Quantcast
This website is a member of Liberty Alliance, which has been named as an company.

Race WarDr. Thomas Sowell, the intellectual juggernaut, recently concluded that a Black and White race war is in effect.

Sowell stated:

“Initial skirmishes in that race war have already begun, and have in fact been going on for some years. But public officials pretend that it is not happening, and the mainstream media seldom publish it at all, except in ways that conceal what is really taking place.”

The Peoples’ ColonelAllen West, echoed Dr. Sowell’s sentiment and further added: 

“We were supposed to be living in a post-racial America since we elected the first ‘African-American’ president. That’s hardly the case.”

Even though these gentlemen are demonized in the Black community for not being Grievance Industry members or stockholders, I respect them tremendously. They are straight-shooting realists, and as Black men, understand that racial solidarity shouldn’t supersede critical thinking.

Moreover, Sowell and West want to do what’s right for America instead of what’s best for a few Americans.

Despite my admiration, I disagree with their assessment that the continued Black-on-White violence indicates a present or future race war.

A race war requires at least two engaging races: the reoccurring Black/White intra-racial violence is overwhelmingly one-sided (Black). 

Seemingly, since the Zimmerman acquittal, this lopsided dynamic of Blacks attacking Whites has become more noticeable. The latest victim was an 87-year-old WWII veteran who was fatally assaulted last week and robbed in his driveway by four Black teens.

Still, I maintain that it’s not a race war.

It’s payback. And it has been happening for decades.

critical race theoryThis payback is encouraged by the victimization mindset that’s deeply rooted in the Black community. Analogous to Critical Race Theory, which is taught in many schools, this mindset instills the notion of racism being so pervasive that no amount of individual effort can overcome it.

Additionally, Whites are branded as universal oppressors who consistently use institutionalized racism as a weapon of mass (Black) destruction. Thus, any Black-on-White offense is regarded as payback for White persecution, and the crime may even be excused as P.T.S.D (Post Traumatic Slavery Disorder).

Actor Jamie Foxx exemplified this mindset while promoting his movie (Django). He joyously proclaimed:

“I kill all the white people in the movie. How great is that? And how black is that?”

Imagine a White actor saying, “I get to whip Black people in the movie. How great is that?”

Django-Unchained-2-600x350Even the White liberals who proudly display their “Hope & Change” bumper stickers and “Justice for Trayvon” sympathies can’t escape the perception that Whites are inherently racist. In fact, White liberals are viewed as Whites who simply internalize their racism, whereas White conservatives are considered shamelessly racist.

Either way, the victimization mentality emphasizes that “good and bad” Whites are simply opposite sides of the same racist coin.

Naturally, the Black-on-White paybacks rarely receive condemnation from the Black community, Black Press, Oval Office, or Grievance Gurus. Any form of denunciation will quickly lead to the questioning of one’s “blackness.”

Undoubtedly, White resistance is surfacing. I believe that this observation sparked Dr. Sowell’s article. However, this mounting White backlash isn’t a violent endeavor; it’s an awareness campaign and shedding of White Guilt.

The timely book, White Girl Bleed A Lot’: The Return of Racial Violence to America and How the Media Ignore It,” which was referenced by Sowell and West, correctly categorized this phenomenon as racial violence. Indeed, it is racial violence, and author Colin Flaherty documents hundreds of violent episodes and notes the mainstream media’s deliberate silence about these crimes.

Allen WestI’m not surprised that the mainstream media conveniently overlooks this pattern of racial violence. After all, it conflicts with their portrayal of Blacks as permanent victims who are incapable of being aggressors against Whites. Once again, the mainstream media is spitting at the public and reporting it as rain.

Dr. Sowell said that he was appreciative that old age may spare him from seeing a race war. I say, enjoy the remainder of your earthly time because there is not, and will not be a race war. Besides, a 63% White population versus a 13% Black population would be more of a slaughter than war.

Hopefully, Dr. Sowell will live long enough to see Allen West run on a presidential ticket.

*****************************************************

Read more about the criminal subculture that exists within the Black community here.

Follow @TaleebStarkes on Twitter

 

 

It's FINALLY HERE!
Kevin Jackson's hilarious take on Race-Pimping: The Multi-Trillion Dollar Business of Liberalism!

Enjoy this excerpt from the book:

"The money in diversity is enormous, even bigger than former sportscaster turned political pundit turned sportscaster Keith Olbermann’s ego. Wouldn’t you like to be a “reverend” and father children out of wedlock without repercussions? If you study hard, this book will teach you how to have your non-profit organization pay your mistress and your child support – all at the same time. You must be so black that if you eat sushi, watch reruns of Dawson’s Creek and Friends, or enjoy the ballet, you will hang yourself."

Pre-Order Now!
 
Posting Policy
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more.

  • tate ellison

    I’m afraid of backlash for even thinking of posting this.

  • grama18

    I geuss I will have to start carrying a weapon since I am 71 And 5′ 1″.. It would be easy to kill or hurt me.. But I do my best to avoid any area that would be bad for my health..

    • RockyMtn1776

      Don’t blacks realize they are only about 13% of the total population of America ? Talk about out numbered ! Unless….something else is in the wind. My guess is Obama wants a race war so he can declare martial law and go after everyone’s guns. If he does this, he will no doubt call in UN troops for help. That’s when it is going to get ugly…REAL ugly !

      • CaMaven

        The UN can’t even successfully occupy or peace keep in minor provinces of third world countries. How d’ya think they’d do here?

        • Loyal

          They will do fine, with the tanks, planes, choppers, and army You and I bought for them. Sad huh?

  • answer1776

    Everything about this administration is a lie. Rather than ending what racial tensions we had, the Democrat Party creates racial division, under the false label of “diversity”.

  • azbear166

    You know I spent some years in the Army and they always said there was 1 color that was Green well if you wanted to know who was who the blacks would call the n—s a n—-but I got along with 99% of everyone well I know a lot of white N—–rs as many black and a lot of people couldn’t understand it well obummer is looking for any reason to take our guns and why not a race war half of this rap crap the kids listen to and crap they watch like the kardasions what happened to good old tv or music!! so if you all can’t get along live with your own color and leave each other alone!!

  • Ken

    the sadness of this is many faceted. First there are many good black people. Next the blacks who are lashing out are not without hope but are being led by the wrong people. I don’t believe in victim Mentality, but many young blacks don’t have the strong father image leading them the right way. People giving them dreams and sadly this is not just the black community anymore.
    We cannot let the mass murderers, the pedophiles and the gangbangers run the show and you want to know the common thread. They are all liberals. They all want to try and prove that they are better than the dominant society that made this country great. Really all they are besides liberal democrats is selfish assholes. Sadly out of fairness we let them have a shot at the top and now we have a mess that will take 50+ years to clean up.

    • delahaya

      Amen. I have often thought how incredibly hard it must be for all the incredible, dignified, hard-working black Americans to see so many brothers and sisters living in ignorance, hatred and crime.

  • Thomas Laman

    Perpetuated by the Democratic party and the Bonzo regime.

  • RIC54

    Thank you mr. Obama for dividing the country before you enslave the people.

  • Tradecraft46

    I doubt if there will be a full blown or even half-blown race war. The problem is now, that the majority will simply decide that the other side doesn’t count, and break their rice bowl as it were. On top of that we will see the majority simply cutting ties of human concern and the results of that are worse than an honest fight.

  • CaMaven

    I’m not at all interested in a race war, but its specific perpetrators and enablers, such as Obama, Sharpton, Jackson, Pelosi, Jones, Holder, Obama, etc,, should be aggressively punished.

  • djmdgo

    Why is it that these self professed “experts” (Sowell and West are the real deal, not phony mouthpieces) never, ever go back to the root of slavery? The fact that it was other BLACKS who captured blacks and sold them to slavers? And notice how very carefully the dems refuse to admit that it was THEIR party who were the slavers, THEIR party who fought to protect the ownership of other human beings, THEIR party in which the KKK was begun, and the Repubs, who were the orginal abolitionist party?? As long as dirt bags like Sharpton and Jackson, (not to mention the racist in chief) are making mega bucks off of using their own people as pawns…guarenteed it’s going to get worse.

    • Mike Eaton

      Yes, blacks are still selling blacks into slavery! They are a slave to the race baiters, a slave to the entitlement party(Demoncraps), and a slave to the thug gangs of their own people. History isn’t just repeating itself, it has been this way all along! Blacks being sold out by blacks!

  • doza

    Let the slaughter begin.

  • ed rosa

    I drive daily through a black neighborhood and patron the local 7-11. I enjoy going to the store because it reminds me of the neighborhood where I grew up. Like George Zimmer, I am a fluent English speaking hispanic and with all the shouts of “racism” against him made me wonder if it was wrong for me to feel so “at home” in that neighborhood, in that 7-11…

  • djmdgo

    Sadly the ones who get the most shredding, screamed at and attacked are black Conservatives! The racism within the black community is a puzzling enigma in that conservative blacks have the audacity to try and educate others who have no clue and apparently don’t want one.

    • athrillofhope

      Agreed. I am a white conservative Christian male, also one of the most discriminated against social groups in the nation. The one social group that is more discriminated against than white conservative Christian males are BLACK conservative Christian males. My heart goes out to these outstanding men of character who stand for truth.

      The more the winds of hate blow, the higher the flames of truth are fanned.

      • djmdgo

        The white male of European decent has been on the endangered species list for some time. When the so-called ‘feminist movement’ ( or as Rush put it so eloquently, the “feminazis) started ramping up in the 70’s white males got clobbered just for being what they were.
        If they were gentlemen they got hammered for that, if they just tried to stay out of the range of fire, they got blasted for that…whatever they did was wrong. Sheesh, it’s a marvel any still exist!

        • athrillofhope

          Here’s where it gets weird: this “divide and conquer” method was funded by BIG MONEY in order to bring down our society. It took the form of the so-called “feminism movement”, “multi-culturalism”, “gay-marriage movement”, “environmentalism”, etc … ALL of these movements were either seeded by Big Money (Rockefellers, Rothschilds, etc … this is documented) or were legitimate movements hi-jacked/purchased by them.

          It is much easier to raid the Treasury, stamp out competition to the money, and reduce the world’s population to “manageable levels” if you keep the “masses” divided and fighting each other. Whether it’s fighting over “sexual equality”, “racial equality”, “sexual preference equality”, etc … does not matter.

          • sandraleesmith46

            Exactly! And they’ve succeeded admirably in doing so for decades, to give credit where it’s due; but their end-game is to wipe some 6 1/2 billions of us off the face of the Earth permanently.

        • go4it

          My mother, grand-mother and two sisters helped make me strong! Dad taught me how to shoot.

          Ready …..

      • go4it

        Well stated! Good words of wisdom.

    • delahaya

      Liberals will move heaven and earth to not only keep black conservatives from being elected, but to try and destroy them personally. You have not seen hard, naked racism until you’ve been on the campaign of a black conservative. Then ironically, these same liberals go “why are there so few black GOP officeholders?” Hypocrites.

  • Dr. Death

    The first girl I ever fell for was half black. Her mom was Jewish, and her dad a doctor who happened to be a black man. Growing up in Los Angeles made it almost impossible to be a racist, but it bit me about a week ago:
    I am confined to a wheelchair, and was waiting for my wife to pick me up from Kaiser Hospital on Edgemont and Sunset Blvd. A nice black family passed me in the waiting room, and after about ten minutes a big black kid, about six four, comes in to the waiting room and gives me a hard look. I thought noting of it, but moved so my chair was butted up against a wall.
    After about 20 minutes the black family came out, and sure enough the big black kid follows about ten minutes later, and knocks my transfer board off my lap when he goes by. He then picks up the sturdy wooden board, and in a threatening manner said “better watch yo’ ass, cracker.”
    Little did my new found friend know that I have a CCW and was packing a .38 special Charter Arms detective special in my coat. All I had to do was reach into my pocket, and my interloper tossed the board on the floor, and walked out the automatic door muttering something about white devils.
    It has begun, don’t leave home without it. How sad, all my black friends in school, some of them best friends, are now are the enemy. Someone is making big $$$$ over racism.

  • athrillofhope

    Here is an opportunity to make things right: as this payback occurs, whites have a chance to FORGIVE and NOT retaliate. LOVE the black community and refuse to lower oneself to this level of hatred, vengeance and self-interest.

    Sadly, this opportunity to rise above and forgive was presented during the 1960s per the Civil Rights Movement. However, the so-called self-proclaimed “black leaders” were out for blood instead of truly eradicating racism as a social norm.

    So here we are: whites now are presented with a fork in the road–to truly eradicate racism from society as fueled by a “tit-for-tat” mentality, or continue down this Satanic path to societal destruction. My prayer is that God may heal our land despite the demonic political powers that are present and that Americans, finally, choose to forgive and allow our past to be healed.

    • Thomas Mrak

      I see a similar militant mindset amongst some of the gay rights activists. That is why, in spite of being gay myself, I refuse to support the way in which they operate.

