Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

On Sun, 15 Jul 2018 06:51:51 -0700 (PDT), True North wrote:

John H

- show quoted text -

"Asshole, maybe. Keeping a long list...not necessary. I've never seen anyone so afraid to answer a*
question."


Y'all are an amusing old fart, Johnny.
Kalif asked me when the Brits were going to make reparations to their former slaves defendants.
I wouldn't know the answer to that anymore than if a Brit asked when 'mericans were going to come to their senses and run Trump out on a rail.
Judging by the motley crew in here, I'd doubt it will be anytime soon.


You've been asked a half dozen questions about stupit comments you've made. You're the one claimed
you had all the British blood. Bill asked the right person the question.

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

On 15 Jul 2018 14:22:44 GMT, Keyser Soze wrote:

True North wrote:
John H

- show quoted text -

"Asshole, maybe. Keeping a long list...not necessary. I've never seen
anyone so afraid to answer a*
question."


Y'all are an amusing old fart, Johnny.
Kalif asked me when the Brits were going to make reparations to their
former slaves defendants.
I wouldn't know the answer to that anymore than if a Brit asked when
'mericans were going to come to their senses and run Trump out on a rail.
Judging by the motley crew in here, I'd doubt it will be anytime soon.


Bilious must think Canadians are Brits. As for Herring, isn't he due for
another injury? ?

Apparently you missed Donna's bragging about his British blood.

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

On Sun, 15 Jul 2018 06:51:51 -0700 (PDT), True North
wrote:

John H

- show quoted text -

"Asshole, maybe. Keeping a long list...not necessary. I've never seen anyone so afraid to answer aÂ*
question."


Y'all are an amusing old fart, Johnny.
Kalif asked me when the Brits were going to make reparations to their former slaves defendants.
I wouldn't know the answer to that anymore than if a Brit asked when 'mericans were going to come to their senses and run Trump out on a rail.
Judging by the motley crew in here, I'd doubt it will be anytime soon.

I doubt anyone on the left actually wants president Pence,
particularly with the SCOTUS we are going to have in a few months.

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

The John flushes his head...
"You've been asked a half dozen questions about stupit comments you've made.. You're the one claimedÂ*
you had all the British blood. Bill asked the right person the question."


Wow....that is a stupid statement..."claimed you had all the British blood"
Did you double up on your meds today?

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

True North Wrote in message:
Make that 'decendents'....


A lesson for you Donnie. Your remark offered with no reference,
makes no sense. Almost no one here uses google groups so it is
highly unlikely that your remark would follow the post that you
think it follows. It has been pointed out to you that you need to
provide some sort of rererence to what you are commenting on. If
you have half a brain you will follow protocol.
--
x


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

On 7/15/18 2:59 PM, justan wrote:
True North Wrote in message:
Make that 'decendents'....


A lesson for you Donnie. Your remark offered with no reference,
makes no sense. Almost no one here uses google groups so it is
highly unlikely that your remark would follow the post that you
think it follows. It has been pointed out to you that you need to
provide some sort of rererence to what you are commenting on. If
you have half a brain you will follow protocol.


Virtually everything you post here is bull****, and sans references and
sense. Your right-wing buddies here won't point it out, and your friend
Luddite thinks you are brilliant. Standards are very low on your side of
the political fence.

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

On Sun, 15 Jul 2018 15:18:16 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 7/15/18 2:59 PM, justan wrote:
True North Wrote in message:
Make that 'decendents'....


A lesson for you Donnie. Your remark offered with no reference,
makes no sense. Almost no one here uses google groups so it is
highly unlikely that your remark would follow the post that you
think it follows. It has been pointed out to you that you need to
provide some sort of rererence to what you are commenting on. If
you have half a brain you will follow protocol.


Virtually everything you post here is bull****, and sans references and
sense. Your right-wing buddies here won't point it out, and your friend
Luddite thinks you are brilliant. Standards are very low on your side of
the political fence.

Did you change your name? Are you Donna now? Or, have you just realized he needs all the help he can
get.

When you mention the word 'virtual', I think of your virtual boat and virtual trips. Virtually
everything you say is a lie.

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

Keyser Soze Wrote in message:
On 7/15/18 2:59 PM, justan wrote:
True North Wrote in message:
Make that 'decendents'....


A lesson for you Donnie. Your remark offered with no reference,
makes no sense. Almost no one here uses google groups so it is
highly unlikely that your remark would follow the post that you
think it follows. It has been pointed out to you that you need to
provide some sort of rererence to what you are commenting on. If
you have half a brain you will follow protocol.


