Giuliani Accused of Pandering on Confederate Flag

[BgMc31]

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3041867&page=1

By JAKE TAPPER

April 14, 2007 — A civil rights leader in Alabama today accused former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani of flip-flopping and pandering on the confederate flag during his visit to the state capitol earlier in the week.

Giuliani, currently the frontrunner for the GOP presidential nomination, has in the past seemed to voice personal opposition to the flag, which to many African-Americans is an offensive symbol of bigotry and slavery.

But when the former New York mayor visited Montgomery, Ala., on Tuesday he said simply that the matter was a state issue.

Edward Vaughn, the president of the NAACP Alabama State Conference, who was in Montgomery that day, told ABC News that Giuliani's remarks disappointed him.

"Giuliani is posturing himself to try to get the conservative, right-wing, Southern white vote in Alabama," Vaughn said. "He used to oppose the flag, but now he's backtracked because he's running for president."

The Giuliani campaign responded that the mayor's position has consistently been that this issue should be decided by each individual state.


'A Very Courageous Stand'

In September 1998, when then-South Carolina Gov. David Beasley was trying to remove from the state capitol in Columbia the symbol of the confederacy, which many white southerners argue is a symbol of heritage and pride, Giuliani praised him for his bravery during a visit to the state — saying Beasley took "a very courageous stand … at great political risk," according to a New York Daily News account at the time.

"FLAG'S NO SOUTHERN COMFORT FOR GIULIANI," screamed a New York Post headline from that time.

"Mayor Giuliani, venturing into the Deep South on another of his 'non-presidential' swings, yesterday urged South Carolina to remove the Confederate flag from atop its state capitol," the newspaper reported.

Two months later, Beasley lost his re-election campaign, in no small part because of his attempts to have the flag removed from atop the capitol.

This week in Alabama, Giuliani seemed a tad more reluctant to wade into the dangerous waters of race in the South.


Asked about the Confederate flag, Giuliani said, "one of the great beauties of the kind of government we have, which is a national/federal government, is that we can make — on a broad range of issues — we can make different decisions in different parts of the country. We have different sensitivities, and at different times we are going to come to different decisions, and I think that is best left up to the states."



Vaughn was critical.



"He knows full well that the flag is anti-American," Vaughn said, "that these people took up bombs against the U.S. government. He's said before that the flag should be taken down."



The Giuliani campaign noted that in 1998, as he did this week, the mayor said that the flag was a state issue.



"There is disagreement in South Carolina," he said nine years ago, "and South Carolina has to work that out."



Giuliani campaign spokeswoman Maria Comella told ABC News: "The bottom line: Mayor Giuliani has been consistent in his belief that this is an issue best left up to the states."




'A Symbol of Defiance and Bigotry and Slavery'


Absent from Giuliani's remarks this week were any hints as to his personal feelings about the Confederate flag and any praise for those who opposed its display.



To some, the comments seemed incongruent with Giuliani's take-me-or-leave-me campaign rhetoric, in which he tries to appeal to GOP primary voters by acknowledging his liberal views on abortion and same-sex civil unions while emphasizing the "90 percent" of areas where he and conservatives agree, such as national defense, taxes and the appointment of conservative judges.



A Republican strategist affiliated with a rival campaign, speaking on condition of anonymity, told ABC News that the flag flap is an example of how "Giuliani risks appearing disingenuous by not addressing issues and risks appearing too liberal if he tells voters how he really feels."



The confederate flag does not sit atop the Alabama state capital, though several fly at a nearby memorial to confederate soldiers. But the flag is still a potent symbol in the Deep South —and, state NAACP President Vaughn said, "a symbol of defiance and bigotry and slavery."



The civil rights leader said "the largest confederate flag I've ever seen" hangs adjacent to Interstate 65 between Montgomery and Birmingham, displayed by the Sons of Confederate Veterans, a group the Southern Poverty Law Center calls, "a southern-heritage group that has been largely dominated by racial extremists."



Because of the importance of the South Carolina primary, most of the national attention to the Confederate flag issue has revolved around the state, which removed the flag from atop the state capitol in 2000 but kept it on statehouse grounds.



In 2000, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., found himself hoisted on the confederate flagpole while running for president.



During a TV interview in January of that year, McCain called the confederate flag "offensive" and "a symbol of racism and slavery."



Weeks later, campaigning in the South Carolina primary, McCain waffled into a more conservative view, saying: "Some view it as a symbol of slavery. Others view it as a symbol of heritage. Personally, I see the battle flag as a symbol of heritage."



After losing the nomination, McCain returned to South Carolina, called for the flag to be taken down, and criticized himself for having pandered, calling it a "sacrifice of principle for personal ambition."

[Logan13]

I do not think that everyone who flies the Confederate flag is doing so as a racial insult. Nonetheless, the Confederate flag is a symbol of slavery, it represents the part of the US that was fighting to keep slavery alive.

