Predict the Year "Tar Heels" is Changed

9,695 Views | 65 Replies | Last: 3 yr ago by GuerrillaPack
GuerrillaPack
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Marxists almost tore down the statue of Andrew Jackson near the White House yesterday:

https://abcnews.go.com/US/protesters-topple-andrew-jackson-statue-white-house/story?id=71398486

Quote:

Protesters tried to pull down a monument of Andrew Jackson, the seventh president of the United States, in a park near the White House on Monday night before police intervened.

Scores of protesters broke through a fence surrounding the 168-year-old bronze equestrian statue at the center of Lafayette Square in Washington, D.C. They climbed atop the sculpture and tied ropes around both Jackson and his horse before attempting to pull the statue from its base, which had been spray-painted with the word "killer."




"Ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." - John 15:19
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GuerrillaPack said:

Influential Marxist ideologue says all statues, stained glass windows, and other pictures depicting Jesus as white should also be torn down -- because, you guessed it, that is "white supremacy":







That's just crazy. Shaun King is just an evil piece of *****
GuerrillaPack
How long do you want to ignore this user?
packgrad said:




That's just crazy. Shaun King is just an evil piece of *****
It's really eye-opening when you research and dig around to see what these Marxists and black supremacists TRULY want. They harbor deep, deep hatred of white/European peoples. They are not just "fighting against discrimination or racism". Oh no. As we've discussed, there is no "systemic racism" against black Americans any more. The only systemic racism is now directed against white/European people (eg, affirmative action).

These Marxists want to destroy virtually all the history of white/European peoples. No more recognition or reverence for Andrew Jackson, Thomas Jefferson, Teddy Roosevelt, or George Washington. They want all the statues of these men torn down. They want the history books re-written to demonize these men as "bigoted racist white supremacists".

And it goes further. No more depictions of Jesus as white -- because that is also "white supremacy". Many universities (Marxist/Leftist-controlled) are shifting to having propaganda courses on "white privilege", where they demonize white/European peoples as essentially being responsible for all the world's problems -- and discrimination and repression of white/European peoples is now "justified" (eg, affirmative action). There is even a growing movement to say that "whiteness should be abolished" (a thinly veiled way of saying that the white/European race should be abolished). One of the leaders of this movement was a jewish professor at Harvard, Noel Ignatiev -- see this article "Abolish the White Race" on the Harvard website.

Here he is telling us that "whiteness must be abolished", because "whiteness is the source of oppression and white supremacy":



Al Jazeera writer Mark LeVine says that "Abolishing Whitness Has Never Been More Urgent"
"Ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." - John 15:19
82TxPackFan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
johntom said:

82TxPackFan said:

johntom said:

GuerrillaPack said:

johntom said:

GuerrillaPack said:

acslater1344 said:

GuerrillaPack said:

Predict when they will remove the confederate statues located outside the State Capitol in Raleigh...

via lawless violence and unlawful Governor edict


Good riddance
Whether you are for or against those statues, the way things should be changed in society is via lawful processes -- eg, laws passed by the state legisltature, etc. Not by terrorism from roaming bands of rioting degenerates and criminals committing acts of violence and property damage.

How would you like it if, hypothetically, there were rioting crowds of "right-wingers" going around tearing down statues of Martin Luther King Jr., and then a Governor issued an executive order taking down all statues of Martin Luther King Jr.??
Comparing Confederate monuments to MLK monuments is.... interesting. Those are not even remotely comparable.

There are hundreds (probably thousands) of instances throughout history of monuments of oppressors being taken down and they are rarely taken down peacefully. This is no different.
So you don't support the rule of law, and making change in society via peaceful (non-violent) means?

You're ok with lawlessness and "non-peaceful" actions being taken when it furthers an agenda you agree with? You're ok with mob violence/terrorism and mob rule via intimidation?

