Kobe claims he was taught the following in school
Comments
-
So then you were taught the truth.RoadDawg55 said:When I was young, we were taught the Indians and Pilgrams had a nice meal and we did aren’t projects relating to it.
The Wampanoag Indians who attended the first Thanksgiving had occupied the land for thousands of years and were key to the survival of the colonists during the first year they arrived in 1620, according to the National Museum of the American Indian. After the Pilgrims successfully harvested their first crops in autumn 1621, at least 140 people gathered to eat and partake in games, historians say. No one knows exactly what prompted the two groups to dine together, but there were at least 90 native men and 50 Englishmen present, according to Kathleen Wall, a colonial foodways culinarian at Plimoth Plantation. They most likely ran races and shot at marks as forms of entertainment, Wall said. The English likely ate off of tables, while the native people dined on the ground.
-
TellingTheKobeStopper said:
What on earth are you talking about?TurdBomber said:
Which was more evil, @TheKobeStopper: Capturing slaves who look just like you and selling them? Or buying them?TheKobeStopper said:
One side betrayed their country and fought a war, that killed 2% of the population, to own human beings. Your centrist “well if you look at both sides” bullshit is not necessary.Tequilla said:I spent a ton of time reading and learning about the Civil War as a teenager ...
You can’t separate the issues of the late 1850s and leading into the Civil War time period without slavery being a massive issue.
To say it was the only issue though is missing the point a bit.
The Northern states at that point were far more industrial and the South far more agriculturally based. Trying to find common ground was virtually impossible. Slavery obviously the most focal part of the disagreements.
Then far more than now the importance of State’s rights was a paramount issue. To understand that you have to understand the principles as to how the nation was founded and why certain separations and protections were built in to ensure states had influence to keep the federal government from overstepping.
For those that need perspective, understand that Robert E. Lee made his decision on which side to serve on based on the direction of his state. Times have changed obviously.
We also need to understand the lessons of history. We have evolved throughout history but basic principles remain. Knowing how to avoid those pitfalls matters. As a country, we’d be well served right now to understand lessons of the past.
I don’t know why they didn’t hold hands, sing kumbaya and drop bombs on foreign countries to settle it like moderates. But sometimes you have to actually fight evil and not just hate both extremes (owning slaves and not owning slaves being the “extremes” in this example”).
I'm sure it's painful to look at both sides, but weren't both sides deeply involved in that evil? -
11th or 12th grade?HuskyJW said:
ThisRoadDawg55 said:When I was young, we were taught the Indians and Pilgrams had a nice meal and we did aren’t projects relating to it.
My turkey crown made from orange and brown construction paper is still talked about -
What I'm talking about is your complete white-washing of one side of the transatlantic slave trade. Most slaves were not actually "sold into slavery." They were already slaves for rival tribes on their home continent, captured in battle, after defeat or just for the fuck of it by more powerful tribesman who didn't want to do the grunt work required to survive in Africa at the time.TheKobeStopper said:
What on earth are you talking about?TurdBomber said:
Which was more evil, @TheKobeStopper: Capturing slaves who look just like you and selling them? Or buying them?TheKobeStopper said:
One side betrayed their country and fought a war, that killed 2% of the population, to own human beings. Your centrist “well if you look at both sides” bullshit is not necessary.Tequilla said:I spent a ton of time reading and learning about the Civil War as a teenager ...
You can’t separate the issues of the late 1850s and leading into the Civil War time period without slavery being a massive issue.
To say it was the only issue though is missing the point a bit.
The Northern states at that point were far more industrial and the South far more agriculturally based. Trying to find common ground was virtually impossible. Slavery obviously the most focal part of the disagreements.
Then far more than now the importance of State’s rights was a paramount issue. To understand that you have to understand the principles as to how the nation was founded and why certain separations and protections were built in to ensure states had influence to keep the federal government from overstepping.
For those that need perspective, understand that Robert E. Lee made his decision on which side to serve on based on the direction of his state. Times have changed obviously.