Virtually everything you post here is bull****, and sans references and
sense. Your right-wing buddies here won't point it out, and your friend
Luddite thinks you are brilliant. Standards are very low on your side of
the political fence.


Not bull**** that Fat Harry lost probably the only home he ever
had a stake in, to forclosure. No bull**** that Fat Harry went
bankrupt, not once but twice.
Not bull**** that Fat Harry is a loser.
--
x


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

Make that a'bit' slower......

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

True North wrote:
Kalif guzzles...
"And when are the British going to send money to their former slavesÂ*
descendants?"



I have no idea...you'll have to ask them.


You seem to know about American former slavery. Why not your own country’s
background.

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

Alex wrote:
True North wrote:
Duh, JohnnyMop. My tablet decided on that word. I just feel the Cajun
people deserve some kind of financial consideration.....like y'all owe black people.

Lean to quote, dummy. Not everyone reads EVERY post.


And it was the British who brought a lot of the slaves to America. And
the Carib. They only freed them in England, not in any colonies.

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

Keyser Soze wrote:
True North wrote:
John H

- show quoted text -

"Asshole, maybe. Keeping a long list...not necessary. I've never seen
anyone so afraid to answer aÂ*
question."


Y'all are an amusing old fart, Johnny.
Kalif asked me when the Brits were going to make reparations to their
former slaves defendants.
I wouldn't know the answer to that anymore than if a Brit asked when
'mericans were going to come to their senses and run Trump out on a rail.
Judging by the motley crew in here, I'd doubt it will be anytime soon.


Bilious must think Canadians are Brits. As for Herring, isn't he due for
another injury? �


They were Brits when the Brits were bringing slaves to America. They are
still part of the commonwealth.

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

True North Wrote in message:
Make that a'bit' slower......


I see your stupidity hasn't diminished.
STILL CAN'T QUOTE OR PROVIDE REFERENCE
--
x


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 02:39:13 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

And it was the British who brought a lot of the slaves to America. And
the Carib. They only freed them in England, not in any colonies.

Make that pretty much all the slaves. 18 years after we kicked the
British out the congress passed a low barring any more importation of
slaves. Most were already here before 1776, brought here on British
ships.

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

On 7/16/18 12:20 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 02:39:13 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

And it was the British who brought a lot of the slaves to America. And
the Carib. They only freed them in England, not in any colonies.

Make that pretty much all the slaves. 18 years after we kicked the
British out the congress passed a low barring any more importation of
slaves. Most were already here before 1776, brought here on British
ships.


Portugal, England, Spain, France, the Netherlands, among other European
nations, engaged in bringing slaves to the "New World." The Portuguese
were the largest slave traders.

Slaves were brought here throughout much of the 19th Century.

There are estimates that twelve to fifteen million Africans were brought
over as slaves, but many died in the transit. Their survivors lived in
slavery in this country beyond the Civil War, even though they were
emancipated. There are ways to enslave people without calling them slaves.

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

On 7/15/18 10:39 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Soze wrote:
True North wrote:
John H

- show quoted text -

"Asshole, maybe. Keeping a long list...not necessary. I've never seen
anyone so afraid to answer a
question."


Y'all are an amusing old fart, Johnny.
Kalif asked me when the Brits were going to make reparations to their
former slaves defendants.
I wouldn't know the answer to that anymore than if a Brit asked when
'mericans were going to come to their senses and run Trump out on a rail.
Judging by the motley crew in here, I'd doubt it will be anytime soon.


Bilious must think Canadians are Brits. As for Herring, isn't he due for
another injury? �


They were Brits when the Brits were bringing slaves to America. They are
still part of the commonwealth.


This country welcomed slaves after it declared itself no longer part of
the British Empire. And the commonwealth is not a governmental entity
and, most important, it is a creature of the 20th century.

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

Keyser Soze

- show quoted text -

"This country welcomed slaves after it declared itself no longer part ofÂ*
the British Empire. And the commonwealth is not a governmental entityÂ*
and, most important, it is a creature of the 20th century."Â*



You'll only confuse those southern boys with facts.
The bottom line they should be concerned with is that there were no slaves up here when Canada became a nation in 1867.

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

On 7/16/18 10:05 AM, True North wrote:
Keyser Soze

- show quoted text -

"This country welcomed slaves after it declared itself no longer part of
the British Empire. And the commonwealth is not a governmental entity
and, most important, it is a creature of the 20th century."



You'll only confuse those southern boys with facts.
The bottom line they should be concerned with is that there were no slaves up here when Canada became a nation in 1867.



