Conquer Club

Here you can debate things without being chased off by people who have been educated therefore cannot think.

Feel free to bring it here.

2dimes wrote:Here you can debate things without being chased off by people who have been educated therefore cannot think.

In just this one sentence you insulted me and invited xtra to take over the topic...

ignotus wrote:

2dimes wrote:Here you can debate things without being chased off by people who have been educated therefore cannot think.

In just this one sentence you insulted me and invited xtra to take over the topic...

but xtra takes over every thread possible. Even if it's about say a sports game or a religous debate

Iliad wrote:but xtra takes over every thread possible. Even if it's about say a sports game or a religous debate

Ooo xtraaaa, this thread is a anti-historians conspiracy...

Iliad wrote:

ignotus wrote:

2dimes wrote:Here you can debate things without being chased off by people who have been educated therefore cannot think.

In just this one sentence you insulted me and invited xtra to take over the topic...

but xtra takes over every thread possible. Even if it's about say a sports game or a religous debate

He has done it here without even posting, apparently.

heavycola wrote:
He has done it here without even posting, apparently.

Genius.

I wasn't pointing at you ignotus, it's refreshing to hear someone being honest though if you're one of those people that's been taught into a box.

Actually I would place xtra in that catigory, he's so caught up in some theories that there is no possible way in his mind that some of what's in the main stream media could be true.

Because of a belief in certain things is held so strongly they is unable to see other things as even possible.

Ok, let's get the ball rolling.

When charlemange forceably converted pagan europeans by the sword, do you think he was justified in any way?

discuss.

thats a hard one, i have to actually think for that one ouch it hurts to think

Hell no it wasn't justified... The fact that he himself converted so as not to be slain as a heretic himself shows he was a man of few morales or ethics... Then attacking people who shared those same beliefs as he had shows even moreso why he was a piece of crap.

Anarkistsdream wrote:Hell no it wasn't justified... The fact that he himself converted so as not to be slain as a heretic himself shows he was a man of few morales or ethics... Then attacking people who shared those same beliefs as he had shows even moreso why he was a piece of crap.

I do believe you insulted my ancestor

Carebian Knight wrote:I do believe you insulted my ancestor

You got William Wallace in there too?

Carebian Knight wrote:
I do believe you insulted my ancestor

Yes, and adolph hitler's ancestors would feel insulted if you mentioned the holocaust, right? yes?

I don't know bout Wallace

Hitler was gay, so are his descendants, of which none are directly from him, so it doesn't really matter to me

Carebian Knight wrote:

Anarkistsdream wrote:Hell no it wasn't justified... The fact that he himself converted so as not to be slain as a heretic himself shows he was a man of few morales or ethics... Then attacking people who shared those same beliefs as he had shows even moreso why he was a piece of crap.

I do believe you insulted my ancestor

Tough shit... I am Black Dutch... He was an ancestor of mine, too... and what he did was still wrong and stupid.

Carebian Knight wrote:I don't know bout Wallace

Hitler was gay, so are his descendants, of which none are directly from him, so it doesn't really matter to me

Trace your direct lineage for us, then... just for kicks.

Because I've lost count of the number of Americans who think they're related to either Charlemagne, William Wallace, Robert the Bruce, Lady Jane Grey or William the Conqueror. Unless you're still either royal or the duke of something or other (or, apparently, a member of the thirteenth tribe) there really is very little chance of any direct claim.

Actually, Norse, maybe we've found a member of the thirteenth tribe!

Carebian Knight wrote:I don't know bout Wallace

Hitler was gay, so are his descendants, of which none are directly from him, so it doesn't really matter to me

so, that one went right over your head then? yes?

The fact that nark stated that charlemange was scum, as he killed and forceabley converted pagan europeans to christians, somehow insulted you? in the same way as a neo-nazi may try to deny the holocaust, or maybe even defend it?

Guiscard wrote:
Actually, Norse, maybe we've found a member of the thirteenth tribe!

Doubt it guissy, unless he is a khazer jew, which I doubt from his charlemange lineage.

Obviously, sarcasm isn't picked up online. I really don't care that I'm descendant from Charlemagne. I don't take pride in family lineage, especially something that far back, I know that probably a quarter of the world's population can find someway of being descendant of Charlemagne.

Plus, every descendant of Charlemagne, even if they are direct, wouldn't rule a country or be the duke of something.

Carebian Knight wrote:I really don't care that I'm descendant from Charlemagne.

Carebian Knight wrote:I know that probably a quarter of the world's population can find someway of being descendant of Charlemagne.

He was a randy bugger.

Guiscard wrote:

Carebian Knight wrote:I don't know bout Wallace

Hitler was gay, so are his descendants, of which none are directly from him, so it doesn't really matter to me

Trace your direct lineage for us, then... just for kicks.

Because I've lost count of the number of Americans who think they're related to either Charlemagne, William Wallace, Robert the Bruce, Lady Jane Grey or William the Conqueror. Unless you're still either royal or the duke of something or other (or, apparently, a member of the thirteenth tribe) there really is very little chance of any direct claim.

Actually, Norse, maybe we've found a member of the thirteenth tribe!

As with most Native American tribes, I do not consider to be a direct descendent when I talk of my ancestors... The only thing I can claim is that Geronimo was a Great great great granduncle or something, but I am not directly descended from him... However, I still call him an ancestor.

I think it should be the same for Charlegmagne, before he converted to Catholicism... Belonging to the same tribe- i.e., the Franks- I am sure many people would call him an ancestor. I thought it was fairly commonplace to do so.

Is that not the case? (No sarcasm, actual curiosity)

Anarkistsdream wrote:
I think it should be the same for Charlegmagne, before he converted to Catholicism... Belonging to the same tribe- i.e., the Franks- I am sure many people would call him an ancestor. I thought it was fairly commonplace to do so.

Is that not the case? (No sarcasm, actual curiosity)

I think this is a very subjective point nark, unless you can find charlemange predecessors lineage, although I would hazard a guess that he was not of the frankish tribe, just a ruler put in place by the almighty christian empire.

It's like trying to say that the queen is an anglo-saxon.

Norse wrote:

Anarkistsdream wrote:
I think it should be the same for Charlegmagne, before he converted to Catholicism... Belonging to the same tribe- i.e., the Franks- I am sure many people would call him an ancestor. I thought it was fairly commonplace to do so.

Is that not the case? (No sarcasm, actual curiosity)

I think this is a very subjective point nark, unless you can find charlemange predecessors lineage, although I would hazard a guess that he was not of the frankish tribe, just a ruler put in place by the almighty christian empire.

It's like trying to say that the queen is an anglo-saxon.

no no... He was born to the Frankish King and Queen...