[BgMc31]

I do not think that everyone who flies the Confederate flag is doing so as a racial insult. Nonetheless, the Confederate flag is a symbol of slavery, it represents the part of the US that was fighting to keep slavery alive.

I totally disagree with that Logan. As a South Carolina native, every person I've encountered waiving that flag harbors some type of racists ideology. They know the general perception of the Confederate flag and immediately attaches it to Civil War Southern mentality, the KKK, etc. Because many of the white supremecists groups use the flag as a beacon of their pride, it is seen as such.

It's the same as the Nazi flag in the eyes of many. The swatistika in other cultures is seen as simple of peace and prosperity, and we all know what most think of that symbol now... don't we?

[Logan13]

I totally disagree with that Logan. As a South Carolina native, every person I've encountered waiving that flag harbors some type of racists ideology. They know the general perception of the Confederate flag and immediately attaches it to Civil War Southern mentality, the KKK, etc. Because many of the white supremecists groups use the flag as a beacon of their pride, it is seen as such.

It's the same as the Nazi flag in the eyes of many. The swatistika in other cultures is seen as simple of peace and prosperity, and we all know what most think of that symbol now... don't we?

My junior year of high school, we were allowed to drive our own vehicles to our baseball games that were within 30 miles of our school. Seven of us used to jump in my buddy's Bronco, mainly because we could take the top off of it when it was nice out. Three of the seven riding in that Bronco were black. That Bronco had a mesh tailgate that was a Confederate flag. One of the guys made a point of bringing up the fact that three black guys were riding around with 4 white guys in a vehicle with a Confederate flag. Our shortstop(black) answered him; "Damn, black guys like the Dukes of Hazzard too." So I refer back to my original statement; I do not think(actually I know) that everyone who flies the Confederate flag is doing so as a racial insult. Sweeping statements are dangerous and irresponsible BgMc31.

[Vinlander]

My junior year of high school, we were allowed to drive our own vehicles to our baseball games that were within 30 miles of our school. Seven of us used to jump in my buddy's Bronco, mainly because we could take the top off of it when it was nice out. Three of the seven riding in that Bronco were black. That Bronco had a mesh tailgate that was a Confederate flag. One of the guys made a point of bringing up the fact that three black guys were riding around with 4 white guys in a vehicle with a Confederate flag. Our shortstop(black) answered him; "Damn, black guys like the Dukes of Hazzard too." So I refer back to my original statement; I do not think(actually I know) that everyone who flies the Confederate flag is doing so as a racial insult. Sweeping statements are dangerous and irresponsible BgMc31.

I don't really care if it is a racial insult or not. The Confederate flag is a historical flag that 280,000 Confederate, American soldiers lost their lives to protect. It wasn't the idea of slavery they cared about. It was the issue of States' rights of supremacy over Federal jurisdiction, which is CLEARLY seen in today's society as being trampled on.

If the Federal government in Washington decides to start a war in Iran, they have the right to draft Californian citizens to fuel that war. To a Confederate, this was anathema (before the war started) because before he was an American, he was a Virginian or Georgian first. That was what mattered; having kinfolk and those who understood your lifestyle making the choices on how your state is run. Now we have people 3,000 miles away issuing directives on things such as abortion rights when it's clear that not all states want such things to even be legal in their territory.

THAT was what the flag represented. It was freedom and home rule with rebellion against an oppressive government that wanted to standardize how everyone learned, felt and lived. And by the way, there were thousands of blacks who volunteered for the Confederate army. Do some research. They certainly weren't fighting for slavery!

[BgMc31]

I don't really care if it is a racial insult or not. The Confederate flag is a historical flag that 280,000 Confederate, American soldiers lost their lives to protect. It wasn't the idea of slavery they cared about. It was the issue of States' rights of supremacy over Federal jurisdiction, which is CLEARLY seen in today's society as being trampled on.

If the Federal government in Washington decides to start a war in Iran, they have the right to draft Californian citizens to fuel that war. To a Confederate, this was anathema (before the war started) because before he was an American, he was a Virginian or Georgian first. That was what mattered; having kinfolk and those who understood your lifestyle making the choices on how your state is run. Now we have people 3,000 miles away issuing directives on things such as abortion rights when it's clear that not all states want such things to even be legal in their territory.

THAT was what the flag represented. It was freedom and home rule with rebellion against an oppressive government that wanted to standardize how everyone learned, felt and lived. And by the way, there were thousands of blacks who volunteered for the Confederate army. Do some research. They certainly weren't fighting for slavery!

First of all the how many German's died in defense of Nazi Germany. Does that make it right? So simply because it's a historical flag doesn't make it ok to waive. The flag to many in our society see the confederate flag the same way Jews and most of the world view the Nazi flag. Second, if you did some research you will find that the so-called thousands of blacks that volunteered for service in the Conferderate army did so with promise that they would be freed from bondage upon completion of service (read the book History of the Negro in America). Plus the south didn't allow blacks to serve until towards the end of the war and that was because the lack of man power in the southern Army. And also initially they weren't allowed to serve in combat roles. Third, are you saying it's ok that this is a symbol of a people who defended their right against oppression while oppressing a race of people at the same time. That's hypocritical.

