Totally offensive

[Old-T]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Hi Jack!

I am sorry, but you are completely incorrect. IB did not hijack the thread.

Look at the thread's title.

Look at who you are talking about. IB.

Need I say more?

[Yssup Rider]

right you are. IBIdiot is always there to add something offensive to any thread!

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by ExNYer

More ignorance from the Confederate illiterate. They rioted because they were getting drafted as soon as they stepped off the boat. They were poor and cannon fodder, while wealthy Americans could buy their way out of the draft. That's an ignorant, deflecting answer, you stupid Yankee jackass. Black dock workers weren't drafting racist New York City micks into the Army to fight in the war, you stupid Yankee jackass; so, why were blac dock workers the ones who were attacked and lynched, you ignorant Yankee jackass wasting good Dixie air?

But it wasn't because no court would convict them as you ignorantly wrote. It was only due to northern mercy and the desire for peace that they escaped trial. In other words, no Confederate leaders were tried and convicted of treason, you ignorant Yankee jackass wasting good Dixie air.

I didn't say that and I didn't imply it either, tranny fuckee. I said that the South seceded to preserve slavery - that was all that they cared about. Everything else is you trying to put words in my mouth. In other words, your blessed Yankee brethren didn't make ending slavery a "war aim" in 1861 as you ignorantly implied, you ignorant Yankee asshole.

Not even you can be THAT stupid, tranny fuckee. YOU could die from a random Al Queda bombing at any minute. Does that mean you are enslaved right now? That was a truly desperate argument you made, you lying Cock Whisperer. You're deflecting again, you dumb-fuck Yankee jackass, because the U.S. today isn't at all like Belfast in the 1970s, you ignorant Yankee asshole.

You want some cheese with that whine, Cock Whisperer? Keep wheezing on that pure Dixie air you are wasting, you dumb-fuck Yankee asshole living in exile in Dixie.

Originally Posted by Old-T

You have an excellent point IB! And based upon your suggestion I tried to ask Oliver C, but I discovered something very odd: he has been dead for over three and a half centuries!! You may want to cross him off your Christmas card list, I doubt you will be getting one back from him.
But I also discovered that things have changed just a TINY bit since the mid-1600s. Religion plays a much smaller role in many people’s lives. What was a “good” reason (not really, but I am sure you can follow my meaning) to kill someone in Great Britain 3 ½ centuries ago is no longer seen that way by most folks.

I know you are shocked by this, but get over it. You are (drum roll) WRONG!!!!! Again. As most sentient beings on here come to expect from you. But you, sitting in mommy’s basement in “Dixie” (your equivalent of Never Never Land), clearly know more about what motivates Irish and English today than they do themselves. Sounds obvious to me. Rant on, IBDelusional.



As to your slavery comment, and your refusal to admit that the south--your beloved Dixie--could ever do any wrong, I would ask the Great Researcher to put up some numbers for us:
In 1860, how many slaves were in Massachusetts vs Georgia?

How many in New York vs Alabama?

How many in Pennsylvania vs Virginia?

Very simple questions. Census data is likely available. Nice thing about numbers, they illuminate so much, don't you think?

http://www.civil-war.net/pages/1860_census.html

Are you ignorantly arguing that New York slavers didn't profit from the slave trade, Old-Twerp? Are you ignorantly arguing that New York City bankers and financiers who gave large loans to the planters didn't profit from slave labor, Old-Twerp? Are you ignorantly arguing those cotton mills in Massachusetts weren't profiting off of the blood, sweat and toil of slave labor in the cotton fields, Old-Twerp? Are you ignorantly arguing that Yankee sugar factors didn't profit not only off Southern sugar crops but Caribbean sugar harvested by slaves, Old-Twerp? Are you ignorantly arguing that Yankees didn't take over and manage confiscated plantations -- with attached slaves -- until the end of the war, Old-Twerp? Are you ignorantly arguing that Yankee soldiers didn't keep slaves on these plantations at the point of a bayonet and make those slaves keep planting and harvesting those plantation crops until the end of the war and after, Old-Twerp? Take your ignorantly stupid arguments and your dumb-ass pretentiousness and go screw yourself, Old-Twerp.