Let's see how you like it if the other side (right-wing) decides that they are done with being peaceful, and institute their own form of vigilante justice. I think you'd be singing a different tune if that were going on.
People have tried for years to have these taken down peacefully lawfully. It hasn't worked. I don't agree with the trashing of private businesses, but knocking down a statue is pretty harmless in the grand scheme of things and can be fairly powerful.
So if something you believe is wrong that hasn't been able to be corrected by following a lawful process then you are okay with using unlawful means to resolve the issue?
Our country was founded on this.
Not quite the same. The colonists had no voice in the decisions made by the king of England. We, as US citizens elect representatives that are responsible for enacting laws that govern our society at the city, county, state, & federal levels. Since you deflected instead of answering my question, I will assume that you are okay with all forms of unlawful behavior as long as you find them acceptable.
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
johntom said:

GuerrillaPack said:

johntom said:

GuerrillaPack said:

acslater1344 said:

GuerrillaPack said:

Predict when they will remove the confederate statues located outside the State Capitol in Raleigh...

via lawless violence and unlawful Governor edict


Good riddance
Whether you are for or against those statues, the way things should be changed in society is via lawful processes -- eg, laws passed by the state legisltature, etc. Not by terrorism from roaming bands of rioting degenerates and criminals committing acts of violence and property damage.

How would you like it if, hypothetically, there were rioting crowds of "right-wingers" going around tearing down statues of Martin Luther King Jr., and then a Governor issued an executive order taking down all statues of Martin Luther King Jr.??
Comparing Confederate monuments to MLK monuments is.... interesting. Those are not even remotely comparable.

There are hundreds (probably thousands) of instances throughout history of monuments of oppressors being taken down and they are rarely taken down peacefully. This is no different.
So you don't support the rule of law, and making change in society via peaceful (non-violent) means?

You're ok with lawlessness and "non-peaceful" actions being taken when it furthers an agenda you agree with? You're ok with mob violence/terrorism and mob rule via intimidation?

Let's see how you like it if the other side (right-wing) decides that they are done with being peaceful, and institute their own form of vigilante justice. I think you'd be singing a different tune if that were going on.
People have tried for years to have these taken down peacefully lawfully. It hasn't worked. I don't agree with the trashing of private businesses, but knocking down a statue is pretty harmless in the grand scheme of things and can be fairly powerful.


Let me be absurd for a moment...

I really don't like your tone on the message board. I think I'm going to tear down your home or perhaps your families home, just because I may not like you! How absurd is that thinking?

It's not pretty harmless if it affects you. Your argument is very naive, unfortunately.

Remember one thing that this country is about: your rights end where my rights begin as well as my rights end where your rights begin.
johntom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
packgrad said:

GuerrillaPack said:

Influential Marxist ideologue says all statues, stained glass windows, and other pictures depicting Jesus as white should also be torn down -- because, you guessed it, that is "white supremacy":







That's just crazy. Shaun King is just an evil piece of *****
This is one thing I think all people should agree on. Shaun King has made a living off of dividing people.
johntom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
caryking said:

johntom said:

GuerrillaPack said:

johntom said:

GuerrillaPack said:

acslater1344 said:

GuerrillaPack said:

Predict when they will remove the confederate statues located outside the State Capitol in Raleigh...

via lawless violence and unlawful Governor edict


Good riddance
Whether you are for or against those statues, the way things should be changed in society is via lawful processes -- eg, laws passed by the state legisltature, etc. Not by terrorism from roaming bands of rioting degenerates and criminals committing acts of violence and property damage.

How would you like it if, hypothetically, there were rioting crowds of "right-wingers" going around tearing down statues of Martin Luther King Jr., and then a Governor issued an executive order taking down all statues of Martin Luther King Jr.??
Comparing Confederate monuments to MLK monuments is.... interesting. Those are not even remotely comparable.

There are hundreds (probably thousands) of instances throughout history of monuments of oppressors being taken down and they are rarely taken down peacefully. This is no different.
So you don't support the rule of law, and making change in society via peaceful (non-violent) means?

You're ok with lawlessness and "non-peaceful" actions being taken when it furthers an agenda you agree with? You're ok with mob violence/terrorism and mob rule via intimidation?

Let's see how you like it if the other side (right-wing) decides that they are done with being peaceful, and institute their own form of vigilante justice. I think you'd be singing a different tune if that were going on.
People have tried for years to have these taken down peacefully lawfully. It hasn't worked. I don't agree with the trashing of private businesses, but knocking down a statue is pretty harmless in the grand scheme of things and can be fairly powerful.


Let me be absurd for a moment...

I really don't like your tone on the message board. I think I'm going to tear down your home or perhaps your families home, just because I may not like you! How absurd is that thinking?