      The gay rights movement is not as openly violent, but the mentality and justifications for bullying those who don’t agree 100% is very similar.

      I choose to deal with others on a personal level where possible, and while I have not converted many Christian Conservatives to my cause, we all agree that live and let live is the most logical and beneficial way in many instances.

      That is all anyone should aim for, not disabling one group while propping up another to remedy past hurts, which can never be undone.

    • REK

      forgive what most whites are immigrants that came to this country long after slavery and had to make our way in life, let them do the same, you appreciate it more when you earn your own way and not handed everything.

      What should we pick out white people for them to terrorize to make it easier for them, no you have to put down a rabid dog. you cant have savages in a civilized society PERIOD.

      • athrillofhope

        Agreed–most white folks–myself included–have no ancestors who ever owned a slave. I am of Sicilian descent on my father’s side, and Irish on my mother’s (my son bought me a T-shirt that says “WARNING: Irish temper and Italian attitude!” ;0))). Point is: both of these ethnic groups were targets of hatred for decades and decades after their arrival in Ellis Island.

        Here’s something to consider: the so-called “liberal” establishment would counter your notion that there is nothing for “most whites” to be forgiven for by saying that most white benefited from being white in the United States, while non-whites could not “benefit” in the same way.

        I do not necessarily agree with this “liberal comeback”, but this is what they would say. It is, at best, a murky, non-empirical statement built more on Marxist economic and social theory than reality. However, to them it is REAL. The anger they foment in society is also REAL.

        My original point is this: do not perpetuate this pattern of race-baiting that only empowers the Marxist and Neo-Fascist Global Elites and their World Bankers (who love to market themselves as “liberals” and “progressives”–how quaint). Whether or not you actually need to forgive or even be forgiven is not the point. Just end the pattern, end the engagement on the level of hate. Let go of being “wronged” or “right”.

        That’s all.

  • athrillofhope

    Just a comment on this concept of “payback”: using this logic to justify immoral behavior, can someone, then, who is an ancestor to a Holocaust victim go to Germany and start shooting Germans in the head? Would this be “justified”? Using the logic of those chanting “payback” as their “justification”, the answer would be YES.

    • sandraleesmith46

      I hope you mean a descendent, because if the ancestors start getting up out of their graves and executing pay back that’s going to get REALLY weird!

      • athrillofhope

        Um, yes, of course–I meant to say that is someone “who HAS ancestors who were Holocaust victims” … but my mind worked against what I was typing … if you get my drift.

        Yes, then, I should have written: ” … can someone … who is a descendant of a Holocaust victim …”. Thank you. I trust most folks realized what I was saying. :)

        • sandraleesmith46

          I thought that was what you meant, but just imagine the havoc that’d cause, if the ancestors did go after retribution. That cephalo-digital interface can be a problem at times I hope most did realize that too. :-)

  • Brontefan

    The reason we are not living in a post-racial America is because the tone of the nation which is being set by the Marxist in the WH, is decidedly racist and anti-white. It is pro-Muslim and anti-Christian. And it is the president’s tone and lack of civility that sets the IRS and EPA employees up to target conservatives. This is the first time in my life that my president came out and stated on TV that I am “the enemy.” I think we know why he did that.. to push the racial divide even harder.

    • Thomas Mrak

      I agree with you somewhat. What I see is Political Correctness run amok.

      If you don’t agree 100% with the Professional Intellectuals, entrepreneurs who use PC rhetoric to manipulate people into supporting them rather than doing something worthy of support, politicians who claim to know what is best for other people, and the millions of middle class and poor people who blindly follow them because they’re looking for a handout, you are ostracized regardless of the values you hold.

  • miprecinct9

    My simple answer. Treat each to their deeds. Reciprocate in kind. Should you be shown kindness and good will, be receptive and return in kind. But if you are shown violence and ill intent, exercise your natural right to defend, even to the death, your right to self preservation. It is also my opinion, that Barak Obama, is willfully and purposely trying to drive a wedge, between the two racial groups. He has publicly called me the enemy. Simply because I disagree with his world view, his enabling of violent Muslins and his Marxist, Fascist agendas.

    • Fred Hedrick

      I agree whole heartedly. Treat me with kindness and respect, and I will reciprocate. Treat me with disdain and malace, and, at some point, I may be forced to reciprocate. I will be slow to do so, but know in advance, I will NOT be made a victim, nor, will I stand by and witness someone else being made a victim, REGARDLESS of RACE.

      • Thomas Mrak

        I think the same way. I grew up in a Union family. Both my parents are white and while we were never rich, we were far better off than many people.

        But, the attitude many poor and lower middle class blacks have was the same- “Poor me! The evil, rich white people aren’t giving me a break and taking care of my finances, my health and my family”.

        I lived in Philadelphia for awhile, and witnessed genuine poverty firsthand. It’s more noticeable in densely populated cities, since there isn’t as much open space separating various Social groups geographically.

        Poor and lower middle Class Liberals of any ethnicity would rather pull their friends, family, and colleagues down to Hell with them than be supportive in helping people escape.

  • REDRUM777

    PTSD!! Great, Taleeb!

  • William556

    Those are the total percentages in the US. However, I don’t think nearly that many will actually engage in the fighting, probably well under half of each. It is also possible that in many areas there might be crossover with some blacks and whites fighting against their own. I can’t imagine white liberals doing anything but.

  • jlp5871

    LOCK AND LOAD LOCK AND LOAD LOCK AND LOAD….. ANY ONE WHOI S NOT ARMED BY NOW MUST BE A DEMOC-RAT- WHICH IS GOOD NEWS DEMOC-RATS SHOULD NOT OWN ANY WEAPONS .. I’M SURE A N THUG WILL LET A DEMOC-RAT= SAFE PASSAGE,HEHEHEHEHEH.

  • Thomas Mrak

    The concept of race doesn’t make any rational sense. It appears to be the invention of those who would justify the destruction of another life to justify their own comfort.

    Because someone’s ancestors lived in a environment and have a gene pool different than another’s they are somehow some strange “other” that is to be feared.

    Instead of one’s skin color and ethnicity being a part of their own personal, and cultural history, they are pigeonholed into a specific role decided by other human beings- usually people claiming “compassion” and “knowing what’s best”.

    Liberal “compassion” needs to be seen for what it is- Authoritarian and Totalitarian values packaged in such a way as to be more palatable and acceptable to the general public.

    There are indeed bigoted people in today’s world- but we can’t legislate it away or continue to push public relations campaign preaching “you have to tolerate everyone’s differences and behavior, or you’re a monster”.

    People engage in behavior that is detrimental to the lives of others, and people have a right to tell another human being that they will not tolerate being abused. Political correctness encourages people to use their victimhood as an excuse to behave like a spoiled child who had their toys taken away as punishment.

    We are robbing people of their dignity, ability to resolve conflict, develop negotiation skills, self-determination, and replacing it with “it’s never your fault, the evil rich white Conservative people rigged everything against you.”

    Slavery may have gone away, but the Master and Slave mentality- victim and abuser- runs rampant. One must only spend a few minutes around poor and lower middle class people, especially in the inner city or former industrial paradises to see this mentality at work.

    While it appears to be a race issue, there are plenty of whites with the same mindset. However, it is considered culturally acceptable to encourage black people to continue to victimize themselves.

    Fostering this mentality in people continues to ensure the dynamic continues through generations. As this is mutually beneficial in a very negative way to exploiter and exploited, it will not stop unless individual people take it upon themselves to do so.

  • Jim

    The cowards only attack the elderly and the handicapped. They won’t attack one on one. It is time for White people to arm and defend themselves. Don’t aim to wound, aim to kill.

  • http://drudgereport.com/ Myles Standish

    Thank GOD for Dr. Thomas Sowell. A level-headed, brilliant man who has excelled because he believed in himself and the fact that the American dream is attainable by those who seek knowledge and who go to school to learn; who strive to stay on the straight and narrow; who don’t look for excuses to fail; who pick their friends wisely; who aren’t afraid of hard work; who never give up; who don’t take “no” for an answer; and in Dr. Sowell’s particular case — chose to ignore hustlers and oppressors like Sharpton and Jackson, to name only two.

  • DMG

    It’s time for the white 77.9% of the us population to re-direct anger back at the

    publically racially prejudice blacks

    USA Populations : http: / / quickfacts. census. gov / qfd/ states/ 00000. html

    White alone, percent, 2012 77.9%

    Black or African American alone, percent, 2012 13.1%

    These idiot blacks better start getting their facts straight about white people strength in the USA today

    and how sissy these foolish blacks look publically to complain about whites calling them what they call themselves and that blacks use “WHITE CRACKER ASS” comments back at 77.9% of the population.

    This black cowardliness is not going to last much longer. There time is up! Same with the muslims!

    puapuapua and all: Since that totally jack a*s lying directly by Barack Obama, Eric Holder, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Oprah Winfrey the NAACP and all the other black hate crime commiters race baiters being black calling George Zimmerman a white racists whose own mother is half black. We will not quit till we fully break break these black racists hate crime commiters and they publicly confess to their criminal lying tactics against the white race and admit defeat and totally stop all this. Then the black people have to publicly show themselves going into their own black communities and correcting the way the black people who are committing all these crimes and bring this into a controllable and accepted life style!

    Again you liberal left i-diot. We have all accepted you don’t have a brain and will not ever be able to learn anything, like saying you have the brain of an armadillo….

    All people who back the NRA – mostly white ( males and females ) all have licenses, background checks, law enforcement, military, non felons, law abiding, educated and use guns for hunting animals in hunting season or for self defense and usually are republican conservative heterosexual Christians who live clean worthwhile lives by being a plus to society.

    Those kids and treyvon martin and obama, eric holder, al sharpton, jesse jackson, oprah winfrey, naacp and all other mostly black kids killing black kids, white kids and anyone else they can when they are bored do not meet these requirements— .have licenses, background checks, law enforcement, military, non felons, law abiding, educated and use guns for hunting animals in hunting season or for self defense and usually are republican conservative heterosexual Christians who live clean worthwhile life by being a plus to society.

    The NRA and all stand your ground laws are backed by all law enforcement and judges. It protects innocent people with legal guns and licenses from these criminals with illegal guns who just want to murder…

    • athrillofhope

      This comes across as a threat. Please consider your words and the impact they have on innocent people caught in this social mess. Speak the truth IN LOVE. Remember what the Apostle Paul wrote, that truth without love is NOTHING, and that the “.. the greatest … is LOVE”.

      You can murder someone with the truth, you know. Love is not mindless–rather, love opens the mind to decipher the truth and to accept it VOLUNTARILY. Free-will makes love possible.

      An issue with the current political climate is that critical debate is not allowed and the leftist viewpoint is being shoved down our throats BY FORCE–against our wills.

      Please do not lower yourself to their level.

      • anarchyst

        I (partially) agree with you–however, the only thing a criminal thug or gang banger understands is FORCE. I believe that all life is valuable. However, when a person CHOOSES to harm another by criminal activity, his life IS subject to forfeiture. In this way, GOOD triumphs over EVIL.

        You state that DMG’s statement comes across as a threat–DAMN RIGHT it’s a threat. Not against innocent people, but against those who would do ALL DECENT PEOPLE harm.

        Best regards

        • athrillofhope

          Well, thanks for the clarification. I am no pacifist, to be sure, nor want to pretend to be. However, innocence must be respected above most else. Self-defense is a just rationale.

      • DMG

        Apostle paul was a murderer and a worthless person in a prehistoric times when people were dumb as rocks and doing opium and mushrooms for the hallucinogenic effects and what they saw they called talking to god. Most if not all God writings back them were just fireside chats made up stories for themselves to sound important to others in the crowd. No one knows who any of these people were that wrote these false stories.

        Now show how strong you really are and read this article to the end and copy and paste one at a time the below http web sites and read and view the videos of the people obama wants to arm. These same people will be attacked and shot dead here in the USA!!!

        From the Fides News Agency (news agency of the Vatican)

        On Sunday, June 23 the Syrian priest François Murad was killed in Gassanieh,

        in northern Syria, in the convent of the Custody of the Holy Land where he had taken refuge.

        This is confirmed by a statement of the Custos of the Holy Land sent to Fides Agency.

        The circumstances of the death are not fully understood. According to local sources,

        the monastery where Fr. Murad was staying was attacked by militants linked to the jihadi group Jabhat al-Nusra.

        Father François, 49, had taken the first steps in the religious life with the Franciscan Friars of the Custody of the Holy Land,

        and with them he continued to share close bonds of spiritual friendship.

        After being ordained a priest he had started the construction of a coenobitic monastery dedicated to St. Simon Stylites

        in the village of Gassanieh.After the start of the Civil War, the monastery of St. Simon had been bombed and

        Fr. Murad had moved to the convent of the Custody for safety reasons and to give support to the remaining few,

        along with another religious and nuns of the Rosary.