Whereas Old Ironsides may have died in the 17th century, that in no manner makes the religious element of Catholic Ireland's struggle with Protestant England less relevant, you sanctimonious asshole.

BTW, Old-Twerp, the sectarian violence so prevalent in Belfast between 1969 and 1998 isn't ancient history as you delusively pretend it is, you moronic fucking dweeb. Furthermore, you sanctimonious moron, you are too ready to dismiss what happened in Ireland during the 17th to 20th century time period as trivial and irrelevant, but your sanctimonious ass is always more than fucking ready to jump up on a soap box about what happened in the United States during that same time period, you sanctimonious, hypocritical, self-righteous jackass.

That describes your every ignorant post to a "T", you lying, hypocritical, racist, cum-gobbling golem fucktard, HDDB, DEM.

X 3

Originally Posted by Old-T

I am sorry, but you are completely incorrect. IB did not hijack the thread.

Look at the thread's title.

Look at who you are talking about. IB.

Need I say more?

Go screw your sanctimonious self, Old-Twerp.

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

[SIZE="3"]

Go screw your sanctimonious self, Old-Twerp.

Wow, that was a clever reply!

[Old-T]

Originally Posted by bigtex

Wow, that was a clever reply!

That does seem to be his new catch phrase. And he uses it whether it is relevant to the topic or not. It is like a little kid who learned to say a new word, and they use it over and over in many stupid and inappropriate ways. IBInappropriate--yep, it fits.

[Guest032516]

[QUOTE=I B Hankering;1055341098]
Originally Posted by ExNYer
But it wasn't because no court would convict them as you ignorantly wrote. It was only due to northern mercy and the desire for peace that they escaped trial. In other words, no Confederate leaders were tried and convicted of treason, you ignorant Yankee jackass wasting good Dixie air.

See below, tranny fuckee.

I didn't say that and I didn't imply it either, tranny fuckee. I said that the South seceded to preserve slavery - that was all that they cared about. Everything else is you trying to put words in my mouth.
In other words, your blessed Yankee brethren didn't make ending slavery a "war aim" in 1861 as you ignorantly implied, you ignorant Yankee asshole.

I never implied it, liar. Which is why you keep repeating it.

BTW, I notice you don't even TRY to deny anymore that the South seceded to preserve slavery. I take that as a victory.

Not even you can be THAT stupid, tranny fuckee. YOU could die from a random Al Queda bombing at any minute. Does that mean you are enslaved right now? That was a truly desperate argument you made, you lying Cock Whisperer.You're deflecting again, you dumb-fuck Yankee jackass, because the U.S. today isn't at all like Belfast in the 1970s, you ignorant Yankee asshole.

It doesn't have to be "just like" 70s Belfast, shithead. Your idiotic premise is that fear of dying in a bombing is just like slavery. Own it, moron.

You want some cheese with that whine, Cock Whisperer? Keep wheezing on that pure Dixie air you are wasting, you dumb-fuck Yankee asshole living in exile in Dixie.
[/QUOTE]

Here is your original quote from Post No. 35:
----------------------------------------------
"BTW, you benighted Yankee jackass, you cannot name one Confederate leader who was tried and convicted of treason -- because it was determined that that charge would not hold up even in a Yankee kangaroo court!"
-------------------------------------------------

So, your original argument was NOT that no Confederate leader was tried and convicted.

Your argument was that there were no convictions because "it was determined" that a treason charge would NOT hold up in court.

You posted NO citation for that. You made it up, liar. Who (besides you) determined that no treason charge would hold up? You don't think the US could have found a jury of Northerners (who had lost family members) to convict Jefferson Davis? Idiot.

My response was that the North LET THEM OFF THE HOOK by showing mercy - not that they couldn't get a conviction. Off course they could have.

And your stupid answer is that somehow this act of mercy proves that there was no treason.

