Whites Should Not Be Forced To Live With Non-Whites

[Unkotare]

Thats because you are stupid. Why waste time and resources trading when you can give a snitch a bottle of rum and capture a whole village?

It would take far more time and resources to hire, equip, feed, and move an armed force into the interior of a country (or a continent) and find, engage, restrain, and then transport large numbers of prisoners than to make a deal with one guy right there in port who then provides the 'commodity' (however evil it is to refer to human beings as such) in the number you need, already restrained and most likely pacified to a degree (be it through physical violence or the withholding of food and water). This would also involve less risk and uncertainty. Thus, it would be "financially smarter and less time consuming."

You are almost as illogical as Lonelystar_Illogical.

Actually it wouldn't. You think like people in that you don't understand process and history. Portuguese built trust with locals and traded with them. Turncoats and snitches were recruited. Colonies were established by the Portuguese. Once there they used snitches and turncoats that also served as help when attacking villages. These people had guns. You are a clown if you think I'm saying they marched into central Africa. They raided villages up and down the west coast of Africa and in inland in areas they gained a foot hold. I already said I know that other Africans sold or traded their people. However if you expect someone to believe that white people just hung out on the beach for 300 years and had slaves delivered to them that wanted to go on vacation to the US you are nuts.

Here we see both your stupidity and dishonesty on display yet again. I didn't say anything about those things above to which you wanted to respond. I merely pointed out the error of your proposition in general, which is how you posited it.

 

[Asclepias]

It would take far more time and resources to hire, equip, feed, and move an armed force into the interior of a country (or a continent) and find, engage, restrain, and then transport large numbers of prisoners than to make a deal with one guy right there in port who then provides the 'commodity' (however evil it is to refer to human beings as such) in the number you need, already restrained and most likely pacified to a degree (be it through physical violence or the withholding of food and water). This would also involve less risk and uncertainty. Thus, it would be "financially smarter and less time consuming."

You are almost as illogical as Lonelystar_Illogical.

Actually it wouldn't. You think like people in that you don't understand process and history. Portuguese built trust with locals and traded with them. Turncoats and snitches were recruited. Colonies were established by the Portuguese. Once there they used snitches and turncoats that also served as help when attacking villages. These people had guns. You are a clown if you think I'm saying they marched into central Africa. They raided villages up and down the west coast of Africa and in inland in areas they gained a foot hold. I already said I know that other Africans sold or traded their people. However if you expect someone to believe that white people just hung out on the beach for 300 years and had slaves delivered to them that wanted to go on vacation to the US you are nuts.

Here we see both your stupidity and dishonesty on display yet again. I didn't say anything about those things above to which you wanted to respond. I merely pointed out the error of your proposition in general, which is how you posited it.

How can you point out anyones error when you are the one thats wrong? Stop being a sheep and do some research. I'll help you a little. Look up Lancados and do the math. I honestly don't expect much from you but snide remarks but at least you can look for yourself.

 

[Unkotare]

Actually it wouldn't. You think like people in that you don't understand process and history. Portuguese built trust with locals and traded with them. Turncoats and snitches were recruited. Colonies were established by the Portuguese. Once there they used snitches and turncoats that also served as help when attacking villages. These people had guns. You are a clown if you think I'm saying they marched into central Africa. They raided villages up and down the west coast of Africa and in inland in areas they gained a foot hold. I already said I know that other Africans sold or traded their people. However if you expect someone to believe that white people just hung out on the beach for 300 years and had slaves delivered to them that wanted to go on vacation to the US you are nuts.

Here we see both your stupidity and dishonesty on display yet again. I didn't say anything about those things above to which you wanted to respond. I merely pointed out the error of your proposition in general, which is how you posited it.

How can you point out anyones error when you are the one thats wrong? .

You don't even understand what the hell I'm talking about. Let me try to help you: What exactly is it you think I'm wrong about?

 

[Nosmo King]

WHITES SHOULDN'T BE FORCED TO LIVE AMONG NON-WHITES - by H. Millard (c) 2013

Do you find the robe and the hood to be too restrictive so far as your movement and other fashion choices are concerned?

I suppose the old social construct of not wearing white after Labor Day is just passé too.

Is there a shorter version of the hood? I would think driving with that big point pressing up against the ceiling of you car might become bothersome.

 

[MikeK]

Fox is in no way credible. Please don't make me laugh.

I trust credible sources of information, such as responsible journalistic mediums which have not been shown to be biased in their editorial views (e.g., Fox "News.")

Please note that I preceded the above reference to Fox News with "e.g.," which is abbreviated exempli gratia, meaning, for example. In other words, I am saying Fox News is an outstanding example of a biased (untrustworthy) source. I apologize for not making it more clear. My oversight. I should have said, such as.

