It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

"Thank God white people populated America"

page: 6
49
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 11:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: abe froman
a reply to: Hazardous1408

You're not even worth talking to.

When asked to show prosperous black led countries your basic response was, I can't because white people.





How I did that without event mentioning white people is a miracle.

Kudos to me.




posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 11:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: abe froman
a reply to: nwtrucker

You forgot the part where they tried to beg the white farmers to come back after they ran everything into the ground.

True story.


Yep, I had heard that. Not blaming the locals as much as the crooks that came after.



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 11:43 PM
link   
I watched a documentary on Lewis and clark, and it discussed his writings about Indian tribes and the way to control one tribe that was a problem. I like real history, not cowboy shows to teach me things. Sure there were some bad tribes, I explained how they kicked out Indians that were troublesome and how they banded together and then attacked the peaceful tribes. If they would have had a better system and killed or imprisoned these troublemakers, they would have had less of a problem with them coming back and attacking and stealing the women after they killed all the men.

I am not trying to paint an angelic picture, I read about how Europe let out prisoners if they would come here and kill the Indians. They would pay these people to clear the land so that the loggers and furriers could come in.

The European governments, especially England, was pretty cruel. I suppose you believe the potato famine in Ireland was about potatoes rotting too, look that up, England would not allow aid from America and India to help the Irish, they did not need to starve, their landscape was full of cows that they were not allowed to touch. Why do you think the Irish were so pissed at England?

The truth is out there, the Indians were tired of being pushed into reservations and being screwed. The ones still around now are from the ones who accepted their fate. There is some pretty strange real history of how they got some Indians to betray their people. Thank god those days are gone, most of the Native Americans nowadays try not to let it bother them. They do not want to have that persecution happen again.

A few of the founding fathers of our country were offspring of some of the criminals let out of prison in Northern Europe to clear the land of Native Americans. I can't remember off hand which two of them were. Some of them turned into big businessmen over here too, these people gained great wealth and their offspring are still in the upper society in America.

I spent three or four days researching the people who cleared the land. Of course, The Churchgoers in Europe did not have a problem with their government killing a bunch of Heathens across the ocean if it made their lives better, god was on the side of the Church. Thing is, Some of the Indians already knew about the ten Commandments and some accepted Christianity because it was so similar to their beliefs. The Ten commandments were basically already here.

This is in the history if you research it too. Heathen can mean man of the woods, uneducated. It does not need to mean not Christian. I am a Heathen because I live in the country and I love walking in the woods and picking berries and hunting.



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 11:43 PM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

I work with and through people from God's Bible School here in Cincinnati.

Those white devils keep funding African men and women's education and visas to come to America.

Convenient for Africans to be sure.



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 11:43 PM
link   
a reply to: TobyFlenderson

Well, we did boot some Mormons off our 'new' island!
en.wikipedia.org...(Lake_Michigan)



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 11:43 PM
link   
a reply to: abe froman

Sounds like an excuse to not answer my questions. You have time to reply to me but you don't have time to reply to me. Makes sense.



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 11:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Tempter


Is Marc Faber someone whose opinion is worthy of our concern?



Why not? We entertain flat-Earthers here



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 11:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Hazardous1408

I don't think you're even fooling yourself at this point.



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 11:45 PM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Wah.



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 11:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: nwtrucker



Since the whites were booted from control, the place went down the crapper due to internal fighting, from my understanding. The indigent leaders selling out resources to Corporate interests. Until they get knocked off and replaced with someone just as crooked.


Sounds an awful lot like America today. But let's ignore that fact.


Why ignore it? It's a good point. Nothing to do with race whatsoever. Now it's the Chinese 'colonizing' Africa.

It doesn't matter what race it is, apparently. All are capable of all the negative attributes known to man.

All I'd expand that to is say that this racist hysteria towards whites in the U.S. is bullcrap. One of the most diverse nations on earth. The immigrants that are not white far outweigh the white immigrants. Still a better place to be than 'home' for many.

'Whites' are no more or less racist than 'non-whites'.



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 11:51 PM
link   
a reply to: abe froman

Good for you, kudos.

America is far from a paradise, Europe is far from a paradise. I'd even go as far as to say that those African and Amazonian tribes have it better than we do simply for the fact they spend all their time with friends and family instead of handing their kids off to strangers for large portions of the week while they work a job they usually hate.

The "prosperous" societies you seem to speak so highly of have ruined the family structure we were meant to be a part of. You spend more time working your job than you do with family, you let your kids spend a good portion of their lives with total strangers and basically let them raise them for you.

Prosperity means jack when most of the people are unhappy or secretly unhappy with their lives. Anyone who says they're happy working a 40+ hour week and being away from the ones they love are lying to themselves.

I didn't mean you in particular, just a general statement.
edit on 10/17/2017 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 11:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: Alien Abduct

So do you have to be intelligent in order to be a good person? Black people are usually more athletic than white people, does that make them better? No, so what is your point other than saying black people are dumber than white people?


Prosperity.



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 11:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Alien Abduct

And prosperity comes with numerous downfalls. Read my post right above yours. Prosperity seems to have the side affect of no family time and giving your children to strangers to be raised.

Yay prosperity!



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 11:57 PM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

You are 100% correct.

We have reached an accord.



posted on Oct, 18 2017 @ 12:00 AM
link   
Abe, I believe you were looking for an amazingly prosperous majority led black nation in Africa, right?

Look no further!


I give you, Wakanda!



posted on Oct, 18 2017 @ 12:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: rickymouse

originally posted by: abe froman
a reply to: rickymouse

The native tribes were murdering each other in droves for land and in tribal wars long before the white folk showed up.

That idyllic picture of native life is a fairy tale.


The Indians would kick the trouble makers out of their tribes and these trouble makers would gather together and attack the good tribes. That is true.

There were a lot of areas in this country with peaceful communities of Indians that had treaties with other tribes. From what I have discussed with the Indians themselves about their communities long ago, what you are saying is nothing other than fake propaganda. Even the Lewis and Clark expedition commented on how friendly most tribes were when they ventured out west to find a better way out there.

Look at real history, most of the Indians were peaceful back before we came here and they had an extensive trade network. When the White man came here, they had to make up the Heathen thing to justify killing off the Indians so they could get their land and steal their buffalo and hides. They also logged out most of the big trees to send back or to use the oak bark to make tanning solutions for the buffalo hides. The Indians did not like them killing the buffalo to just get the hides, I saw pictures of piles of buffalo bones from those days, that was happening all the way into the eighteen hundreds.

Look for the real history, not the lies that people of those days were spreading to make themselves look good to the Christians of Europe. On top of that there were Europeans here already, Some were treated as Indians, some kept their old styles and nobody even bothered to check when they got here, there were farms in the Upper US, there were Northern Europeans in Canada before Columbus discovered America and some had migrated down south a bit into Minnisota and the Northern states.

The world court gave the US to England, one of their strong allies, Norway, had settlers here already, and so did a bunch of other countries before Columbus discovered America. After Columbus discovered America, there were maps of both sides of the Americas within a year, gathered and combined from maps of Maritimers who already mapped them partially. Both sides within a Year. You will find this in European History. We can find it now here in America if we know where to look.


I wonder about the Lewis and Clark reports. I mean, here you are, funded to find the great passage, and what if you did encounter much native resistance or unfriendliness? Would you really write about it if your real goal was to encourage travelers west?

It just seems like they would have a good reason to hide negativity.



posted on Oct, 18 2017 @ 12:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker

'Whites' are no more or less racist than 'non-whites'.


That is an important point that should be repeated and recognized.

It was only a specific group of people who were Pro-Slavery and had white skin. They also weren't the only group of people to slave Trade that didn't have white skin.

Trying to tie Slavery to that feature is wrong. Just like with those other non white skinned slaver traders, it was really a matter of Wealth and Power that made that possible, not the skin color.

It was also White Skinned People who were standing with the other various skin colored people who fought against it.

Making "White Skin" an automatic marker for Slavery is just as Racist as other forms of Racism and it needs to also stop. Doesn't mean that some White Skinned people didn't have slaves but that is clearly not the correct term to make into some universal link between the two.



posted on Oct, 18 2017 @ 12:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: Tempter

originally posted by: rickymouse

originally posted by: abe froman
a reply to: rickymouse

The native tribes were murdering each other in droves for land and in tribal wars long before the white folk showed up.

That idyllic picture of native life is a fairy tale.


The Indians would kick the trouble makers out of their tribes and these trouble makers would gather together and attack the good tribes. That is true.

There were a lot of areas in this country with peaceful communities of Indians that had treaties with other tribes. From what I have discussed with the Indians themselves about their communities long ago, what you are saying is nothing other than fake propaganda. Even the Lewis and Clark expedition commented on how friendly most tribes were when they ventured out west to find a better way out there.

Look at real history, most of the Indians were peaceful back before we came here and they had an extensive trade network. When the White man came here, they had to make up the Heathen thing to justify killing off the Indians so they could get their land and steal their buffalo and hides. They also logged out most of the big trees to send back or to use the oak bark to make tanning solutions for the buffalo hides. The Indians did not like them killing the buffalo to just get the hides, I saw pictures of piles of buffalo bones from those days, that was happening all the way into the eighteen hundreds.

Look for the real history, not the lies that people of those days were spreading to make themselves look good to the Christians of Europe. On top of that there were Europeans here already, Some were treated as Indians, some kept their old styles and nobody even bothered to check when they got here, there were farms in the Upper US, there were Northern Europeans in Canada before Columbus discovered America and some had migrated down south a bit into Minnisota and the Northern states.

The world court gave the US to England, one of their strong allies, Norway, had settlers here already, and so did a bunch of other countries before Columbus discovered America. After Columbus discovered America, there were maps of both sides of the Americas within a year, gathered and combined from maps of Maritimers who already mapped them partially. Both sides within a Year. You will find this in European History. We can find it now here in America if we know where to look.


I wonder about the Lewis and Clark reports. I mean, here you are, funded to find the great passage, and what if you did encounter much native resistance or unfriendliness? Would you really write about it if your real goal was to encourage travelers west?

It just seems like they would have a good reason to hide negativity.


It seems to me they would get better money if they were to say they ran into a lot of bad people. It would also discourage others from competing with them. I think what you are saying probably was not an issue. They would send a rider out every fhalf dozen days to bring information to the people funding them. I can't verify how honest they were, but I did find that their expeditions were real



posted on Oct, 18 2017 @ 12:20 AM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Move there then write back in a few months, let me know if you still feel that way. Some of you are so out of touch with reality it's just hopeless.

If you were so worried about sending your kids off to strangers then couldn't you homeschool them? Not everyone actually hates their job either however you have a point there. But your better alternative is to stay (or revert to) in a primitive type culture?

That sounds good for the short term but it's not feasible for the long term survival of our species. If there were an asteroid about six miles wide headed for a direct impact with Earth, what would a primitive society do to detect it let alone stop it? By the way if an asteroid that size hit the Earth the only thing that would survive would be microbes.

We are making sacrifices in the now for our future generations by working a lot and sending our children to strangers for an education. The work week is getting shorter and shorter and pretty soon it will be all automated and the only jobs that people will be doing would be labor of love. In time.



posted on Oct, 18 2017 @ 12:24 AM
link   
For me it's a weird scenario to get my head around. This world is the way it is because of the fact that Northern Europeans were the ones who invaded the Americas and established the nations and cultures that exist here now. It was a signature moment in world history. Humanity started down a completely different path when Columbus stepped off his ship in 1492.

The Sub-Saharan Africans of the 15th century weren't seafaring explorers like the Europeans. So, it's difficult for me to imagine an African version of Christopher Columbus. Who's to say that an African invader would have interacted with the indigenous people the same way the Europeans did? Isn't it entirely possible that because of greater similarities of belief systems that there would be more cooperation between the First Nations and Africans, thus leading to a faster colonization/blending in North America that may have led to an even more powerful nation.

Another seafaring nation at the time was China. If one were to consider a more likely alternative scenario of colonization, it would likely be the Chinese landing on the West Coast and colonizing Eastward. I wonder how that would have ended up.

Now, allow me to propose another alternative scenario to the building of the nation. What would have happened if the white settlers never had African slaves? The African nations could have just filleted the white slave traders and left their bleached white carcasses on the beaches as a warning to others. I think that would have put a crimp in the slave trade. If the US had no slaves, there would be no great plantations; which were crucial to growth of the early nation.

In other words, the gentleman that made the quote in question should have added that in addition to his thankfulness that the white man established this nation, he was thankful for all the enslaved peoples that actually built this nation under their tyranny.

-dex



new topics

top topics



 
49
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join