Such illogical conclusions and distortions is why EVERYONE on this board knows you are some high-school drop out pretending to be educated.

[Mr MojoRisin]

I agree with the offensiveness of this incident, but. If you look at the totality of this whole thing. There's a few problems with it. Although Copeland was in a public place at the time, he didn't say what he did publically with any intent to inflame. His comment in reference to the president was unfortunately overheard by Jane O'Toole a stupid bitch that caused it to become public. O'Toole caused nothing but undue controversy and in the process Copeland who is 82 years old resigned from his position as Police Commissioner. O'Toole's behavior is equally as offensive as Copeland's comment.

Jim

[Old-T]

As to your slavery comment, and your refusal to admit that the south--your beloved Dixie--could ever do any wrong, I would ask the Great Researcher to put up some numbers for us:

In 1860, how many slaves were in Massachusetts vs Georgia?


How many in New York vs Alabama?


How many in Pennsylvania vs Virginia?

IB, you said a lot of words, but you didn't answer any of the questions. Simple questions, including the link to the census numbers. Quit deflecting, answer the questions.

How many slaves.

Very simple questions. Census data is likely available. Nice thing about numbers, they illuminate so much, don't you think?


http://www.civil-war.net/pages/1860_census.html





[/QUOTE]

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by Old-T

IB, you said a lot of words, but you didn't answer any of the questions.

IBIdiot actually answer a question?

Ain't gonna happen!

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Old-T

As to your slavery comment, and your refusal to admit that the south--your beloved Dixie--could ever do any wrong, I would ask the Great Researcher to put up some numbers for us:

In 1860, how many slaves were in Massachusetts vs Georgia?


How many in New York vs Alabama?

How many in Pennsylvania vs Virginia?

IB, you said a lot of words, but you didn't answer any of the questions. Simple questions, including the link to the census numbers. Quit deflecting, answer the questions.

How many slaves.

Very simple questions. Census data is likely available. Nice thing about numbers, they illuminate so much, don't you think?


http://www.civil-war.net/pages/1860_census.html

Quite the opposite, Old-Twerp. It's your sanctimonious, self-righteous ass, Old-Twerp, that is ignorantly and hypocritically standing on your ignorant soap box pontificating while disingenuously ignoring how Yankees were guilty of and complicit in any evil or crime you can imagine to level at Southerners, you sanctimonious, hypocritical, self-righteous asshole.

Originally Posted by bigtex

Wow, that was a clever reply!

Thank you, BigKoTex: the BUTTer Bar ASShat!

Originally Posted by Old-T

That does seem to be his new catch phrase. And he uses it whether it is relevant to the topic or not. It is like a little kid who learned to say a new word, and they use it over and over in many stupid and inappropriate ways. IBInappropriate--yep, it fits.

Actually, Old-Twerp, you started it, and the feeble minded BigKoTex: the BUTTer Bar ASShat evidently found it extremely contagious: kinda like viral encephalitis.

Originally Posted by ExNYer

I never implied it, liar. Which is why you keep repeating it. In other words, no Confederate leaders were tried and convicted of treason, you ignorant Yankee jackass; which, btw, you ignorantly "imply" every time you bring this subject up, you benighted Yankee asshole wasting good Dixie air.

BTW, I notice you don't even TRY to deny anymore that the South seceded to preserve slavery. I take that as a victory. BTW, noticed that you still can't cite where Lincoln, et al, made slavery a "war aim" in 1861 as you so ignorantly implied, you ignorant Yankee asshole living in exile in Dixie.

It doesn't have to be "just like" 70s Belfast, shithead. Your idiotic premise is that fear of dying in a bombing is just like slavery. Own it, moron. You're deflecting again, you dumb-fuck Yankee jackass, because the IRA was killing and maiming innocent women and children in Belfast in the 1970s and not in the U.S. in the 21st century, you ignorant Yankee asshole living in exile in Dixie.