Yeah, you actually have to go to school, pay attention, and do the
reading assignments to understand history. Well, unless you are one of
the rec.boats right-wingers who don't believe in formal education.

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

Keyser Soze Wrote in message:
On 7/16/18 12:20 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 02:39:13 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

And it was the British who brought a lot of the slaves to America. And
the Carib. They only freed them in England, not in any colonies.

Make that pretty much all the slaves. 18 years after we kicked the
British out the congress passed a low barring any more importation of
slaves. Most were already here before 1776, brought here on British
ships.


Portugal, England, Spain, France, the Netherlands, among other European
nations, engaged in bringing slaves to the "New World." The Portuguese
were the largest slave traders.

Slaves were brought here throughout much of the 19th Century.

There are estimates that twelve to fifteen million Africans were brought
over as slaves, but many died in the transit. Their survivors lived in
slavery in this country beyond the Civil War, even though they were
emancipated. There are ways to enslave people without calling them slaves.




Union members?
--
x


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

True North Wrote in message:
Keyser Soze

- show quoted text -

"This country welcomed slaves after it declared itself no longer part of
the British Empire. And the commonwealth is not a governmental entity
and, most important, it is a creature of the 20th century."



You'll only confuse those southern boys with facts.
The bottom line they should be concerned with is that there were no slaves up here when Canada became a nation in 1867.


I thought it was around 1975 that Kanada freed themselves from
Brittish rule and became semi independant.
--
x


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

On 7/16/18 10:19 AM, justan wrote:
Keyser Soze Wrote in message:
On 7/16/18 12:20 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 02:39:13 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

And it was the British who brought a lot of the slaves to America. And
the Carib. They only freed them in England, not in any colonies.

Make that pretty much all the slaves. 18 years after we kicked the
British out the congress passed a low barring any more importation of
slaves. Most were already here before 1776, brought here on British
ships.


Portugal, England, Spain, France, the Netherlands, among other European
nations, engaged in bringing slaves to the "New World." The Portuguese
were the largest slave traders.

Slaves were brought here throughout much of the 19th Century.

There are estimates that twelve to fifteen million Africans were brought
over as slaves, but many died in the transit. Their survivors lived in
slavery in this country beyond the Civil War, even though they were
emancipated. There are ways to enslave people without calling them slaves.




Union members?


Since union members typically earn a higher hourly wage and receive
better benefits than non-union members performing identical jobs, and
since union members have a contract and union officials to file and
pursue grievances on their behalf, one might fairly conclude that
non-union members are the wage slaves. Non-union workers are, for the
most part, easily disposable...just like slaves. You, of course, never
had the skills to perform a skilled union job.

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

justan

True North Wrote in message:Â*

- show quoted text -

"I thought it was around 1975 that Kanada freed themselves fromÂ*
Â*Brittish rule and became semi independant."


That's where y'all went wrong.
Don't try to think....it's not a strong suit for your Exaulted Ruler or any of his turds.

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 09:11:43 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 12:20 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 02:39:13 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

And it was the British who brought a lot of the slaves to America. And
the Carib. They only freed them in England, not in any colonies.

Make that pretty much all the slaves. 18 years after we kicked the
British out the congress passed a low barring any more importation of
slaves. Most were already here before 1776, brought here on British
ships.


Portugal, England, Spain, France, the Netherlands, among other European
nations, engaged in bringing slaves to the "New World." The Portuguese
were the largest slave traders.

Slaves were brought here throughout much of the 19th Century.

Not legally, after 1807.

There are estimates that twelve to fifteen million Africans were brought
over as slaves, but many died in the transit. Their survivors lived in
slavery in this country beyond the Civil War, even though they were
emancipated. There are ways to enslave people without calling them slaves.

That gets us back to my contention that the civil war was unnecessary.
Perhaps if slavery was ended in a way that did not cost us 600,000
lives and destroy half of the country, the transition might have been
faster and less contentious. At least you admit the war did not make
the slaves equal. The process took 150 years, just to get where we are
now.

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 10:23:10 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 10:19 AM, justan wrote:
Keyser Soze Wrote in message:
On 7/16/18 12:20 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 02:39:13 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

And it was the British who brought a lot of the slaves to America. And
the Carib. They only freed them in England, not in any colonies.

Make that pretty much all the slaves. 18 years after we kicked the
British out the congress passed a low barring any more importation of
slaves. Most were already here before 1776, brought here on British
ships.


Portugal, England, Spain, France, the Netherlands, among other European
nations, engaged in bringing slaves to the "New World." The Portuguese
were the largest slave traders.

Slaves were brought here throughout much of the 19th Century.