And you are right Logan, making broad generalizations are harmful, so instead I will say that every person that I encountered waving the confederate flag harbored racists ideologies. Since I don't know everyone who waves the flag I will not say that they all harbor racists ideologies.

[Vinlander]

First of all the how many German's died in defense of Nazi Germany. Does that make it right? So simply because it's a historical flag doesn't make it ok to waive. The flag to many in our society see the confederate flag the same way Jews and most of the world view the Nazi flag. Second, if you did some research you will find that the so-called thousands of blacks that volunteered for service in the Conferderate army did so with promise that they would be freed from bondage upon completion of service (read the book History of the Negro in America). Plus the south didn't allow blacks to serve until towards the end of the war and that was because the lack of man power in the southern Army. And also initially they weren't allowed to serve in combat roles. Third, are you saying it's ok that this is a symbol of a people who defended their right against oppression while oppressing a race of people at the same time. That's hypocritical.

And you are right Logan, making broad generalizations are harmful, so instead I will say that every person that I encountered waving the confederate flag harbored racists ideologies. Since I don't know everyone who waves the flag I will not say that they all harbor racists ideologies.

Only 10% of the Southern population owned slaves and few of them were actually fighting. Your argument doesn't hold any water.

As for the German soldiers, that ***ends on how you view the war. History is dictated by the victor and how you see what was done isn't necessarily what's true. It's what's written/told in history by those who won.

[Teabagger]

I don't really care if it is a racial insult or not. The Confederate flag is a historical flag that 280,000 Confederate, American soldiers lost their lives to protect. It wasn't the idea of slavery they cared about. It was the issue of States' rights of supremacy over Federal jurisdiction, which is CLEARLY seen in today's society as being trampled on.

If the Federal government in Washington decides to start a war in Iran, they have the right to draft Californian citizens to fuel that war. To a Confederate, this was anathema (before the war started) because before he was an American, he was a Virginian or Georgian first. That was what mattered; having kinfolk and those who understood your lifestyle making the choices on how your state is run. Now we have people 3,000 miles away issuing directives on things such as abortion rights when it's clear that not all states want such things to even be legal in their territory.

THAT was what the flag represented. It was freedom and home rule with rebellion against an oppressive government that wanted to standardize how everyone learned, felt and lived. And by the way, there were thousands of blacks who volunteered for the Confederate army. Do some research. They certainly weren't fighting for slavery!

Stop the presses...I so totally agree with you. People today are so fricking ignorant of the reasons for the Civil War...of course we can thank our edumacation system for that. When the Civil War began slavery was dead...thank you Eli Whitney and the cotton gin. It was in fact about states rights..and its a damn shame the South wasn't successful in its move for self-determination. Now we are the slaves to a centralized Federal government completely out of control. They over tax, and over regulate.

[Vinlander]

The Confederate government would've released the slaves eventually anyhow and for economic reasons. Racial tensions would've been FAR less extreme and organizations such as the Ku Klux Klan would've never needed to exist as they were created in response to forced integration at the hands of what was seen as a foreign power.

[biglouie250]

funny thing is that those flags have not been waving since the days of the confederacy. they were put up around 1964 or 1965.....if you know your history youll think that is quite "convienent". just because 10% owned them doesnt make the other 90% morally correct in any way, they just couldnt afford slaves or didnt have the land for them to work! give them a parcel of land and wad of cash and the first they would buy is a slave not a shovel.

[BgMc31]

Stop the presses...I so totally agree with you. People today are so fricking ignorant of the reasons for the Civil War...of course we can thank our edumacation system for that. When the Civil War began slavery was dead...thank you Eli Whitney and the cotton gin. It was in fact about states rights..and its a damn shame the South wasn't successful in its move for self-determination. Now we are the slaves to a centralized Federal government completely out of control. They over tax, and over regulate.

If you believe slavery was dead by the time the civil war began, I have a bridge in brooklyn to sell you. The cotton gin did revolutionize the cotton industry but the new cash crop in the south during the time was tobacco. Plus the continual high profits of sugar cane also furthered the slave trade. No one is disputing the fact that the civil war was fought over slavery, just like any educated person would tell you that Lincoln didn't free the slaves because of his disagreement with it. He knew that freedom of the slaves would put the south in a bad way.

Nothing can be said to justify the using of the Confederate Flag. As I said before to blacks and many others there is no difference between the Nazi flag and the Confederate flag. Both are symbols of hatred and bigotry and many deaths and oppression of peoples were justified under the banner of each of these flags.

Sure eventually the slavery would have ended in the south, because international pressure would have made that possible. It is similar to the pressure put on South Africa to end apartheid. But how long would it have taken. And how much longer would it have taken for blacks to achieve equality. Instead of 1965 (when blacks finally recieved all the same rights as whites), would it have been 1995? But again, we aren't debating slavery here, we are debating the relevance of the confederate flag and what it stands for.