Here is your original quote from Post No. 35:
----------------------------------------------
"BTW, you benighted Yankee jackass, you cannot name one Confederate leader who was tried and convicted of treason --because it was determined that that charge would not hold up even in a Yankee kangaroo court!"
-------------------------------------------------

So, your original argument was NOT that no Confederate leader was tried and convicted. Your ignorant Yankee ass has still to cite where any Confederate leaders were tried and convicted of treason defining them in law as "traitors" as you keep stating, you ignorant Yankee jackass wasting good Dixie air.


Your argument was that there were no convictions because "it was determined" that a treason charge would NOT hold up in court. Jefferson Davis wanted a trial, you ignorant Yankee jackass wasting good Dixie air, and your ignorant Yankee ass has still to cite where any Confederate leaders were tried and convicted of treason, you ignorant Yankee jackass wasting good Dixie air.

You posted NO citation for that. You made it up, liar. Who (besides you) determined that no treason charge would hold up? You don't think the US could have found a jury of Northerners (who had lost family members) to convict Jefferson Davis? Idiot. By law, the trial would have been held in Richmond, you ignorant Yankee jackass wasting good Dixie air.

My response was that the North LET THEM OFF THE HOOK by showing mercy - not that they couldn't get a conviction. Off course they could have. Your ignorant Yankee ass has still to cite where any Confederate leaders were tried and convicted of treason defining them in law as "traitors", you ignorant Yankee jackass wasting good Dixie air.

And your stupid answer is that somehow this act of mercy proves that there was no treason. Your ignorant Yankee ass has still to cite where any Confederate leaders were tried and convicted of treason, you ignorant Yankee jackass wasting good Dixie air.

Such illogical conclusions and distortions is why EVERYONE on this board knows you are some high-school drop out pretending to be educated. Keep wheezing on that pure Dixie air you are wasting, you dumb-fuck Yankee asshole living in exile in Dixie; it's obvious from your pathetic life and circumstances as a dumb-fuck Yankee retard living your pathetic life in exile in Dixie that it's your pissant education that failed you.

Originally Posted by bigtex

IBIdiot actually answer a question?

Ain't gonna happen!

You're dribbling again, grab another BigKotTex product and shove it up your ass, BigKoTex: the BUTTer Bar ASShat!

[Guest032516]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

I never implied it, liar. Which is why you keep repeating it.

In other words, no Confederate leaders were tried and convicted of treason, you ignorant Yankee jackass; which, btw, you ignorantly "imply" every time you bring this subject up, you benighted Yankee asshole wasting good Dixie air.

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

BTW, I notice you don't even TRY to deny anymore that the South seceded to preserve slavery. I take that as a victory.

BTW, noticed that you still can't cite where Lincoln, et al, made slavery a "war aim" in 1861 as you so ignorantly implied, you ignorant Yankee asshole living in exile in Dixie.

I don't have to cite it becuase I never said or implied it, Cock Whisperer. Which is why you can't provide a LINK to it.

It doesn't have to be "just like" 70s Belfast, shithead. Your idiotic premise is that fear of dying in a bombing is just like slavery. Own it, moron.

You're deflecting again, you dumb-fuck Yankee jackass, because the IRA was killing and maiming innocent women and children in Belfast in the 1970s and not in the U.S. in the 21st century, you ignorant Yankee asshole living in exile in Dixie.

That make NO sense. You got caught in a stupid comparison and now you can't figure a way to retract it. So you spout drivel.

Here is your original quote from Post No. 35:
----------------------------------------------
"BTW, you benighted Yankee jackass, you cannot name one Confederate leader who was tried and convicted of treason --because it was determined that that charge would not hold up even in a Yankee kangaroo court!"
-------------------------------------------------

So, your original argument was NOT that no Confederate leader was tried and convicted. Your ignorant Yankee ass has still to cite where any Confederate leaders were tried and convicted of treason defining them in law as "traitors" as you keep stating, you ignorant Yankee jackass wasting good Dixie air.

Your argument was that there were no convictions because "it was determined" that a treason charge would NOT hold up in court.