        “Let us pray,” writes the Custos of the Holy Land Pierbattista Pizzaballa OFM ” so that this absurd and

        shameful war ends soon and that the people of Syria can go back to living a normal life.”

        Archbishop Jacques Behnan Hindo, titular of the Syrian Catholic archeparchy in Hassaké-Nisibis

        reports to Fides: “The whole story of Christians in the Middle East is marked and made fruitful by the blood of the martyrs of many persecutions.

        Lately, father Murad sent me some messages that clearly showed how conscious he was of living in a dangerous situation,

        and offered his life for peace in Syria and around the world. ” .

        Just copy and paste and delete the spaces. The spaces stop discus and newsmax from doing an obama and nsa on these true articles.

        http :// www. news. va/ en/ news/ asiasyria-a-catholic-priest-killed-bishop-hindo-he

        Read more at http :// http://www.liveleak. com/view?i=ead_1372329728#WQdCOOEOYjA3T1au.99

        • athrillofhope

          Well, if you insist on lowering yourself to primate levels, then you become a part of the problem, as you play into the Globalists’ designs to keep people focused on each other, fighting against each other.

          I see that your regards for Scripture, God, and Satan relegate you to the ranks of ignorant on the topic, but I will make my statement anyway: this is a war all right, but a war between God and Satan. Human beings are but a pawn in this cosmic drama. One of Satan’s greatest deceptions is clearly enunciated by you: that Scripture is but cavemen drawings.

          Any scholarship on this topic quickly reveals the authenticity and accuracy of everything in the Bible as confirmed. Everything. Archaeologically, historically, empirically, even scientifically: these disciplines do not contradict anything in Scripture whatsoever. In fact, they often confirm Scripture.

          But they never contradict it, your musings notwithstanding.

          In closing, I would challenge you, for your own eternal good, to question your beliefs. What do you base your view of God, Scripture, the spiritual realm on? What factual evidence do you use to claim that the Scriptures are mere “hallucinations”? Your opinion is hardly “evidence”.

          Sadly, it is ignorance like yours that allows the leftists to paint a picture of conservatives.

          • DMG

            A first hand lie; no scholarship on this topic ever revealed the authenticity and accuracy of everything in the Bible as confirmed. Just the opposite – The bivble and torah are supposed to equal but where the first writings in the torah had the babylon king killing the jewish people in the old testament, the bible over 1000 years later changed the babylonian king to satan.

            Adam and Eve – where is Lilith – she is in the torah but intentionally re-written out of the bible.

            Adam and Eve had Cain and Abel – 4 people on earth. 3 males and 1 female. They are all dressed in animal skins. Cain kill’s Abel. 2 males 1 female. cain is driven out and knew his wife ( His who ??? ) Cain and 1 female create a city of many people and are not in animal skins but in cloth. Lott and his wife and daughters who are to know better live in a homosexual city. ( Angels are spirits and don’t need food ever, these ones ate with Abraham and Lott ) Not Spirits at all. Lott told to take his family and leave – He is a God’s favorite. The 4 of them Lott – 2 daughters and wife run up a hill away from the boom boom. Don’t look back –

            Lot’s wife looks back and turns into a pillar of salt. Lott and daughters ignore her and run up into a cave where luckily they brought all the wine they needed. Lot gets drunk has sex with his daughters and gets them pregnant so they can become a very close family with no remorse for ma the pillar of salt. There is so much BS in those goofball books – the only things proven is that there were cities there but the events never were proven. How does a male and female populate the world without it being brother and sister and cousins and parents with their kids having sex. Samuel – rich man poor man – rich man judged and put in hell, revelation, no judgement for anyone yet waiting on judgement day. and i like the one where the man jumped as high as a building by his god and brought crashing down by the bible god.

            god came down and impregnated a virgin who had a boy who did many great things but suffered and when died was risen and taken up to heaven to be with his father in heaven. Jesus – not yet – this was hercules in greece 300 to 600 years before jesus and only 700 miles away for the story tellers of each area to make up their own stories. This is proven and written down by the people of those times and is sitting in museums today for you to read. Lucifer never was a devil or fallen angel but the first time lucifer name was used was by the catholics in rome italy about the planet venus. when the name lucifer name was used in the bible rewrite there was no roman language yet and satan was not invented yet but weas a human babylon king in the iraq area. The greek-roman christians rewrite of the torah changed the babylonian king to a fallen angel satan to make the story more interesting. The Catholic Pope then named a telescope Lucifer because it was looking at venus.

          • athrillofhope

            Just one example off the top of my head of an astro-physicist who can chew you up and spit you out on everything your anti-God mind has to offer: http://www.reasons.org.

            To use your phrase–of all of your “goofball” musings and antics, there is only one that poses a logistical impossibility: Where did Cain’s wife come from? Answer: Adam and Eve had an untold number children–NOT JUST the two. Scripture only deals with the first two by name, that’s all. By the time Cain murdered Able, their younger brothers and sisters had time to grow, move out, have families and FORM OTHER CITIES. Cain married a niece, most likely. It’s all there in Scripture, just read carefully.

            As for your version of history: you sure you don’t have that backwards? The presence of Satan is mentioned in the open chapters of Genesis, written around 3,500 years ago. The Messianic figure, who was God, became man, died and rose again was in prophetic form around 3,500 years ago as well, starting from the Book of Genesis (written by Moses around 1440 BC).

            This clearly pre-dates the Grecian versions you claim inspired the Messianic storyline. Me thinks you have this backwards. Satan is a great copy-cat and deceiver.

            As for Satan–yes, you are correct: he is never explicitly called “Lucifer” in Scripture. Um–does it really matter what his name is/was? Christ made it clear that Satan is a fallen angel cast from heaven after attempting to overthrow God’s government. (Read the Gospels and the Book of Revelation for details.)

            Therefore, your attempt to discredit Scripture on even this note fails.

            Furthermore, the Dead Sea Scrolls confirm (archaeologically, by the way) the accuracy of what we call the “Old Testament”. The Dead Sea scrolls contain manuscripts of the Old Testament as it existed in 400 BC. Before the Dead Sea Scrolls were found in 1946, the oldest extant manuscripts we had were from 1,100 AD or so–a nearly 1500 year gap! And we discovered that there were NO DIFFERENCES in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the versions of the Old Testament from 1500 years LATER!

            That means that there is no reason to deny the accuracy of the transmission of the Scripture over thousands of years.

            … and the point: the Scriptures as we have them pre-date all of your silly little anti-God explanations of how the Scriptures ‘came to be’.

            Everything else you posted above is, at best, your own personal inaccurate recollection of Scripture. Therefore, unless you can present a logistical error from the Bible itself, your “goofball” musings will be treated as just that.

            Now, back to intelligence. Name one instance in which empirical science, archaeology, historical fact with eyewitness accounts contradicts anything in the Bible. Cite your sources.

          • DMG

            And children – brothers and sisters never never have sex with each other because from adam and eve in the beginning it’s sin and not happening. Scripture is what the demons of evil and sin whispered into the hallucinogenic drug addicted fools who were very lonely people who had no friends because they were weird and wrong, like you. Those stories aren’t worth garbage and you little boy – you really believe in the bible as true and god as real – and you admit to being a softy and chasing the Sodom and Gomorrah boys. Now your bible says that your god said that that is 100% wrong 100% of the time and just look at you. Running your little dumb brain calling yourself an idiot for saying you believe in something as true, the bible and god and his word and everything he says and living against it saying it can’t be true, he didn’t mean me and my personal lifestyle that I chose. Those demons of scripture have you right where they want you…

          • athrillofhope

            Okay, my final response to you. “… brothers and sister never never have sex …” Says who? God never said it was wrong; God simply banned it after the Fall of Mankind (deceived by Satan, mind you) because the blood lines became distorted and biological difficulties increased with “in-breeding”. However, other than this biological fall-out due to the Fall of Mankind, God never says that children of the same family could not inter-marry BEFORE the Fall. God forbade children having sex with their parents, I believe, however.

            I must ask: where do you get all of your beliefs about the Bible? Very entertaining. The more desperate you get to discredit that which is unable to be discredited, you get all the more, um, “goofball”.

            Next accusation: you state that I “… admit to being a softy and chasing the Sodom and Gomorrah boys …” When did I state this?

            Okay, wow … let’s sit back and see what you conjure up this time. Seems I have to feed reality and logic to you in tiny little pieces or else you will self-implode and start shooting holes in your ceiling …

          • DMG

            When did the name Satan first Appear in the bible?

            AnswerSatan is not mentioned in any book of the Bible written before the time of the Babylonian.
            Exile, when the Jews came into contact with the Zoroastrian religion and arguably learnt of this concept. The Chronicler, living during or shortly after the Exile, rewrote the Deuteronomic history,
            updating some parts to suit later theological, political and social needs. He retrospectively
            inserted Satan into 1 Chronicles 21:1, although Satan is absent from the original passage in Kings:
            “And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.” The psalms were also
            written during and after the Exile, and Psalm 109 mentions Satan. The Book of Job is also from this

            period, although some parts are much older.

          • athrillofhope

            Wow, so you are 3500 years old! You witnessed first-hand this alteration to Holy Scripture! OR, wait–most probably you read some op-ed piece passing as “scholarship” by an anti-God pseudo-intellectual too lazy to get a real job.

            Remember–does it matter what the name of Satan is/was? No. Here’s the point: there is a literal being who was once an Arch Angel who rebelled against God’s authority (the “arch angel” status is described in Revelation) and was booted from heaven, along with one-third of the heavenly host by the other two arch angels (this scenario is also described in Revelation, and by Christ when He stated He “… saw Satan fall like lightening from heaven …” (Luke 10:18).

            Jesus Christ Himself verifies that Genesis 3:15 is the first mention of Satan–although you correctly point out that he is not called “Satan” at this time (which merely means “the deceiver”). In Genesis 3:15, God is speaking to Satan (who is in the form of the serpent):

            “And I will put enmity between you and the woman,
            and between your offspring and hers;
            he will crush your head,
            and you will strike his heel.”

            Christ, Who being God become flesh, verified in Scripture (so this is what the Bible teaches, whether or not you believe this teaching is not the point) that the “offspring” referred to in Genesis 3:15 is The Messiah, and that the Messiah will “crush [Satan's] head, and [Satan] will strike his [the Messiah's] heal.”

            You see, God was speaking to Adam, Eve and Satan (who was in the form of a “serpent” somehow–we are not sure exactly how) after the Fall Of Mankind, and God was promising Mankind a Messiah–a Savior, Who will Redeem Mankind from The Fall. But this Savior, we are later to learn, was to redeem us by His death–hence Satan was to “strike his heel”. But by putting the Messiah to death, Messiah was to have ETERNAL victory over Satan because Messiah’s sacrifice on the Cross will open up the end of Satan’s Kingdom (that began with The Fall of Mankind) and the eternal salvation of otherwise doomed humans. Hence, God stated that Messiah will “crush your head”–a much more permanent defeat than the merely “striking [Messiah's] heel”.

            So the point here is not whether or not YOU believe any of this. Rather, the point is: Scripture mentions Satan (although not by the literal name “Satan”) in the earliest passages of Genesis. It was not some afterthought, something “made up” based upon the fickle theological and political needs of the day to placate the masses–a theory that fits comfortably with your (unfounded) belief that there is not God–let alone one that has the ability to preserve a simple book across the ages.

          • DMG

            Did Jesus Sail Across the Mediterranean in a storm and not the Sea of Galilee ?

            So the premise of the episode The Lost Voyage of Jesus is
            that Jesus’ journey to the region of the Gadarenes, or Gerasenes,
            depicted in the Gospels of Mark (4:35-5:20), Luke (8:22-39), and Matthew
            (8:18-34) did not take place on the Sea of Galilee but on the
            Mediterranean. He claims that the storm described in this story could
            not have taken place on the placid waters of Galilee but rather on the
            Mediterranean Sea, which is known for violent storms. He sites further
            evidences to prove this claim.

            The central point to his argument is that Jesus set out to fulfill
            “the sign of Jonah.” What Jacobovici believes the sign of Jonah to be is
            bringing the lost sheep of Israel back to the fold, that is, those
            tribes that were scattered during exile returning to Jerusalem. He then
            goes on to say that part of the tribe of Gad had settled in Spain. His
            reasoning for this is that in the ancient world, there was a region in
            southern Spain called Tartessos. Situated in the area of Tartessos was a
            coastal town called Gades/Gadir/Gadira, now modern-day Cadiz. He
            speculates further that because the town of Gades has Gad in its name,
            it is evidence that it was inhabited by members of the tribe of Gad.
            Jacobovici believes Tartessos to be the place referred to in the Book of
            Jonah as Tarshish. It is his assertion that Jonah set out to
            minister to these Gadites in Tartessos before God caught up with him.
            Since the sign of Jonah is interpreted to mean the reunification of the
            twelve tribes of Israel, it is essential that Jesus undertake this
            journey as part of his Messianic duty. From this perspective, Gades,
            Spain could easily be seen as the land of the Gadarenes that Jesus and
            his disciples traveled to.