It's not pretty harmless if it affects you. Your argument is very naive, unfortunately.

Remember one thing that this country is about: your rights end where my rights begin as well as my rights end where your rights begin.
How was anyone affected by a Confederate monument being taken down? What rights were violated?
GuerrillaPack
How long do you want to ignore this user?
johntom said:



This is one thing I think all people should agree on. Shaun King has made a living off of dividing people.
That guy belongs in an insane asylum. Actually, he should be in prison, and be prosecuted for inciting violence. He is provoking people to commit acts of private property damage and terrorism.

And he is a darling of the Establishment. He has written for the New York Daily News, appeared on "The Young Turks" program, appears on the nationally syndicated "Tom Joyner Morning Show" on radio, and is a writer for Harvard Law School's "Fair Punishment Project".

It's one thing to argue that statues should be removed from government property (and via lawful, peaceful means).

But this guy is saying that the Marxist mob should go into private churches (and homes?), and "tear down" all statues, murals, stained glass windows and other depictions of Jesus that show him as white/European. If people like him controlled the government, Marxist gestapos and secret police would be raiding private churches and homes in order to enforce his form of "racial justice", and controlling your artistic tastes and what you can think and say. And then throwing all the "thought criminals" in jail for "hate speech".

He is a hyper-racist totalitarian communist maniac.

And people like him are the average person in these rioting mobs. King is a major BLM activist. The mob is taking direction and orders from him. They are already tearing down statues on private property. That's the next step -- not only statues on government property....but telling us what we can do on our private property, and restricting freedom of speech in general.

"Ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." - John 15:19
johntom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
82TxPackFan said:

johntom said:

82TxPackFan said:

johntom said:

GuerrillaPack said:

johntom said:

GuerrillaPack said:

acslater1344 said:

GuerrillaPack said:

Predict when they will remove the confederate statues located outside the State Capitol in Raleigh...

via lawless violence and unlawful Governor edict


Good riddance
Whether you are for or against those statues, the way things should be changed in society is via lawful processes -- eg, laws passed by the state legisltature, etc. Not by terrorism from roaming bands of rioting degenerates and criminals committing acts of violence and property damage.

How would you like it if, hypothetically, there were rioting crowds of "right-wingers" going around tearing down statues of Martin Luther King Jr., and then a Governor issued an executive order taking down all statues of Martin Luther King Jr.??
Comparing Confederate monuments to MLK monuments is.... interesting. Those are not even remotely comparable.

There are hundreds (probably thousands) of instances throughout history of monuments of oppressors being taken down and they are rarely taken down peacefully. This is no different.
So you don't support the rule of law, and making change in society via peaceful (non-violent) means?

You're ok with lawlessness and "non-peaceful" actions being taken when it furthers an agenda you agree with? You're ok with mob violence/terrorism and mob rule via intimidation?

Let's see how you like it if the other side (right-wing) decides that they are done with being peaceful, and institute their own form of vigilante justice. I think you'd be singing a different tune if that were going on.
People have tried for years to have these taken down peacefully lawfully. It hasn't worked. I don't agree with the trashing of private businesses, but knocking down a statue is pretty harmless in the grand scheme of things and can be fairly powerful.
So if something you believe is wrong that hasn't been able to be corrected by following a lawful process then you are okay with using unlawful means to resolve the issue?
Our country was founded on this.
Not quite the same. The colonists had no voice in the decisions made by the king of England. We, as US citizens elect representatives that are responsible for enacting laws that govern our society at the city, county, state, & federal levels. Since you deflected instead of answering my question, I will assume that you are okay with all forms of unlawful behavior as long as you find them acceptable.
Of course not, but also... kind of. There's a gray area that I don't think some people are acknowledging. Pretty much everyone is accepting of some forms of unlawful behavior as long as they agree with it. Would you have told Rosa Parks to get to the back of the bus because that was the law?
GuerrillaPack
How long do you want to ignore this user?
johntom said:



Of course not, but also... kind of. There's a gray area that I don't think some people are acknowledging. Pretty much everyone is accepting of some forms of unlawful behavior as long as they agree with it. Would you have told Rosa Parks to get to the back of the bus because that was the law?
Should white people start circumventing and ignoring "affirmative action" laws because it is blatant racial discrimination against white people?
"Ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." - John 15:19
GuerrillaPack
How long do you want to ignore this user?
johntom said:



How was anyone affected by a Confederate monument being taken down? What rights were violated?
The will of the people, via their lawfully elected government, was violated. By a racist mob committing criminal acts of vandalism and terrorism.