We also need to understand the lessons of history. We have evolved throughout history but basic principles remain. Knowing how to avoid those pitfalls matters. As a country, we’d be well served right now to understand lessons of the past.
I don’t know why they didn’t hold hands, sing kumbaya and drop bombs on foreign countries to settle it like moderates. But sometimes you have to actually fight evil and not just hate both extremes (owning slaves and not owning slaves being the “extremes” in this example”).
I'm sure it's painful to look at both sides, but weren't both sides deeply involved in that evil?
It's funny how you never mention the Walmart angle while chronically bitching about the immorality and evils of the men who shopped there. It's almost as if you're a willfully ignorant shill with gaping holes in your logic and argument.
Care to discuss the Barbary Pirates sometime? Course not, you fucking ignorant hypocrite. -
There's slavery that exists in the world today. Do you ever hear Kobe talking about fighting that evil? Much easier to rail against the evils of slavery in the United States that ended over 150 years ago, then to do anything about the slavery that's going on right now in Africa.TurdBomber said:
What I'm talking about is your complete white-washing of one side of the transatlantic slave trade. Most slaves were not actually "sold into slavery." They were already slaves for rival tribes on their home continent, captured in battle, after defeat or just for the fuck of it by more powerful tribesman who didn't want to do the grunt work required to survive in Africa at the time.TheKobeStopper said:
What on earth are you talking about?TurdBomber said:
Which was more evil, @TheKobeStopper: Capturing slaves who look just like you and selling them? Or buying them?TheKobeStopper said:
One side betrayed their country and fought a war, that killed 2% of the population, to own human beings. Your centrist “well if you look at both sides” bullshit is not necessary.Tequilla said:I spent a ton of time reading and learning about the Civil War as a teenager ...
You can’t separate the issues of the late 1850s and leading into the Civil War time period without slavery being a massive issue.
To say it was the only issue though is missing the point a bit.
The Northern states at that point were far more industrial and the South far more agriculturally based. Trying to find common ground was virtually impossible. Slavery obviously the most focal part of the disagreements.
Then far more than now the importance of State’s rights was a paramount issue. To understand that you have to understand the principles as to how the nation was founded and why certain separations and protections were built in to ensure states had influence to keep the federal government from overstepping.
For those that need perspective, understand that Robert E. Lee made his decision on which side to serve on based on the direction of his state. Times have changed obviously.
We also need to understand the lessons of history. We have evolved throughout history but basic principles remain. Knowing how to avoid those pitfalls matters. As a country, we’d be well served right now to understand lessons of the past.
I don’t know why they didn’t hold hands, sing kumbaya and drop bombs on foreign countries to settle it like moderates. But sometimes you have to actually fight evil and not just hate both extremes (owning slaves and not owning slaves being the “extremes” in this example”).
I'm sure it's painful to look at both sides, but weren't both sides deeply involved in that evil?
It's funny how you never mention the Walmart angle while chronically bitching about the immorality and evils of the men who shopped there. It's almost as if you're a willfully ignorant shill with gaping holes in your logic and argument.
Care to discuss the Barbary Pirates sometime? Course not, you fucking ignorant hypocrite.
And why is it that slavery in the US, which involved only a tiny fraction of the African slave trade, is the only historical example of slavery the left ever wants to talk about? Do you ever hear them talk about the slavery in the Muslim world that involved way more black slaves than ever came to the US. -
YesterdayRaceBannon said:
11th or 12th grade?HuskyJW said:
ThisRoadDawg55 said:When I was young, we were taught the Indians and Pilgrams had a nice meal and we did aren’t projects relating to it.
