant than you are, I said where in the fck does it say the war was based on any concern for black people??? Where the fck does it say in any history book that whites were so upset and concerned about the mistreatment of black people they decided to declare war? Where does it say in any history book that the war was based on freedom and justice for black folks, you lying sack of shyt? Of course it was about slavery and the fckn economic advantage slavery gave the south, Jackazz...
 
the flag is a symbol for our country; what should we do, change it to something else? but I though kap was protesting the treatment of blacks? therefore when everyone who currently doesn't kneel during the anthem, still doesn't kneel for the new flag, will kap still kneel? the current state of kap's mind about the treatment of blacks doesn't change if the flag is changed; so why kneel during the anthem?
 
  • Like
Reactions: CashvilleCane1
Your little insults make you sound more ignorant than you are, I said where in the fck does it say the war was based on any concern for black people??? Where the fck does it say in any history book that whites were so upset and concerned about the mistreatment of black people they decided to declare war? Where does it say in any history book that the war was based on freedom and justice for black folks, you lying sack of shyt? Of course it was about slavery and the fckn economic advantage slavery gave the south, Jackazz...
You have no idea what you're taking about. Here you go:

"fore was changing attitudes toward slavery. Northern abolitionists began vehemently assailing the institution and the states that continued to practice it, nearly all of them below the Mason-Dixon Line. Some Northerners aided the escape of runaway slaves (a violation of the Constitution’s provisiions that made a fugitive from one state a fugitive in every state) and mobs sometimes assaulted slave owners and slave hunters seeking runaways. (Slavery originally existed in all states, and the writers of the Constitution avoided addressing the matter of perpetuating or ending slavery in order to obtain ratification from all states.) When victory in the Mexican War (1846-48) resulted in the US expanding its territory all the way to the Pacific Ocean, the question of whether or not to permit slavery in the new territories. The debate over slavery intensified, creating a widening gap between slaveholding and nonslaveholding states. When a “purely regional party,” the new Republican Party swept the 1859 elections in the North and the party’s candidate Abraham Lincoln, an avowed foe of the expansion of slavery, Southern states seceded from the Union. See Causes of the Civil War on HistoryNet."

http://www.historynet.com/states-rights-civil-war
 
You have no idea what you're taking about. Here you go:

"fore was changing attitudes toward slavery. Northern abolitionists began vehemently assailing the institution and the states that continued to practice it, nearly all of them below the Mason-Dixon Line. Some Northerners aided the escape of runaway slaves (a violation of the Constitution’s provisiions that made a fugitive from one state a fugitive in every state) and mobs sometimes assaulted slave owners and slave hunters seeking runaways. (Slavery originally existed in all states, and the writers of the Constitution avoided addressing the matter of perpetuating or ending slavery in order to obtain ratification from all states.) When victory in the Mexican War (1846-48) resulted in the US expanding its territory all the way to the Pacific Ocean, the question of whether or not to permit slavery in the new territories. The debate over slavery intensified, creating a widening gap between slaveholding and nonslaveholding states. When a “purely regional party,” the new Republican Party swept the 1859 elections in the North and the party’s candidate Abraham Lincoln, an avowed foe of the expansion of slavery, Southern states seceded from the Union. See Causes of the Civil War on HistoryNet."

http://www.historynet.com/states-rights-civil-war
Again not true!
 
Again not true!
I'm sorry I didn't realize you were alive in 1865. It's been recorded in history this way ever since. So those people who won the war, wrote history wrong? Make sense! By the way your 9/11 stuff is beyond nuts. My friends wife was a flight attendant on one of those flights so please spare me the govt inside job stuff. I've seen the transcripts of their cell phone conversation before she died. I was assigned to region 6 JTTF office 2003-2004. Several of the hijackers trained in Venice / Sarasota. That is in Region 6. I know well more about what actually happened on 9/11 than you do I promise.
 
