History from the other side

[HDNB]

i just want to know where to get some of this meat filled bread

[der wo]

these god damn Europeans coming on this thread like the age of discovery, taking over then place.

Yes. From time to time Europeans like visiting America.
First came the vikings, they had a few weeks fun with the Indians, borrowed a few things and returned home, because the beer of the Indians was not really palatable.
Later there was a rumor about gold, land, women, meat filled bread and flat screens for free, so all the scum from Europe sloped over the ocean and they didn't find home again.
What happens today, only future generations can judge.

History from the other side. I can't believe, the bullshit I write is NOT off-topic.

That's one way to look at it I suppose.....or you could look at it that some people who couldn't stand being mindless sheep in a hard left wing socialist society or (in other countries) a "class" structure and moved to a country (or countries) where everyone was treated equal, not shit on just because their parents were shit on and their grandparents were shit on and their kids would someday be shit on. They moved and improved their life....but of course that only worked for those that wanted to work hard and better themselves, they lazy fucks that wanted to suck off the socialist government teat remained in Europe.

But I will accept your premise that the beer is better in Germany!

Yes! Same plausible as my version. Probably better, because it also explains, why they raided the Indians: The Indians came from Asia, so for sure they were socialists.

[cuginosgrizzo]

i just want to know where to get some of this meat filled bread

try McDonald's

[der wo]

i just want to know where to get some of this meat filled bread

You are going off-topic!
Move to the Favourite Food Recipes forum!

[cranky]

i just want to know where to get some of this meat filled bread

try McDonald's

Pretty sure that is "Meat" not meat. Kind of like froot loops are made from "Froot" not fruit. They say "2 all beef patties" But they never say "2 all meat patties"

[WooTeck]

we should try rain it in a touch before we go to far on rule #6.


a lot of the scotts that emagrated to the new world. had no choice they were turfed of their land during the highland clearnaces. it wasnt to leave a socialist society.

i herd an interesting fact recently. at the start only white male land owners had a vote in the usa. this equates to about 6% of the population. not exaclty a democratic contry when 94% of the people had no voice.

was america origonally founded by proud patriots fighting for freedom of an opressive crown or land grabing greedy rebles that wanted to avoid tax and stack the deck of law in their favour?

i should probably avoid this thread but i love playing devil's advocate

[cranky]

we should try rain it in a touch before we go to far on rule #6.


a lot of the scotts that emagrated to the new world. had no choice they were turfed of their land during the highland clearnaces. it wasnt to leave a socialist society.

i herd an interesting fact recently. at the start only white male land owners had a vote in the usa. this equates to about 6% of the population. not exaclty a democratic contry when 94% of the people had no voice.

was america origonally founded by proud patriots fighting for freedom of an opressive crown or land grabing greedy rebles that wanted to avoid tax and stack the deck of law in their favour?

i should probably avoid this thread but i love playing devil's advocate

As I once told an Islamic acquaintance of mine who was very pro his home country, but nevertheless migrated here for a better life, when he said said "God made America great". My response was that "God didn't make America great a bunch of people who didn't like what was happening said 'F**K this shit' and did something about it" That's not to say the system began as perfect and is indeed not perfect today. Our forefathers were kicked out of every decent country in the world but today we can proudly go anywhere in the world and declare "We are Americans! Bring us your women!"

I think I should avoid reading this thread altogether so I am not tempted to post on it

[WooTeck]

we should try rain it in a touch before we go to far on rule #6.


a lot of the scotts that emagrated to the new world. had no choice they were turfed of their land during the highland clearnaces. it wasnt to leave a socialist society.

i herd an interesting fact recently. at the start only white male land owners had a vote in the usa. this equates to about 6% of the population. not exaclty a democratic contry when 94% of the people had no voice.

was america origonally founded by proud patriots fighting for freedom of an opressive crown or land grabing greedy rebles that wanted to avoid tax and stack the deck of law in their favour?

i should probably avoid this thread but i love playing devil's advocate

As I once told an Islamic acquaintance of mine who was very pro his home country, but nevertheless migrated here for a better life, when he said said "God made America great". My response was that "God didn't make America great a bunch of people who didn't like what was happening said 'F**K this shit' and did something about it" That's not to say the system began as perfect and is indeed not perfect today. Our forefathers were kicked out of every decent country in the world but today we can proudly go anywhere in the world and declare "We are Americans! Bring us your women!"