How is anyone affected by the Confederate monument being left standing? How are anyone's rights "being violated" by it being left standing?
"Ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." - John 15:19
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
johntom said:

caryking said:

johntom said:

GuerrillaPack said:

johntom said:

GuerrillaPack said:

acslater1344 said:

GuerrillaPack said:

Predict when they will remove the confederate statues located outside the State Capitol in Raleigh...

via lawless violence and unlawful Governor edict


Good riddance
Whether you are for or against those statues, the way things should be changed in society is via lawful processes -- eg, laws passed by the state legisltature, etc. Not by terrorism from roaming bands of rioting degenerates and criminals committing acts of violence and property damage.

How would you like it if, hypothetically, there were rioting crowds of "right-wingers" going around tearing down statues of Martin Luther King Jr., and then a Governor issued an executive order taking down all statues of Martin Luther King Jr.??
Comparing Confederate monuments to MLK monuments is.... interesting. Those are not even remotely comparable.

There are hundreds (probably thousands) of instances throughout history of monuments of oppressors being taken down and they are rarely taken down peacefully. This is no different.
So you don't support the rule of law, and making change in society via peaceful (non-violent) means?

You're ok with lawlessness and "non-peaceful" actions being taken when it furthers an agenda you agree with? You're ok with mob violence/terrorism and mob rule via intimidation?

Let's see how you like it if the other side (right-wing) decides that they are done with being peaceful, and institute their own form of vigilante justice. I think you'd be singing a different tune if that were going on.
People have tried for years to have these taken down peacefully lawfully. It hasn't worked. I don't agree with the trashing of private businesses, but knocking down a statue is pretty harmless in the grand scheme of things and can be fairly powerful.


Let me be absurd for a moment...

I really don't like your tone on the message board. I think I'm going to tear down your home or perhaps your families home, just because I may not like you! How absurd is that thinking?

It's not pretty harmless if it affects you. Your argument is very naive, unfortunately.

Remember one thing that this country is about: your rights end where my rights begin as well as my rights end where your rights begin.
How was anyone affected by a Confederate monument being taken down? What rights were violated?


Not everyone sees the monuments as racists. They see them as the country's heritage, good or bad. They see this as a destruction of our history, good or bad. So, who wins the argument? The Mob?

My point on rights is to say: not everyone agrees; so, be mindful and respectful of those differences. Just don't assume you can take unilateral efforts to do something without affecting another.
johntom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GuerrillaPack said:

johntom said:



Of course not, but also... kind of. There's a gray area that I don't think some people are acknowledging. Pretty much everyone is accepting of some forms of unlawful behavior as long as they agree with it. Would you have told Rosa Parks to get to the back of the bus because that was the law?
Should white people start circumventing and ignoring "affirmative action" laws because it is blatant racial discrimination against white people?
I would argue that many do.
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
johntom said:

GuerrillaPack said:

johntom said:



Of course not, but also... kind of. There's a gray area that I don't think some people are acknowledging. Pretty much everyone is accepting of some forms of unlawful behavior as long as they agree with it. Would you have told Rosa Parks to get to the back of the bus because that was the law?
Should white people start circumventing and ignoring "affirmative action" laws because it is blatant racial discrimination against white people?
I would argue that many do.
do tell...
johntom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
caryking said:

johntom said:

GuerrillaPack said:

johntom said:



Of course not, but also... kind of. There's a gray area that I don't think some people are acknowledging. Pretty much everyone is accepting of some forms of unlawful behavior as long as they agree with it. Would you have told Rosa Parks to get to the back of the bus because that was the law?
Should white people start circumventing and ignoring "affirmative action" laws because it is blatant racial discrimination against white people?
I would argue that many do.
do tell...
People have fought back against affirmative action. It's considered illegal in multiple states. The use of hard racial quotas was ruled unconstitutional. Many ignore affirmative action (which is more of a strong suggestion now) and simply employ the most qualified candidates (rightfully so). White males are still out earning other groups. Either it's been ignored or it's largely ineffective. I'd argue both are true.
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
johntom said:

caryking said:

johntom said:

GuerrillaPack said:

johntom said:



Of course not, but also... kind of. There's a gray area that I don't think some people are acknowledging. Pretty much everyone is accepting of some forms of unlawful behavior as long as they agree with it. Would you have told Rosa Parks to get to the back of the bus because that was the law?
Should white people start circumventing and ignoring "affirmative action" laws because it is blatant racial discrimination against white people?
I would argue that many do.
do tell...
People have fought back against affirmative action. It's considered illegal in multiple states. The use of hard racial quotas was ruled unconstitutional. Many ignore affirmative action (which is more of a strong suggestion now) and simply employ the most qualified candidates (rightfully so). White males are still out earning other groups. Either it's been ignored or it's largely ineffective. I'd argue both are true.
What people?
What States?
Name one state that has laws prohibiting affirmative action where the law has been enacted.
The use of hard racial quotas was ruled unconstitutional. - and... that's the ruling of the Supreme Court!

Tell me how affirmative action laws are "NOT" systematic racism... name one other law that is systematic racism, currently enforced in this country.
johntom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
caryking said:

johntom said:

caryking said:

johntom said:

GuerrillaPack said:

johntom said:



Of course not, but also... kind of. There's a gray area that I don't think some people are acknowledging. Pretty much everyone is accepting of some forms of unlawful behavior as long as they agree with it. Would you have told Rosa Parks to get to the back of the bus because that was the law?
Should white people start circumventing and ignoring "affirmative action" laws because it is blatant racial discrimination against white people?
I would argue that many do.
do tell...
People have fought back against affirmative action. It's considered illegal in multiple states. The use of hard racial quotas was ruled unconstitutional. Many ignore affirmative action (which is more of a strong suggestion now) and simply employ the most qualified candidates (rightfully so). White males are still out earning other groups. Either it's been ignored or it's largely ineffective. I'd argue both are true.
What people?
What States?
Name one state that has laws prohibiting affirmative action where the law has been enacted.
The use of hard racial quotas was ruled unconstitutional. - and... that's the ruling of the Supreme Court!

Tell me how affirmative action laws are "NOT" systematic racism... name one other law that is systematic racism, currently enforced in this country.
What people? Do I need to list every court case where affirmative action has been fought? There are many.

What States? There are also 8 states currently where affirmative action has been deemed illegal. This is easily found on Google. If you need one, Oklahoma.

I agree that affirmative action is wrong and a version of systemic racism. I was simply pointing out that many have already ignored and/or fought affirmative action. It's a dumb idea and ineffective when used.
WolfPacker54
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Back to the original topic, everyone should go retweet this and force UNC to respond.
Mormad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I have yet to see a "constructive debate" as mentioned earlier.

I'm sensitive to what's happening in our world, but I'm having trouble really understanding how tearing down a statue, no matter how offensive and how temporarily exhilarating, changes the day to day life of those involved and makes it any better. Our country is so divided, and it just seems that such aggressive acts are more divisive and destructive. Just seems there are better ways to foster a "constructive debate?" Maybe? I just think that energy and effort could be used in a more effective manner? Maybe I'm wrong.
GuerrillaPack
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mormad said:

I have yet to see a "constructive debate" as mentioned earlier.

I'm sensitive to what's happening in our world, but I'm having trouble really understanding how tearing down a statue, no matter how offensive and how temporarily exhilarating, changes the day to day life of those involved and makes it any better. Our country is so divided, and it just seems that such aggressive acts are more divisive and destructive. Just seems there are better ways to foster a "constructive debate?" Maybe? I just think that energy and effort could be used in a more effective manner? Maybe I'm wrong.
The Marxist Left doesn't want a debate. They have demands. They will not compromise. They will only keep pushing until they get their agenda rammed down everyone's throats -- even if done via non-peaceful means, including every form of cheating, criminal acts, and even violent terrorism to intimidate people into kowtowing to their agenda.
"Ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." - John 15:19
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GuerrillaPack said:

Mormad said:

I have yet to see a "constructive debate" as mentioned earlier.

I'm sensitive to what's happening in our world, but I'm having trouble really understanding how tearing down a statue, no matter how offensive and how temporarily exhilarating, changes the day to day life of those involved and makes it any better. Our country is so divided, and it just seems that such aggressive acts are more divisive and destructive. Just seems there are better ways to foster a "constructive debate?" Maybe? I just think that energy and effort could be used in a more effective manner? Maybe I'm wrong.
The Marxist Left doesn't want a debate. They have demands. They will not compromise. They will only keep pushing until they get their agenda rammed down everyone's throats -- even if done via non-peaceful means, including every form of cheating, criminal acts, and even violent terrorism to intimidate people into kowtowing to their agenda.
Some here may think GuerrilaPack is somewhat off putting and verbose; however, he hit the nail on the head with this response!
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
And, what the hell does this mean?

No Justice, No Peace

The system we have is the best in the world. Is it perfect? Please name one system that is perfect. Regardless of all the talking points coming next, the system provides the results it does.

So, if the system provides a result that doesn't make "No justice, No peace" happy, are they going to burn more other people's property? If you think that's ok, your probably not a good fit for thIs country. Renounce your citizenship and I'm sure another country will take you. Or, will they?
GuerrillaPack
How long do you want to ignore this user?
caryking said:

And, what the hell does this mean?

No Justice, No Peace

The system we have is the best in the world. Is it perfect? Please name one system that is perfect. Regardless of all the talking points coming next, the system provides the results it does.

So, if the system provides a result that doesn't make "No justice, No peace" happy, are they going to burn more other people's property? If you think that's ok, your probably not a good fit for thIs country. Renounce your citizenship and I'm sure another country will take you. Or, will they?
And they are violating their own principle of "no justice no peace" in regards to the George Floyd situation. Those 4 police officers in Minneapolis have been arrested and charged with murder, for George Floyd's death.

So the justice system IS working to obtain justice in this case. So what are BLM and Antifa rioting for? Those 4 police officers are being charged! What more do the Leftist rioters and terrorists want? I guess for the entire Minneapolis police department (and others around the country) to be disbanded. In addition to tearing down statues commemorating dead Confederate soldiers, Teddy Roosevelt, Thomas Jefferson, and basically any other statue of a white person in the entire country. And also tearing down all statues and stained glass windows and murals that depict Jesus as white.

It never ends with these people. Even when there is justice, they demand that there be no peace, and that they have the "right" to commit criminal acts of vandalism, and riot and engage in terrorism in order to intimidate people into kowtowing to their agenda.
"Ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." - John 15:19
GuerrillaPack
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This is not a joke...

The Communist terrorists/rioters are now demanding that the "Emancipation Memorial" statue of Abraham Lincoln in D.C. be torn down. This statue was paid for by freed slaves, and erected in 1876 to celebrate the emancipation of slaves.

Why? Because they say that because the freed slave is kneeling in front of Lincoln, it is depicting "the white man as superior".

lmfao




These rioters literally got up in front of the statue and made a speech announcing the date and time that they were going to come back and tear down the statue. They didn't include it in the video above, but I saw it in another video with more of the speech.

And the police do nothing? Shouldn't that speaker be arrested on the spot for inciting violence and destruction of property?

These riots are the textbook definition of "terrorism". They are using violence, threats of violence, and intimidation in order to achieve their political agenda.

Oh, and by the way, I'm not being hyperbolic when describing these rioters as Marxists. "Black Lives Matter" is an admittedly "Marxist-trained" organization. And Antifa are obvious communists. Also, notice how these BLM and Antifa rioters give the "raised clenched fist" salute at their rallies -- which is a well-known communist gesture/sign.





"Ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." - John 15:19
GuerrillaPack
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Predict the year Mt Rushmore is closed down for visitors. Predict the year they rig it with explosives to blow off the faces of Washington, Jefferson, Roosevelt, and Lincoln.

The NY Times just published an article a few days ago that is a thinly veiled advocacy for closing down Mount Rushmore:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/01/us/mount-rushmore.html

From the article...

Quote:

Native Americans have long criticized the sculpture, in part because it was built on what had been Indigenous land. And more recently, amid a nationwide movement against racism that has toppled statues commemorating Confederate generals and other historical figures, some activists have called for Mount Rushmore to close.

[...]

Critics of the monument have also taken issue with the men whose faces were etched into the granite. Mr. Borglum chose Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln and Roosevelt, he said, because they embodied "the founding, expansion, preservation and unification of the United States."