Yes Whites did decimate Naive Americans later after gaining a foothold. However prior to that they simply did not have the power and simply deceived them and built their trust. I was not talking about slavery. I was speaking to the method of gaining a foot hold and eventually exerting their power. A continent, nation, city, or villages most valuable resource is its people. So I totally disagree they took nothing of material value from Africa.

I speak with confidence because I know what I am talking about. You already said you only accept responsible sources like Fox . i typically don't waste time listing my sources on this message board because its sort of pointless when people have already told you that they will not accept those sources. I find it funny that the same people that have been shown to lie time and time again throughout history are considered "responsible" sources. I for one don't let others define my reality. I form my own opinions based on what I discover during research.

It is clear your mind is made up and you refuse to be influenced by historical facts. But I think you should give some thought to the fact that Africa is the very birthplace of slavery and that slavery flourishes there to this day. If you don't believe that I suggest you Google keywords: Slavery In Africa Today.

The simple fact is there never was any need for slave traders to venture to interior Africa because there was no shortage of predatory tribal chieftans who were eager to deliver their captives to the "slave castles" mentioned in an earlier message, which were conveniently situated in coastal regions.

To be even more specific, if you will follow my Google suggestion you will learn that in some parts of contemporary Africa you could purchase a human slave for the price of a tv set (The Sudan, for one example).

 

[Asclepias]

Here we see both your stupidity and dishonesty on display yet again. I didn't say anything about those things above to which you wanted to respond. I merely pointed out the error of your proposition in general, which is how you posited it.

How can you point out anyones error when you are the one thats wrong? .

You don't even understand what the hell I'm talking about. Let me try to help you: What exactly is it you think I'm wrong about?

Well thats a really stupid question. You just said I don't understand what you are talking about. However, I don know what I am talking about. White Europeans abducted Blacks from Africa and brought them over to the US. If they didn't want to live near Black people why would they do that?

 

[Michelle420]

Whites should be forced to live with non-whites and also forced to do non-whites laundry.

 

[Unkotare]

White Europeans abducted Blacks from Africa and brought them over to the US. If they didn't want to live near Black people why would they do that?

I knew you were gassing on without even understanding what I was talking about. I was not disputing or even addressing either of those things. Try to pay attention, moron.

 

[Asclepias]

White Europeans abducted Blacks from Africa and brought them over to the US. If they didn't want to live near Black people why would they do that?

I knew you were gassing on without even understanding what I was talking about. I was not disputing or even addressing either of those things. Try to pay attention, moron.

Then you are off topic. Get back on it and stop changing the subject.

 

[Unkotare]

White Europeans abducted Blacks from Africa and brought them over to the US. If they didn't want to live near Black people why would they do that?

I knew you were gassing on without even understanding what I was talking about. I was not disputing or even addressing either of those things. Try to pay attention, moron.

Then you are off topic. Get back on it and stop changing the subject.

Pay attention before opening your pie hole next time, fool.

 

[Asclepias]

I knew you were gassing on without even understanding what I was talking about. I was not disputing or even addressing either of those things. Try to pay attention, moron.

Then you are off topic. Get back on it and stop changing the subject.

Pay attention before opening your pie hole next time, fool.

Stay with the OP or dont comment clown.

 

[Unkotare]

Then you are off topic. Get back on it and stop changing the subject.

Pay attention before opening your pie hole next time, fool.

Stay with the OP or dont [sic] comment clown.

Pay attention next time and you won't make quite as much a fool of yourself, moron.

 

[TheBarber]

Pay attention before opening your pie hole next time, fool.

Stay with the OP or dont [sic] comment clown.

Pay attention next time and you won't make quite as much a fool of yourself, moron.

Are you two black guys arguing? Why?

 

[MikeK]

How can you point out anyones error when you are the one thats wrong? .

You don't even understand what the hell I'm talking about. Let me try to help you: What exactly is it you think I'm wrong about?

Well thats a really stupid question. You just said I don't understand what you are talking about. However, I don know what I am talking about. White Europeans abducted Blacks from Africa and brought them over to the US. If they didn't want to live near Black people why would they do that?

You need to purge yourself of this spurious justification for hating Whites. The fact is White Europeans did not abduct Blacks from Africa. Black African slaves were purchased by slave traders from other Black African tribesmen who kidnapped them.

Please don't take my word for that. It is easy enough to research.

Those Whites who participated in the slave trade deserve all the condemnation directed at them. But there is blame to be shared. So who would you say is more deserving of derision, the White European who bought a Black slave -- or the Black African who kidnapped and sold that other Black African into slavery?

Again; you can buy a Black African slave today (from other Black Africans). Not four hundred years ago. Today! Just go to The Sudan with a few hundred dollars.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Sudan

 

[Unkotare]

Stay with the OP or dont [sic] comment clown.

Pay attention next time and you won't make quite as much a fool of yourself, moron.

Are you two black guys arguing? Why?

Huh?

 

[Asclepias]

You don't even understand what the hell I'm talking about. Let me try to help you: What exactly is it you think I'm wrong about?