I think I should avoid reading this thread altogether so I am not tempted to post on it

that theres a reasonable response.

[HDNB]

was america origonally founded by proud patriots fighting for freedom of an opressive crown or land grabing greedy rebles that wanted to avoid tax and stack the deck of law in their favour?

i should probably avoid this thread but i love playing devil's advocate

with your penchant for avoiding likker taxes, i guess we know which line you would have been standing in. (i'm gussing the same line as me)

(as of a couple years ago) i understood there is still a homestead act in Canada... i like the idea of free dirt and the whole back to nature kinda thing, but i'm not sure i'm into backbreaking timber clearing to "improve" some northern alberta bush. i think the whole isolation thing would get kinda loney after a while. (let's say month 2 of an 8 month winter)

[goinbroke2]

Actually, funny story;
My father grew up in the middle of nowhere in Saskatchewan, soon after he left, the rail line moved and the town emptied. That was in the early 50's (late 40's?) anyway, my sister was doing the family tree thing and google earth'd where dad grew up. Apparently there is still buildings standing there (empty since the 50's) but she noticed a few newer trucks at a few of them. After a bit of research, she found out the Sask government said as long as you pay the taxes (which are dirt cheap in nowhere'sville) you can have the property. I guess another name for that would be "homesteading"?

So yes, homesteading is still alive and well in Canada, you just have to go where there is nothing....which is anywhere north of 200 miles from the US border.

Crap, that was a few years ago...now I'm going to go and waste time googling all this stuff again..

[WooTeck]

with your penchant for avoiding likker taxes, i guess we know which line you would have been standing in. (i'm gussing the same line as me)

HNDB i am insulted... i also avoid tobaco and any other sin tax...
i cant believe there would be any question. ohh wait thats another thread

[thecroweater]

Was going to put this in did you know but forgot to so here's some facts that may cause some trip their shit.
Did you know about 400 Australians were killed in the American civil war. They have begun a civil war veterans grave site survey of Qld and have located 11 confederate and 18 union mostly unmarked graves so far in the state of Queensland Australia and around a hundred others in other states, heck one is buried less then a mile from my house
The last Civil war veteran in Australia one George Wilson Edwards died August 9th 1939 aged 96 in NSW

[The Baker]

Lots of points of view.

The Scots poet Robert Burns got to the heart of it.

Man was made to mourn: A Dirge

Many and sharp the num'rous ills
Inwoven with our frame!
More pointed still we make ourselves
Regret, remorse, and shame!
And man, whose heav'n-erected face
The smiles of love adorn, –
Man's inhumanity to man
Makes countless thousands mourn!

Geoff

[contrahead]

A Man's A Man For A' That
by Robert Burns

Is there for honesty poverty
That hings his head, an' a' that;
The coward slave--we pass him by,
We dare be poor for a' that!
For a' that, an' a' that,
Our toils obscure an' a' that,
The rank is but the guinea's stamp,
The man's the gowd for a' that.
What though on hamely fare we dine,
Wear hoddin grey, an' a' that?
Gie fools their silks, and knaves their wine,
A man's a man for a' that.
For a' that, an' a' that,
Their tinsel show, an' a' that,
The honest man, tho' e'er sae poor,
Is king o' men for a' that.
Ye see yon birkie ca'd a lord,
Wha struts, an' stares, an' a' that;
Tho' hundreds worship at his word,
He's but a coof for a' that.
For a' that, an' a' that,
His ribband, star, an' a' that,
The man o' independent mind
He looks an' laughs at a' that.
A prince can mak a belted knight,
A marquis, duke, an' a' that,
But an honest man's aboon his might,
Gude faith, he maunna fa' that!
For a' that, an' a' that,
Their dignities an' a' that,
The pith o' sense, an' pride o' worth,
Are higher rank than a' that.
Then let us pray that come it may,
(As come it will for a' that,)
That Sense and Worth, o'er a' the earth,
Shall bear the gree, an' a' that,
For a' that, an' a' that,
It's coming yet for a' that,
That man to man, the world o'er,
Shall brithers be for a' that.