My turkey crown made from orange and brown construction paper is still talked about -
-
Or the fact that 80+ percent of African slaves went to South America, Central America and the Caribbean.SFGbob said:
There's slavery that exists in the world today. Do you ever hear Kobe talking about fighting that evil? Much easier to rail against the evils of slavery in the United States that ended over 150 years ago, then to do anything about the slavery that's going on right now in Africa.TurdBomber said:
What I'm talking about is your complete white-washing of one side of the transatlantic slave trade. Most slaves were not actually "sold into slavery." They were already slaves for rival tribes on their home continent, captured in battle, after defeat or just for the fuck of it by more powerful tribesman who didn't want to do the grunt work required to survive in Africa at the time.TheKobeStopper said:
What on earth are you talking about?TurdBomber said:
Which was more evil, @TheKobeStopper: Capturing slaves who look just like you and selling them? Or buying them?TheKobeStopper said:
One side betrayed their country and fought a war, that killed 2% of the population, to own human beings. Your centrist “well if you look at both sides” bullshit is not necessary.Tequilla said:I spent a ton of time reading and learning about the Civil War as a teenager ...
You can’t separate the issues of the late 1850s and leading into the Civil War time period without slavery being a massive issue.
To say it was the only issue though is missing the point a bit.
The Northern states at that point were far more industrial and the South far more agriculturally based. Trying to find common ground was virtually impossible. Slavery obviously the most focal part of the disagreements.
Then far more than now the importance of State’s rights was a paramount issue. To understand that you have to understand the principles as to how the nation was founded and why certain separations and protections were built in to ensure states had influence to keep the federal government from overstepping.
For those that need perspective, understand that Robert E. Lee made his decision on which side to serve on based on the direction of his state. Times have changed obviously.
We also need to understand the lessons of history. We have evolved throughout history but basic principles remain. Knowing how to avoid those pitfalls matters. As a country, we’d be well served right now to understand lessons of the past.
I don’t know why they didn’t hold hands, sing kumbaya and drop bombs on foreign countries to settle it like moderates. But sometimes you have to actually fight evil and not just hate both extremes (owning slaves and not owning slaves being the “extremes” in this example”).
I'm sure it's painful to look at both sides, but weren't both sides deeply involved in that evil?
It's funny how you never mention the Walmart angle while chronically bitching about the immorality and evils of the men who shopped there. It's almost as if you're a willfully ignorant shill with gaping holes in your logic and argument.
Care to discuss the Barbary Pirates sometime? Course not, you fucking ignorant hypocrite.
And why is it that slavery in the US, which involved only a tiny fraction of the African slave trade, is the only historical example of slavery the left ever wants to talk about? Do you ever hear them talk about the slavery in the Muslim world that involved way more black slaves than ever came to the US.
Why isn't Uruguay paying reparations? -
Because those countries are empty bags in a legal sense.TurdBomber said:
Or the fact that 80+ percent of African slaves went to South America, Central America and the Caribbean.SFGbob said:
There's slavery that exists in the world today. Do you ever hear Kobe talking about fighting that evil? Much easier to rail against the evils of slavery in the United States that ended over 150 years ago, then to do anything about the slavery that's going on right now in Africa.TurdBomber said:
What I'm talking about is your complete white-washing of one side of the transatlantic slave trade. Most slaves were not actually "sold into slavery." They were already slaves for rival tribes on their home continent, captured in battle, after defeat or just for the fuck of it by more powerful tribesman who didn't want to do the grunt work required to survive in Africa at the time.TheKobeStopper said:
What on earth are you talking about?TurdBomber said:
Which was more evil, @TheKobeStopper: Capturing slaves who look just like you and selling them? Or buying them?TheKobeStopper said:
One side betrayed their country and fought a war, that killed 2% of the population, to own human beings. Your centrist “well if you look at both sides” bullshit is not necessary.Tequilla said:I spent a ton of time reading and learning about the Civil War as a teenager ...
You can’t separate the issues of the late 1850s and leading into the Civil War time period without slavery being a massive issue.
To say it was the only issue though is missing the point a bit.
The Northern states at that point were far more industrial and the South far more agriculturally based. Trying to find common ground was virtually impossible. Slavery obviously the most focal part of the disagreements.
Then far more than now the importance of State’s rights was a paramount issue. To understand that you have to understand the principles as to how the nation was founded and why certain separations and protections were built in to ensure states had influence to keep the federal government from overstepping.
For those that need perspective, understand that Robert E. Lee made his decision on which side to serve on based on the direction of his state. Times have changed obviously.