Good point, BigLouie!!!!

[gixxerboy1]

This is why racism and hate will never end. We are still arguing and defending issues from hundreds of years ago. At some time we need to let go and move forward for everyone. Drop the pride and the hate for once. Its 2007

[Vinlander]

This is why racism and hate will never end. We are still arguing and defending issues from hundreds of years ago. At some time we need to let go and move forward for everyone. Drop the pride and the hate for once. Its 2007

I agree. You should mail that statement to the NAACP, JDL, KKK, MEChA and Federal Government.

[Vinlander]

If you believe slavery was dead by the time the civil war began, I have a bridge in brooklyn to sell you. The cotton gin did revolutionize the cotton industry but the new cash crop in the south during the time was tobacco. Plus the continual high profits of sugar cane also furthered the slave trade. No one is disputing the fact that the civil war was fought over slavery, just like any educated person would tell you that Lincoln didn't free the slaves because of his disagreement with it. He knew that freedom of the slaves would put the south in a bad way.

Nothing can be said to justify the using of the Confederate Flag. As I said before to blacks and many others there is no difference between the Nazi flag and the Confederate flag. Both are symbols of hatred and bigotry and many deaths and oppression of peoples were justified under the banner of each of these flags.

Sure eventually the slavery would have ended in the south, because international pressure would have made that possible. It is similar to the pressure put on South Africa to end apartheid. But how long would it have taken. And how much longer would it have taken for blacks to achieve equality. Instead of 1965 (when blacks finally recieved all the same rights as whites), would it have been 1995? But again, we aren't debating slavery here, we are debating the relevance of the confederate flag and what it stands for.

Good point, BigLouie!!!!

The United States ended slavery at the same time the Confederacy did. lol Is our US flag now a "symbol of hatred and bigotry?" I suppose many would say yes, but you'll make up an excuse, no doubt. The fact is my ancestors fought under both of those flags, in the Civil War and in WWI and WWII, dying for this country. You want to take my Confederate flag down? Come on down and take your best shot.

[RA]

This is why racism and hate will never end. We are still arguing and defending issues from hundreds of years ago. At some time we need to let go and move forward for everyone. Drop the pride and the hate for once. Its 2007

4

It would be nice if people didnt run around trying to be offended...but this is just political. If a Democrat does the same thing you wont hear the naacp say anything.

[BgMc31]

The United States ended slavery FOR the Confederacy, the Confederacy didn't end it on it's own. You cannot compare the American flag to the Confederate flag and I take offense to you doing so. My family has fought in every war in this country since the war for In***endance. Fighting in all black regiments (including Buffaloe Soldier regiment after the Civil war) up until WWII(grandfather was a member of the 1st all black tank battalion who was one of the first to enter Paris during it's liberation), fighting with elite forces (LRRPs and the 82nd Airborn div in Vietnam) and with the 1st Cav Division in the 1st Persian Gulf war and the same unit in the current Iraq War. My family members have died because of what that Confederate flag stood for. Lynchings, Jim Crowe, etc. but we are still here.

Don't stoop to a physical challenge that you know will never materialize because you've been bested in a debate. That is extremely juvenile. We all know the internet has spawned a new generation of tough guys that hide behind these made-up personas.

[BgMc31]

4

It would be nice if people didnt run around trying to be offended...but this is just political. If a Democrat does the same thing you wont hear the naacp say anything.

ABSOLUTELY NOT TRUE!!! When Howard Dean said he wanted to be the presidential candidate of all the Confederate flag waiving people of the south, the NAACP jumped all over him. As did Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and others.

People aren't trying to get offended. WE ARE OFFENDED!!! Why is it hard for some of you to understand the negative significance of this flag? All you have to do is look at any of the white supremacists sites on the web and you will see that they all use this flag as a beacon of their pride. JUST LIKE NAZI's. There is no difference!!!!

[Lexed]

is there anything he hasnt been accused of already?

[Vinlander]

The United States ended slavery FOR the Confederacy, the Confederacy didn't end it on it's own. You cannot compare the American flag to the Confederate flag and I take offense to you doing so. My family has fought in every war in this country since the war for In***endance. Fighting in all black regiments (including Buffaloe Soldier regiment after the Civil war) up until WWII(grandfather was a member of the 1st all black tank battalion who was one of the first to enter Paris during it's liberation), fighting with elite forces (LRRPs and the 82nd Airborn div in Vietnam) and with the 1st Cav Division in the 1st Persian Gulf war and the same unit in the current Iraq War. My family members have died because of what that Confederate flag stood for. Lynchings, Jim Crowe, etc. but we are still here.

Don't stoop to a physical challenge that you know will never materialize because you've been bested in a debate. That is extremely juvenile. We all know the internet has spawned a new generation of tough guys that hide behind these made-up personas.