A non Scot - English speaker needs the lyrics to understand whats going on - although the spelling doesn't help.

Jim Malcolm version
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0zUbnEDMUWQ" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" rel="nofollow

Opening of Scottish Parliament- version
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hudNoXsUj0o" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" rel="nofollow

This version has lyrics
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2pGWkjwOBw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" rel="nofollow

Ed Miller's version /pipes/good introduction
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jd4zgSpCPbM" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" rel="nofollow

[WooTeck]

its good to read a wee bit o, rabbie on a friday. thanks for that

[DAD300]

I like when you guys get seriously deep!

All history relies on these facts...you must look at it within the reality of Human Nature. The Natural Laws that we cannot escape.

-Human Nature has and will never change.

-Only the situation dictates how civil we act.

-10% of any Society works for the common good of the Society.
-80% of Society will follow the strongest leader, good or bad.
-10% of any Society work for the destruction of the Society for their own gain, wealth, power, to inflate their own ego,...
-Once you understand the 10-80-10%, all history falls into place.

-Most conflict arises, because 90% (the Good and the Sheep) don't want to acknowledge that the Destructive 10% exists.

-Ideologies, Communism, Socialism, Capitalism, could all work well, if Human Nature didn't prevail (remember that Destructive 10%). They would have to be ruled by a benevolent leader or government that does not fall victim to their own ego.

-In war, HE who is the most ruthless wins, HE survives in power and that is why HE writes the history.

-Feeding the starving world is not now, nor has it ever been about growing enough food. The World has always grown enough food to feed its self. Today it is about the logistics of moving that food to the blighted regions and starving peoples that live in places that cannot sustain the numbers trying to live there. WE created this by trying to feed the blighted regions and starving peoples. If we had left it alone, the people would have moved or the population diminished to the level the land was capable of sustaining.

If you try to teach this to the Good and the Sheep, most will fight it. Their version of Human Nature won't allow for the existence of the Destructive. They believe they have or can change Human Nature. I reply, "That is why WE define it as HUMAN NATURE. It IS what it IS. It has not nor can you change HUMAN NATURE!

All history relies on these facts...you must look at it within the reality of Human Nature.

When you recount the atrocities of Destructive Leader XXXXXX, please assume GOOD Leader YYYYY had to be more ruthless to subdue XXXXXXX.

As we sit at out computers, in relative times of Peace, assume that, "Men can only be highly civilized while other men, inevitably less civilized, are there to guard and feed them."

[Kareltje]

Men, and women, can only sit at their computers and seem civilized, because other men and women pay and work for them.
We, both in North-America and the EU, are living in a castle. And like in the Middle-Ages, around that castle there are the people who suffer and die to provide us of our safety and wealth.
If I am poor in the EU I still am in the castle. Maybe a servant or a stallhand, but in the castle nevertheless: I get my food every day, I get my rest in time, I am not shot today.

Maybe it is a bit sensitive to some, but from the top of the former WTC-towers one could observe, glass of whiskey in one and large cigar in the other hand, the children toiling in the factories in Bangladesh. Or the Chinese labourers making our cellphones during 16 hours a day, 7 days a week. The African children mining the coltan for this cellphones. While their mothers are raped and cut open!

DAD: some years ago I read Macchiavelli's Il principe. I did not understand why a lot of people think it is immoral: to me it seemed logical and very true.

[shadylane]

Once upon a time, wives and daughters brewed the beer, wine and mead.
Then brewing became commercialized and a source of taxes.
Sadly the Females lost the right and skills needed to supply alcoholic beverages.

[contrahead]

A couple weeks ago I picked up a random book from a public bookshelf but finished it only a few days ago. It was a book concerned with the history of events surrounding the attempted invasion of England by the Spanish Armada during the years 1587-89 of the Elizabethan era. It starts with Mary Queen of Scots preparing for her own beheading by facetiously having her head shaved and fitted with a wig. Anyway, reading the book encouraged me to do some auxiliary research.

I dredged up this old thread only to post a historical picture. Zoom in to get a good look at the eyes. This person looks mean to me. No vodka and tomato juice here. This is the real deal, the real McCoy, the real “Bloody Mary” herself. {Bloody Mary and younger Elizabeth were half sisters while the younger still Mary Queen of Scots was their first cousin once removed}.