            Upon arriving at Cadiz, Spain, Jacobovici examines the coastal
            landscape and compares it to what is described in the Gospel story.

            Mark 5:1-14, from the NIV

            1 They went across the lake to the region of the Gerasenes. 2 When Jesus got out of the boat, a man with an evil spirit came from the tombs to meet him. 3 This man lived in the tombs,
            and no one could bind him any more, not even with a chain. 4 For he
            had often been chained hand and foot, but he tore the chains apart and
            broke the irons on his feet. No one was strong enough to subdue him. 5 Night and day among the tombs and in the hills he would cry out
            and cut himself with stones. 6 When he saw Jesus from a distance, he
            ran and fell on his knees in front of him. 7 He shouted at the top of
            his voice, “What do you want with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God?
            Swear to God that you won’t torture me!” 8 For Jesus had said to him,
            “Come out of this man, you evil spirit!” 9 Then Jesus asked him, “What
            is your name?” “My name is Legion,” he replied, “for we are many.” 10
            And he begged Jesus again and again not to send them out of the area. 11 A large herd of pigs was feeding on the nearby hillside.
            12 The demons begged Jesus, “Send us among the pigs; allow us to go
            into them.” 13 He gave them permission, and the evil spirits came out
            and went into the pigs. The herd, about two thousand in number, rushed down the steep bank into the lake and were drowned. 14
            Those tending the pigs ran off and reported this in the town and
            countryside, and the people went out to see what had happened.

            He remarks that the scenes described in this passage indicate that
            the tombs were not far from the shore but were actually quite close, and
            that there were hills among the tombs. The passage explains further
            that the hills were on the coast and that they were steep. The fact that
            the pig herders ran to the town to tell the people what had happened
            and that the people came out to see, suggests that the town was nearby.
            Jacobovici continues by saying a cemetery with a nearby town means that
            it was a necropolis, or city for the dead. That there were pigs leads
            him to believe that this was not a Jewish community but a pagan or
            Gentile one since contact with pigs is considered a sin in the Torah. He
            believes the pigs described in the story were used as sacrifices in
            celebration of the dead. This fact is more evidence for Jacobovici that
            this event did not take place in the Jewish area of Galilee.

            After examining the evidence and the surrounding landscape,
            Jacobovici concludes that the area matches the description found in the
            Gospels. Not only are there steep hills along the coast, but there is a
            fairly large number of tombs with a nearby village where pigs are
            minded. However, because Jacobovici is using the NIV Bible, he points
            out a problem in the translation. He says that the word translated as
            ‘lake’ in the original Greek actually refers to salt water, not fresh
            water, and should be rendered more accurately as ‘sea’; further evidence
            to support his claim that the events described took place on the
            Mediterranean Sea rather than the fresh water lake of Galilee.

            Although the area checks out as a possible location for the events
            found in the Gospels, Jacobovici reexamines the story and suggests that
            the storm encountered at “sea” forced Jesus and his disciples to dock at
            the nearest port, which he says would have been on the Balearic Island
            of Majorca off the eastern coast of Spain. He remarks that this location
            fits the description found in the Gospels also. Interestingly, there is
            a group of Spanish Jews that Jacobovici spends some time with on the
            island who claim they are the descendants of Jesus and Mary Magdalene.
            These supposed descendants of Jesus believe that Jesus was an ordinary
            man who lived a normal life, died, but was not resurrected. He is
            regarded as a good teacher, nothing more. There is even site in Majorca
            under a certain tree where a footprint is preserved that locals regard
            as the footprint of Jesus. As much effort as Jacobovici puts forth in
            demolishing accepted biblical interpretations, he spends little time
            scrutinizing these claims and passively accepts what is being said.

            Central to his objective, he sites the passage near the end of the
            story about the villagers asking Jesus and his disciples to leave.

            Mark 5:15-17 , from the NIV

            15 When they came to Jesus, they saw the man who had been possessed
            by the legion of demons, sitting there, dressed and in his right mind;
            and they were afraid. 16 Those who had seen it told the people what
            had happened to the demon-possessed man– and told about the pigs as
            well. 17 Then the people began to plead with Jesus to leave their
            region.

            Jacobovici interprets this to mean that Jesus’ attempt at persuading
            the Gadarenes to return to Jerusalem was unsuccessful. He then comments
            that the language used in the Gospel story is obscure and that the exact
            location of the land of the Gadarenes was meant to be concealed, since
            it would reveal that Jesus failed at this central task of reuniting the
            lost tribes of Israel as his role of Messiah. This leads Jacobovici to
            conclude that Jesus was not a true Messiah.

            The thing about this show is Jacobovici knows where he is going and
            is just stringing the viewer along by using references and facts that
            support his views, while ignoring or casually brushing aside others that
            contradict them. The show purports to reveal secrets about Christianity
            but does more to create a work of fiction similar to Dan Brown’s “The Da Vinci Code.”
            By the end of the documentary, it is clear what Jacobovici’s agenda is.
            That he travels extensively on the show to the places relating to the
            subject of each episode does make for an interesting watch though.

          • athrillofhope

            “The Lost Voyage of Jesus”. You can call the Bible a work of delusional, drug-induced men, and in the same breathe you can cite some ancient cartoon tale as your “evidence”?

            Okay, this is useless. Good-bye.

          • the truth will set you free

            wow that was alot of dribble…. angels dont eat?? really because the israelites were fed by manna in the desert and manna just happens to be “angels food” lol this is why you have to read the bible for yourself and not take your info from a websitre because it makes you look foolish..angels are spiritual beings that can take on human form, it is presented many times in the bible and you either accept it or not..

          • DMG

            Definition of Manna:

            Manna was the supernatural food God gave to the Israelites during their 40-year wandering in the desert. The word manna means “What is it?” in Hebrew.

            Not long after the Jewish people had escaped Egypt and crossed the Red Sea, they ran out of the food they had brought with them. They began to grumble, recalling the tasty meals they had enjoyed when they were slaves.

            God told Moses he would rain down bread from heaven for the people. That evening quail came and covered the camp. The people killed the birds and ate their meat. The next morning, when the dew evaporated, a white substance covered the ground. The Bible describes manna as white like coriander seed and tasting like wafers made with honey.

            Moses instructed the people to gather an omer, or about two quarts’ worth, for each person each day. When some of the people tried to save extra, it became wormy and spoiled.

            Manna appeared for six days in a row. On Fridays the Hebrews were to gather a double portion, because it did not appear on the next day, the Sabbath. And yet, the portion they saved for the Sabbath did not spoil.

            God told Moses to save a jar of manna so future generations could see how the Lord provided for his people in the desert. Aaron filled a jar with an omer of manna and put it in the Ark of the Covenant, in front of the tablets of the Ten Commandments.

            Exodus says the Jews ate manna every day for 40 years. Miraculously, when Joshua and the people came to the border of Canaan and ate the food of the promised land, manna stopped the next day and was never seen again.

            In one form or another, bread is a recurring symbol of life in the Bible because it was the staple food of ancient times. Manna could be ground into flour and baked into bread; it was also called the bread of heaven.

            To us intelligent people who use our brains and casn read and understand with a high IQ

            NEVER did the bible or torah ever say the Angels ate Mana – you lying dumb asses.

          • DMG

            Angels Don’t Eat. Spirits Don’t Eat or dress in cloths. They don’t have too! Male Muslims don’t die as martyrs and get 76 female virgins to have sex with all the time. All just story tellers who have no power and are just making up Disney Lies and stories. They have no God, just want to be important and controlling over other people.

        • the truth will set you free

          well you are definitely ignorant of any truth

          • DMG

            who are you talking about and what truth are you talking about?

          • DMG

            John Piper on Why Paul Was a Murderer Before a Great Apostle of Christ

            Widely respected preacher and author John Piper asks another tough question to his readers: Why did God let Paul become a murderer before he became one of the most influential figures of Christianity?

            Not for one but for several reasons, the megapastor outlined recently on the Desiring God ministry website, one of which showed that God could make the “chief of sinners the chief of missionaries.”

            It was understood that before Paul was born, he was set apart for apostleship, revealed in the Scriptures of Galatians.

            “He who had set me apart before I was born, and who called me by his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son to me, in order that I might preach him among the Gentiles” (Galatians 1:15-16).

            Yet before he began ministering to the people and spreading a Gospel of grace and justification by faith alone, he zealously persecuted the disciples of Christ and did “much evil” to the saints.

            So the question remained: Why didn’t God bring Paul to faith or encounter him on the road to Damascus before he imprisoned and murdered Christians?

            “His purpose … was to allow Paul to become the ‘chief of sinners’ and then save him, and make him the apostle who would write thirteen books of the New Testament,” the author of Don’t Waste Your Life explained.

            “Why? Why do it this way? Why choose him before birth to be an apostle? Then let him sink into wicked and violent opposition to Christ? And then save him dramatically and decisively on the Damascus road?”

            Because God wanted to encourage those who thought they were “too sinful” to have hope and also put the perfect patience of Christ on display – two explanations that were explicitly stated in the Bible.

            God also wanted to show the world that he saved “hardened haters of Christ” like Paul who previously murdered Christians, and show that he permitted his “much-loved elect to sink into flagrant wickedness.”

            “God did it this way … to show a powerless, persecuted, marginalized church that they can triumph by the supernatural conversion of their most powerful foes,” Piper added.

            The evil that Apostle Paul had done prior to his conversion similarly pointed to a topic of discussion that the pastor at Bethlehem Baptist Church in Minneapolis often addressed: Why is there evil in the world at all or why did Satan still hold power?

            “God has ordained that Satan have a long leash with God holding on —- etc etc etc – just writings of prehistoric man. Paul was a murderer!!!

      • the truth will set you free

        he is speaking the truth in love , love for ones freedom from attack, love for ones people nd love for ones countries..these are all biblical principles..jesus told his apostles when he was getting ready to be crucified to get themselves a sword for protection, no where in th bible does it say you cannot protect yourself..

        • athrillofhope

          Well, the “love part” is questionable, especially if you read DMG’s subsequent rantings on this blog.

          At any rate, I agree that self-defense is Biblically justifiable. There is a difference between self-defense, however, and using “being scared” as an excuse to incite and originate your own instance of violence against innocent people who pose no threat to you other than being of a certain ethnic group.

      • DMG

        It does not come across as a threat unless your a softy inside and out and you hang with the girls.

        Lucifer

        (Hebrew helel; Septuagint heosphoros, Vulgate lucifer)

        The name Lucifer “””””originally””””” denotes the planet Venus, emphasizing its brilliance. Originally always means first – after that people made up lies to embellish their fireside chats to look and sound impressive.

        The Vulgate employs the word also for “the light of the morning” (Job 11:17), “the signs of the zodiac” (Job 38:32), and “the aurora” (Psalm 109:3).

        Metaphorically, the word is applied to the King of Babylon (Isaiah 14:12) as preeminent among the princes of his time;

        to the high priest Simon son of Onias(Ecclesiasticus 50:6), for his surpassing virtue, to the glory of heaven (Apocalypse 2:28), by reason of its excellency;

        finally to Jesus Christ himself (2 Peter 1:19; Apocalypse 22:16; the “Exultet” of Holy Saturday) the true light of our spiritual life.

        The Syriac version and the version of Aquila derive the Hebrew noun helel from the verb yalal, “to lament”; St. Jerome agrees with them (In Isaiah 1.14), and makes Lucifer the name of the principal fallen angel who must lament the loss of his original glory bright as the morning star. In Christian tradition this meaning of Lucifer has prevailed;

        the Fathers maintain that Lucifer is not the proper name of the devil, but denotes only the state from which he has fallen (Petavius, De Angelis, III, iii, 4).

      • DMG

        THE BIBLE PROPHETS WERE STONED !

        BUT NOT WITH ROCKS

        This is so critically important because if indeed the Biblical prophets were stoned, and hallucinating, then our holy book is one that may indeed tell us of the bizarre nature of the sub atomic we refer to as Heaven, or the place of angels and God.

        The manna is described in the Book of Exodus.

        THAT ABOVE DESCRIPTION FITS MAGIC MUSHROOMS

        That is the description from the Bible concerning manna.

        Found in the early morning, and if left , it rots, fills with worms, and smells.

        Now compare this with the description of something not mentioned in name by the Bible.

        MANNA was round, was found on the ground in the dew, would melt to mush if not dried or collected on time,

        and would breed larvae. All unique characteristics of mushrooms. When dried it was like WAFERS OF BREAD and its color was like CORIANDER SEED, the consistency and color of dried mushrooms. Exodus Ch. 16. Sacred-Wine Press.

        THERE IS YOUR MANNA FOOD FROM GOD THAT TAKES YOU PLACES YOU CAN’T GET TO ANY OTHER WAY

        The Bible description provides all the unique characteristics of mushrooms.