Jefferson Davis wanted a trial, you ignorant Yankee jackass wasting good Dixie air, and your ignorant Yankee ass has still to cite where any Confederate leaders were tried and convicted of treason, you ignorant Yankee jackass wasting good Dixie air.

You posted NO citation for that. You made it up, liar. Who (besides you) determined that no treason charge would hold up? You don't think the US could have found a jury of Northerners (who had lost family members) to convict Jefferson Davis? Idiot.

By law, the trial would have been held in Richmond, you ignorant Yankee jackass wasting good Dixie air.

Really? Provide a citation that say it would have to be held in Richmond. They could try them ANYWHERE that an act of treason occurred. That is pretty much the entire US. Especially Gettysburg.

My response was that the North LET THEM OFF THE HOOK by showing mercy - not that they couldn't get a conviction. Off course they could have.

Your ignorant Yankee ass has still to cite where any Confederate leaders were tried and convicted of treason defining them in law as "traitors", you ignorant Yankee jackass wasting good Dixie air.

And your stupid answer is that somehow this act of mercy proves that there was no treason. Your ignorant Yankee ass has still to cite where any Confederate leaders were tried and convicted of treason, you ignorant Yankee jackass wasting good Dixie air.

Such illogical conclusions and distortions is why EVERYONE on this board knows you are some high-school drop out pretending to be educated. Keep wheezing on that pure Dixie air you are wasting, you dumb-fuck Yankee asshole living in exile in Dixie; it's obvious from your pathetic life and circumstances as a dumb-fuck Yankee retard living your pathetic life in exile in Dixie that it's your pissant education that failed you.

You don't even TRY to make intelligent arguments any more.

You just put words in other people's mouths by saying they were implying something when they clearly weren't.

Then you reply to your own made-up lies.

Your stupidity about Belfast and Civil War aims being just two examples.

Just because Confederates were given blanket amnesty by Andrew Johnson does NOT mean they were not traitors.

You are definitely an idiot.

[Old-T]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Old-T

As to your slavery comment, and your refusal to admit that the south--your beloved Dixie--could ever do any wrong, I would ask the Great Researcher to put up some numbers for us:

In 1860, how many slaves were in Massachusetts vs Georgia?


How many in New York vs Alabama?

How many in Pennsylvania vs Virginia?

IB, you said a lot of words, but you didn't answer any of the questions. Simple questions, including the link to the census numbers. Quit deflecting, answer the questions.

How many slaves.

Very simple questions. Census data is likely available. Nice thing about numbers, they illuminate so much, don't you think?


http://www.civil-war.net/pages/1860_census.html

Quite the opposite, Old-Twerp. It's your sanctimonious, self-righteous ass, Old-Twerp, that is ignorantly and hypocritically standing on your ignorant soap box pontificating while disingenuously ignoring how Yankees were guilty of and complicit in any evil or crime you can imagine to level at Southerners, you sanctimonious, hypocritical, self-righteous asshole.

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Quite the opposite, Old-Twerp. It's your sanctimonious, self-righteous ass, Old-Twerp, that is ignorantly and hypocritically standing on your ignorant soap box pontificating while disingenuously ignoring how Yankees were guilty of and complicit in any evil or crime you can imagine to level at Southerners, you sanctimonious, hypocritical, self-righteous asshole.

I know it is getting a little repetitious, but Wrong Again IB

You are deflecting, dodging, and ignoring because once more you have been caught in a lie and called out. I asked a very simple question (three actually):

In 1860, how many slaves were in Massachusetts vs Georgia?

How many in New York vs Alabama?

How many in Pennsylvania vs Virginia?

But since the answers would be embarrassing to your stellar reputation for objectivity and honesty, you immediately pull out the IB defence and lie, accuse, and bully. I will give you one more opportunity to answer before I take time to look post the answers for you. (I know that is what will happen, since you are incapable of ever admitting you were caught spouting BS, but to show that I am kind, patient, and your moral superior I will ask you a third time. I know you would prefer I ask you the biblical seven times, or seven times seventy, but I am not THAT patient).