[kiwi Bruce]

An interesting side affect of the Spanish Armada for the Irish...many many Spanish Galleons foundered and wrecked on the Irish coast, now what were the Irish going to do with all these young handsome and CATHOLIC Spanish seamen...turn them over to the hated English...NOOO! You marry them off with the local Irish lasses...the origin of the black Irish? Very pretty women, darker skin complexion, black hair and dark brown eyes...I should know, I'm married to one!!!

[hstuurman]

Stalin killed millions yet Adolf Hitler gets acknowledged for killing hundreds if thousands . I'm not trying to take away from what transpired but history has forgotten the billions lost.

i think you are minimalizing hitler's atrocities. stalin was indeed a horrific mass murderer but your number makes hitler look less evil than something closer to the truth:

"The exact number of people killed by the Nazi regime may never be known, but scholars, using a variety of methods of determining the death toll, have generally agreed upon common range of the number of victims. Recently declassified British and Soviet documents have indicated the total may be somewhat higher than previously believed[20]. However, the following estimates are considered to be highly reliable. The estimates:

5.1–6.0 million Jews, including 3.0–3.5 million Polish Jews
1.8 –1.9 million non-Jewish Poles (includes all those killed in executions or those that died in prisons, labor, and concentration camps, as well as civilians killed in the 1939 invasion and the 1944 Warsaw Uprising)
500,000–1.2 million Serbs killed by Croat Nazis
200,000–800,000 Roma & Sinti
200,000–300,000 people with disabilities
80,000–200,000 Freemasons [23]
100,000 communists
10,000–25,000 homosexual men
2,000 Jehovah's Witnesses
Raul Hilberg, in the third edition of his ground-breaking three-volume work, The Destruction of the European Jews, estimates that 5.1 million Jews died during the Holocaust. This figure includes "over 800,000" who died from "Ghettoization and general privation;" 1,400,000 who were killed in "Open-air shootings;" and "up to 2,900,000" who perished in camps. Hilberg estimates the death toll in Poland at "up to 3,000,000."[24] Hilberg's numbers are generally considered to be a conservative estimate, as they generally include only those deaths for which some records are available, avoiding statistical adjustment.[25] British historian Martin Gilbert used a similar approach in his Atlas of the Holocaust, but arrived at a number of 5.75 million Jewish victims, since he estimated higher numbers of Jews killed in Russia and other locations.[26]" *quoted from the interwebbies

Hitler and Stalin were both made as hell. But looking from a different, Dutch, side. Did you know the concentration camp was an English invention during the Boeren war.

[kiwi Bruce]

I did know that...but the purpose wasn't mass genocide, it was used to remove the non-combatant Afrikaners off the land thus denying the Commandos (yes the Afrikaners "Guerrilla fighters" coined the name) comfort, food and shelter.

[thecroweater]

I did know that...but the purpose wasn't mass genocide, it was used to remove the non-combatant Afrikaners off the land thus denying the Commandos (yes the Afrikaners "Guerrilla fighters" coined the name) comfort, food and shelter.

That maybe true but the result was the same. There was some vengeance involved that can not be denied in the fact that the families of combatants were put on starvation diets and starve they did, more then 26,000 boer women and children were murdered on this way and who knows how many blacks that were in segregated camps. Mass murder might not have been the official aim goal but the policies in place made damn sure that would be the result. To put this in perspective something like 26% of all inmates interned perished of either starvation, exposure or disease and to really clarify that perspective crystal clear over 50 percent of all boer children in South Africa perished in one of those concentration camps and that is a more devastating result by far then those genicidal nazis could have ever hoped to achieve. All that was no reflection at all on the soldiers the fought in that theatre but is pretty damning for the likes of Kitchener and his immediate subordinates. No doubt has this happened after the UKs 1929 signing of the Geneva convention they would have hanged as war criminals.

[kiwi Bruce]

This is why Mahatma Gandhi said that famous saying to louis Mountbatten...
"Do you know why the sun doesn't set on the British Empire?
Because God doesn't trust what you'd do it the dark!"

[Kareltje]

I do have to look up the exact number, but Mao seems to surpass all mass-murderers.