Good for you, buddy. Slavery ended in 1865, after the war was lost. Your cute little comment at the end doesn't change that fact and that Lincoln said he didn't care whether he freed the slaves so long as the Union was preserved. It was a well-known quote. Look it up.

[biglouie250]

The United States ended slavery at the same time the Confederacy did. lol Is our US flag now a "symbol of hatred and bigotry?" I suppose many would say yes, but you'll make up an excuse, no doubt. The fact is my ancestors fought under both of those flags, in the Civil War and in WWI and WWII, dying for this country. You want to take my Confederate flag down? Come on down and take your best shot.

slavery was a state by state issue prior to the emancipation proclamation. slaves in the north were freed well before the civil war willfully not under military duress.

[biglouie250]

Good for you, buddy. Slavery ended in 1865, after the war was lost. Your cute little comment at the end doesn't change that fact and that Lincoln said he didn't care whether he freed the slaves so long as the Union was preserved. It was a well-known quote. Look it up.

continue the quote.....until he heard about the massachussets 54th regiment (all blacks) and their fight. he saw the sacrafices they made and change his tune on slavery.

[Vinlander]

slavery was a state by state issue prior to the emancipation proclamation. slaves in the north were freed well before the civil war willfully not under military duress.

Missouri and Kentucky were Union states whose institution of slavery were not abolished until 1865. Indisputable. The emancipation proclamation had more to do with weakening the diplomatic position of the South along with creating a steady stream of new, Union cannon fodder than caring whether anyone was "free" or "slave."

[RA]

ABSOLUTELY NOT TRUE!!! When Howard Dean said he wanted to be the presidential candidate of all the Confederate flag waiving people of the south, the NAACP jumped all over him. As did Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and others.

People aren't trying to get offended. WE ARE OFFENDED!!! Why is it hard for some of you to understand the negative significance of this flag? All you have to do is look at any of the white supremacists sites on the web and you will see that they all use this flag as a beacon of their pride. JUST LIKE NAZI's. There is no difference!!!!

Sorry bgmc, any legit democrat candidate

I dont look up white supremacists sites, I ignore the toothless bitches and you should too.

[biglouie250]

Missouri and Kentucky were Union states whose institution of slavery were not abolished until 1865. Indisputable. The emancipation proclamation had more to do with weakening the diplomatic position of the South along with creating a steady stream of new, Union cannon fodder than caring whether anyone was "free" or "slave."

missouri and kentucky are cases where parts of the states seceded. you can look it up. the north didnt look at them as northern states at all. they were border states and you had abolishonists and slave owners all in one area. led to a lot of bloodshed. THAT is indisputable.

[BgMc31]

Good for you, buddy. Slavery ended in 1865, after the war was lost. Your cute little comment at the end doesn't change that fact and that Lincoln said he didn't care whether he freed the slaves so long as the Union was preserved. It was a well-known quote. Look it up.

You must not read very well, Vinlander. I made that exact statement in post #11. Check it out.

All I'm saying Vinlander is this, I don't care if your ancestors fought for the Confederacy and you see at as a sense of pride. There are many people in Germany today that feel that same sense of pride for their forebearers fighting for Nazi Germany because they died for what they thought was right... TO THEM. That still doesn't make it right, nor should it be celebrated. Regardless of your sense of pride, the southern mentality during that time (that still continues in some today) was a system of white supremacy. There is no denying that and there is no denying that it was wrong!!! So whether or not it's history there are certain elements of history that should not be celebrated. The Confederacy, the Nazi's, Ho Chi Min Trail, Stalins slaughter, Aparthied, etc., are all instances of historical items that should not be celebrated. That is understood in other countries, why isn't it understood here, by other's like yourself?

[BgMc31]

Sorry bgmc, any legit democrat candidate

I dont look up white supremacists sites, I ignore the toothless bitches and you should too.

You're right Roid. I should ignore it, but it's difficult to do so when government sanctions a symbol of historical hate and bigotry, and people like Vinlander defend it vehemently. There would be no discussion here if we were referring to the Nazi flag and to us (blacks) and many others, there is no difference.

[gixxerboy1]

You must not read very well, Vinlander. I made that exact statement in post #11. Check it out.

All I'm saying Vinlander is this, I don't care if your ancestors fought for the Confederacy and you see at as a sense of pride. There are many people in Germany today that feel that same sense of pride for their forebearers fighting for Nazi Germany because they died for what they thought was right... TO THEM. That still doesn't make it right, nor should it be celebrated. Regardless of your sense of pride, the southern mentality during that time (that still continues in some today) was a system of white supremacy. There is no denying that and there is no denying that it was wrong!!! So whether or not it's history there are certain elements of history that should not be celebrated. The Confederacy, the Nazi's, Ho Chi Min Trail, Stalins slaughter, Aparthied, etc., are all instances of historical items that should not be celebrated. That is understood in other countries, why isn't it understood here, but other's like yourself?

I do agree with you.

But isn't there a time you have to let go of what it stood for? Why is anybody so offended over anything that has happened so long ago and really didn't effect them personally. Granted it may have effected your grandparents but its time to let go.