I'm sorry I didn't realize you were alive in 1865. It's been recorded in history this way ever since. So those people who won the war, wrote history wrong? Make sense! By the way your 9/11 stuff is beyond nuts. My friends wife was a flight attendant on one of those flights so please spare me the govt inside job stuff. I've seen the transcripts of their cell phone conversation before she died. I was assigned to region 6 JTTF office 2003-2004. Several of the hijackers trained in Venice / Sarasota. That is in Region 6. I know well more about what actually happened on 9/11 than you do I promise.
Cash, appreciate you telling the story of your friend's wife but this is the exact response Frick and Frack were hoping for........any sign of misfortune you've had in the past makes their day better. If they're not willing to help themselves there is nothing anyone here can do. You can only go so far when serving and protecting.........and in this case educating.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BreakingCane
I'm sorry I didn't realize you were alive in 1865. It's been recorded in history this way ever since. So those people who won the war, wrote history wrong? Make sense! By the way your 9/11 stuff is beyond nuts. My friends wife was a flight attendant on one of those flights so please spare me the govt inside job stuff. I've seen the transcripts of their cell phone conversation before she died. I was assigned to region 6 JTTF office 2003-2004. Several of the hijackers trained in Venice / Sarasota. That is in Region 6. I know well more about what actually happened on 9/11 than you do I promise.
Lol, yeah and how dumb can you be. There's 1000s of evidences of a inside job. From financial to military. Look that shit up. The legal documents and everything. They can't tell how building 7 came down. The phony reason for going to war with lraq, but keep sleeping. F a conspiracy. It's all true! Kennedy was killed, because he was about squash the CIA and the shadow government. How naive can you be? 911 was government planned.
 
Cash, appreciate you telling the story of your friend's wife but this is the exact response Frick and Frack were hoping for........any sign of misfortune you've had in the past makes their day better. If they're not willing to help themselves there is nothing anyone here can do. You can only go so far when serving and protecting.........and in this case educating.
Wtf you mean? I have nothing in heart but love for people period. I just speak facts. Facts about our fake ass government. I can be educated, but not on Bullshit.
 
According to you...

9/11 was an inside job
Kennedy was an inside job
Jews were never enslaved
The holocaust never happened
China is the cause of hurricanes and earthquakes

What else did Imiss?
-It really was pass interference in the 2003 Fiesta Bowl
-Cleveland Gary did fumble against Notre Dame in 1988
-Mark Walton's knee never hit the ground on the kickoff return against Duke in 2015
 
  • Like
Reactions: BreakingCane
Lol, yeah and how dumb can you be. There's 1000s of evidences of a inside job. From financial to military. Look that shit up. The legal documents and everything. They can't tell how building 7 came down. The phony reason for going to war with lraq, but keep sleeping. F a conspiracy. It's all true! Kennedy was killed, because he was about squash the CIA and the shadow government. How naive can you be? 911 was government planned.
Just stop. Building 7 was a controlled detonation. There was structural damage from the other two buildings coming down and a large fire inside but it was safer to drop the building in place rather than risk more life's trying to put the fire out which would eventually caused the support system to fail anyway. Why it wasn't publicized I don't know.
 
definition of racism, " i will take #5,6,7 in the list of Websters;
-are Indians just as dark as Africans?
 
Just stop. Building 7 was a controlled detonation. There was structural damage from the other two buildings coming down and a large fire inside but it was safer to drop the building in place rather than risk more life's trying to put the fire out which would eventually caused the support system to fail anyway. Why it wasn't publicized I don't know.
Huh? Go read why investigators said, building 7 went down. They said, fire damage.
 
Just to be clear, it was a missile that hit the pentagon on 9/11, not a plane?
 
The fact you even entertain this as a possibility shows you're missing a few screws.
You mean the fact that the government is a proven corrupted system? You know this by its history! A system that will lie and cheat its way to the top. Like I said, 911 is a inside job. Don't act like some idiot just saying sht, because our government can't be that evil. Get your lazy ass up and do real reseach with a open mind or shut the f up. There's a alot of sht not adding up. The game and it's players have their hand in the financial part of the 911 shadow government job. The reason for Evading Iraq was full BS, and was call out by Ex-CIA agents, but I'm the missing a few screws huh? SMDH
 
-It really was pass interference in the 2003 Fiesta Bowl
-Cleveland Gary did fumble against Notre Dame in 1988
-Mark Walton's knee never hit the ground on the kickoff return against Duke in 2015
Your point?
 
