See other 4play Articles
Title: NAACP calls for Mount Rushmore to be demolished
Source:
League of the South/Rebellion blog
URL Source: http://www.lsrebellion.blogspot.com/
Published: Apr 1, 2013
Author: Old Rebel
Post Date: 2013-04-01 21:39:12 by X-15
Keywords: None
Views: 3124
Comments: 127
At a hastily organized news conference today, the national president of the NAACP asserted that images of two of the presidents honored on Mount Rushmore, George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, are "offensive and hurtful." National NAACP president Rev. William Barber claimed that he was shocked Friday when he was shown a picture of the monument. Upon researching the memorial's history on Wikipedia, he discovered what he described as "disturbing truths" that require the site's "total demolition." Both former presidents were slaveowners. One historian who disagrees is Civil War historian Kevin M. Levin. "I sympathize with Reverend Barber, and normally I do not disagree with black people, especially those who are bigger than me. But as a student of history, I think we need to appreciate Mount Rushmore in its historical context." These arguments have not changed Barber's mind. "He is right that it has a historical context," Barber said. "But what is that history? The history of racism. The history of lynchings. The history of death. The history of slavery. If you say that shouldn't be offensive, then either you don't know the history, or you are denying the history." When asked why the images of Lincoln and Roosevelt should suffer the same fate, Barber laughed. "They've been hangin' with George and Tom too long to be innocent. They had their chance."
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 106.
#6. To: X-15 (#0)
This is an April Fools joke, right? On the other hand, it's stupid enough to be real. This country is so fucked.
hahahahaha. i burst out laughing on that one too. you're making my night, Jim, and you would not believe how much in need of some good laughs i am.
maybe you're not tough enough to run a forum like this... i mean, the continual barrage of chicken littles cant be doing you any good if you're not mean enough to blow them off see what i mean?
Sounds to me like you're speaking of Global Warming/Peak Oil agendists there.
about this chicken little stuff... myabe we can start with areas of agreement... can we agree that there are people in the world that think they're entitled to run the world? can we agree that this entitlement is based on their belief in their racial superiority? can we agree that, so far and despite their supposed superiority, these people have not demonstrated enough sense to pour piss out of a boot? can we agree that production from individual oil wells peaks, then declines? can we agree that production from fields of oil wells peaks, then declines? can we agree that production from entrie countries peaks, then declines? can we agree that all this implies that global oil production will, someday, peak and then decline? can we agree that co2 warms the atmosphere? can we agree that burning a gallon of gas produces about 20 pounds of co2? can we agree that humans are putting over 30 billion tons of extra co2 into the atmosphere every year? can we agree that if we put all the co2 back in the atmosphere, we will eventually return to a tropical climate that will melt the ice in greenland and antarctica? can we agree that there's enough water locked up in that ice that, if melted, sea level will rise by 70 or 80 meters? can we agree that a 70 or 80 meter sea level rise would not be a good thing for "business as usual"? so it looks to me that there's enough real chicken little stuff to worry about without people manufacturing more chicken little stuff like chemtrails and hysteria about "global extinction events" like the gulf oil spill and fukushima. now then, these people who are convinced that they're entitled to run the world... what if they believe the evidence of peak oil and global warming? what if they're especially vulnerable to both peak oil and global warming? what if they staged an event in response to peak oil and global warming... a truly despicable event, but one that would serve as a pretext to grab control of the remaining oil before oil shortages cripple their support system? what if that staged event was just another in a succession of bad ideas? ...ideas that dont prove their superiority, but instead prove how haywire their basic philosophy is?
Chaff Chemtrails Detected by NWS Louisville Radar: During the afternoon hours of 7 January 2006, the Louisville NEXRAD radar (KLVX) detected what appeared to be chaff. Weatherman Explains Chemtrails on Radar Weatherman Slips... CHEM TRAILS, page 1 at abovetopsecret.com [My note: video reference at 8:13-8:51] ...now they won't confirm that but i was in the marine corp for many years and i tell you right now, thats what it is It's chaff. As he says, used by the military and does in fact show up on doplar radar. It's no secret. Do a google search for "chaff on weather radar". NOAA talks about it. The FAA talks about it. Chaff has been around as long as radar has. Both the British and the Germans developed it during World War II as a countermeasure for radar. It is presently used to throw radar guided missiles off their target More from the Comments at abovetopsecret.com: "No worries people, your safe to breath in this particular aluminum and plastic.. in fact anything you call 'chaff' automatically becomes harmless." I think that last comment was sarcasm and the one above it is wrong. Can we agree on that? Edited for punctuation.
ah now chemtrails are not barium or aluminum , or sulfur or whatever other flavor of the day is in fashion now they're "allummanim, plastic or sometimes metalized paper products" and they're not intended to poison us all or geoengineer a cooler climate (and that's a relief, because global warming doesnt exist, anyhow) nope, chemtrails are radar countermeasures
So are we in agreement, then, that such radar countermeasures don't amount to chicken little hysteria (as you've characterized the concerned) but do account to some extent as actual chemtrails containing aluminum and other metals? Edited punctuation.
i picked the wrong day to forget a sarcasm tag... chaff has been around for since WWII, they used it in the vietnam war... not that it makes any difference . the problem you guys got is that you're unable to prove the existence of chemtrails
No, you're unable to admit that such radar countermeasures prove the existence of chemtrails to some extent.
we can get bogged down in legal hairsplitting about the definition of chemtrails, if you want to. are those chemtrails or contrails or chaff?
You tell me: Are those just contrails or are they chaff-chemtrails?
probably contrails... i'd say with 99.99% certainty... . now then, we might as well be methodical about this... starting with: "what percentage of observed trail phenomena are chemtrails?"
starting with: "what percentage of observed trail phenomena are chemtrails?" I don't know. Do you?
so you dont belong to the wudidiz/original_intent "i know a chemtrail when i see one" school of thought
...the point being, if you cant tell the difference between a chemtrail and a contrail, how do you know that all "chemtrails" are not really contrails?
I haven't studied the subject of chemtrails as extensively as others but have seen what I suspected were lingering chemtrails rather than contrails. You didn't answer my question, though. Do you know what percentages of observed trail phenomena are contrails or chemtrails?
everything i've observed (including making my own contrails at sea level in the arctic, starting at about 35 below and colder) can be explained as contrails. there's ton of air going into those big engines every second, and a ton of co2 and nitrogen, plus a gallon of water, vaporized, coming out every second that water vapor is distributed evenly throughout the ton of co2 and nitrogen you got to ask yourself how much space a ton of co2, nitrogen and water vapor occupies at 30,000 or 40,000 feet... when the temperature, humidity and pressure are right, you get varying types of contrails, including persistant contrails. all this has been common knowledge in aviation circles since WWII
i got to think that your chaff theory is lacking, mostly in visibility... if chaff were visible enough to be mistaken for contrails, there'd be pictures of the stuff... but i cant find any pictures... lots of pictures and videos of white phosphorus flares, though, but they are going off at low altitudes where contrails are not forming. ...white phosphorus because it's burning, and is effective against heat- seekers... cant be mistaken for contrails
Well, I did link to pictures of the stuff on weather radar screens. Ordinary contrails wouldn't show up so.
well, you'd expect radar countermeasures to show up on radar, wouldnt you? you might even expect chemtrails to show up on radar if they existed... seeing as how they're supposedly composed of aluminum and barium... or sulfur or silver iodide or whatver the fact remains: other than eyewitness reports, you guys have no evidence of chemtrails' existence... no evidence with a solid provenance you're unwilling to hire a jet and take samples directly from a supposed chemtrail, you're unwilling to acknowledge that you need temperature, humidity and altitude information to tell if contrails, including persistent contrails, are likely to form. there's just no evidence at all from reliable sources it's as simple as that
You've got a point there. Nevertheless, they apparently did show up. I didn't say that countermeasure was flawless. You have no reasonable reason to not simply agree that the metallized chaff -- which you know is used for Military purposes and has been for quite some time -- is evidence of chemtrails to some extent.
You've got a point there. Nevertheless, they apparently did show up. I didn't say that countermeasure was flawless. you're missing the whole point of "countermeasures" they are designed to show up on radar to divert radar-guided incoming missles from the airplane
Like I said before, I haven't extensively studied this subject. I'd rather discuss other issues instead but not right now. Maybe this evening.
. myabe we can start with areas of agreement... can we agree that there are people in the world that think they're entitled to run the world? can we agree that this entitlement is based on their belief in their racial superiority? can we agree that, so far and despite their supposed superiority, these people have not demonstrated enough sense to pour piss out of a boot? can we agree that production from individual oil wells peaks, then declines? can we agree that production from fields of oil wells peaks, then declines? can we agree that production from entrie countries peaks, then declines? can we agree that all this implies that global oil production will, someday, peak and then decline? can we agree that co2 warms the atmosphere? can we agree that burning a gallon of gas produces about 20 pounds of co2? can we agree that humans are putting over 30 billion tons of extra co2 into the atmosphere every year? can we agree that if we put all the co2 back in the atmosphere, we will eventually return to a tropical climate that will melt the ice in greenland and antarctica? can we agree that there's enough water locked up in that ice that, if melted, sea level will rise by 70 or 80 meters? can we agree that a 70 or 80 meter sea level rise would not be a good thing for "business as usual"? so it looks to me that there's enough real chicken little stuff to worry about without people manufacturing more chicken little stuff like chemtrails and hysteria about "global extinction events" like the gulf oil spill and fukushima. now then, these people who are convinced that they're entitled to run the world... what if they believe the evidence of peak oil and global warming? what if they're especially vulnerable to both peak oil and global warming? what if they staged an event in response to peak oil and global warming... a truly despicable event, but one that would serve as a pretext to grab control of the remaining oil before oil shortages cripple their support system? what if that staged event was just another in a succession of bad ideas? ...ideas that dont prove their superiority, but instead prove how haywire their basic philosophy is? have a nice nap, if that's what you intend to do
So lead, Chemtrail and con... Folks give you all kinds of links to the college boys that are doing new fangled things like cloud seeding and such. And you think what? That research like that isn't real? That Chemtrails do not exist? Do you really think their is no such thing as a chemtrail? I'll not be one to blame all manner of anything and everything on those chemical trails in the sky but I am not so completely ignorant or arrogant so as to say they are all benign contrails. as an avid daily radio listener both fm and am I think this article might be on to something rense.com/general79/chem.htm lord knows when the skys get unnaturally cloudy it does ruin my reception.
have you googled cloud seeding? if we've been seeding clounds for 60 years, is it "newfangled"?
if we've been seeding clounds for 60 years, is it "newfangled"? Ah yes and yet you failed to answer my question regarding your (irrational) belief that chemtrails are imaginary. As for your google ponder? Top hit en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_seeding With an NFPA 704 rating of Blue 2, silver iodide can cause temporary incapacitation or possible residual injury to humans and mammals with intense or continued but not chronic exposure. However, there have been several detailed ecological studies that showed negligible environmental and health impacts.
#107. To: titorite (#106)
*shrug*
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#8. To: Esso (#6)
#11. To: christine (#8)
(Edited)
#76. To: lead.and.lag (#11)
the continual barrage of chicken littles
#77. To: GreyLmist (#76)
#80. To: lead.and.lag (#77)
(Edited)
...it looks to me that there's enough real chicken little stuff to worry about without people manufacturing more chicken little stuff like chemtrails...
It has been documented in the past, particularly in western states, that NWS NEXRAD radar can detect chaff. What is that you ask? Chaff is a radar countermeasure used by military aircraft consisting of very small pieces of metal such as aluminum. It can appear as narrow bands of reflectivity on the radar since they are dispersed by planes flying at high speeds along a path.
Here we have an Anchorman/Weather Man explaining in detail Chaff that is ejected from Military aircraft
That is not rain, that is not snow. Believe it or not, military aircraft flying through the region dropping chaft(sp?). Small bits of allummanim, plastic or sometimes metalized paper products
"nothing to do with chemtrails"
#81. To: GreyLmist (#80)
(Edited)
#82. To: lead.and.lag (#81)
(Edited)
chemtrails are radar countermeasures
#83. To: GreyLmist (#82)
(Edited)
chemtrails are radar countermeasures /sarc
#84. To: lead.and.lag (#83)
the problem you guys got is that you're unable to prove the existence of chemtrails
#85. To: GreyLmist (#84)
#86. To: lead.and.lag (#85)
are those chemtrails or contrails or chaff?
#87. To: GreyLmist (#86)
Are those just contrails
#88. To: lead.and.lag (#87)
we might as well be methodical about this...
#89. To: GreyLmist (#88)
(Edited)
I don't know
#90. To: All (#89)
#91. To: lead.and.lag, wudidiz, Original_Intent (#90)
#92. To: GreyLmist (#91)
(Edited)
you know what percentages of observed trail phenomena are contrails or chemtrails?
#93. To: All (#92)
#96. To: lead.and.lag (#93)
if chaff were visible enough to be mistaken for contrails, there'd be pictures of the stuff
#97. To: GreyLmist (#96)
(Edited)
Ordinary contrails wouldn't show up so.
#99. To: lead.and.lag (#97)
well, you'd expect radar countermeasures to show up on radar, wouldnt you?
the fact remains: other than eyewitness reports, you guys have no evidence of chemtrails' existence... no evidence with a solid provenance
#100. To: GreyLmist (#99)
(Edited)
well, you'd expect radar countermeasures to show up on radar, wouldnt you?
#101. To: lead.and.lag (#100)
#102. To: GreyLmist (#101)
(Edited)
not right now.
about this chicken little stuff...
#103. To: lead.and.lag (#102)
#105. To: titorite (#103)
(Edited)
new fangled things like cloud seeding
#106. To: lead.and.lag (#105)
have you googled cloud seeding?
Replies to Comment # 106. ...negligible environmental and health impacts
End Trace Mode for Comment # 106.