Same thing for the pride end of it. Do you have nothing else to be proud of then something that took place hundreds of years ago?
Hell I'm proud i banged a famous porn star but i don't go waving the condom around tied to a stick. Eventually i had to flush it and move on

[BgMc31]

I do agree with you.

But isn't there a time you have to let go of what it stood for? Why is anybody so offended over anything that has happened so long ago and really didn't effect them personally. Granted it may have effected your grandparents but its time to let go.

Same thing for the pride end of it. Do you have nothing else to be proud of then something that took place hundreds of years ago?
Hell I'm proud i banged a famous porn star but i don't go waving the condom around tied to a stick. Eventually i had to flush it and move on

That's the point Gixxer. As a white person, you may not see the effects of racism. But as a black person, I see it all the time... STILL!! And that's the difference in society today. Many whites don't believe that racism is still prevolent because they aren't racists themselves and don't associate with racists, so it doesn't affect them directly nor do they see it. But any black person will tell you that it still exists today and we see it all the time. I can't convince you that it still exists because it doesn't happen to you, just like you can't convince me it doesn't exist because I see it first hand all the time.

[RA]

That's the point Gixxer. As a white person, you may not see the effects of racism. But as a black person, I see it all the time... STILL!! And that's the difference in society today. Many whites don't believe that racism is still prevolent because they aren't racists themselves and don't associate with racists, so it doesn't affect them directly nor do they see it. But any black person will tell you that it still exists today and we see it all the time. I can't convince you that it still exists because it doesn't happen to you, just like you can't convince me it doesn't exist because I see it first hand all the time.

First gixxer

Second bgmc, Ive met an equal amount of racist black people as white people...but it is such a small percentage today.

Third using gixxers logic maybe we should flush the flag

Fourth, Giuliani is doing it for votes. If a Republican doesnt win the south, he doesnt win and pandering to the naacp wouldnt be smart for him because Dems get 90% of the black vote automatically.

[Logan13]

There would be no discussion here if we were referring to the Nazi flag and to us (blacks) and many others, there is no difference.

No one can excuse the Nazi symbols either.

[gixxerboy1]

That's the point Gixxer. As a white person, you may not see the effects of racism. But as a black person, I see it all the time... STILL!! And that's the difference in society today. Many whites don't believe that racism is still prevolent because they aren't racists themselves and don't associate with racists, so it doesn't affect them directly nor do they see it. But any black person will tell you that it still exists today and we see it all the time. I can't convince you that it still exists because it doesn't happen to you, just like you can't convince me it doesn't exist because I see it first hand all the time.

I was going to ask you how you knew i was white Then i remember my pic

I know there is racism. No doubt. But spend your energy and time fighting that racism. Not what happened 200 years ago. I think a huge part of the problem is why don't work on the present why worry to much about the past

[BgMc31]

There again lies the problem Gixxer. You and others can't see the direct correlation between the events of so long ago carrying over today. If we allow a blatant symbol of racism (Confederate flag) to be continued to be used as a symbol of pride, it is a way to condone those actions that that symbol represents.

[Vinlander]

There again lies the problem Gixxer. You and others can't see the direct correlation between the events of so long ago carrying over today. If we allow a blatant symbol of racism (Confederate flag) to be continued to be used as a symbol of pride, it is a way to condone those actions that that symbol represents.

You've said you experience racism. Can you give some examples? And would you be willing to say that groups that likewise divide along ethnic lines (NAACP, JDL, United Negro College Fund, Native American tribes, etc.) should be abolished as well since they discriminate based on color?

[BgMc31]

You've said you experience racism. Can you give some examples? And would you be willing to say that groups that likewise divide along ethnic lines (NAACP, JDL, United Negro College Fund, Native American tribes, etc.) should be abolished as well since they discriminate based on color?

I never said any group should be abolished. Groups with private memberships should be allowed to have anyone they want. I said the flag has no place in celebrating our American history. This is no honor and pride in racism.

As far as examples, where would you like me to start? I'm 33yrs old should I give every example of all the racism I experienced or just recently? And what would that prove? Would you believe me or make up an excuse like I'm stating isolated events?

Let's try to stay focused on the original thread Vinlander... if you can. You cannot justify the Confederate flag, you just can't. History, pride, honor, all this is trumped by what the flag stood for... white supremacy, oppression, etc. What is the purpose of bringing up Mencha, NAACP, etc, anyway. I have no problem with the Sons of the Conferacy, the KKK, Aryan Nation, Daughters of the Confederacy, etc. These groups can recruit who they want. Use any flag they want. That's what this country is built on. That's their right. But government cannot justify the waiving of a flag that was a symbol of an oppressive society, domestic terrorists, traitors, and insurgents. Essentially that's exactly what the south was after succession.