But each of these titans of American history has a complicated legacy. Washington and Jefferson were slaveholders. Roosevelt actively sought to Christianize and uproot Native Americans as the United States expanded, Professor Smith said. "He was a racist," he added.

[...]

And although Lincoln was behind the Emancipation Proclamation a move some have characterized as reluctant and late he has been criticized for his response to the so-called Minnesota Uprising, in which more than 300 Native Americans were sentenced to death by a military court after being accused of attacking white settlers in 1862.

[...]

Activists and officials look to the future

Mr. Tilsen said recent efforts to confront racial injustice in the United States could provide an opportunity to reconsider the monument's future. "Mount Rushmore needs to be closed as a national monument, and the land itself needs to be returned to the Indigenous people," he said.

In a statement on Monday, Harold Frazier, the chairman of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, called the monument a "brand on our flesh" that needed to be removed.

"Visitors look upon the faces of those presidents and extol the virtues that they believe make America the country it is today," he said. "Lakota see the faces of the men who lied, cheated and murdered innocent people whose only crime was living on the land they wanted to steal."

Professor Smith said reparations could be made to the tribes "in an attempt to make amends for our greediness and our unjustified taking of their land."

He said Mount Rushmore offered an opportunity to learn about American history, including the country's wrongdoings. "We can leave a monument where it's at, as long as it has a proper contextual label on it," he said.

According to these far-Left activists...essentially every President before JFK (and I guess every Republican after that) was a "racist". They are calling each of the 4 Presidents on Mt Rushmore a "racist" -- Washington, Jefferson, Teddy Roosevelt, and even Abraham Lincoln...as detailed in that article.

According to Leftists, essentially all of American history is a history of "wrongdoings" ("racism", "white supremacy", etc). So...basically ALL of our history needs to be condemned and scorned, and anything that celebrates our history (statues, monuments, history books) must be torn down or revised in order to cast the United States in a negative light.

When you boil it all down, this is a highly-coordinated Marxist attempt to overthrow the nation. They want to erase our history, and "wipe the slate clean", with the nation essentially starting over and built on new principles.
"Ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." - John 15:19
M_A
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I would appreciate it if people took the generic political hand wringing to another thread and remain focused on the goal of this one: to get the 'Tar Heels' to change their name

Progress is being made. Soon UNC will have to reckon for their crimes

"It's ACC Championship or bust, quite honestly"
ZAXPACK15
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Looks like the protesters are gaining steam

https://www.cbs17.com/news/local-news/group-calls-for-change-to-uncs-tar-heels-nickname/
3rd generation CALS grad
Pacfanweb
How long do you want to ignore this user?
M_A said:

I would appreciate it if people took the generic political hand wringing to another thread and remain focused on the goal of this one: to get the 'Tar Heels' to change their name

Progress is being made. Soon UNC will have to reckon for their crimes


Now THAT is stupid.
cowboypack02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
M_A said:

I would appreciate it if people took the generic political hand wringing to another thread and remain focused on the goal of this one: to get the 'Tar Heels' to change their name

Progress is being made. Soon UNC will have to reckon for their crimes


UNC will have to reckon? Come on man...we all know those guys to the west never have to face the consequences for anything they have ever done
M_A
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ZAXPACK15 said:

Looks like the protesters are gaining steam

https://www.cbs17.com/news/local-news/group-calls-for-change-to-uncs-tar-heels-nickname/

"It's ACC Championship or bust, quite honestly"
ZAXPACK15
How long do you want to ignore this user?
https://www.wral.com/unc-chapel-hill-adopts-policy-for-scrubbing-buildings-of-racist-links/19191609/

Step One?
3rd generation CALS grad
GuerrillaPack
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Statue of Christopher Columbus removed in Chicago after Antifa/BLM terrorists threaten to tear it down.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jul/24/christopher-columbus-statue-removed-chicago-following-protests

This is FAR beyond just removing statues of confederate generals or honoring confederate soldiers.

This is now about removing anything that honors the white/European founders of the United States -- under the guise of "fighting against white supremacy". Because these communist terrorists and activists basically say that any white/European leader in the United States (prior to and including Donald Trump) was a "white supremacist".
"Ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." - John 15:19
Refresh
Page 2 of 2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.