Ben Carson refers to slaves as "immigrants"

[Carl in Michigan]

Shall I tell you how a Pedo statesman brought the Declaration of Independence to life as a living document.

Please continue to bash the USA and praise the 'Religion of Peace.'

Let everyone see where a libtard stands.

BTW, the Constitution is NOT a 'living document.' Its author says so.

If telling the truth is bashing, stay tuned. History tells me that both Jefferson and mohammed were pedophiles. I'm not making a judgement history has already done that. And learn to read: I referenced the Declaration of Independence as a living document not the US Constitution.

The Declaration of Independence
"President Abraham Lincoln credited with recognizing the Declaration of Independence as the first living document that would direct the goals of the countries achievement over time. "

Do you understand the meaning of "living document"?

It is NOT regardless what your liberal idols think. Your libel against TJ is not with considering.

 

[Ame®icano]

Why don't you read it, and all... Earth was created on day one. Adam and Eve on day six.

It doesn't say the earth was created on 'day one'. Reread what I just told you.

IF you actually crack open the Bible and READ IT, you'll see the "the face of God hovered over the earth, and the earth was covered in water. NO LAND.

1) The earth existed for billions of years.

2) The earth BECAME 'chaotic and desolate' This could have occurred ANY TIME prior to Adam.

3) "The face of God hovered over the face of the deep (surface of the water covered earth)

4) The "Creation Story" now begins.

Do you understand now? The bible is referring to the RESTORATION of a damaged earth -- not the creation of the earth.

I know you can't be bothered to actually READ it, but if you do, WITH AN OPEN MIND, you can understand.

The short answer is, the creation of the first man has NOTHING to do with the age of the earth

I got it, the earth was created before it was actually created. And it was flat.

I must missed the word "restoration", so can you please point me to it.

 

[JQPublic1]

A quick question for you Christians out there........

Since in the Bible it says that all of mankind is descended from Adam and Eve, that means we are all related, so why should Christians be against someone in their own family?

Racism is definitely anti Christian.

you don't believe in race? how do you explain the differences between caucasian, mongoloid, and negroid?

The same way they did for thousands of years before some White guy i Germany said "let there be race."

Thats not entirely true, if you research the Islamic/Arab slave trade which spanned over a thousand years. The word they used to describe Africans litteraly meant "slave". I doubt by this time white europeans had african slaves, but they themselves had been taken as slaves by Arabs who sailed as far as Iceland to get them.

Then allow me to examine the "truth" in your premise as well. The very word "slave" is derived from the word "SLAV."
slave
Word History: The derivation of the word slave encapsulates a bit of European history and explains why the twowords slave and Slav are so similar; they are, in fact, historically identical. The word slave first appears in Englisharound 1290, spelled sclave. The spelling is based on Old French esclave from Medieval Latin sclavus, "Slav, slave,"first recorded around 800. Sclavus comes from Byzantine Greek sklabos (pronounced sklä′vōs) "Slav," which appearsaround 580. Sklavos approximates the Slavs' own name for themselves

Continuing... A you can see the word "slavery" has origins in Europe, not the middle east or Africa. And also I would impress upon you to take notice of the difference between chattel slavery and human bondage. That slight variation is dependent on how the captor's society sees his captives. Chattel slavery i the world of Ilam was decidedly less racial intensive than Christian slavery according to the following passage:

How Islam moderated slavery
Islam's approach to slavery added the idea that freedom was the natural state of affairs for human beings and in line with this it limited the opportunities to enslave people, commended the freeing of slaves and regulated the way slaves were treated:

• Islam greatly limited those who could be enslaved and under what circumstances (although these restrictions were often evaded)
• Islam treated slaves as human beings as well as property
• Islam banned the mistreatment of slaves - indeed the tradition repeatedly stresses the importance of treating slaves with kindness and compassion
• Islam allowed slaves to achieve their freedom and made freeing slaves a virtuous act
• Islam barred Muslims from enslaving other Muslims

BBC - Religions - Islam: Slavery in Islam

They were treated as human beings? really? Kindness and compassion? They estimate 10 to 20 million Africans were transported to the east Arabia, persia etc. but it's estimated up to 80 million died on the way there. That doesn't sound to me like they were well looked after. I believe though that some Arab historians might try to claim they were.
Most African males including most young boys were castrated, thats why you see very few african descendants in ME countries as compared to in the west and a high percentage of those boys died from the castration.That would have been an agonizing death. The Arabs also for the most part did not allow them to have families as in the Americas. The men were used as soldiers or eunichs, while women were mainly captured as sex slaves. They were still property any way revisionists try to spin it.

I think one of the main differences was in the west, slaves were used more in agriculture in an expanding new world. For the most part arabs just didn't need slaves in that way so maybe people are fooled to think they were more compassionate. One example where there is an exception to this is when Africans were used to drain the salt marshes in Iraq and were treated so brutally they had a slave uprising of like 1/2 million slaves.

So slaves were allowed their freedom? yeah well look at the diaspora that exist in places like ME today, they are still heavily marginalized, and discriminated as second class as opposed to here in the West where the decendants of slaves have fared much much better since the days of slavery than those in the ME. It is definately about race with those people, I don't know why some like to pretend it was only European Whites who practiced racism

Arabs went up and down the coasts of Europe raiding villages, killing the men and taking the women as sexual slaves (they like to call them 'wives'). This guy is a moron and a traitor to in any way praise Islam.

Is that appreciably different than what the Vikings, Goths, Franks or Vandals did? Dare we compare the evils of Islam with the evils committed by the European colonization of Africa? i will take the risk of being called a traitor for bringing balance to this discussion in a historical context. I am no one apologist, I just want the whole picture revealed instead of the portion you want me to see.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

From the book, In Defense of Thomas Jefferson:

• “The virulent rumor was first started by the unscrupulous, scandal-mongering journalist James Callender, who burned for political revenge against Jefferson. Callender was described as ‘an alcoholic thug with a foul mind, obsessed with race and sex,’ who intended to defame Jefferson’s public career. Historian James Truslow Adams wrote: ‘Almost every scandalous story about Jefferson which is still whispered or believed may be traced to the scurrilous writings of Callender.'”

• “The allegation of Jefferson’s guilt was a huge [modern day] story prompting tabloid headlines. Media accounts contained strong language, such as ‘proves conclusively,’ ‘demonstrated,’ or ‘resolved,’ and included the following incredible headline: ‘Adulterer on Mount Rushmore’ claimed the Des Moines Register, which included a charge of ‘statutory rape.’ Two authors wrote churlish books calling for a dismantling of the Jefferson Memorial.

• “There was little notice of a subsequent 13-member blue-ribbon panel of prominent historians and scientists (white, black, male and female) named to reconfirm the DNA conclusions (the ‘scholars commission’). After a year of investigating history’s most famous paternity case, the independent historians tamped down the simmering allegation: ‘Our conclusions range from serious skepticism about the charge to a conviction that is is almost certainly false.'”

• “After Callender’s smear of Jefferson in the Richmond Recorder on Sept. 1, 1802, Thomas Jefferson won re-election in 1804 – in a landslide. He won all but two of the 17 states and 92 percent of the electoral vote. Callender, by contrast, also libeled Dr. Samuel Johnson, President John Adams and Alexander Hamilton, among others.

• “The fevered debate about Sally and Jefferson changed radically in 1998. Scientists exploded a historic bombshell, confirming that a male carrying Jefferson DNA had fathered Sally Hemmings’ last child, Eston. The British science journal Nature’s distortion of that news led to a worldwide misrepresentation that DNA had specifically proven that Thomas Jefferson was the father. In fact, at least two dozen male Jefferson could have been.”
  

• “Following the release of the DNA study in the fall of 1998, Daniel P. Jordan, the president of the Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation, or TJMF, appointed a nine-person in-house research committee. The TJMF consisted entirely of embedded Monticello researchers, two of whom, Lucia Cinder Stanton and Dianne Swann-Wright, had believed Jefferson’s guilt at least three years before the DNA study.
  “The Monticello committee essentially took the ‘family myths’ of Madison Hemmings’ descendants and accepted them as a sound-bite history. The committee was chaired by slave historian Swann-Wright, the African-American director of special programs at Monticello.
  
  “One of the committee, Dr. White McKenzie Wallenborn, charged that the Monticello committee, and particularly its chair, Dianne Swann-Wright, and co-chair Lucia Cinder Stanton, had ‘already reached their conclusions’ at the start of the deliberations. The committee ignored or dismissed as problematic ‘most of the evidence that would exonerate Mr. Jefferson.’ … The second paragraph in the official Monticello guidebook states that ‘Monticello was the home not only to Jefferson and his large family but also to as many as 135 slaves who worked the plantation’s four farms. …’ The guidebook declares to the world: ‘Because of genetic testing in 1998 and an ensuing review of other kinds of evidence, most historians today accept the truth of Madison Hemmings’ statement and believe that he and his siblings were Thomas Jefferson’s children.'”

• “The Monticello Board of Trustees now has as one of its more prominent members Julian Bond, the NAACP chairman. … Professor Peter Onuf is a history professor at the University of Virginia and enthusiastic Hemmings-paternity proponent. In his office he has a magnificent Houden bust of Thomas Jefferson dressed in a reverse baseball cap and sunglasses and a sign around its neck: MY MEAL TICKET. … According to Dr. Wallenborn, when he pointed out to Onuf that you could not use evidence, if it was not reliable evidence, to accuse Jefferson of paternity, Onuf retorted: ‘We are historians. We do not need proof. We write history the way we want to.'”

• “During a meeting at the Kenwood International Center for Jefferson Studies in Charlottesville, Wallenborn recalled Onuf saying in his presence: ‘Sometimes I hate Thomas Jefferson’ and ‘We are going to have to knock Jefferson off his pedestal.'”

 

[Carl in Michigan]

The liberals created the term. If you don't understand it, use Google.

Justice Scalia: 'Constitution is not a living organism'

 

[JQPublic1]

From the book, In Defense of Thomas Jefferson:

• 
  
  
  • “The virulent rumor was first started by the unscrupulous, scandal-mongering journalist James Callender, who burned for political revenge against Jefferson. Callender was described as ‘an alcoholic thug with a foul mind, obsessed with race and sex,’ who intended to defame Jefferson’s public career. Historian James Truslow Adams wrote: ‘Almost every scandalous story about Jefferson which is still whispered or believed may be traced to the scurrilous writings of Callender.'”

• 
  
  
  • “The allegation of Jefferson’s guilt was a huge [modern day] story prompting tabloid headlines. Media accounts contained strong language, such as ‘proves conclusively,’ ‘demonstrated,’ or ‘resolved,’ and included the following incredible headline: ‘Adulterer on Mount Rushmore’ claimed the Des Moines Register, which included a charge of ‘statutory rape.’ Two authors wrote churlish books calling for a dismantling of the Jefferson Memorial.

• 
  
  
  • “There was little notice of a subsequent 13-member blue-ribbon panel of prominent historians and scientists (white, black, male and female) named to reconfirm the DNA conclusions (the ‘scholars commission’). After a year of investigating history’s most famous paternity case, the independent historians tamped down the simmering allegation: ‘Our conclusions range from serious skepticism about the charge to a conviction that is is almost certainly false.'”

• 
  
  
  • “After Callender’s smear of Jefferson in the Richmond Recorder on Sept. 1, 1802, Thomas Jefferson won re-election in 1804 – in a landslide. He won all but two of the 17 states and 92 percent of the electoral vote. Callender, by contrast, also libeled Dr. Samuel Johnson, President John Adams and Alexander Hamilton, among others.

• 
  
  
  • “The fevered debate about Sally and Jefferson changed radically in 1998. Scientists exploded a historic bombshell, confirming that a male carrying Jefferson DNA had fathered Sally Hemmings’ last child, Eston. The British science journal Nature’s distortion of that news led to a worldwide misrepresentation that DNA had specifically proven that Thomas Jefferson was the father. In fact, at least two dozen male Jefferson could have been.”

• 
  
  
  • “Following the release of the DNA study in the fall of 1998, Daniel P. Jordan, the president of the Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation, or TJMF, appointed a nine-person in-house research committee. The TJMF consisted entirely of embedded Monticello researchers, two of whom, Lucia Cinder Stanton and Dianne Swann-Wright, had believed Jefferson’s guilt at least three years before the DNA study.
    “The Monticello committee essentially took the ‘family myths’ of Madison Hemmings’ descendants and accepted them as a sound-bite history. The committee was chaired by slave historian Swann-Wright, the African-American director of special programs at Monticello.
    
    “One of the committee, Dr. White McKenzie Wallenborn, charged that the Monticello committee, and particularly its chair, Dianne Swann-Wright, and co-chair Lucia Cinder Stanton, had ‘already reached their conclusions’ at the start of the deliberations. The committee ignored or dismissed as problematic ‘most of the evidence that would exonerate Mr. Jefferson.’ … The second paragraph in the official Monticello guidebook states that ‘Monticello was the home not only to Jefferson and his large family but also to as many as 135 slaves who worked the plantation’s four farms. …’ The guidebook declares to the world: ‘Because of genetic testing in 1998 and an ensuing review of other kinds of evidence, most historians today accept the truth of Madison Hemmings’ statement and believe that he and his siblings were Thomas Jefferson’s children.'”

• 
  
  
  • “The Monticello Board of Trustees now has as one of its more prominent members Julian Bond, the NAACP chairman. … Professor Peter Onuf is a history professor at the University of Virginia and enthusiastic Hemmings-paternity proponent. In his office he has a magnificent Houden bust of Thomas Jefferson dressed in a reverse baseball cap and sunglasses and a sign around its neck: MY MEAL TICKET. … According to Dr. Wallenborn, when he pointed out to Onuf that you could not use evidence, if it was not reliable evidence, to accuse Jefferson of paternity, Onuf retorted: ‘We are historians. We do not need proof. We write history the way we want to.'”

• 
  
  
  • “During a meeting at the Kenwood International Center for Jefferson Studies in Charlottesville, Wallenborn recalled Onuf saying in his presence: ‘Sometimes I hate Thomas Jefferson’ and ‘We are going to have to knock Jefferson off his pedestal.'”

Rather than attempting to rebut an author who has dedicated so much of his time to refute the Jefferson Sal Hemings saga, I will simply leave this link for other readers to explore. Let them use the copious references therein to compare notes with those of your author.
Jefferson–Hemings controversy - Wikipedia

 

[JimBowie1958]

From the book, In Defense of Thomas Jefferson:

• 
  
  
  • “The virulent rumor was first started by the unscrupulous, scandal-mongering journalist James Callender, who burned for political revenge against Jefferson. Callender was described as ‘an alcoholic thug with a foul mind, obsessed with race and sex,’ who intended to defame Jefferson’s public career. Historian James Truslow Adams wrote: ‘Almost every scandalous story about Jefferson which is still whispered or believed may be traced to the scurrilous writings of Callender.'”

• 
  
  
  • “The allegation of Jefferson’s guilt was a huge [modern day] story prompting tabloid headlines. Media accounts contained strong language, such as ‘proves conclusively,’ ‘demonstrated,’ or ‘resolved,’ and included the following incredible headline: ‘Adulterer on Mount Rushmore’ claimed the Des Moines Register, which included a charge of ‘statutory rape.’ Two authors wrote churlish books calling for a dismantling of the Jefferson Memorial.

• 
  
  
  • “There was little notice of a subsequent 13-member blue-ribbon panel of prominent historians and scientists (white, black, male and female) named to reconfirm the DNA conclusions (the ‘scholars commission’). After a year of investigating history’s most famous paternity case, the independent historians tamped down the simmering allegation: ‘Our conclusions range from serious skepticism about the charge to a conviction that is is almost certainly false.'”

• 
  
  
  • “After Callender’s smear of Jefferson in the Richmond Recorder on Sept. 1, 1802, Thomas Jefferson won re-election in 1804 – in a landslide. He won all but two of the 17 states and 92 percent of the electoral vote. Callender, by contrast, also libeled Dr. Samuel Johnson, President John Adams and Alexander Hamilton, among others.

• 
  
  
  • “The fevered debate about Sally and Jefferson changed radically in 1998. Scientists exploded a historic bombshell, confirming that a male carrying Jefferson DNA had fathered Sally Hemmings’ last child, Eston. The British science journal Nature’s distortion of that news led to a worldwide misrepresentation that DNA had specifically proven that Thomas Jefferson was the father. In fact, at least two dozen male Jefferson could have been.”

• 
  
  
  • “Following the release of the DNA study in the fall of 1998, Daniel P. Jordan, the president of the Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation, or TJMF, appointed a nine-person in-house research committee. The TJMF consisted entirely of embedded Monticello researchers, two of whom, Lucia Cinder Stanton and Dianne Swann-Wright, had believed Jefferson’s guilt at least three years before the DNA study.
    “The Monticello committee essentially took the ‘family myths’ of Madison Hemmings’ descendants and accepted them as a sound-bite history. The committee was chaired by slave historian Swann-Wright, the African-American director of special programs at Monticello.
    
    “One of the committee, Dr. White McKenzie Wallenborn, charged that the Monticello committee, and particularly its chair, Dianne Swann-Wright, and co-chair Lucia Cinder Stanton, had ‘already reached their conclusions’ at the start of the deliberations. The committee ignored or dismissed as problematic ‘most of the evidence that would exonerate Mr. Jefferson.’ … The second paragraph in the official Monticello guidebook states that ‘Monticello was the home not only to Jefferson and his large family but also to as many as 135 slaves who worked the plantation’s four farms. …’ The guidebook declares to the world: ‘Because of genetic testing in 1998 and an ensuing review of other kinds of evidence, most historians today accept the truth of Madison Hemmings’ statement and believe that he and his siblings were Thomas Jefferson’s children.'”

• 
  
  
  • “The Monticello Board of Trustees now has as one of its more prominent members Julian Bond, the NAACP chairman. … Professor Peter Onuf is a history professor at the University of Virginia and enthusiastic Hemmings-paternity proponent. In his office he has a magnificent Houden bust of Thomas Jefferson dressed in a reverse baseball cap and sunglasses and a sign around its neck: MY MEAL TICKET. … According to Dr. Wallenborn, when he pointed out to Onuf that you could not use evidence, if it was not reliable evidence, to accuse Jefferson of paternity, Onuf retorted: ‘We are historians. We do not need proof. We write history the way we want to.'”

• 
  
  
  • “During a meeting at the Kenwood International Center for Jefferson Studies in Charlottesville, Wallenborn recalled Onuf saying in his presence: ‘Sometimes I hate Thomas Jefferson’ and ‘We are going to have to knock Jefferson off his pedestal.'”

Rather than attempting to rebut an author who has dedicated so much of his time to refute the Jefferson Sal Hemings saga, I will simply leave this link for other readers to explore. Let them use the copious references therein to compare notes with those of your author.
Jefferson–Hemings controversy - Wikipedia

Lol, the genetic testing showed only a *possible* link to the Jefferson family with Eston, the rest is based on 'family histories' which is 90% bullshit.

"Oh, I am a descendant of a Cherokee Princess!" and similar rubbish have been handed down from one family generation to the next for millenia, dude.

 

[JQPublic1]

The definition of immigrant seems to boggle the hysterical minds of liberals. Immigrant- coming from another place of residence

Er...yeah.... usually WILLINGLY. Carson is as bat shit crazy as his boss.

Yep. Usually. NOt always, but usually.

In the case of slaves, it was the UNusual one.

So stop pretending that you don't know that.

Dumbass, slaves were not immigrants.

So, when you said, "usually willingly" you were just talking shit?

Oh, give it a rest.. Do you see any mention of slaves in that exchange? Since immigrants were considered humans during slavery times and slaves were commodities, not humans, the argument ends here.

 

[Yarddog]

A quick question for you Christians out there........

Since in the Bible it says that all of mankind is descended from Adam and Eve, that means we are all related, so why should Christians be against someone in their own family?

Racism is definitely anti Christian.

you don't believe in race? how do you explain the differences between caucasian, mongoloid, and negroid?