        The proposal is that the Biblical manna was actually mushrooms, and of course it became the food of the Gods, as it was referred to, because people were having hallucinations as a result of ingesting it.

        It certainly gives the statement, manna from heaven, a whole new meaning doesn’t it?

        No wonder Moses wandered in the desert 40 years, he didn’t want to leave !

        THIS MAGIC MUSHROOM MANNA WAS HIDDEN AWAY IN A VERY SPECIAL PLACE

        The Biblical manna description is the same as the description of mushrooms, and the fact that this manna was kept in the most holy place as described in the Bible, gives credence to the fact that the Biblical prophets were high on something.

        Let us look at the mushroom as a hallucinogenic. Mushrooms that contains psychedelic substances psilocybin and other psychoactive tryptamines.

        PSYCHEDELIC MUSHROOMS CONTAIN THE SAME STUFF THAT IS IN YOUR PINEAL GLAND

        Where it identifies a psychoactive tryptamine in the first paragraph, keep in mind that the drug secreted by the pineal gland into the brain is dimethyltryptamine.

        Users experience a connection with a higher power. John Hopkins University studied the spiritual effects.

        MUSHROOMS AND A SPIRITUAL FEELING OF HIGHER POWER

        I want you to look closely at the first paragraph above where people experience intense feelings of being connected with a higher power, and it is believed that this is what is referred to in the Bible as the Bread of God.

        REPORT FROM JOHN HOPKINS UNIVERSITY

        Now let us look at the results of the mushroom test at John Hopkins.

        John Hopkins University test results. One third reported the most
        spiritually significant experience of their lifetimes. Two thirds said it was among the top five most significant spiritual experiences.

        USERS CAN LOSE TOUCH WITH REALITY OR ARE THEY IN TOUCH WITH A REALITY THE REST OF US ONLY PRAY TO.
        ANGELS FOOD

        Bible, How manna tasted. Man ate angels food. It was kept in a golden pot in the Holy of Holies, where only the HIGH PRIEST could get at it..

        IT SURE WAS ANGELS FOOD

        The evidence is very strong that the manna was mushroom, and that it certainly could be the source of the visions experienced by Bible writers, and prophets.

        HALLUCINATIONS ARE THE PRODUCT OF SPIRIT WHICH IS THE PRODUCT OF SUBSTANCE

        What I want to share with you is a fact, and a very important fact.

        We are talking about hallucinations, as being very possibly what we have been raised to consider as spirit, or God, or angels, or Holy Spirit, etc.

        The hallucinatory drug DMT is naturally produced within the human brain.

        Now consider this.

        What is the scientific name for hallucinatory drugs such as DMT?

        Read from Scholars who are also religious studies with PHD’s and Masters Degrees, People who really know how those people really were and thought and acted 2 and 3 thousand and more years ago. There word is worthless. Fly over them with a

        Harrier Jump Jet today and land and you are their God creator of all people and everything else. They will bow and honor and glorify you and write books about you and preach to all people about you as their God.
        http :// www. hiddenmeanings. com/ Sermon10drugs. htm

        • athrillofhope

          Against my better judgement, I will respond once more.

          Your diatribe is a classic example of the arrogance of the human condition. Based on pure assumption, you reduce the intelligence of Jesus Christ, the prophets and other writers of Scripture to that of, at best, a hallucinating mind, and at worst, retardation.

          Furthermore, it is apparent from the time and energy you have put into creating a “defense” against a believe in God and His Word that you truly respect Him at some level, and His reality scares you to your foundations; otherwise, you would not take this amount of time. Sorta like the so-called “atheists” who travel the world debating theologians in a vain attempt to “debunk” something they pretend is “goofball”.

          I do not recall how we wandered into the topic of God and the Bible on a blog concerning contemporary social issues, but your preoccupation with God and the Bible only underscores just how seriously you take Him and His Word and how scared to eternity you really are.

          Your actions betray your true beliefs. But I digress …

          First of all, your arguments are self-contradictory. You use the Bible as “evidence” to “prove” that the Bible is nothing but a worthless pack of lies or hallucinating garbage. Therefore, you have to first premise that the Bible is reliable in order to prove that it is UN-reliable. This insanity is akin to attempting to prove, say, a gentle, loving Carpenter is a homicidal maniac by using His own testimony as reliable “evidence”.

          For example, you refer to the account of the Exodus, specifically the “manna from heaven” event, to “prove” that the Bible folks were all doing drugs. So you admit–on some level–that you agree that the Bible is true–that this event actually happened in some form or another. You base your argument on the reliability and authenticity of an event described in Scripture.

          And then you turn around and use that reliability to “prove the Bible is unreliable” because the people who authored the Bible were all hallucinating. Well, in order to present a cogent thesis that the authors of the Bible were hallucinating, you first have to admit that what they wrote was lucid, clear, reliable, and truthful.

          And you do all of this based on pure assumption and bias that anyone who believes in God is an idiot and that SURELY there’s an explanation other than TRUTH and INTELLIGENCE that explains the Bible’s contents. Nothing more.

          You offer nothing historical, factual, scientific, archaeologically compliant–NOTHING. It is PURE BIAS AND ASSUMPTION. And to boot–it’s not even your own assumptions! You have to cut and paste others’ opinions because–what?–you lack the ability to think for yourself?

          So think on all of this before you continue. The only one you are fooling is yourself.

          • DMG

            I was pointing out that —– YOU —– look back 3000 to 4000 years ago to people who didn’t have any ability but to live on dirt and sand in mud huts and barely had food daily and were not educated and you put all your full belief in these people who lived way back then in everything they write and you have not a clue who they were. I come from people – scholars who have dug up new evidence and writings showing that these bible writings are made up stories to captivate an audience. Why would you believe in the writings of people 3000 years ago as so true and intelligent and us today as stupid in intellect. You just are lazy and go to church too much just to give your 10% and make the church rich. There even is evidence that that moses was that egyptian Pharaoh Akhenaten who changed the egyptian belief from many gods to one single god and he was expelled with his followers and led out of egypt up to the jerusalem area by general ramses and another general at that time crossing the red sea at a low point and left in the jerusalem area for the remainder of his life.

            Back then the earth was flat and lava was the lake of fire in hell. I love education and when archeological findings are uncovered showing new or disproving old – I love it.

            Because those people wrote anything down does not make it true.

            The bible and Torah differ which makes these just man personal attitude written books.

            The Council of Nicea. Early 4th century-325 C.E. They decided to leave out: The Gospel of Thomas: The Gospel of Judas: The Gospel of Mary Magdalene.

            The compiled of the new testament. The Council of Nicea picked and chose among the available writings they could find those that best fit their purposes and created the bible.

            Books or writings about Jesus Christ omitted, Certain ones’ said things like Christ was a wizard when he was younger and did bad things.

            The New Testament left books out. It was because they wanted unity of the message. Books that were considered inspired that didn’t jive with the message the powers that be liked were excluded, for that reason.

            If they wanted a book for the new testament in but part of it they didn’t like, they re-wrote it to make it fit their needs. Mark or Luke shows their re-writes.

            This is the year 2013 not 2013 bc and what they wrote back then was what they wanted to believe.

            I believe in a higher authority but far more powerful and intelligent than an old man on a toilet behind a wall guarded by Peter.

            If your God knows your whole life – everything you have already done even before your conceived – then the job story is 2 demons talking and attacking job because no matter what job does in his whole life, before job is conceived your god knows if he did or didn’t turn against your god when put through a test and therefore no test would ever be needed. But demons would attack job this way because they are stupid and have nothing else to do in their bored existence. Your god doesn’t ever have to test or judge.

            If the revelation is gods “”” FINAL “”””” judgement of mankind for all their sins, then why not kill satan instead of locking him or chaining him in a pit for 1000 years where man becomes wicked again and satan is released and it all starts over again.

            “”” FINAL JUDGEMENT “”””” means just that no more satan and sin ever again. No repeat or it’s not final and thats a lie. Your god created then your god can create without sin and without free will to sin. Out of Your god came sin as your god created everything and man didn’t create anything. Your god then must destroy his creation of sin and the free will ability to sin.

            Plus old testament – samuel – rich man poor man – rich man already judged into hell which kills the revelation story all to hell of thats when all will be judged as good or bad.

          • athrillofhope

            You are just too tempting to not respond to. Geez–the plethora of absolute groundless and ignorant statements to take target at is unreal. I feel like a mosquito in a nudist camp.

            A couple of things I will address: The Council of Nicea was a formality. It determined NOTHING. What is Scripture and what is NOT, to a believer, has–I repeat–NOTHING to do with organized religion. That was not the purpose of The Council.

            The Canon–what is God’s Word and what is not–is decided by God Himself. Jesus Christ, Who Christians believe is God in the flesh, quoted from every single book of what we now call the Old Testament except for maybe one or two. He verified firsthand the established Canon of Israel. What was considered The Canon (again, what is and is not God’s Word) in Christ’s day is well known today. There is no doubt about this. For Christ Himself to quote from every book save one is historical documentation that He was verifying this Canon as correct.

            Furthermore, the New Testament writers also quoted heavily from this same Canon of what we now call the Old Testament. And the New Testament also establishes within itself what Gospels and books in the New Testament was authentic and which ones were not. The New Testament accounts were EYE-WITNESS accounts, and corroborated between more than one eyewitness to the accounts recorded and the Apostolic letters of Paul and Peter, et al … are referred to as “Scripture” by the letters themselves.

            So it was never a mystery as to what was and was not “Scripture”.

            The Council understood this. They were not attempting to “create Canon”. Again, the Council were mere FORMALITY to demonstrate that The Church was aligning itself with Jesus Christ Who had already established the Canon. Because there was a plethora of BOGUS writings, like the extraneous ones you cite that was gaining traction among the people you describe as “dirt dwellers” or something like that, The Council was formed to reinforce ITS alignment with Jesus Christ. In other words–you can believe what you want, but the Church believes this over here.

            But never was The Council of Nicea the determining body of what is or is not Scripture.

            That the Gospels are not identical should not be confused with meaning they are contradictory. They do not contradict each other in any way. Furthermore, that they are not identical should underscore that there was NO CONSPIRACY to concoct some “unifying message” to create a fake illusion of “divine inspiration”. If anything, that the Gospels address the same events differently (again, but NOT contradictory) underscores their authenticity. It is no different than multiple newspapers and news organizations covering the same story but leaving out different details from each other.

            No contradiction–just different sets of details from the same events.

            This lack of being identical is also NOT “evidence” of any re-writes. The historical evidence is clear and confirms that we have the content of the original letters and Gospels from each of the authors intact. Corroborating quotations from the 1st Century amply proves what the original Gospel Accounts stated and each of the books of the New Testament, and we have them intact today. There is NO evidence of any tampering whatsoever.

            Final thing I want to address in your above post: “… back then the earth was flat …” No according to the Bible. NO where in the Bible does it state that the earth was flat. Here, try this: http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-c015.html

            The “four corners” mentioned in the Book of Revelation are figurative and refer to North, South, East and West. Scripture is replete with references to the Earth being “suspended upon nothing”, being a “sphere”. No where is there any reference that the earth is explicitly flat. That came from the pantheistic ancient Greeks, mind you, the very ones you align yourself with–the same ancient Greeks who believed a giant tortoise was carrying the earth, or something like that …

            Everything else you wrote fails to make a lucid point that can be addressed in a reasonable manner.

          • DMG

            You said it – not me – you are a mosquito – slap your dead.

            finish – job
            samual – rich man poor man
            revelation – FINAL JUDGEMENT

          • athrillofhope

            I wrote “… I FEEL LIKE a mosquito …” I never stated that I WAS A MOSQUITO.

            The context was figurative analogy.

            True to form, you demonstrate your inability to take writings in their true context and instead twist what something says into a distortion in order for it to fit your personal agenda of discrediting everyone and everything that does not suit your anti-God assumptions.

            Is it any wonder to you why your arguments lack credibility?

          • DMG

            finish – job
            samual – rich man poor man
            revelation – FINAL JUDGEMENT

  • DMG

    Here is why All Washington is just a big TV show to distract the public from what is going on in the background..

    Here is where Congress and our whole government is on every subject. It now is too late for all us Americans. Big business has now made the elected and appointed officials real real rich to work with just the big business and lie to and forget the citizens all together. This is why we are now watching congress go through a Hollywood written script series with obamacare, Benghazi, IRS, and the national debt and wall street etc…..

    All congress, senate, legislators, the president and his cabinet and the law makers and judges… Federal, state, county, city and rural government and law.

    This proves that they have agreed behind the scenes to work with big business and wall street for a wealthy life for them and their families and put on a fraud show for the public about lying to us citizens about jobs and the economy and what ever else. Since I was a kid in the 1960’s all I ever heard was everyone running for an office was going to bring jobs, create jobs, etc…

    That is a line from a script writer that they read, memorize and repeat to the public but since the 1960’s jobs, the economy and the whole united states of america has gone down in decay with no jobs and greater than ever debt.

    Sixteen lawmakers who left Congress recently have landed posts with groups that seek to influence policy.

    WASHINGTON — Sixteen lawmakers who left Congress recently have landed posts with groups that seek to influence policy — despite rules aimed at slowing the revolving door between Capitol Hill and lobbying firms, a USA TODAY analysis shows.

    Former House members are barred from lobbying their former colleagues

    for a year;

    and former senators,

    for two years.

    There are no restrictions, however, on providing behind-the-scenes advice to corporations and others seeking to shape federal legislation. Ex-lawmakers can immediately lobby the executive branch and officials in state and local governments.

    Former Ohio congressman Steve LaTourette, who retired from Congress in January after 18 years in the House with full retirement pay and medical , cannot register as a federal lobbyist nor talk to his former colleagues on Capitol Hill. But the Republican heads a new Washington lobbying branch of a Cleveland-based law firm.

    “My job is to fashion strategies and give advice,” LaTourette said.

    His wife, Jennifer, is a veteran lobbyist and serves as vice president of the new firm, McDonald Hopkins Government Strategies.

    Launched in January, the lobbying operation already has nine clients — including the Cleveland Clinic Foundation and the Association of Public Television Stations, as public television girds for congressional budget battles over its funding.

    LaTourette and 15 others of the 98 lawmakers who have retired or were ousted by voters since January 2011 hold lobbying-related jobs, according to the USA TODAY tally. The analysis looked at lawmakers who retired, resigned or lost their seats in the last Congress — along with the handful who left their posts during the first months of the new Congress.

    “The Congress-to-K Street connection has been institutionalized,” said Sheila Krumholz of the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks lobbying and political money. “It’s Plan A for former members of Congress.”

    Other ex-lawmakers who have recently moved to potentially lucrative second careers with lobbying firms and trade associations include:

    • Former Missouri congresswoman Jo Ann Emerson, who resigned from Congress in January to become president and CEO of the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association.

    Emerson, a Republican who served on the House Appropriations Committee, was first elected in 1996, and a special election to replace her is scheduled for early June. She was a lobbyist before she entered Congress. Emerson’s predecessor at the association, former Oklahoma congressman Glenn English, earned more than $1.7 million in 2011, according to the most recent, publicly available tax filings. Emerson was unavailable for comment.

    • Another former appropriator, Montana Republican Denny Rehberg, announced last week he was joining a Washington public-strategy and lobbying firm. Rehberg, who served six terms in the House before losing his bid to unseat Democratic Sen. Jon Tester last November, will be co-chairman of Mercury/Clark & Weinstock’s Washington office.

    Rehberg, a former state legislator and Montana lieutenant governor, has worked in real estate, ranching and as a lobbyist in the early 1980s for the Montana Association of Realtors. In the U.S. House, he ran an appropriations subcommittee that oversaw spending on federal health programs, such as Medicare. “I like the combination of applying my knowledge and trying to help others understand both business, government and the problems government creates for free enterprise,” Rehberg told USA TODAY.

    • Former California congressman Howard Berman, who lost re-election last fall, started his new job Monday at Covington & Burling, a law and lobbying firm that is expanding its international practice.

    The Democrat is a former chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Berman said he’ll provide “strategic advice” to clients but doesn’t know whether he will register to lobby once the one-year cooling-off period expires. “I don’t want to speculate.”

    The USA TODAY tally shows that one in five of the lawmakers on the recent list of those who Congress departed after one term. Many of them have not announced post-congressional job plans.

    One factor: The lackluster economy and corporate belt-tightening have made it harder for less-experienced legislators to land lobbying-related jobs. In addition, lobbying revenue is down as partisan stalemates have stalled action on even routine spending bills. (A recent USA TODAY analysis found the 112th Congress was the least productive legislative session since the end of World War II.)

    “This is a really difficult time,” said Ivan Adler, a principal at the McCormick Group. He recruits executives and lobbyists for law firms and trade associations, and he has spoken with more than 15 newly departed members of Congress about their job prospects in recent months.

    “It’s the most challenging for former members who don’t have the seniority and haven’t been on the money committees,” said Adler, referring to congressional panels that oversee federal spending, tax policy and key industries, such as banking and energy.

    Former Massachusetts senator Scott Brown, defeated in November after serving part of one term, is one of the relative newcomers to join a law and lobbying firm. Brown, a former state legislator, was the top recipient of campaign contributions from the financial services, insurance and real-estate sector in the 2012 election, according to a tally by the Center for Responsive Politics. He will focus on financial services issues and commercial real estate in the Boston office of the Nixon Peabody, an international law firm.

    The firm’s lobbying clients in Washington include Goldman Sachs, student lender Sallie Mae and the New York City Housing Authority.

    Brown, a Republican, burst onto the national stage in 2010 when he was elected to replace late senator Ted Kennedy in a special election. He was unavailable for an interview last week.

    Andrew Glincher, Nixon Peabody’s CEO and managing partner, said the firm was drawn to Brown’s public service record, his “entrepreneurship” and “relationships with a wide range of companies.”

    Democrat Kathy Hochul, another lawmaker ousted in November after winning a special election, returned to New York, where she is vice president of government relations for M&T Bank in Buffalo. She did not return phone messages seeking comment for this story.

    Some former lawmakers have multiple jobs.

    Former Arizona senator Jon Kyl, who left Congress in January as the Senate’s No. 2 Republican, joined Covington & Burling this month. He plans to work on tax policy, immigration, defense, health care and cyber-security issues.

    Kyl teaches at Arizona State University, appears on Fox News as a contributor and has teamed up with ex-senator Joe Lieberman of Connecticut to co-chair a project on American global leadership at a Washington think-tank.

    “I’m just as busy,” Kyl said of life after Congress. “It’s just that I don’t have a big staff to help me.”

    Retired Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Az., has joined the Washington office of Covington & Burling, where he plans to work on tax policy, immigration, defense, health care and cyber-security issues.

    Republican Scott Brown will focus on financial services and commercial real estate for the law firm Nixon Peabody.

    Former representative Howard Berman, D-Calif., starts work Monday at Covington & Burling, where he says he will provide “strategic advice” to clients.

  • DMG

    This article is for all you blacks who have a chip on your shoulder against white people because your past ancestry was brought over here as slaves for white people.

    Read on to see how you blacks were the slave traders trading yourselves. You blacks started all your own problems by yourselves just like you do today! You just don’t think! You just don’t get it!

    This article is for drunk racist hate crime comitter little dummy OPIE uh Oprah…

    The Origins of the African S_lave Trade : Started by the

    BLACKS THEMSELVES IN AFRICA WORKING WITH THE MUSLIM ISLAMIST’S….

    If the stupid blacks in africa didn’t sell their own kind as slaves then maybe there would not be black slaves all around the world and the USA had one of the lowest % of black slaves and 25% of black slave owners in the USA were blacks themselves who had up to 12 black slaves at a time. This article is written by a black man.

    So up yours obama, holder, winfrey, sharpton, jackson and all you other cowardly black lying liberal left garbage. READ THE WHOLE TRUTH HERE!

    In 1807 Britain outlawed s_lavery. In 1820 the king of the African kingdom of Ashanti inquired why the Christians did not want to trade s_laves with him anymore, since they

    worshipped the same god as the Muslims and the Muslims were continuing the

    trade like before.

    The civil rights movement of the 1960’s have left many people with the belief that the s_lave trade was exclusively a European/USA phenomenon and only evil white people were to blame for it. This is a simplistic scenario that hardly reflects the facts.

    Thousands of records of transactions are available on a CDROM prepared by Harvard University and several comprehensive books have been published recently on the origins of modern s_lavery (namely, Hugh Thomas’ The S_lave Trade and Robin Blackburn’s The Making Of New World S_lavery) that shed new light on centuries of s_lave trading.

    What these records show is that the modern s_lave trade flourished in the early middle

    ages, as early as 869, especially between Muslim traders and western African

    kingdoms. For moralists, the most important aspect of that trade should be that

    Muslims were selling goods to the African kingdoms and the African kingdoms

    were paying with their own people. In most instances, no violence was necessary

    to obtain those s_laves. Contrary to legends and novels and Hollywood movies,

    the white traders did not need to savagely kill entire tribes in order to exact

    their tribute in s_laves. All they needed to do is bring goods that appealed to

    the kings of those tribes. The kings would gladly sell their own subjects. (Of

    course, this neither condones the white traders who bought the s_laves nor deny

    that many white traders still committed atrocities to maximize their business).

    This explains why s_lavery became “black”. Ancient s_lavery, e.g. under the Roman

    empire, would not discriminate: s_laves were both white and black (so were

    Emperors and Popes). In the middle ages, all European countries outlawed

    s_lavery (of course, Western powers retained countless “civilized”

    ways to ens_lave their citizens, but that’s another story), whereas the African

    kingdoms happily continued in their trade. Therefore, only colored people could

    be s_laves, and that is how the stereotype for African-American s_lavery was

    born. It was not based on an ancestral hatred of blacks by whites, but simply

    on the fact that blacks were the only ones selling s_laves, and they were selling

    people of their own race. (To be precise, Christians were also selling Muslim

    s_laves captured in war, and Muslims were selling Christian s_laves captured in

    war, but neither the Christians of Europe nor the Muslims of Africa and the

    Middle East were selling their own people).

    Then the Muslim the trade of African s_laves declined rapidly when Arab domination was reduced by the emerging European powers. (Note: Arabs continued to capture and sell s_laves, but mostly in the Mediterranean. In fact, Robert Davis estimates that

    1.25 million European Christians were ens_laved by the “barbary

    states” of northern Africa. As late as 1801 the USA bombed Morocco,

    Algiers, Tunis and Tripoli precisely to stop that Arab s_lave trade of

    Christians. The rate of mortality of those Christian s_laves in the Islamic

    world was roughly the same as the mortality rate in the Atlantic s_lave trade

    of the same period.)

    Christians took over in black Africa, though. The first ones were the Portuguese, who, applying an idea that originally developed in Italian seatrading cities, and often using

    Italian venture capital, started exploiting sub-Saharan s_laves in the 1440s to

    support the economy of the sugar plantations (mainly for their own African

    colonies of Sao Tome and Madeira).

    The Dutch were the first, apparently, to import black s_laves into North America, but black s_laves had already been employed all over the world, including South and

    Central America. We tend to focus on what happened in North America because the

    United States would eventually fight a war over s_lavery (and it’s in the U.S.

    that large sectors of the population would start condemning s_lavery, contrary

    to the indifference that Muslims and most Europeans showed for it).

    Even after Europeans began transporting black s_laves to America, most trade was just that: “trade”. In most instances, the Europeans did not need to use

    any force to get those s_laves. The s_laves were “sold” more or less

    legally by their (black) owners. Scholars estimate that about 12,000,000

    Africans were sold by Africans to Europeans (most of them before 1776, when the

    USA wasn’t yet born) and 17,000,000 were sold to Arabs. The legends of European

    mercenaries capturing free people in the jungle are mostly just that: legends.

    A few mercenaries certainly stormed peaceful tribes and committed terrible

    crimes, but that was not the rule. There was no need to risk their lives, so

    most of them didn’t: they simply purchased people.

    As an African-American scholar (Nathan Huggins) has written, the “identity”

    of black Africans is largely a white invention: sub-Saharan Africans never felt

    like they were one people, they felt (and still feel) that they belonged to

    different tribes. The distinctions of tribe were far stronger than the distinctions

    of race.

    Everything else is true: millions of s_laves died on ships and of diseases, millions of blacks worked for free to allow the Western economies to prosper, and the economic

    interests in s_lavery became so strong that the southern states of the United

    States opposed repealing it. But those millions of s_laves were just one of the

    many instances of mass exploitation: the industrial revolution was exported to

    the USA by enterpreuners exploiting millions of poor immigrants from Europe.

    The fate of those immigrants was not much better than the fate of the s_laves

    in the South. As a matter of fact, many s_laves enjoyed far better living

    conditions in the southern plantations than European immigrants in the

    industrial cities (which were sometimes comparable to concentration camps). It

    is not a coincidence that s_lavery was abolished at a time when millions of

    European and Chinese immigrants provided the same kind of cheap labor.

    It is also fair to say that, while everybody tolerated it, very few whites practiced s_lavery: in 1860 there were 385,000 USA citizens who owned s_laves, or about 1.4% of the white population (there were 27 million whites in the USA). That percentage was zero in the states that did not allow s_lavery (only 8 million of the 27 million whites lived in states that allowed s_lavery). Incidentally, in 1830 about 25%

    of the free Negro s_lave masters in South Carolina owned 10 or more s_laves:

    that is a much higher percentage (ten times more) than the number of white

    s_lave owners. Thus s_lave owners were a tiny minority (1.4%) and it was not

    only whites: it was just about anybody who could, including blacks themselves.