There are estimates that twelve to fifteen million Africans were brought
over as slaves, but many died in the transit. Their survivors lived in
slavery in this country beyond the Civil War, even though they were
emancipated. There are ways to enslave people without calling them slaves.




Union members?


Since union members typically earn a higher hourly wage and receive
better benefits than non-union members performing identical jobs, and
since union members have a contract and union officials to file and
pursue grievances on their behalf, one might fairly conclude that
non-union members are the wage slaves. Non-union workers are, for the
most part, easily disposable...just like slaves. You, of course, never
had the skills to perform a skilled union job.

They simply become slaves to the union and the union rules. A slug who
should have been fired a decade ago will still make a lot more money
than a young guy with superior skills and work ethic simply because
the old guy has more time in the union.
The big difference in "disposibility" is a non performing non union
employee may be fired but he can go next door and try to get hired
there. When the union prices themselves out of the labor market
everyone gets fired, the factory moves and there is no next door to go
to. You can walk around Flint Michigan to see that, just don't drink
the water.

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 14:32:56 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 10:23:10 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 10:19 AM, justan wrote:
Keyser Soze Wrote in message:
On 7/16/18 12:20 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 02:39:13 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

And it was the British who brought a lot of the slaves to America. And
the Carib. They only freed them in England, not in any colonies.

Make that pretty much all the slaves. 18 years after we kicked the
British out the congress passed a low barring any more importation of
slaves. Most were already here before 1776, brought here on British
ships.


Portugal, England, Spain, France, the Netherlands, among other European
nations, engaged in bringing slaves to the "New World." The Portuguese
were the largest slave traders.

Slaves were brought here throughout much of the 19th Century.

There are estimates that twelve to fifteen million Africans were brought
over as slaves, but many died in the transit. Their survivors lived in
slavery in this country beyond the Civil War, even though they were
emancipated. There are ways to enslave people without calling them slaves.




Union members?


Since union members typically earn a higher hourly wage and receive
better benefits than non-union members performing identical jobs, and
since union members have a contract and union officials to file and
pursue grievances on their behalf, one might fairly conclude that
non-union members are the wage slaves. Non-union workers are, for the
most part, easily disposable...just like slaves. You, of course, never
had the skills to perform a skilled union job.

They simply become slaves to the union and the union rules. A slug who
should have been fired a decade ago will still make a lot more money
than a young guy with superior skills and work ethic simply because
the old guy has more time in the union.
The big difference in "disposibility" is a non performing non union
employee may be fired but he can go next door and try to get hired
there. When the union prices themselves out of the labor market
everyone gets fired, the factory moves and there is no next door to go
to. You can walk around Flint Michigan to see that, just don't drink
the water.

And don't get shot.

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

On 7/16/18 2:25 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 09:11:43 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 12:20 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 02:39:13 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

And it was the British who brought a lot of the slaves to America. And
the Carib. They only freed them in England, not in any colonies.

Make that pretty much all the slaves. 18 years after we kicked the
British out the congress passed a low barring any more importation of
slaves. Most were already here before 1776, brought here on British
ships.


Portugal, England, Spain, France, the Netherlands, among other European
nations, engaged in bringing slaves to the "New World." The Portuguese
were the largest slave traders.

Slaves were brought here throughout much of the 19th Century.

Not legally, after 180

There are estimates that twelve to fifteen million Africans were brought
over as slaves, but many died in the transit. Their survivors lived in
slavery in this country beyond the Civil War, even though they were
emancipated. There are ways to enslave people without calling them slaves.

That gets us back to my contention that the civil war was unnecessary.
Perhaps if slavery was ended in a way that did not cost us 600,000
lives and destroy half of the country, the transition might have been
faster and less contentious. At least you admit the war did not make
the slaves equal. The process took 150 years, just to get where we are
now.


I see you are still promoting the idea that slavery was an ok thing. If
the former slaves are not equal, it is the fault of whitey.

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 15:46:12 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 7/16/18 2:25 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 09:11:43 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 12:20 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 02:39:13 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

And it was the British who brought a lot of the slaves to America. And
the Carib. They only freed them in England, not in any colonies.

Make that pretty much all the slaves. 18 years after we kicked the
British out the congress passed a low barring any more importation of
slaves. Most were already here before 1776, brought here on British
ships.


Portugal, England, Spain, France, the Netherlands, among other European
nations, engaged in bringing slaves to the "New World." The Portuguese
were the largest slave traders.

Slaves were brought here throughout much of the 19th Century.

Not legally, after 180

There are estimates that twelve to fifteen million Africans were brought
over as slaves, but many died in the transit. Their survivors lived in
slavery in this country beyond the Civil War, even though they were
emancipated. There are ways to enslave people without calling them slaves.