You mean the fact that the government is a proven corrupted system? You know this by its history! A system that will lie and cheat its way to the top. Like I said, 911 is a inside job. Don't act like some idiot just saying sht, because our government can't be that evil. Get your lazy ass up and do real reseach with a open mind or shut the f up. There's a alot of sht not adding up. The game and it's players have their hand in the financial part of the 911 shadow government job. The reason for Evading Iraq was full BS, and was call out by Ex-CIA agents, but I'm the missing a few screws huh? SMDH
7L0Lyqo.gif
 
Your little insults make you sound more ignorant than you are, I said where in the fck does it say the war was based on any concern for black people??? Where the fck does it say in any history book that whites were so upset and concerned about the mistreatment of black people they decided to declare war? Where does it say in any history book that the war was based on freedom and justice for black folks, you lying sack of shyt? Of course it was about slavery and the fckn economic advantage slavery gave the south, Jackazz...

Actually, I agree with you on this Azar.
 
You have no idea what you're taking about. Here you go:

"fore was changing attitudes toward slavery. Northern abolitionists began vehemently assailing the institution and the states that continued to practice it, nearly all of them below the Mason-Dixon Line. Some Northerners aided the escape of runaway slaves (a violation of the Constitution’s provisiions that made a fugitive from one state a fugitive in every state) and mobs sometimes assaulted slave owners and slave hunters seeking runaways. (Slavery originally existed in all states, and the writers of the Constitution avoided addressing the matter of perpetuating or ending slavery in order to obtain ratification from all states.) When victory in the Mexican War (1846-48) resulted in the US expanding its territory all the way to the Pacific Ocean, the question of whether or not to permit slavery in the new territories. The debate over slavery intensified, creating a widening gap between slaveholding and nonslaveholding states. When a “purely regional party,” the new Republican Party swept the 1859 elections in the North and the party’s candidate Abraham Lincoln, an avowed foe of the expansion of slavery, Southern states seceded from the Union. See Causes of the Civil War on HistoryNet."

http://www.historynet.com/states-rights-civil-war

Your reading comprehension is definitely lacking if you believe the article above indicates the war was based on justice and equality for black people. Think you need to read more about your history:

"In 1854 opposition to compromise with the South led to the formation of the Republican Party. Republicans represented the economic interests of the North and Mid-West, supporting higher tariffs, subsidies for railroad expansion, and uncompromising opposition to the expansion of slavery in the territories. The differences between the two sections over the tariff, railroad policy, and the expansion of slavery into the territories became more sharply drawn with every election. Each section saw its future economic prosperity threatened by the other's political success. The election of Republican Abraham Lincoln (1861-1865) as president in 1860 on a platform that was entirely pledged to support northern economic needs convinced Southern states that secession was their only hope to preserve their economies. Lincoln and the North's refusal to accept secession led directly to the Civil War."

http://www.encyclopedia.com/history...ipts-and-maps/civil-war-economic-causes-issue
 
You have no idea what you're taking about. Here you go:

"fore was changing attitudes toward slavery. Northern abolitionists began vehemently assailing the institution and the states that continued to practice it, nearly all of them below the Mason-Dixon Line. Some Northerners aided the escape of runaway slaves (a violation of the Constitution’s provisiions that made a fugitive from one state a fugitive in every state) and mobs sometimes assaulted slave owners and slave hunters seeking runaways. (Slavery originally existed in all states, and the writers of the Constitution avoided addressing the matter of perpetuating or ending slavery in order to obtain ratification from all states.) When victory in the Mexican War (1846-48) resulted in the US expanding its territory all the way to the Pacific Ocean, the question of whether or not to permit slavery in the new territories. The debate over slavery intensified, creating a widening gap between slaveholding and nonslaveholding states. When a “purely regional party,” the new Republican Party swept the 1859 elections in the North and the party’s candidate Abraham Lincoln, an avowed foe of the expansion of slavery, Southern states seceded from the Union. See Causes of the Civil War on HistoryNet."

http://www.historynet.com/states-rights-civil-war

Here's a letter by Lincoln I suggest you read:

Hon. Horace Greeley:
Dear Sir.
I have just read yours of the 19th. addressed to myself through the New-York Tribune. If there be in it any statements, or assumptions of fact, which I may know to be erroneous, I do not, now and here, controvert them. If there be in it any inferences which I may believe to be falsely drawn, I do not now and here, argue against them. If there be perceptable in it an impatient and dictatorial tone, I waive it in deference to an old friend, whose heart I have always supposed to be right.
As to the policy I "seem to be pursuing" as you say, I have not meant to leave any one in doubt.
I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be "the Union as it was." If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views.
I have here stated my purpose according to my view of officialduty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personalwish that all men every where could be free.
Yours,
A. Lincoln.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jabazz
They also said how. Caused by fire!
No you're assuming how because they stated fire (which there was) but that's an assumption they want you to make. See where I'm going here? A building doesn't fully collapse like that unless it's an extremely hot fire with a high heat booster like aviation fuel or something similar within the facility but it would've had to be at key points in the structure. Or... a controlled detonation! The. Building was collapsed on itself
Here's a letter by Lincoln I suggest you read:

Hon. Horace Greeley:
Dear Sir.
I have just read yours of the 19th. addressed to myself through the New-York Tribune. If there be in it any statements, or assumptions of fact, which I may know to be erroneous, I do not, now and here, controvert them. If there be in it any inferences which I may believe to be falsely drawn, I do not now and here, argue against them. If there be perceptable in it an impatient and dictatorial tone, I waive it in deference to an old friend, whose heart I have always supposed to be right.
As to the policy I "seem to be pursuing" as you say, I have not meant to leave any one in doubt.
I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be "the Union as it was." If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views.
I have here stated my purpose according to my view of officialduty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personalwish that all men every where could be free.
Yours,
A. Lincoln.
oye! You don't even understand the context of this letter, which honestly doesn't surprise me. President Lincoln was trying to unite the country rather than break it apart. The facts are this: he sent the union states armies and militia to fight against those states which seceded in favor of states rights & slavery. On a side note guys Robert E Lee (even though a confederate general, did not support slavery either) have fun tearing down all those statues though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Strack_Cane
No you're assuming how because they stated fire (which there was) but that's an assumption they want you to make. See where I'm going here? A building doesn't fully collapse like that unless it's an extremely hot fire with a high heat booster like aviation fuel or something similar within the facility but it would've had to be at key points in the structure. Or... a controlled detonation! The. Building was collapsed on itself

oye! You don't even understand the context of this letter, which honestly doesn't surprise me. President Lincoln was trying to unite the country rather than break it apart. The facts are this: he sent the union states armies and militia to fight against those states which seceded in favor of states rights & slavery. On a side note guys Robert E Lee (even though a confederate general, did not support slavery either) have fun tearing down all those statues though.

Fck Robert E Lee! He like most of the country at that time was a racist, white supremacist minded bastard which is why it's absolutely absurd for you continue with your embellishment about the Civil War being about any justice or equal rights for black people. That's a lie and you know it. I just quoted Lincoln's word, what the hell is wrong with you??? What type of mental barrier do you guys have when it comes to racism and the past? I mean talk about cognitive dissonance. What is there to misunderstand about this statement "If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union". He clearly states that he doesn't give a shyt about the slaves and his only goal was to save the union. Other than the few abolitionist, who were an extremely small percentage in comparison to the population, whites didn't give a shyt about slaves nor what happened to black people otherwise racism would've been dead long ago. Again, the Civil War had nothing to do with white's being concerned about Black folks so stop the bull. It was a war of economic interests on both sides.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jabazz
Fck Robert E Lee! He like most of the country at that time was a racist, white supremacist minded bastard which is why it's absolutely absurd for you continue with your embellishment about the Civil War being about any justice or equal rights for black people. That's a lie and you know it. I just quoted Lincoln's word, what the hell is wrong with you??? What type of mental barrier do you guys have when it comes to racism and the past? I mean talk about cognitive dissonance. What is there to misunderstand about this statement "If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union". He clearly states that he doesn't give a shyt about the slaves and his only goal was to save the union. Other than the few abolitionist, who were an extremely small percentage in comparison to the population, whites didn't give a shyt about slaves nor what happened to black people otherwise racism would've been dead long ago. Again, the Civil War had nothing to do with white's being concerned about Black folks so stop the bull. It was a war of economic interests on both sides.
And again you're a race baiter. You have zero idea what you're talking about because you're literally just regurgitating what you've been told to think. Your opinion doesn't equal fact nor actual history. Good day!
 
  • Like
Reactions: BreakingCane
And again you're a race baiter. You have zero idea what you're talking about because you're literally just regurgitating what you've been told to think. Your opinion doesn't equal fact nor actual history. Good day!
Man, how could you find any justification in what they did? All of it was wrong. That's crazy
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT