What Is Up With Willfully Ignorant White People?

[ClosedCaption]

White people defending the violence and destruction of our innercities is what I call the real ignorance. Attempting to make these people feel good for this is just wrong! Made even more wrong as 90% of 50% of the murder in this country is black on black.

Not only do we justify this, but we justify blacks remaining Ignorant of reality.

You're more worried about black on black crime than white on white....why?

Question is, why aren't you worried about it?

Because crime to me is bad and skin color doesnt fall into the equation. But for Matthew (and you excusing it apparently) skin color is more important than crime

It's not skin color as much as it is a culture.

Tomato Tomahto....Just a coincidence that culture all have the same skin color.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Just pull a number out of your ass and go with it.

Of the blacks residing in the South, 261,988 were not slaves. Of this number, 10,689 lived in New Orleans. The country's leading African American historian, Duke University professor John Hope Franklin, records that in New Orleans over 3,000 free Negroes owned slaves, or 28 percent of the free Negroes in that city.

This 28 percent is certainly impressive when compared to less than 1.4 percent of all American whites and less than 4.8 percent of southern whites who owned slaves. The statistics show that, when free, blacks disproportionately became slave masters.

Black Slave Owners Civil War Article by Robert M Grooms

Just pull a deflection out of you ass and hope no one notices. What does that have to do with the 99.9% of slave owners being white?

Nothing. But your 99.9% number means nothing also.

If it meant nothing why did you deflect then?

Dude I called you number bullshit from the start. I showed you verifiable stats that wasn't pulled out of thin air hoping you would do likewise. But I see you're going to stick with your fabricated number regardless.

Stay stuck on stupid.

You showed me a diversion. You showed me Black slave owners in New Orleans which had nada to do with the fact that slave owners were by the vast majority white people here in the states. Your admission that you deflected is telling. .

It's called an example you retarded fuck.

 

[ClosedCaption]

I see now we've gone past the topic and into the land of deflection.

If I spoke about Pecan Pie no one would bring up where Pecan Trees came from. But mention something about blacks in America and we get the same tired ol "but there were black slave owners" "why didnt blacks go back to Africa after we removed them from it for generation after generation?"
"Why are Hip Hop?"

 

[Lonestar_logic]

It stands to reason they would indeed have a head start. They were landowners and had some degree of wealth whereas a common slave did not. But there were some former slaves that did very well for themselves.

Ok so why when I say whites generally had a head start do you get defensive? Its the truth but for some reason you believe it you just dislike that I say it.

Whether or not I say it...its still the truth

Your comparing apples to oranges.

It's true that every free man whether he's black or white had a head start over those enslaved. It's true that those of wealth had an edge over those that were poor regardless of skin tone.

What I fail to understand is how the events that happened 150 years ago can be attributed to what is happening today. My theory is that for whatever reason blacks refuse to move on from the past. They seem to think they way Assclapius does and that is that the plight of the black man today is connected to the events of the past and the evil white man.. Forgetting it was the white man that ultimately freed the slaves from bondage.

Build on that understanding displayed in your second paragraph. Take the next step in logical thinking. If the majority of the wealthy an non enslaved had a head start what does that do for their descendants? Now take that a step further. Those descendants have it even better and the descendants of those enlsaved and poor have it the same or worse. Add in that the descendants of the enslaved and poor are still being repressed. Is this making sense to you?

It does nothing unless they allow it to be a crutch. Which is what most, like yourself has chose to do.

Your argument is silly to begin with.

By the way, if the US was so bad then why didn't the majority of blacks go back to Africa when given the opportunity? The fact that so few availed themselves of the opportunity or heeded the exhortations of Marcus Garvey reflects the reality that descendants of slaves were better off remaining in the US.

So willful ignorance is again your response and you also tacked on a diversion again?

The majority of Blacks didnt go back to Africa for a couple of reasons ranging from being brainwashed into believing they would be going back to a jungle all the way up to people staying because they felt that they rightfully were owed the privilege of being a US citizen considering they are the ones that built the US into an economic power.

You don't think very highly of your race.

 

[Asclepias]

Just pull a deflection out of you ass and hope no one notices. What does that have to do with the 99.9% of slave owners being white?

Nothing. But your 99.9% number means nothing also.

If it meant nothing why did you deflect then?

Dude I called you number bullshit from the start. I showed you verifiable stats that wasn't pulled out of thin air hoping you would do likewise. But I see you're going to stick with your fabricated number regardless.

Stay stuck on stupid.

You showed me a diversion. You showed me Black slave owners in New Orleans which had nada to do with the fact that slave owners were by the vast majority white people here in the states. Your admission that you deflected is telling. .

It's called an example you retarded fuck.

I understand it was an example of a diversion. My question is why did you do that instead of concentrating on the point?

 

[ClosedCaption]

Just pull a deflection out of you ass and hope no one notices. What does that have to do with the 99.9% of slave owners being white?

Nothing. But your 99.9% number means nothing also.

If it meant nothing why did you deflect then?

Dude I called you number bullshit from the start. I showed you verifiable stats that wasn't pulled out of thin air hoping you would do likewise. But I see you're going to stick with your fabricated number regardless.

Stay stuck on stupid.

You showed me a diversion. You showed me Black slave owners in New Orleans which had nada to do with the fact that slave owners were by the vast majority white people here in the states. Your admission that you deflected is telling. .

It's called an example you retarded fuck.

An example of what?

Diversion?

 

[Asclepias]

Ok so why when I say whites generally had a head start do you get defensive? Its the truth but for some reason you believe it you just dislike that I say it.

Whether or not I say it...its still the truth

Your comparing apples to oranges.

It's true that every free man whether he's black or white had a head start over those enslaved. It's true that those of wealth had an edge over those that were poor regardless of skin tone.

What I fail to understand is how the events that happened 150 years ago can be attributed to what is happening today. My theory is that for whatever reason blacks refuse to move on from the past. They seem to think they way Assclapius does and that is that the plight of the black man today is connected to the events of the past and the evil white man.. Forgetting it was the white man that ultimately freed the slaves from bondage.

Build on that understanding displayed in your second paragraph. Take the next step in logical thinking. If the majority of the wealthy an non enslaved had a head start what does that do for their descendants? Now take that a step further. Those descendants have it even better and the descendants of those enlsaved and poor have it the same or worse. Add in that the descendants of the enslaved and poor are still being repressed. Is this making sense to you?

It does nothing unless they allow it to be a crutch. Which is what most, like yourself has chose to do.

Your argument is silly to begin with.

By the way, if the US was so bad then why didn't the majority of blacks go back to Africa when given the opportunity? The fact that so few availed themselves of the opportunity or heeded the exhortations of Marcus Garvey reflects the reality that descendants of slaves were better off remaining in the US.

So willful ignorance is again your response and you also tacked on a diversion again?

The majority of Blacks didnt go back to Africa for a couple of reasons ranging from being brainwashed into believing they would be going back to a jungle all the way up to people staying because they felt that they rightfully were owed the privilege of being a US citizen considering they are the ones that built the US into an economic power.

You don't think very highly of your race.

You dont think very highly of your race.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

White people defending the violence and destruction of our innercities is what I call the real ignorance. Attempting to make these people feel good for this is just wrong! Made even more wrong as 90% of 50% of the murder in this country is black on black.

Not only do we justify this, but we justify blacks remaining Ignorant of reality.

You're more worried about black on black crime than white on white....why?

Question is, why aren't you worried about it?

Because crime to me is bad and skin color doesnt fall into the equation. But for Matthew (and you excusing it apparently) skin color is more important than crime

It's not skin color as much as it is a culture.

Tomato Tomahto....Just a coincidence that culture all have the same skin color.

You're not concerned about it either way. Why is that?

 

[Uncensored2008]

The mass majority of slave owners were white. Its probably in the figure of 99.9%

The first slave owner in the 13 colonies was a black man - sploogy. He started the whole thing.

Hugh Gwyn was not Black. Get your fact straight son or risk being embarrassed. Even if that were true what does that have to do with the majority of slave owners being white?

Try again sploogy.

America 8217 s first slave owner was a black man.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

I see now we've gone past the topic and into the land of deflection.

If I spoke about Pecan Pie no one would bring up where Pecan Trees came from. But mention something about blacks in America and we get the same tired ol "but there were black slave owners" "why didnt blacks go back to Africa after we removed them from it for generation after generation?"
"Why are Hip Hop?"

Well you can't have one and not mention the other. Why do facts freak you out so much?

 

[ClosedCaption]

You're more worried about black on black crime than white on white....why?

Question is, why aren't you worried about it?

Because crime to me is bad and skin color doesnt fall into the equation. But for Matthew (and you excusing it apparently) skin color is more important than crime

It's not skin color as much as it is a culture.

Tomato Tomahto....Just a coincidence that culture all have the same skin color.

You're not concerned about it either way. Why is that?

Huh? I just told you I was Matthew only cares about black crime. Why?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Nothing. But your 99.9% number means nothing also.

If it meant nothing why did you deflect then?

Dude I called you number bullshit from the start. I showed you verifiable stats that wasn't pulled out of thin air hoping you would do likewise. But I see you're going to stick with your fabricated number regardless.

Stay stuck on stupid.

You showed me a diversion. You showed me Black slave owners in New Orleans which had nada to do with the fact that slave owners were by the vast majority white people here in the states. Your admission that you deflected is telling. .

It's called an example you retarded fuck.

An example of what?

Diversion?

That blacks disproportionately owned slaves dumbass.

Are you two twins?

 

[ClosedCaption]

I see now we've gone past the topic and into the land of deflection.

If I spoke about Pecan Pie no one would bring up where Pecan Trees came from. But mention something about blacks in America and we get the same tired ol "but there were black slave owners" "why didnt blacks go back to Africa after we removed them from it for generation after generation?"
"Why are Hip Hop?"

Well you can't have one and not mention the other. Why do facts freak you out so much?

Diversion. Pecan trees arent the topic...Pecan Pie is

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Your comparing apples to oranges.

It's true that every free man whether he's black or white had a head start over those enslaved. It's true that those of wealth had an edge over those that were poor regardless of skin tone.

What I fail to understand is how the events that happened 150 years ago can be attributed to what is happening today. My theory is that for whatever reason blacks refuse to move on from the past. They seem to think they way Assclapius does and that is that the plight of the black man today is connected to the events of the past and the evil white man.. Forgetting it was the white man that ultimately freed the slaves from bondage.

Build on that understanding displayed in your second paragraph. Take the next step in logical thinking. If the majority of the wealthy an non enslaved had a head start what does that do for their descendants? Now take that a step further. Those descendants have it even better and the descendants of those enlsaved and poor have it the same or worse. Add in that the descendants of the enslaved and poor are still being repressed. Is this making sense to you?

It does nothing unless they allow it to be a crutch. Which is what most, like yourself has chose to do.

Your argument is silly to begin with.

By the way, if the US was so bad then why didn't the majority of blacks go back to Africa when given the opportunity? The fact that so few availed themselves of the opportunity or heeded the exhortations of Marcus Garvey reflects the reality that descendants of slaves were better off remaining in the US.

So willful ignorance is again your response and you also tacked on a diversion again?

The majority of Blacks didnt go back to Africa for a couple of reasons ranging from being brainwashed into believing they would be going back to a jungle all the way up to people staying because they felt that they rightfully were owed the privilege of being a US citizen considering they are the ones that built the US into an economic power.

You don't think very highly of your race.

You dont think very highly of your race.

There's an apostrophe in the word "don't".

You're welcome.

 

[Asclepias]

The mass majority of slave owners were white. Its probably in the figure of 99.9%

The first slave owner in the 13 colonies was a black man - sploogy. He started the whole thing.

Hugh Gwyn was not Black. Get your fact straight son or risk being embarrassed. Even if that were true what does that have to do with the majority of slave owners being white?

Try again sploogy.

America 8217 s first slave owner was a black man.

I'll up your diversion and do you one better. You are a perfect example of a willfully ignorant white boy.

John Punch slave - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

For this reason, historians consider John Punch the "first official slave in the English colonies,"[4] and his case as the "first legal sanctioning of lifelong slavery in the Chesapeake."[5] Historians also consider this to be one of the first legal distinctions between Europeans and Africans made in the colony,[6] and his case a key milestone in the development of the institution of slavery in the United States.[

I be the next thing you are going to claim is that slavery is illegal in the US.

 

[ClosedCaption]

If it meant nothing why did you deflect then?

Dude I called you number bullshit from the start. I showed you verifiable stats that wasn't pulled out of thin air hoping you would do likewise. But I see you're going to stick with your fabricated number regardless.

Stay stuck on stupid.

You showed me a diversion. You showed me Black slave owners in New Orleans which had nada to do with the fact that slave owners were by the vast majority white people here in the states. Your admission that you deflected is telling. .

It's called an example you retarded fuck.

An example of what?

Diversion?

That blacks disproportionately owned slaves dumbass.

Are you two twins?

I think you're using that word wrong

 

[Asclepias]

Build on that understanding displayed in your second paragraph. Take the next step in logical thinking. If the majority of the wealthy an non enslaved had a head start what does that do for their descendants? Now take that a step further. Those descendants have it even better and the descendants of those enlsaved and poor have it the same or worse. Add in that the descendants of the enslaved and poor are still being repressed. Is this making sense to you?

It does nothing unless they allow it to be a crutch. Which is what most, like yourself has chose to do.

Your argument is silly to begin with.

By the way, if the US was so bad then why didn't the majority of blacks go back to Africa when given the opportunity? The fact that so few availed themselves of the opportunity or heeded the exhortations of Marcus Garvey reflects the reality that descendants of slaves were better off remaining in the US.

So willful ignorance is again your response and you also tacked on a diversion again?

The majority of Blacks didnt go back to Africa for a couple of reasons ranging from being brainwashed into believing they would be going back to a jungle all the way up to people staying because they felt that they rightfully were owed the privilege of being a US citizen considering they are the ones that built the US into an economic power.

You don't think very highly of your race.

You dont think very highly of your race.

There's an apostrophe in the word "don't".

You're welcome.

More diversions? That was a pretty weak one.

 

[Uncensored2008]

You dont think very highly of your race.

The Human race?

Well, with members like you in it, it does sort of skew opinions...

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Question is, why aren't you worried about it?

Because crime to me is bad and skin color doesnt fall into the equation. But for Matthew (and you excusing it apparently) skin color is more important than crime

It's not skin color as much as it is a culture.

Tomato Tomahto....Just a coincidence that culture all have the same skin color.

You're not concerned about it either way. Why is that?

Huh? I just told you I was Matthew only cares about black crime. Why?

Maybe it's because it's two to three times higher than that of white crime. Maybe he lives in a black neighborhood and it worries him. Personally I would think most blacks would be more concerned about it, but they aren't. They just sit back and blame it all on whitey as if that excuses it.

 

[Asclepias]

You dont think very highly of your race.

The Human race?

Well, with members like you in it, it does sort of skew opinions...

No the white race. Both you and lonestar being an example of what having too much neanderthal DNA does to the gene pool.