We also need to understand the lessons of history. We have evolved throughout history but basic principles remain. Knowing how to avoid those pitfalls matters. As a country, we’d be well served right now to understand lessons of the past.
I don’t know why they didn’t hold hands, sing kumbaya and drop bombs on foreign countries to settle it like moderates. But sometimes you have to actually fight evil and not just hate both extremes (owning slaves and not owning slaves being the “extremes” in this example”).
I'm sure it's painful to look at both sides, but weren't both sides deeply involved in that evil?
It's funny how you never mention the Walmart angle while chronically bitching about the immorality and evils of the men who shopped there. It's almost as if you're a willfully ignorant shill with gaping holes in your logic and argument.
Care to discuss the Barbary Pirates sometime? Course not, you fucking ignorant hypocrite.
And why is it that slavery in the US, which involved only a tiny fraction of the African slave trade, is the only historical example of slavery the left ever wants to talk about? Do you ever hear them talk about the slavery in the Muslim world that involved way more black slaves than ever came to the US.
Why isn't Uruguay paying reparations? -
Compare the life expectancy of African slaves in the Caribbean and South America to the US. I'm not sugar coating slavery in the United States, it was an awful and brutal dehumanizing institution but in comparison to the treatment of slaves in South America it wasn't anywhere near as bad.TurdBomber said:
Or the fact that 80+ percent of African slaves went to South America, Central America and the Caribbean.SFGbob said:
There's slavery that exists in the world today. Do you ever hear Kobe talking about fighting that evil? Much easier to rail against the evils of slavery in the United States that ended over 150 years ago, then to do anything about the slavery that's going on right now in Africa.TurdBomber said:
What I'm talking about is your complete white-washing of one side of the transatlantic slave trade. Most slaves were not actually "sold into slavery." They were already slaves for rival tribes on their home continent, captured in battle, after defeat or just for the fuck of it by more powerful tribesman who didn't want to do the grunt work required to survive in Africa at the time.TheKobeStopper said:
What on earth are you talking about?TurdBomber said:
Which was more evil, @TheKobeStopper: Capturing slaves who look just like you and selling them? Or buying them?TheKobeStopper said:
One side betrayed their country and fought a war, that killed 2% of the population, to own human beings. Your centrist “well if you look at both sides” bullshit is not necessary.Tequilla said:I spent a ton of time reading and learning about the Civil War as a teenager ...
You can’t separate the issues of the late 1850s and leading into the Civil War time period without slavery being a massive issue.
To say it was the only issue though is missing the point a bit.
The Northern states at that point were far more industrial and the South far more agriculturally based. Trying to find common ground was virtually impossible. Slavery obviously the most focal part of the disagreements.
Then far more than now the importance of State’s rights was a paramount issue. To understand that you have to understand the principles as to how the nation was founded and why certain separations and protections were built in to ensure states had influence to keep the federal government from overstepping.
For those that need perspective, understand that Robert E. Lee made his decision on which side to serve on based on the direction of his state. Times have changed obviously.
We also need to understand the lessons of history. We have evolved throughout history but basic principles remain. Knowing how to avoid those pitfalls matters. As a country, we’d be well served right now to understand lessons of the past.
I don’t know why they didn’t hold hands, sing kumbaya and drop bombs on foreign countries to settle it like moderates. But sometimes you have to actually fight evil and not just hate both extremes (owning slaves and not owning slaves being the “extremes” in this example”).
I'm sure it's painful to look at both sides, but weren't both sides deeply involved in that evil?
It's funny how you never mention the Walmart angle while chronically bitching about the immorality and evils of the men who shopped there. It's almost as if you're a willfully ignorant shill with gaping holes in your logic and argument.
Care to discuss the Barbary Pirates sometime? Course not, you fucking ignorant hypocrite.
And why is it that slavery in the US, which involved only a tiny fraction of the African slave trade, is the only historical example of slavery the left ever wants to talk about? Do you ever hear them talk about the slavery in the Muslim world that involved way more black slaves than ever came to the US.
Why isn't Uruguay paying reparations?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SFwHQYDqf6c