Here's a scenario that maybe you can ponder, Vinlander. If the Muslims in Michigan (this is where the largest concentration of Muslims and middle easterns in the US) decided to form their own government and rise against the US, should we allow them to waive their flags after we crush them into submission? What if they oppressed and berated all non-muslims while doing so, lynched them, beat them, didn't allow them to learn to read or write, raped them, and treated them simply as property, what then? Would that be something we should all celebrate?

[Vinlander]

I never said any group should be abolished. Groups with private memberships should be allowed to have anyone they want. I said the flag has no place in celebrating our American history. This is no honor and pride in racism.

As far as examples, where would you like me to start? I'm 33yrs old should I give every example of all the racism I experienced or just recently? And what would that prove? Would you believe me or make up an excuse like I'm stating isolated events?

Let's try to stay focused on the original thread Vinlander... if you can. You cannot justify the Confederate flag, you just can't. History, pride, honor, all this is trumped by what the flag stood for... white supremacy, oppression, etc. What is the purpose of bringing up Mencha, NAACP, etc, anyway. I have no problem with the Sons of the Conferacy, the KKK, Aryan Nation, Daughters of the Confederacy, etc. These groups can recruit who they want. Use any flag they want. That's what this country is built on. That's their right. But government cannot justify the waiving of a flag that was a symbol of an oppressive society, domestic terrorists, traitors, and insurgents. Essentially that's exactly what the south was after succession.

Here's a scenario that maybe you can ponder, Vinlander. If the Muslims in Michigan (this is where the largest concentration of Muslims and middle easterns in the US) decided to form their own government and rise against the US, should we allow them to waive their flags after we crush them into submission? What if they oppressed and berated all non-muslims while doing so, lynched them, beat them, didn't allow them to learn to read or write, raped them, and treated them simply as property, what then? Would that be something we should all celebrate?

As far as government sponsorship, I'm 100% in agreement. I think individual groups' strength should determine how symbols are used, but the government remain secular in that regard. So we agree on that point.

As far as your comparison to the Muslims, that's different. Your people sold you into slavery to Jewish merchants all those years ago to make up for deficits in farm labor. The same happened to Greek immigrants as well as the Irish. But I understand how you feel about it.

[BgMc31]

As far as government sponsorship, I'm 100% in agreement. I think individual groups' strength should determine how symbols are used, but the government remain secular in that regard. So we agree on that point.

As far as your comparison to the Muslims, that's different. Your people sold you into slavery to Jewish merchants all those years ago to make up for deficits in farm labor. The same happened to Greek immigrants as well as the Irish. But I understand how you feel about it.

Classic misinformed justification for slavery. It wasn't until later in the slave trade (1700 forward), that Africans began to get involved in the slave trade. But it was out of necessity, either they participated or were threatened with slavery for the entire tribes. From the onset of illegal slavery (1400s) blacks were stolen from Africa. My people originated from the Nigerian basin of Africa where it was proven that they did not willingly participate in the slave trade. Very, very few Africans participated in the African slave trade. The ones who did were mostly Eastern Africans who didn't consider themselves Africans but instead considered themselves Arabs. Do some real reasearch.

And as Jews were concerned, again, it wasn't until later in the slave trade that Jews became involved. The starters and most prevelent slave traders were Spanish, Portugese, Danish, English, and eventually Americans.

The Greek, Irish, and Scottish endurtured servitude was completely different than that of the sub-Saharan African Slave trade. With the European endentured servants, they exchanged their services for a certain period of time to pay off debt. Most, if not all, were eventually allowed their freedom. Plus, at no time were European endentured servants considered property, not allowed to learn to read or write (actual legislation was passed by states in order to make this law). You cannot compare the two.

But again we aren't here to debate slavery. And that is part of the problem, every time someone brings up slavery the first response is Africans sold Africans into slavery. Not mentioning the other facts the go along with it. Take some responsibility and maybe we can move pass this.

No difference between a muslim insurrection and a southern insurrection. Your pride and honor prevent you from admitting it.

[Vinlander]

Classic misinformed justification for slavery. It wasn't until later in the slave trade (1700 forward), that Africans began to get involved in the slave trade. But it was out of necessity, either they participated or were threatened with slavery for the entire tribes. From the onset of illegal slavery (1400s) blacks were stolen from Africa. My people originated from the Nigerian basin of Africa where it was proven that they did not willingly participate in the slave trade. Very, very few Africans participated in the African slave trade. The ones who did were mostly Eastern Africans who didn't consider themselves Africans but instead considered themselves Arabs. Do some real reasearch.

And as Jews were concerned, again, it wasn't until later in the slave trade that Jews became involved. The starters and most prevelent slave traders were Spanish, Portugese, Danish, English, and eventually Americans.

The Greek, Irish, and Scottish endurtured servitude was completely different than that of the sub-Saharan African Slave trade. With the European endentured servants, they exchanged their services for a certain period of time to pay off debt. Most, if not all, were eventually allowed their freedom. Plus, at no time were European endentured servants considered property, not allowed to learn to read or write (actual legislation was passed by states in order to make this law). You cannot compare the two.

But again we aren't here to debate slavery. And that is part of the problem, every time someone brings up slavery the first response is Africans sold Africans into slavery. Not mentioning the other facts the go along with it. Take some responsibility and maybe we can move pass this.

No difference between a muslim insurrection and a southern insurrection. Your pride and honor prevent you from admitting it.

Boy, talk about letting pride get in the way of seeing the truth..

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/africa/412628.stm

This type of event is occurring commonly in West Africa even today and black Africans are sold/traded between other black Africans. Please don't act like my ancestors taught yours these values: Human life has traditionally meant less than the dirt people walk on in Africa and whatever "source" you have that denies your ancestors' part in the slavery debacle is pure fantasy. The blame goes both ways and if tribal leaders hadn't traded for firearms, textiles and other goods in exchange for their rival tribesman's flesh, there wouldn't have been the same large pool of manpower that existed.

What's your excuse for what's going on there today? Is this just some sudden, spontaneous and recent occurrence?

[BgMc31]

Boy, talk about letting pride get in the way of seeing the truth..

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/africa/412628.stm

This type of event is occurring commonly in West Africa even today and black Africans are sold/traded between other black Africans. Please don't act like my ancestors taught yours these values: Human life has traditionally meant less than the dirt people walk on in Africa and whatever "source" you have that denies your ancestors' part in the slavery debacle is pure fantasy. The blame goes both ways and if tribal leaders hadn't traded for firearms, textiles and other goods in exchange for their rival tribesman's flesh, there wouldn't have been the same large pool of manpower that existed.

What's your excuse for what's going on there today? Is this just some sudden, spontaneous and recent occurrence?

I never stated that Africans had no hand in the slave trade. You tend to read what you want to read. Next time read exactly what I read. I admitted to the role Africans played in the slave trade. Stop trying to deflect your own ancestors role.

As I am not African, I cannot tell you why the things in Africa are going the way they are. I could list a million reasons, but none of which would explain everything. Plus lumping all blacks into this category is like calling all whites English. Africa is a continent with millions of people, cultures, and languages, just like Europe. I consider myself American first and can trace my heritage here in the United States back to the 1600s and to the Caribbean back to the 1400s. So my people haven't been in Africa for over 450yrs.

We can go on and on about this Vinlander. As I've admitted the role of Africans in the slave trade, you've yet to admit any role of Anglos in it. First your blame Africans, then you blame Jews, then back to Africans again. Let's face it, there is no denying the role of Europeans in the slave trade and they were the most prevolent.

This thread isn't about the slave trade. Let's move on!

Read this ENTIRE article and notice the difference in African slavery and European slavery. Also see what the slave trades effects on Africa today. More education eliminates ignorance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_slave_trade

[mcpeepants]

Classic misinformed justification for slavery. It wasn't until later in the slave trade (1700 forward), that Africans began to get involved in the slave trade. But it was out of necessity, either they participated or were threatened with slavery for the entire tribes. From the onset of illegal slavery (1400s) blacks were stolen from Africa. My people originated from the Nigerian basin of Africa where it was proven that they did not willingly participate in the slave trade. Very, very few Africans participated in the African slave trade. The ones who did were mostly Eastern Africans who didn't consider themselves Africans but instead considered themselves Arabs. Do some real reasearch.

And as Jews were concerned, again, it wasn't until later in the slave trade that Jews became involved. The starters and most prevelent slave traders were Spanish, Portugese, Danish, English, and eventually Americans.

The Greek, Irish, and Scottish endurtured servitude was completely different than that of the sub-Saharan African Slave trade. With the European endentured servants, they exchanged their services for a certain period of time to pay off debt. Most, if not all, were eventually allowed their freedom. Plus, at no time were European endentured servants considered property, not allowed to learn to read or write (actual legislation was passed by states in order to make this law). You cannot compare the two.

But again we aren't here to debate slavery. And that is part of the problem, every time someone brings up slavery the first response is Africans sold Africans into slavery. Not mentioning the other facts the go along with it. Take some responsibility and maybe we can move pass this.

No difference between a muslim insurrection and a southern insurrection. Your pride and honor prevent you from admitting it.

East Africans are mostly black unless your talking about the few Arabs who live near the coast like in Zanzibar. The atlantic slave travel was dominated by Europeans and the certain West and Central African tribes. Arabs and some coastal East African tribes were mostly involved in taking slaves from the East Africa and bringing them to the middle east.

[BgMc31]

East Africans are mostly black unless your talking about the few Arabs who live near the coast like in Zanzibar. The atlantic slave travel was dominated by Europeans and the certain West and Central African tribes. Arabs and some coastal East African tribes were mostly involved in taking slaves from the East Africa and bringing them to the middle east.

That's what I was saying. Again, I never denied the role of Africans in the slave trade. East Africans are mostly black, but many including many Somali's, Djaboutis, and Eritriea consider themselves Arab not black Africans. Many of the population in the Horn of Africa consider themselves Arabs.