[By the way, the Las Vegas odds are 20% chance IB ignores this, 20% chance of a truly epic meltdown, 55% chance of a typical IB deflect/lie/distort response, and 5% chance he actually tries to answer them.]

[Old-T]

Don't want this to get lost.

Anyone care to help little IB out?

[Old-T]

Originally Posted by Old-T

Originally Posted by Old-T
As to your slavery comment, and your refusal to admit that the south--your beloved Dixie--could ever do any wrong, I would ask the Great Researcher to put up some numbers for us:

In 1860, how many slaves were in Massachusetts vs Georgia?

How many in New York vs Alabama?

How many in Pennsylvania vs Virginia?

Very simple questions. Census data is likely available. Nice thing about numbers, they illuminate so much, don't you think?

http://www.civil-war.net/pages/1860_census.html

IB's "Answer": "Quite the opposite, Old-Twerp. It's your sanctimonious, self-righteous ass, Old-Twerp, that is ignorantly and hypocritically standing on your ignorant soap box pontificating while disingenuously ignoring how Yankees were guilty of and complicit in any evil or crime you can imagine to level at Southerners, you sanctimonious, hypocritical, self-righteous asshole."

Time is up IB! Put your crayon down and pass your paper to the front of the room.

Oh look! Your paper is blank, except for your rant about why you shouldn't be forced to answer such a question. It hurts your sensibilities! Poor IBHurtFeelings!

Well, look upon it as a learning opportunity little IB, and maybe you can pass 4th grade history next year. The right answers are:

MASSACHUSETTS: 0 slaves
GEORGIA: 462,198 slaves

NEW YORK: 0 slaves
ALABAMA: 438,080 slaves

PENNSYLVANIA: 0 slaves
VIRGINIA: 490,865 slaves

See, this is called DATA. DATA can be used to test the truth or falsehood of statements. In this case, DATA shows that YOUR claim that slavery was practiced ALL ACROSS the US up until the 1860s is FALSE. FALSE is the opposite of TRUE. You can use these terms in your vocabulary lesson this week if you wish.

For a bonus, can you say how many slaves were in the confederate states in 1860? Then can you say how many were in all the rest of the states combined? Can you tell which number is BIGGER?

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Old-T

I know it is getting a little repetitious, but Wrong Again IB

You are deflecting, dodging, and ignoring because once more you have been caught in a lie and called out. I asked a very simple question (three actually):

In 1860, how many slaves were in Massachusetts vs Georgia?

How many in New York vs Alabama?

How many in Pennsylvania vs Virginia?

But since the answers would be embarrassing to your stellar reputation for objectivity and honesty, you immediately pull out the IB defence and lie, accuse, and bully. I will give you one more opportunity to answer before I take time to look post the answers for you. (I know that is what will happen, since you are incapable of ever admitting you were caught spouting BS, but to show that I am kind, patient, and your moral superior I will ask you a third time. I know you would prefer I ask you the biblical seven times, or seven times seventy, but I am not THAT patient).

[By the way, the Las Vegas odds are 20% chance IB ignores this, 20% chance of a truly epic meltdown, 55% chance of a typical IB deflect/lie/distort response, and 5% chance he actually tries to answer them.]

You are deceitfully ignoring that Yankee bankers, financiers, brokers, factors, slave-traders, etc., etc., all had liens against those slaves, crops and plantations, Old-Twerp. So while you so ignorantly focus on where the "slaves lived" you disingenuously avoid talking about where those Yankees who profited off of slaves lived. But as long as you are willing to lie, Old-Twerp, be ready to have your sanctimonious, self-righteous nose rubbed in facts until you writhe in pain.

Originally Posted by Old-T

Don't want this to get lost.

Anyone care to help little IB out?

But you're the sanctimonious, self-righteous cretin who is "lost", Old-Twerp.

Originally Posted by Old-T

Time is up IB! Put your crayon down and pass your paper to the front of the room.

Oh look! Your paper is blank, except for your rant about why you shouldn't be forced to answer such a question. It hurts your sensibilities! Poor IBHurtFeelings!

Well, look upon it as a learning opportunity little IB, and maybe you can pass 4th grade history next year. The right answers are:

MASSACHUSETTS: 0 slaves
GEORGIA: 462,198 slaves

NEW YORK: 0 slaves
ALABAMA: 438,080 slaves

PENNSYLVANIA: 0 slaves
VIRGINIA: 490,865 slaves

See, this is called DATA. DATA can be used to test the truth or falsehood of statements. In this case, DATA shows that YOUR claim that slavery was practiced ALL ACROSS the US up until the 1860s is FALSE. FALSE is the opposite of TRUE. You can use these terms in your vocabulary lesson this week if you wish.

For a bonus, can you say how many slaves were in the confederate states in 1860? Then can you say how many were in all the rest of the states combined? Can you tell which number is BIGGER?

New York had slaves for 201 years, Old-Twerp; whereas, Alabama had slaves for about 141 years, Old-Twerp.

Massachusetts had slaves for about 160 years, Old-Twerp; whereas, slavery existed in Georgia for only 115 years.

Pennsylvania had slaves for 208 years, Old-Twerp, and Virginia had slaves for 246 -- less than forty years -- one generation -- longer than Pennsylvania.

Further, Old-Twerp, you confuse "geography" with "innocence". You're like a two-bit Kansas City pimp, Old-Twerp, that pleads innocent to a pandering charge because, even though you did take your cut, you ignorantly plead you were not in the room where the actual "business" part of the transaction took place.

In the years leading up to the Civil War, greater than 50% of New York's exports were the product of slave labor, and Yankees pocketed some 40% out of every fucking dollar profit made off southern, slave-picked cotton, Old-Twerp. Plus, slavers actively engaged in the slave trade after it was banned in the U.S. were almost entirely Yankees -- and those were mostly New Yorkers, you dumb-fuck SOB: New York City was the epicenter for outfitting slave ships! Can you figure those numbers and percentages with your dweeb fucking crayon, Old-Twerp?

Originally Posted by ExNYer

BTW, I notice you don't even TRY to deny anymore that the South seceded to preserve slavery. I take that as a victory.
Noticed that you still can't cite where Lincoln, et al, made slavery a "war aim" in 1861 as you so ignorantly implied, you ignorant Yankee asshole living in exile in Dixie.

I don't have to cite it becuase I never said or implied it, Cock Whisperer. Which is why you can't provide a LINK to it. Noticed again how you still can't cite where Lincoln, et al, made slavery a "war aim" in 1861 as you so ignorantly implied, you ignorant Yankee asshole living in exile in Dixie.

That make NO sense. You got caught in a stupid comparison and now you can't figure a way to retract it. So you spout drivel. It makes perfect sense, since the original remark pertained to the "fear" created by the IRA in Belfast, you ignorant Yankee asshole living in exile in Dixie.

Really? Provide a citation that say it would have to be held in Richmond. They could try them ANYWHERE that an act of treason occurred. That is pretty much the entire US. Especially Gettysburg.
The onus is on you to back up your claim that the Confederate leaders were traitors by showing where they were tried and convicted of treason, you ignorant Yankee asshole living in exile in Dixie.

You don't even TRY to make intelligent arguments any more. You never had an intelligent argument, you ignorant Yankee asshole living in exile in Dixie.

You just put words in other people's mouths by saying they were implying something when they clearly weren't. You're a liar, you lying Yankee jackass living in exile in Dixie.

Then you reply to your own made-up lies. "Facts" are not lies, you ignorant Yankee jackass living in exile in Dixie.

Your stupidity about Belfast and Civil War aims being just two examples. Nothing so stupid as the inane lies you post, you stupid Yankee asshole living in exile in Dixie.

You are definitely an idiot. You're definitely an ignorant Yankee asshole living in exile in Dixie.

.