Do they Not Understand.....

pwillie

...that with out the War Between The States,there would be no reparations in the form of affirmative action, no free housing, no free lunches at school as well as breakfast!...No welfare checks,and most of all no free cell phones....because we owe them amenities, they are much better off with their relatives being brought to this country...and free medical(None of that exists today in Africa)...so, if you get rid of flags and monuments,they will soon lose steam,and will have nothing to * about...so,let them take down the monumets and try to bury a history...will see how it works...I feel better already...I have a plan...[:o)][;)]

Ray B

FACTS have nothing to do with it. Not mentioned is that those slaves shipped from Africa were already slaves, captured by a different tribe, The plantation owner in America was merely purchasing a slave, that had been purchased by a trader from an African warrior that had captured an African farmer in a raid on the village. From what I see on the news, the practice of conquering a village and taking slaves continues to day (see Boko Harem). 200 years ago Africans weren't considered completely human- so to view the action up to 1964 through present day knowledge and values is strictly revisionist history.

Secondly, consider this: the disease we call Sickle Cell Anemia is a genetic dominant/recessive situation. The combination of genes are Sickle/Sickle, Sickle/Non, Non/Non. Those babies born with S/S suffered from anemia and generally died shortly after birth. Those babies that were N/N had no sickle cells, but had no immunity to malaria and similar diseases, so they generally didn't survive to adulthood. Those that had S/N were the lucky ones. The blood cells were less effective than N/N, but they provided sufficient oxygen to live, and the S gene provided an increased immunity to malaria,etc so the S/N people were the survivors. In America the S/Ns are considered very unfortunate because they have this anemia disorder, but had their ancestors stayed in Africa, they would have been considered the very lucky ones. Such were the conditions in Africa, and it appears this to remains virtually unchanged.

p3skyking

Paul,
I put a question on FB, under the LA Times post asking if any Black people would have preferred their ancestors NOT to have been brought to the United States.

I wrote that basically Stone Age people living in mud huts, eating god knows what, exposed to tribal warfare and sometimes ending up in stew pots had it better than having a real roof over their heads, eating real meat and vegetables, and doing a little work in the 19th century.

Although I caught a lot of flak, NOT ONE SINGLE PERSON WOULD ANSWER THE QUESTION.
It's not that they don't understand, they just know the ramifications of the truth. They're better off on account of slavery.

1911a1-fan

to me every time they demand something for slavery their ancestors are being disgraced, they worked hard and many died paving the way for their freedom


and after all it wasn't blacks that got them free in the first place

Ditch-Runner

buttttt Al and Jessy and the pot stirrers ,, how would they make a living [:D]

I agree they never bring up the fact there own people made them slaves and sold them , just like the 200 ? school girls recently where is Al or Jessy in the US safe and far away condemning it . but I do not see a protest march against the group in the mother country
like Chicago now killing off countless people each year that no one cares because they gain no money , fame, and know there's nothing they can do about it