The same way they did for thousands of years before some White guy i Germany said "let there be race."

Thats not entirely true, if you research the Islamic/Arab slave trade which spanned over a thousand years. The word they used to describe Africans litteraly meant "slave". I doubt by this time white europeans had african slaves, but they themselves had been taken as slaves by Arabs who sailed as far as Iceland to get them.

Then allow me to examine the "truth" in your premise as well. The very word "slave" is derived from the word "SLAV."
slave
Word History: The derivation of the word slave encapsulates a bit of European history and explains why the twowords slave and Slav are so similar; they are, in fact, historically identical. The word slave first appears in Englisharound 1290, spelled sclave. The spelling is based on Old French esclave from Medieval Latin sclavus, "Slav, slave,"first recorded around 800. Sclavus comes from Byzantine Greek sklabos (pronounced sklä′vōs) "Slav," which appearsaround 580. Sklavos approximates the Slavs' own name for themselves

Continuing... A you can see the word "slavery" has origins in Europe, not the middle east or Africa. And also I would impress upon you to take notice of the difference between chattel slavery and human bondage. That slight variation is dependent on how the captor's society sees his captives. Chattel slavery i the world of Ilam was decidedly less racial intensive than Christian slavery according to the following passage:

How Islam moderated slavery
Islam's approach to slavery added the idea that freedom was the natural state of affairs for human beings and in line with this it limited the opportunities to enslave people, commended the freeing of slaves and regulated the way slaves were treated:

• Islam greatly limited those who could be enslaved and under what circumstances (although these restrictions were often evaded)
• Islam treated slaves as human beings as well as property
• Islam banned the mistreatment of slaves - indeed the tradition repeatedly stresses the importance of treating slaves with kindness and compassion
• Islam allowed slaves to achieve their freedom and made freeing slaves a virtuous act
• Islam barred Muslims from enslaving other Muslims

BBC - Religions - Islam: Slavery in Islam

They were treated as human beings? really? Kindness and compassion? They estimate 10 to 20 million Africans were transported to the east Arabia, persia etc. but it's estimated up to 80 million died on the way there. That doesn't sound to me like they were well looked after. I believe though that some Arab historians might try to claim they were.
Most African males including most young boys were castrated, thats why you see very few african descendants in ME countries as compared to in the west and a high percentage of those boys died from the castration.That would have been an agonizing death. The Arabs also for the most part did not allow them to have families as in the Americas. The men were used as soldiers or eunichs, while women were mainly captured as sex slaves. They were still property any way revisionists try to spin it.

I think one of the main differences was in the west, slaves were used more in agriculture in an expanding new world. For the most part arabs just didn't need slaves in that way so maybe people are fooled to think they were more compassionate. One example where there is an exception to this is when Africans were used to drain the salt marshes in Iraq and were treated so brutally they had a slave uprising of like 1/2 million slaves.

So slaves were allowed their freedom? yeah well look at the diaspora that exist in places like ME today, they are still heavily marginalized, and discriminated as second class as opposed to here in the West where the decendants of slaves have fared much much better since the days of slavery than those in the ME. It is definately about race with those people, I don't know why some like to pretend it was only European Whites who practiced racism

Arabs went up and down the coasts of Europe raiding villages, killing the men and taking the women as sexual slaves (they like to call them 'wives'). This guy is a moron and a traitor to in any way praise Islam.

Agree, once someone steals you away and most likely killed some of your family to take you, its called slavery. Not getting a wife. But people are willing to make excuses for slavery to make whatever point their trying to make

 

[JQPublic1]

Er...yeah.... usually WILLINGLY. Carson is as bat shit crazy as his boss.

Yep. Usually. NOt always, but usually.

In the case of slaves, it was the UNusual one.

So stop pretending that you don't know that.

Dumbass, slaves were not immigrants.

So, when you said, "usually willingly" you were just talking shit?

Oh, give it a rest.. Do you see any mention of slaves in that exchange? Since immigrants were considered humans during slavery and slaves were commodities, not humans, the argument ends here.

THe opinions of some slavers did not change the reality of the situation, ie the slaves were people.


YOur pretense that it did, is vile beyond belief.