    Moral opposition to s_lavery was widespread even before Lincoln, and throughout Europe. On the other hand, opposition to s_lavery was never particularly strong in Africa itself, where s_lavery is slowly being eradicated only in our time. One can

    suspect that s_lavery would have remained common in most African kingdoms until

    this day: what crushed s_lavery in Africa was that all those African kingdoms

    became colonies of western European countries that (for one reason or another)

    eventually decided to outlaw s_lavery. When, in the 1960s, those African

    colonies regained their independence, numerous cases of s_lavery resurfaced. And

    countless African dictators behaved in a way that makes a s_lave owner look

    like a saint. Given the evidence that this kind of s_lavery was practiced by

    some Africans before it was practiced by some Americans, that it was abolished

    by all whites and not by some Africans, and that some Africans resumed it the

    moment they could, why would one keep blaming the USA but never blame, say,

    Ghana or the Congo?

    The more we study it, the less blame we have to put on the USA for the s_lave trade with black Africa: it was pioneered by the Arabs, its economic mechanism was invented by the Italians and the Portuguese, it was mostly run by western Europeans, and it was conducted with the full cooperation of many African kings. The USA fostered free criticism of the phenomenon: no such criticism was allowed in the Muslim and Christian nations that started trading goods for s_laves, and no such

    criticism was allowed in the African nations that started selling their own

    people (and, even today, no such criticism is allowed within the Arab world).

    Today it is politically correct to blame some European empires and the USA for s_lavery (forgetting that it was practiced by everybody since prehistoric times). But I

    rarely read the other side of the story: that the nations who were the first to

    develop a repulsion for s_lavery and eventually abolish s_lavery were precisely

    those countries (especially Britain and the USA). In 1787 the Society for

    Effecting the Abolition of the S_lave Trade was founded in England: it was the

    first society anywhere in the world opposed to s_lavery. In 1792 English prime

    minister William Pitt called publicly for the end of the s_lave trade: it was

    the first time in history (anywhere in the world) that the ruler of a country

    had called for the abolition of s_lavery. No African king and emperor had ever

    done so. As Dinesh D’Souza wrote, “What is uniquely Western is not

    s_lavery but the movement to abolish s_lavery”.

    To be completely fair, what was also unique about the western s_lave trade is the scale (the millions shipped to another continent in a relatively short period of time),

    and, of course, that it eventually became a racist affair, discriminating

    blacks, whereas previous s_lave trades had not discriminated based on the color

    of the skin. What is unique about the USA, in particular, is the unfair

    treatment that blacks received AFTER emancipation, which is, after all, the

    real source of the whole controversy, because, otherwise, just about everybody

    on this planet could claim to be the descendant of an ancient s_lave).

    That does not mean that western s_lave traders were justified in what they did, but placing all the blame on them is a way to absolve all the others.

    Also, it is worth noting that the death rate among the white crews of the s_lave ships (20-25%) was higher than the rate among black s_laves (15%) because s_laves were more valuable than sailors but nobody has written books and filmed epics about those

    sailors (often unwillingly enrolled or even kidnapped in ports around Europe when

    they were drunk).

    To this day, too many Africans, Arabs and Europeans believe that the African s_lave trade was an USA aberration, not their own invention.

    By the time the s_lave trade was abolished in the West, there were many more s_laves in Africa (black s_laves of black owners) than in the Americas.

    Total Population in the USA today

    315,100,000 total population in the USA today census

    77.9% white = 245,147,800

    13% black = 40,963,000

    Difference is 204,184,800 more whites than blacks in the USA

    2 hundred and 4 million, 1 hundred and 84 thousand, 800 more whites than blacks

    vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

    The Origins of the African S_lave Trade : Started by the

    BLACKS THEMSELVES IN AFRICA WORKING WITH THE MUSLIM ISLAMIST’S….

    In 1807 Britain outlawed s_lavery. In 1820 the king of the African kingdom of Ashanti inquired why the Christians did not want to trade s_laves with him anymore, since they worshipped the same god as the Muslims and the Muslims were continuing the trade like before.

    The civil rights movement of the 1960’s have left many people with the belief that the s_lave trade was exclusively a European/USA phenomenon and only evil white people were to blame for it. This is a simplistic scenario that hardly reflects the facts.

    Thousands of records of transactions are available on a CDROM prepared by Harvard University and several comprehensive books have been published recently on the origins of modern s_lavery (namely, Hugh Thomas’ The S_lave Trade and Robin Blackburn’sThe Making Of New World S_lavery) that shed new light on centuries of s_lave trading.

    What these records show is that the modern s_lave trade flourished in the early middle ages, as early as 869, especially between Muslim traders and western African kingdoms. For moralists, the most important aspect of that trade should be that Muslims were selling goods to the African kingdoms and the African kingdoms were paying with their own people. In most instances, no violence was necessary to obtain those s_laves. Contrary to legends and novels and Hollywood movies, the white traders did not need to savagely kill entire tribes in order to exact their tribute in s_laves. All they needed to do is bring goods that appealed to the kings of those tribes. The kings would gladly sell their own subjects. (Of course, this neither condones the white traders who bought the s_laves nor deny that many white traders still committed atrocities to maximize their business).

    This explains why s_lavery became “black”. Ancient s_lavery, e.g. under the Roman empire, would not discriminate: s_laves were both white and black (so were Emperors and Popes). In the middle ages, all European countries outlawed s_lavery (of course, Western powers retained countless “civilized” ways to ens_lave their citizens, but that’s another story), whereas the African kingdoms happily continued in their trade. Therefore, only colored people could be s_laves, and that is how the stereotype for African-American s_lavery was born. It was not based on an ancestral hatred of blacks by whites, but simply on the fact that blacks were the only ones selling s_laves, and they were selling people of their own race. (To be precise, Christians were also selling Muslim s_laves captured in war, and Muslims were selling Christian s_laves captured in war, but neither the Christians of Europe nor the Muslims of Africa and the Middle East were selling their own people).

    Then the Muslim the trade of African s_laves declined rapidly when Arab domination was reduced by the emerging European powers. (Note: Arabs continued to capture and sell s_laves, but mostly in the Mediterranean. In fact, Robert Davis estimates that 1.25 million European Christians were ens_laved by the “barbary states” of northern Africa. As late as 1801 the USA bombed Morocco, Algiers, Tunis and Tripoli precisely to stop that Arab s_lave trade of Christians. The rate of mortality of those Christian s_laves in the Islamic world was roughly the same as the mortality rate in the Atlantic s_lave trade of the same period.)

    Christians took over in black Africa, though. The first ones were the Portuguese, who, applying an idea that originally developed in Italian seatrading cities, and often using Italian venture capital, started exploiting sub-Saharan s_laves in the 1440s to support the economy of the sugar plantations (mainly for their own African colonies of Sao Tome and Madeira).

    The Dutch were the first, apparently, to import black s_laves into North America, but black s_laves had already been employed all over the world, including South and Central America. We tend to focus on what happened in North America because the United States would eventually fight a war over s_lavery (and it’s in the U.S. that large sectors of the population would start condemning s_lavery, contrary to the indifference that Muslims and most Europeans showed for it).

    Even after Europeans began transporting black s_laves to America, most trade was just that: “trade”. In most instances, the Europeans did not need to use any force to get those s_laves. The s_laves were “sold” more or less legally by their (black) owners. Scholars estimate that about 12,000,000 Africans were sold by Africans to Europeans (most of them before 1776, when the USA wasn’t yet born) and 17,000,000 were sold to Arabs. The legends of European mercenaries capturing free people in the jungle are mostly just that: legends. A few mercenaries certainly stormed peaceful tribes and committed terrible crimes, but that was not the rule. There was no need to risk their lives, so most of them didn’t: they simply purchased people.

    As an African-American scholar (Nathan Huggins) has written, the “identity” of black Africans is largely a white invention: sub-Saharan Africans never felt like they were one people, they felt (and still feel) that they belonged to different tribes. The distinctions of tribe were far stronger than the distinctions of race.

    Everything else is true: millions of s_laves died on ships and of diseases, millions of blacks worked for free to allow the Western economies to prosper, and the economic interests in s_lavery became so strong that the southern states of the United States opposed repealing it. But those millions of s_laves were just one of the many instances of mass exploitation: the industrial revolution was exported to the USA by enterpreuners exploiting millions of poor immigrants from Europe. The fate of those immigrants was not much better than the fate of the s_laves in the South. As a matter of fact, many s_laves enjoyed far better living conditions in the southern plantations than European immigrants in the industrial cities (which were sometimes comparable to concentration camps). It is not a coincidence that s_lavery was abolished at a time when millions of European and Chinese immigrants provided the same kind of cheap labor.

    It is also fair to say that, while everybody tolerated it, very few whites practiced s_lavery: in 1860 there were 385,000 USA citizens who owned s_laves, or about 1.4% of the white population (there were 27 million whites in the USA). That percentage was zero in the states that did not allow s_lavery (only 8 million of the 27 million whites lived in states that allowed s_lavery). Incidentally, in 1830 about 25% of the free Negro s_lave masters in South Carolina owned 10 or more s_laves: that is a much higher percentage (ten times more) than the number of white s_lave owners. Thus s_lave owners were a tiny minority (1.4%) and it was not only whites: it was just about anybody who could, including blacks themselves.

    Moral opposition to s_lavery was widespread even before Lincoln, and throughout Europe. On the other hand, opposition to s_lavery was never particularly strong in Africa itself, where s_lavery is slowly being eradicated only in our time. One can suspect that s_lavery would have remained common in most African kingdoms until this day: what crushed s_lavery in Africa was that all those African kingdoms became colonies of western European countries that (for one reason or another) eventually decided to outlaw s_lavery. When, in the 1960s, those African colonies regained their independence, numerous cases of s_lavery resurfaced. And countless African dictators behaved in a way that makes a s_lave owner look like a saint. Given the evidence that this kind of s_lavery was practiced by some Africans before it was practiced by some Americans, that it was abolished by all whites and not by some Africans, and that some Africans resumed it the moment they could, why would one keep blaming the USA but never blame, say, Ghana or the Congo?

    The more we study it, the less blame we have to put on the USA for the s_lave trade with black Africa: it was pioneered by the Arabs, its economic mechanism was invented by the Italians and the Portuguese, it was mostly run by western Europeans, and it was conducted with the full cooperation of many African kings. The USA fostered free criticism of the phenomenon: no such criticism was allowed in the Muslim and Christian nations that started trading goods for s_laves, and no such criticism was allowed in the African nations that started selling their own people (and, even today, no such criticism is allowed within the Arab world).

    Today it is politically correct to blame some European empires and the USA for s_lavery (forgetting that it was practiced by everybody since prehistoric times). But I rarely read the other side of the story: that the nations who were the first to develop a repulsion for s_lavery and eventually abolish s_lavery were precisely those countries (especially Britain and the USA). In 1787 the Society for Effecting the Abolition of the S_lave Trade was founded in England: it was the first society anywhere in the world opposed to s_lavery. In 1792 English prime minister William Pitt called publicly for the end of the s_lave trade: it was the first time in history (anywhere in the world) that the ruler of a country had called for the abolition of s_lavery. No African king and emperor had ever done so. As Dinesh D’Souza wrote, “What is uniquely Western is not s_lavery but the movement to abolish s_lavery”.

    To be completely fair, what was also unique about the western s_lave trade is the scale (the millions shipped to another continent in a relatively short period of time), and, of course, that it eventually became a racist affair, discriminating blacks, whereas previous s_lave trades had not discriminated based on the color of the skin. What is unique about the USA, in particular, is the unfair treatment that blacks received AFTER emancipation, which is, after all, the real source of the whole controversy, because, otherwise, just about everybody on this planet could claim to be the descendant of an ancient s_lave).

    That does not mean that western s_lave traders were justified in what they did, but placing all the blame on them is a way to absolve all the others.

    Also, it is worth noting that the death rate among the white crews of the s_lave ships (20-25%) was higher than the rate among black s_laves (15%) because s_laves were more valuable than sailors but nobody has written books and filmed epics about those sailors (often unwillingly enrolled or even kidnapped in ports around Europe when they were drunk).

    To this day, too many Africans, Arabs and Europeans believe that the African s_lave trade was an USA aberration, not their own invention.

    By the time the s_lave trade was abolished in the West, there were many more s_laves in Africa (black s_laves of black owners) than in the Americas.

    Total Population in the USA today

    315,100,000 total population in the USA today

    77.9% white = 245,147,800

    13% black = 40,963,000

    Difference is 204,184,800 more whites than blacks

    2 hundred and 4 million, 1 hundred and 84 thousand, 800

    more whites than blacks for you al sharpton and

    jesse jackson and obama and eric holder and the naacp and oprah

    who need help with the big numbers and facts that are true and not

    made up disney lies by you cowards.

    • Arationofreason

      Enjoyed the history lesson and the statistics.