Well thats a really stupid question. You just said I don't understand what you are talking about. However, I don know what I am talking about. White Europeans abducted Blacks from Africa and brought them over to the US. If they didn't want to live near Black people why would they do that?

You need to purge yourself of this spurious justification for hating Whites. The fact is White Europeans did not abduct Blacks from Africa. Black African slaves were purchased by slave traders from other Black African tribesmen who kidnapped them.

Please don't take my word for that. It is easy enough to research.

Those Whites who participated in the slave trade deserve all the condemnation directed at them. But there is blame to be shared. So who would you say is more deserving of derision, the White European who bought a Black slave -- or the Black African who kidnapped and sold that other Black African into slavery?

Again; you can buy a Black African slave today (from other Black Africans). Not four hundred years ago. Today! Just go to The Sudan with a few hundred dollars.

Slavery in Sudan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I dont hate whites. Whites did abduct Africans from Africa. How many of them went willingly? If they didnt go willingly then they were abducted. I'm pretty sure you know what the word means so why are you saying they were not abducted?

None of the slaves were held for ransom so they could not have been kidnapped. Trust me that I am not taking your word. I have already researched. It appears you haven't or stopped at the first convenient claim you found to support your theory.

My post has nothing to do with blame. I am addressing the OP. My post has to do with the fact that whites abducted blacks and brought them to the US. If they didnt want to live around them they should have never brought them to the US. Why did they do that?

You can buy white slaves in Russia or any of the other European countries today. Whats your point? Europeans enslaved each other before the Trans-Atlantic slave trade. What does that have to do with the OP?

The Forgotten White Slaves Of America

One of the largest white slavery rings targetting Eastern Europeans goes down

 

[TheBarber]

Whites should not be forced to live with Asclepias, that would be cruel and unusual.

 

[Asclepias]

Whites should not be forced to live with Asclepias, that would be cruel and unusual.

I'm nowhere near as bad as people seem to think I am. I have white family members.

 

[MikeK]

I dont hate whites.

If you didn't harbor extreme, possibly subliminal, antagonism against Whites you would not be so determined to believe and to propagate this common distortion of the facts.

Whites did abduct Africans from Africa.

Whites did not abduct Black Africans. Black Africans abducted other Black Africans and sold them to Dutch, Portugese, and Arab slave traders who transported them to the Americas and sold them to White slave dealers.

How many of them went willingly? If they didnt go willingly then they were abducted.

Yes. They were abducted -- by other Black Africans, who sold them to slave traders.

I'm pretty sure you know what the word means so why are you saying they were not abducted?

Yes. I know what the word means. So do you. But the meaning doesn't accommodate your purpose, which is (self?) deception.

None of the slaves were held for ransom so they could not have been kidnapped. Trust me that I am not taking your word. I have already researched. It appears you haven't or stopped at the first convenient claim you found to support your theory.

Kidnapping and ransom are two separate things. Ransom is not always the motive for kidnapping someone.

My post has nothing to do with blame.

It has everything to do with blame.

Your obvious objective, whether conscious or not, is to absolve Blacks of any guilt where the practice of negro slavery in the Americas is concerned, and to shift all blame for that abomination onto Whites.

I am addressing the OP. My post has to do with the fact that whites abducted blacks and brought them to the US.

Your commentary seeks to convince this forum, and possibly yourself, that Black Africans played no part in the slave trade.

If they didnt want to live around them they should have never brought them to the US. Why did they do that?

That is a good question. The simple answer is those who engaged in the slave trade were concerned only with profit and had no interest in the social potential of their evil enterprise.

You can buy white slaves in Russia or any of the other European countries today. Whats your point?

Now you're resorting to semantic gimmickry.

The legal term, "white slavery," refers to verious forms of involuntary or coercive servitude being separate and apart from the enslavement of Black Africans in the Americas. In legal terminology, white slavery refers specifically to the transport, either voluntary or involuntary, of females, including non-White females, across borders or state lines for the purpose of prostitution. The term has nothing to do with the enslavement of Black Africans in the Americas -- which the the primary topic of this discussion.

Europeans enslaved each other before the Trans-Atlantic slave trade. What does that have to do with the OP?

The Forgotten White Slaves Of America

One of the largest white slavery rings targetting Eastern Europeans goes down

Not in the same manner or circumstance which occurred in the example of Black African slavery in the Americas. To understand the difference you need to research the separate circumstances of chattel slavery as opposed to indentured servitude. While both are referred to as forms of "slavery" there are extremely substantial differences.

 

[MisterBeale]

Whites should be forced to live with non-whites and also forced to do non-whites laundry.

They should desire to do that anyway. When you are in your youth, you should experience as much of the world, as many different aspects of it as possible.

While it is impossible to walk in some other persons shoes, empathy will be much more difficult if you limit your experiences in life to the predictable, comfortable, and familiar. This is not the way to acquire wisdom.