And I heard about the genocide in Rwanda in 1994. I think it was far more brutal than the holocaust.
The number of people killed per annum was far greater, the people were killed, even slaughtered, by their neighbours and even family. I think, but of course that is my personal opinion, that killing someone you personally know or being killed by someone you know, is much more brutal than killing or being killed by someone you do not know. The former is personal, the latter is business.
And the killing was much more personal: people were really cut to pieces, piece by piece.

Of course: they were black and lived far away in a strange continent. So they lived, killed and died on the other side.

[googe]

Its all about who can talk the talk and finding whilling people to participate . If you offer someone something they need at a particular time in there life and it fullfils there every need, they will do.anything to achieve it. How have we after thousands of years, being where we are?, we are stuck, theres no mass advancement in society , one year we have big ideas and advancements in ideas to improve the world, then it stalls. People are held back by society judement now, in past days that wasnt a issue, why many power hungry people changed the world .

[kiwi Bruce]

We seem to be divided into three mass social group...sheep, shepherds...and wolves

[HDNB]

I do have to look up the exact number, but Mao seems to surpass all mass-murderers.

And I heard about the genocide in Rwanda in 1994. I think it was far more brutal than the holocaust.
The number of people killed per annum was far greater, the people were killed, even slaughtered, by their neighbours and even family. I think, but of course that is my personal opinion, that killing someone you personally know or being killed by someone you know, is much more brutal than killing or being killed by someone you do not know. The former is personal, the latter is business.
And the killing was much more personal: people were really cut to pieces, piece by piece.

Of course: they were black and lived far away in a strange continent. So they lived, killed and died on the other side.

this is a tough thread to moderate. after all it is the counter perspective.

however i find it appalling that one atrocity could be more brutal, or somehow mitigate the brutality of another. Rwanda was awful, generally (accepted?) at 1MM victims; the holocaust 6MM. i'm sure to the victims they were equally as brutal and as final. the concept that mao doing away with 10's millions of his citizens is somehow less barbaric that stalin killing 10's millions of his citizens using a rationalization as weak as "hey, there was way more chinese than russians, so per capita it was not as bad"...is ludicrous.

while there is history from the other side, you cannot deny facts through revisionism. belittling the facts do not make them go away.

[kiwi Bruce]

+1 HDNB...the thing that's terrifying is...it's not over, and it could happen anywhere...it just takes the right situation and wrong despot... and it could and most likely will, happen again.

[stillvodka]

I do have to look up the exact number, but Mao seems to surpass all mass-murderers.

And I heard about the genocide in Rwanda in 1994. I think it was far more brutal than the holocaust.
The number of people killed per annum was far greater, the people were killed, even slaughtered, by their neighbours and even family. I think, but of course that is my personal opinion, that killing someone you personally know or being killed by someone you know, is much more brutal than killing or being killed by someone you do not know. The former is personal, the latter is business.
And the killing was much more personal: people were really cut to pieces, piece by piece.

Of course: they were black and lived far away in a strange continent. So they lived, killed and died on the other side.

this is a tough thread to moderate. after all it is the counter perspective.

however i find it appalling that one atrocity could be more brutal, or somehow mitigate the brutality of another. Rwanda was awful, generally (accepted?) at 1MM victims; the holocaust 6MM. i'm sure to the victims they were equally as brutal and as final. the concept that mao doing away with 10's millions of his citizens is somehow less barbaric that stalin killing 10's millions of his citizens using a rationalization as weak as "hey, there was way more chinese than russians, so per capita it was not as bad"...is ludicrous.

while there is history from the other side, you cannot deny facts through revisionism. belittling the facts do not make them go away.

This is revisionism
Dresden bombings sparked controversy after 25,000 civilians died in attack!

It was initially claimed that up to 250,000 civilians lost their lives in the Dresden bombings but an official report released after the war showed the casualty figure was in fact closer to 25,000.

Over two days and nights in February 1945 British and American bombers turned the city into a sea of flames and rubble.

And ''Butcher bomber Harris'' said he would of done the same again.

Talk about Hitlers Henchmen, Butcher Bomber Harris was Churchills Henchman, Bomber Harris ''Just'' following Orders??
Can these two wartime leaders be in the Same Catagory?