  • MrD

    I tried to read some of the comments but finally gave up.However the thought of people that have lived together all their lives and respected one another will suffer along with the extremists and the folks on both sides in Washington will be safe in their bunkers until it is all finished.Allowing a former Nazi sympathizer (apostate Jew who sold out his own people) to put millions into the destruction of America (George Soros) reveals just what greed can do.There are people in every ethnic group (I believe God created one race-the human) that are decent and just want to live their lives,have a family,and be able to get along with anyone,but they are being placed in the same stereotype as those who spend their lives thriving on destruction and chaos rather than making a better life for everyone.I personally believe that the Lord has given up on America and will allow it to go as far as it can downward.Read Habakkuk and his concern,but see what the Lord told him,that’s the future.

    • Melissa Katsmom Votano

      God never gives up on anything.

  • Truth

    So true MrD

  • Truth

    Thank you for your enlightment on the subject of Slavery DMG. I was not raised to hate other people because of the color of there skin. We are all Gods children.

    • malik

      preach that steveie wonder bullshit to some other fool we blk gods know better

  • Melissa Katsmom Votano

    Interesting. Face facts folks….everyone is “racist” to one degree or another.

    I don’t suffer from any white guilt. Why should I? I have never bought, sold or owned another human being. I give the things I give to others because they asked for it and need it not because I want to “feel good” about myself, think I know what is better for someone else nor am I attempting to make up for past wrongs or to get my face on the news which is what the Left tends to do.

    They don’t know any better because they have been told this is how they should be….that they owe something to someone else for something that was done by someone else a long time ago. And if they don’t they are hateful, racist, white folks and no one wants to be perceived as hateful and racist. The same holds true for the black folks who think mayhem is the answer because they are told by the Al Sharptons of the world this is how it should be. Unless you want to be called a traitor to your “race” and labeled as an Uncle Tom you fall in step with the narrative.

    What a shame it is.

    • rhondakelly07

      Please see my post I left here for you sir about White slavery

  • DMG

    To al sharpton, barrack obama, eric holder, jesse jackson and oprah winfrey and the NAACP,,,,, you made such a gigantic big deal out of 1 black teen treyvon martin being shot by a latino – black guy that you call white… Now your silent over the white baseball player from Australia and the white 88 year old marine, both killed by black kids. Your very silent and smiling.

    That’s very very good of you. Your silent and smiling. Thank You For That!

    Here is for us – the other side, the white side. Since the day treyvon martin was shot dead ( 1 black kid ) by a latino – black guy that you call white… to this day –
    today – almost 11,000 black kids have been shot dead by black kids in America and us white people are now very silent and smiling.

    There will be no race war – whites vs blacks, ( That will be christians and jews against the cowardly muslims that obama is sneaking into this country). The black people are killing themselves off without any help from white people.

    That’s very very good of you again for this. We are also silent and smiling.

    Thank You For That al sharpton, barrack obama, eric holder, jesse jackson and oprah winfrey and the NAACP! By these numbers alone – you all are eliminating your selves by yourselves and Your very silent and smiling.

    Your also blaming us the white people and we still stay quiet and smiling at what you say, how you say it and that you blame us, the white people.

    Thank you again!

    Think about that for a while. And look at yourself first if you say anything negative against me. Your not really talking negative to me but to your silent smiling selves NAACP and the obama gang.

    if black liberals really want to invest in their young black kids, they must first invest in restoring the traditional family unit.

    As long as 68 percent of black women who have children are unwed, there are no cures for the social maladies preventing black progress.

    • alan_1969

      The only blacks that will get ahead in this society are those that work their way up, just like the rest of us. Those kind have my respect.

      • malik

        no those black people who will be respected are those with the knowledge to do for themselves who will become independent of you white minded demon bastards

        • infadelicious

          Why are you still dependent on whites? If you are- Dont blame crackers. You should blame yourself. People from other cultures and ethnicities come here and have done just fine. Blacks are well able Maybe you’re just a failure yourself and looking for a scapegoat. Look in the mirror RACIST

    • malik

      oh no devil war is coming you will be the first one ill kill

      • rhondakelly07

        You are evil wicked racist God will put you in Hell…How many whites did you kill or get killed..

    • rhondakelly07

      You just have to come back see my post

  • DMG

    Actor Jamie Foxx exemplified this mindset while promoting his movie (Django). He joyously proclaimed:
    “I kill all the white people in the movie. How great is that? And how black is that?”

    That is just a Hollywood script but in real life jamie fox would be the first one shot dead in the streets of LA…

    • livefreeordie

      And when he said it, all the stupid, STUPID white people there just clapped and hollered. Did it not occur to them that they are white? How stupid are the younger white people???

  • bdcorvette

    Some of us are prepared. I just bought another box of Hornady .38 Sp+P hollow points. Not interested in starting anything, but I WILL finish it.

    Jamie Foxx is not a black; he is a n***** as defined by Taleeb Starks, the black author of the book, “Un-Civil War: Blacks vs. Niggers.” I am sure that he has difficulty with some of his neighbors, as he lives in a mixed middle class neighborhood as do I. I admire his courage and forthrightness in sending the same message that whites have spread amongst themselves for years.

    • malik

      listen to this demon wow really cracka

      • rhondakelly07

        YOUR ANOTHER DEMOCRAT..EVIL WICKED RACIST WITH WHITES GOD HELP YOU..

    • rhondakelly07

      Could you see my post come back

  • Arationofreason

    Didn’t any of you here read the reference :

    http://www.amazon.com/The-Un-Civil-War-NIGGERS-ebook/dp/B00BMHY5R4/?_encoding=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&linkCode=ur2&tag=bookfree-20

    The book clearly defines terms and differentiates between ‘Niggers’ and the majority of ‘Black’ citizens who are honest hard working people. Don’t paint ‘blacks’ with the broad brush which should be reserved for the sociopathic criminal element of the black race. The causes and remedies of this still huge problem should be the topic of discussion and not blacks in general.
    Please be more specific with your comments, you embarrass me before some of my friends and associates.

    • rhondakelly07

      I want you to see what I wrote about white slavery see my post up here come back please

  • Sharon Scully

    I was reading an article where a black man was standing in line to get his free Obama bucks. (His words) He commented that We owe him because of slavery of his family 150 years ago. Are these people really serious? It just goes to show how ignorant some people really are. I feel I owe No one anything. Get a fricking job like the rest of us.

    • spencer1952

      Although I think you completely made this story up for some sort of effect, I don’t think anyone especially a black person wants a damn thing from you Sharon. You are just trying to get some dumb redneck angry over nothing at all. Please stop this practice because it makes you look like a cheap @#$%.

      • C.D. Allen

        Oh no, that actually happened. And Bill Maher had a similar situation captured for his Real Time cable tv show. Fast forward to the 1:45 mark. http://youtu.be/Z5tqH7UrzOw

    • malik

      typical white trash cracka talk

      • rhondakelly07

        Blacks had more whites as slaves and for longer in Africa from 1530 to 1780…200 years of white slavery in America…Black Slavery in Mexico Spain..Even Arabs…Whites are in Genocide in the whole world.. Democrats..like you we know it’s you that is really racist..in the end WHITE JESUS WILL GET YOU, wont he…race card denied!!

    • rhondakelly07

      Blacks had more white people for slaves and for longer please come back to the web site

  • Harvey Melton

    really just think about it, if the devil wanted to come and take down America in person who would he come back as and why? he would think of all the races that has been done wrong to where he could get the most support from and be more influential in, he would think about the Indians, now they were done wrong in so many many ways their land taken their people and even babies killed etc. then put on worthless reservations etc. But no that wouldn’t work because the Indians aren’t so easily incited to violence and riot and so easily excited, oh yeah he would think I will go back as a black man one from mother Africa no less, because of what they perceive the white man has done that in their modern minds they have allowed themselves to ignore the facts that are otherwise prevalent in the rest of the world also it will be easy to use this race to bring America down, well my work will be practically done for me, I will get this people excited to commit violence, murder and injustice and civil unrest, the nations attention will be on that while I do these other evils to help things along at a even faster pace, urgency is the key, as a matter of fact I will use that urgent ”pass it now” phrase everytime I work up some evil unworkable law or reg. then I will blame it on my predecessor who after all was a no good Whiteman anyway. you see how this is working? makes sense now huh?

    • malik

      yes spoken like a true coon

    • johnharping

      Never mind genocide, enslavement, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Napalm, VX Gas, and nuclear weapons. No a bunch of people rioting is far, far worst.

      You silly former slave.

  • infadelicious

    You’ll hear crickets and tumbleweeds about black on black or black on white crime from the race hustlers. there’s no $$$ in it for them…..

    • rhondakelly07

      See what I wrote about white slavery

  • Mark Steel

    Blacks will lose a race war and lose it fast and that will be the end of them. 95% of Blacks live in cities and suburbs. Whites own and control all of the weapons manufacturers, ammo, medical supplies, food etc. All Whitey has to do is cut off the supply lines and it’s over. Most Blacks are to dumb to see that so you can guarantee a race war will happen and when it does all these violent hate filled negroes are gone.

    • rhondakelly07

      See what i wrote up here

  • Davis

    This is true. In an effort to maintain control over the blks the liberal community has resorted to an emotional mythos that insists that blks are the perpetual victim of racism, EVEN THOUGH, they, as a group, have benefited the most from more overt forms of “assistance” than the “white privilege” they insist exists in this country.

    While “white privilege” is the “tail wind” that they maintain has helped whites get to where they are (if this is true), it STILL REQUIRES that the white individual actually sail the boat in the first place. However, the assistance the blks have received is in cold hard cash money. It requires ZERO effort at all.

    In order to maintain this system of control, liberals have concocted this idea of control by making blks think they are constantly oppressed and it’s “not their fault”. However, this has gotten away from them. When you spend 50, 60, 70 years telling a culture that they are being oppressed yet can only point to a few instances of it and the rest is simply an amorphous statement of “white privilege” or other non-definitive examples, you breed something that you will lose control over. This is especially true when you double down and say that there is no possibility of improvement of your position.

    The liberals are beginning to lose control over their system of getting votes. You can see this developing in the interactions of the blks with the mexicans. The blks are beginning to ask “wait, why are these mexicans getting OUR money”.

    It will only get worse, but not in the way Jamie Foxx wants it to.

    • rhondakelly07

      Please come back read my post

  • Gregory VII

    When I was 18 years old , I was working at a commercial Aviation repair facility. I was nothing more than a errand boy but since I love Aviation was happy to have the job. One major project we had going at the facility was a McDonnell Douglas MD-11 test program . One day my boss ( A black man) asked me to go on board the aircraft as it had just returned from a test flight . I was too meet the captain and crew and take them to their hotel. I walked up the steps of the aircraft and met the captain right away. He was a black man. I don’t recall even thinking about his race at the time , since I did not really have time to. I had the chance to meet and talk with him over the next few weeks and learned what a experienced pilot and engineer he was. He had been a USAF fighter pilot and test pilot at Tonopah and had allot of interesting stories. He then became a McDonnell Douglas test pilot on heavy jets ( DC10/MD11/KC10)
    To sum it up, this was a man who made and accepted no excuses for himself. He did not become what he was by waiting for someone to hold his hand or give him a pass because of his skin color. Every time I hear liberals talk about this issue I always go back to that time and I know that race is no excuse for achievement.

    • rhondakelly07

      Please come back read my [post

  • Marie

    The reason why the media wants to portray Blacks as eternal victims is because the media are at war with Whites. The media doesn’t care one iota about Blacks( see how Blacks are treated in Israel). The media are using Blacks to attack Whites. Once the media are finished with you, you’ll be finished. They have no loyalty to you, only to their own kind.

    • rhondakelly07

      Blackjs had more white people for slaves and for longer.. In Africa, from 1530 to 1780….200 years of white slavery in America, More whites was slaves..Shipped here to USA, by Africans, Mexicans Spain, Arabs, INDIANS, and hey had both white/ black slaves…Less that 2 % of whites relly had slaves it’s all a DEMOCRATIC COVER UP…For 152 years its been a lie..Millions of whites have been Lyinched because Liberal news hides it and democrats control,our school.. I started White history month, from Nov to DEC….Jan to FEB, is white slavery month…March To April is White genocide month…Please put posters up every where put it in our history book…

  • infadelicious

    there is no payback. None of these thugs acting out were slaves, unless you count their exchanging their dignity and their vote for crumbs and trinkets given to them by the democrats who stay in power by keeping their special interests groups down. And none of the whites I know own slaves today, so what are they being paid back for? Pffffttt! Blacks have been had, just as women have for decades by the democratic party. Well, the jig is up and blacks and women are gonna be even worse off as they are thrown under the bus because the democrats will now pander to their new pet minority, the illegals……………..

  • rhondakelly07

    Who is really racist now?

    • johnharping

      Same as who was before, white people.

  • Marie

    The overwhelming majority of Blacks who live in this country arrived here after ww2.

    • Prosperity

      Maybe if by “arrived here” you mean “were born here.”

    • johnharping

      I hear white IQ is highest in the world…then again maybe not.