Sharia Law at Wal Mart [Trigger Warning: People Arguing With Ben]

[giblets]

Cockney did, however. I'm not sure why you're defending a myth cobbled up by the despised Europeans. Oh wait. You hate yourself. Sorry, carry on, sir.

Tell us the just so story about how the white man got his gold.

c0ckney also never claimed that indigenous populations were morally perfect. You're stupid.

[Ben Kenobi]

Ben can't win real arguments, so he needs fight imaginary ones.

Personally I'm amused that the best anticolonial arguments come from European Enlightenment philosophers but then, why should I be surprised? White men are the best at evil after all.

[Ben Kenobi]

c0ckney also never claimed that indigenous populations were morally perfect. You're stupid.

Oh. Which is why he railed against conversion to Christianity? I'm guessing if they were muslim, he'd be a-ok with it?

[Sava]

Ben has a hard time accepting the fact that he is a bad person.

[giblets]

Oh. Which is why he railed against conversion to Christianity? I'm guessing if they were muslim, he'd be a-ok with it?

No, he railed against colonization, unless you think the goal of spreading Christianity justifies conquest I don't see how Christianity is relevant.

[giblets]

Ben has a hard time accepting the fact that he is a bad person.

People have given him a hard time for being disabled yet he continues to hate black people, muslims, native americans, homosexuals...

[Sava]

People have given him a hard time for being disabled yet he continues to hate black people, muslims, native americans, homosexuals...

Yeah. It is sad. But it is an excellent case study in how such trauma can cause a person to lash out and inflict that abuse on others.

He needs some serious cognitive behavioral therapy... or something suited to someone with his learning disabilities.

Sadly, I don't think he got the right kind of help as a kid. I think a lot of people let him down in that regard.

But that's just my guess. Who knows for sure. He lies so much.

[C0ckney]

Did they have an agreement with the other tribes that this was their land? If not, then how can they say that they owned the land? I love how you lump all 'indigenous people' as if they were a collective.

yes indeed how can one say that those in occupation of the land had a better claim to it than european interlopers. why i bet those savages didn't even have title documents.

Given that the Church bought the land in question - I'm not sure why you're arguing that the Papacy had no right to be compensated. Oh right - you're a liberal. Land theft is a-ok if you're doing it for liberal causes.

i'm not a liberal; i support expropriation in a broad range of circumstances. and you are wrong as usual. the church got the land either through turning its control as a private landlord to sovereign control, or through grants from frankish kings, or through war and conquest. as if further confirmation of your historical ignorance were required, the pope, in an agreement with the fascist government in 1929, contrary to your assertions, relinquished his claims to papal territories and received compensation in consideration thereof. this treaty established the vatican city.

[Ben Kenobi]

No, he railed against colonization

Odd then that he would only condemn Christianity.

unless you think the goal of spreading Christianity justifies conquest I don't see how Christianity is relevant.

You'll have to ask Cockney then. He brought Christianity into it.

[Ben Kenobi]

yes indeed how can one say that those in occupation of the land had a better claim to it than european interlopers. why i bet those savages didn't even have title documents.

If they couldn't prove that they owned the land, then why would they have greater claim than the Europeans?

i'm not a liberal; i support expropriation in a broad range of circumstances. and you are wrong as usual. the church got the land either through turning its control as a private landlord to sovereign control, or through grants from frankish kings, or through war and conquest. as if further confirmation of your historical ignorance were required, the pope, in an agreement with the fascist government in 1929, contrary to your assertions, relinquished his claims to papal territories and received compensation in consideration thereof. this treaty established the vatican city.

What 'wars of conquest'? They got most of it through grants from the Franks and Byzantines. Some through private purchases. Why shouldn't the Italians have compensated the Pope for stealing his land?

Yes, he was compensated in 1929, over 70 years after it was stolen.

[Ben Kenobi]

People have given him a hard time for being disabled yet he continues to hate black people

Who said anything about black people? I'm aware they aren't your number one favourites, but I don't think that makes you racist Gribbler.

[C0ckney]

Odd then that he would only condemn Christianity.

You'll have to ask Cockney then. He brought Christianity into it.

all these lies you are telling are about things written on this page. it's not as if your stock here could get any lower, but still...

[C0ckney]

If they couldn't prove that they owned the land, then why would they have greater claim than the Europeans?

because they were in actual occupation of it.

What 'wars of conquest'? They got most of it through grants from the Franks and Byzantines. Some through private purchases. Why shouldn't the Italians have compensated the Pope for stealing his land?

Yes, he was compensated in 1929, over 70 years after it was stolen.

i know how the papal states acquired its land; i explained it to you in my last post. if you don't know about the various italian wars they were involved and acquired territory through, there's a wealth of material out there on the subject. it seems though that you broadly accept what i said, in contrast to your earlier claims.

[C0ckney]

curiously the compensation accepted by the pope in 1929 was around 1/3 of that offered to, and rejected by, his predecessor in 1871. but of course it must be remembered that the catholic church has always found it easy to enter into arrangements with fascists.

[Ben Kenobi]

because they were in actual occupation of it.

So occupation is the same as ownership? Interesting thesis.

if you don't know about the various italian wars they were involved and acquired territory through, there's a wealth of material out there on the subject. it seems though that you broadly accept what i said, in contrast to your earlier claims.

I am aware of it - and you said nothing about the Byzantines.