I had no intent of invoking Godwin's law but present circumstance bring me to the precipice of using it.
Dehumanization was an integral part of the White Christian American brand of slavery and it preceded, by far, the dehumanization of the Jews in Christian Nazi Germany. The reality is not only have people of color been dehumanized to justify slavery but sub human"races" based on religious preference have been created to justify genocide. Don't get teary eyed on me now and start to invoke the creed of the abolitionist.
The institution of slavery was apart of the social fabric if this nation for several hundred years.

A minority of abolitionists were the only visible proponents of humanity for Blacks. Tell me how vile THAT was? Burt more on point. The only law on those slave ships was slaver's law. And the slave cargo they carried was no more human to them than the other livestock on board. Immigrants???? Hardly... teh ships Captain would have thrown a mug of grog in your face, laughed and walked away saying..."blow me down" this pecker head is crazy!"

 

[JimBowie1958]

THe opinions of some slavers did not change the reality of the situation, ie the slaves were people.
YOur pretense that it did, is vile beyond belief.

Exactly.

 

[flacaltenn]

Immigrant: a person who comes to a country to take up permanent residence

I'm not picking on you man.. I'm picking on ALL those responses that can't tell the difference between coming here WILLFULLY and VOLUNTARILY with being kidnapped, abused and FORCED to come here to be sold like cattle.

God help us........ Especially those people on Pg1 trying to justify such indecent garbage..

 

[Kat]

Please respect the topic in this thread. Also, please refrain from using racial slurs.

 

[Call Sign Chaos]

Carson has been hypnotized by white supremacy. He is now called uncle Ruckus.

Unlike your dear leader Obama who said the same exact thing, Ben Carson is actually a descendent of slaves.

Er... no you are wrong there too, Obama's mother had a Black American slave ancestor.

You do know that Obama's mother was white, don't you dumbass?

I don't believe in race, dumbass but since I live in a country obsessed by it I have to use the term to converse with you troglodytes. Google it you DMF!

Race has nothing to do with the fact that Obama is not the descendant of slaves you stupid faggot.

 

[Call Sign Chaos]

Obama used a modifying clause to clarify he wasn't saying slaves were immigrants per se. Carson outright stated that African slaves, considered non human at the time were immigrants when in fact they were just CARGO. = jUst like the ducks, pigs and other animals on the same ships. I see slaves as human, but , the slavers didn't.

So how were they "like" immigrants you hyppcritical little bitch?

 

[Call Sign Chaos]

You do know that Obama's mother was white, don't you dumbass?

I don't believe in race, dumbass but since I live in a country obsessed by it I have to use the term to converse with you troglodytes. Google it you DMF!

you don't believe in race? how do you explain the differences between caucasian, mongoloid, and negroid?

The same way they did for thousands of years before some White guy i Germany said "let there be race."

Thats not entirely true, if you research the Islamic/Arab slave trade which spanned over a thousand years. The word they used to describe Africans litteraly meant "slave". I doubt by this time white europeans had african slaves, but they themselves had been taken as slaves by Arabs who sailed as far as Iceland to get them.

Then allow me to examine the "truth" in your premise as well. The very word "slave" is derived from the word "SLAV."
slave
Word History: The derivation of the word slave encapsulates a bit of European history and explains why the twowords slave and Slav are so similar; they are, in fact, historically identical. The word slave first appears in Englisharound 1290, spelled sclave. The spelling is based on Old French esclave from Medieval Latin sclavus, "Slav, slave,"first recorded around 800. Sclavus comes from Byzantine Greek sklabos (pronounced sklä′vōs) "Slav," which appearsaround 580. Sklavos approximates the Slavs' own name for themselves

Continuing... A you can see the word "slavery" has origins in Europe, not the middle east or Africa. And also I would impress upon you to take notice of the difference between chattel slavery and human bondage. That slight variation is dependent on how the captor's society sees his captives. Chattel slavery i the world of Ilam was decidedly less racial intensive than Christian slavery according to the following passage:

How Islam moderated slavery
Islam's approach to slavery added the idea that freedom was the natural state of affairs for human beings and in line with this it limited the opportunities to enslave people, commended the freeing of slaves and regulated the way slaves were treated:

• Islam greatly limited those who could be enslaved and under what circumstances (although these restrictions were often evaded)
• Islam treated slaves as human beings as well as property
• Islam banned the mistreatment of slaves - indeed the tradition repeatedly stresses the importance of treating slaves with kindness and compassion
• Islam allowed slaves to achieve their freedom and made freeing slaves a virtuous act
• Islam barred Muslims from enslaving other Muslims

BBC - Religions - Islam: Slavery in Islam

Ah yes Muslim slavery was actually a good thing lmfao fucking kill yourself you sorry excuse for a human being. The Arab slave trade was greater in scale ans longer lasting than the trans-Atlantic slave trade, the BBCs assertion that slaves were treated with compassion and kindness under the Islamic Imperialists ranks right up there with holocaust denial in the revisionist history department, the author should be drug out into the streets and fucking shot.

 

[tigerred59]

Ben Carson isn't stupid, he's just another example of people who are given undeserved creds, for shit that should stay in their lane....he's a surgeon, not a can do every thing genius. Trump is a mediocre business man who people think should lead the free world...some people should just stick with what the fuck they know....After Trump is finished fuckin over this nation, Businessmen and women, as with the Bush's and Clinton's, will forever fall on deaf ears for any office in this country.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Ben Carson isn't stupid, he's just another example of people who are given undeserved creds, for shit that should stay in their lane....he's a surgeon, not a can do every thing genius. Trump is a mediocre business man who people think should lead the free world...some people should just stick with what the fuck they know....After Trump is finished fuckin over this nation, Businessmen and women, as with the Bush's and Clinton's, will forever fall on deaf ears for any office in this country.

Yeah, I feel your yearning for the return to lying-ass career politicians.

Carson used a poor choice of words.

Obama's black half is not and never was American.

 

[Correll]

Yep. Usually. NOt always, but usually.

In the case of slaves, it was the UNusual one.

So stop pretending that you don't know that.

Dumbass, slaves were not immigrants.

So, when you said, "usually willingly" you were just talking shit?

Oh, give it a rest.. Do you see any mention of slaves in that exchange? Since immigrants were considered humans during slavery and slaves were commodities, not humans, the argument ends here.

THe opinions of some slavers did not change the reality of the situation, ie the slaves were people.


YOur pretense that it did, is vile beyond belief.

I had no intent of invoking Godwin's law but present circumstance bring me to the precipice of using it.
Dehumanization was an integral part of the White Christian American brand of slavery and it preceded, by far, the dehumanization of the Jews in Christian Nazi Germany. The reality is not only have people of color been dehumanized to justify slavery but sub human"races" based on religious preference have been created to justify genocide. Don't get teary eyed on me now and start to invoke the creed of the abolitionist.
The institution of slavery was apart of the social fabric if this nation for several hundred years.

A minority of abolitionists were the only visible proponents of humanity for Blacks. Tell me how vile THAT was? Burt more on point. The only law on those slave ships was slaver's law. And the slave cargo they carried was no more human to them than the other livestock on board. Immigrants???? Hardly... teh ships Captain would have thrown a mug of grog in your face, laughed and walked away saying..."blow me down" this pecker head is crazy!"

And in order to support your smear on Ben Carson, you are accepting and defending that Dehumanization as the reality of the situation.


In this, you are literally siding with the slavers. ANd mouthing their arguments as your own.


I dismiss their arguments as self serving bullshit.

The slaves were humans.

 

[Asclepias]

Carson has been hypnotized by white supremacy. He is now called uncle Ruckus.

Unlike your dear leader Obama who said the same exact thing, Ben Carson is actually a descendent of slaves.

Er... no you are wrong there too, Obama's mother had a Black American slave ancestor.

You do know that Obama's mother was white, don't you dumbass?

I don't believe in race, dumbass but since I live in a country obsessed by it I have to use the term to converse with you troglodytes. Google it you DMF!

Race has nothing to do with the fact that Obama is not the descendant of slaves you stupid faggot.

You dont know what you are talking about. Obama is the descendant of the first officially recognized slave in the US.