That gets us back to my contention that the civil war was unnecessary.
Perhaps if slavery was ended in a way that did not cost us 600,000
lives and destroy half of the country, the transition might have been
faster and less contentious. At least you admit the war did not make
the slaves equal. The process took 150 years, just to get where we are
now.


I see you are still promoting the idea that slavery was an ok thing. If
the former slaves are not equal, it is the fault of whitey.

It's much the fault of them not taking advantage of that which is offered - education. And a lack of
fatherly influence doesn't help matters. Remember, about 80% of the black babies born in DC are born
out of wedlock.

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 15:46:12 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 2:25 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 09:11:43 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 12:20 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 02:39:13 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

And it was the British who brought a lot of the slaves to America. And
the Carib. They only freed them in England, not in any colonies.

Make that pretty much all the slaves. 18 years after we kicked the
British out the congress passed a low barring any more importation of
slaves. Most were already here before 1776, brought here on British
ships.


Portugal, England, Spain, France, the Netherlands, among other European
nations, engaged in bringing slaves to the "New World." The Portuguese
were the largest slave traders.

Slaves were brought here throughout much of the 19th Century.

Not legally, after 180

There are estimates that twelve to fifteen million Africans were brought
over as slaves, but many died in the transit. Their survivors lived in
slavery in this country beyond the Civil War, even though they were
emancipated. There are ways to enslave people without calling them slaves.

That gets us back to my contention that the civil war was unnecessary.
Perhaps if slavery was ended in a way that did not cost us 600,000
lives and destroy half of the country, the transition might have been
faster and less contentious. At least you admit the war did not make
the slaves equal. The process took 150 years, just to get where we are
now.


I see you are still promoting the idea that slavery was an ok thing. If
the former slaves are not equal, it is the fault of whitey.

I never said it was OK. I just said that the war was not the best way
to resolve the issue and you are simply proving the futility of that
method.

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

On 7/16/18 9:05 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 15:46:12 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 2:25 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 09:11:43 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 12:20 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 02:39:13 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

And it was the British who brought a lot of the slaves to America. And
the Carib. They only freed them in England, not in any colonies.

Make that pretty much all the slaves. 18 years after we kicked the
British out the congress passed a low barring any more importation of
slaves. Most were already here before 1776, brought here on British
ships.


Portugal, England, Spain, France, the Netherlands, among other European
nations, engaged in bringing slaves to the "New World." The Portuguese
were the largest slave traders.

Slaves were brought here throughout much of the 19th Century.

Not legally, after 180

There are estimates that twelve to fifteen million Africans were brought
over as slaves, but many died in the transit. Their survivors lived in
slavery in this country beyond the Civil War, even though they were
emancipated. There are ways to enslave people without calling them slaves.

That gets us back to my contention that the civil war was unnecessary.
Perhaps if slavery was ended in a way that did not cost us 600,000
lives and destroy half of the country, the transition might have been
faster and less contentious. At least you admit the war did not make
the slaves equal. The process took 150 years, just to get where we are
now.


I see you are still promoting the idea that slavery was an ok thing. If
the former slaves are not equal, it is the fault of whitey.

I never said it was OK. I just said that the war was not the best way
to resolve the issue and you are simply proving the futility of that
method.


It wasn't futile; it was necessary. How many more generations of slavery
would have been acceptable to you and the rest of you white conservatives?

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

True North wrote:
John H

- show quoted text -

"Asshole, maybe. Keeping a long list...not necessary. I've never seen
anyone so afraid to answer aÂ*
question."


Y'all are an amusing old fart, Johnny.
Kalif asked me when the Brits were going to make reparations to their
former slaves defendants.
I wouldn't know the answer to that anymore than if a Brit asked when
'mericans were going to come to their senses and run Trump out on a rail.
Judging by the motley crew in here, I'd doubt it will be anytime soon.


You asked about American reparations. We asked you about British
reparations. You are closer to British than us southern people. And when
the British were,shipping slaves to the America’s Canada was 100% British.

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 21:54:58 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 9:05 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 15:46:12 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 2:25 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 09:11:43 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 12:20 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 02:39:13 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

And it was the British who brought a lot of the slaves to America. And
the Carib. They only freed them in England, not in any colonies.

Make that pretty much all the slaves. 18 years after we kicked the
British out the congress passed a low barring any more importation of
slaves. Most were already here before 1776, brought here on British
ships.


Portugal, England, Spain, France, the Netherlands, among other European
nations, engaged in bringing slaves to the "New World." The Portuguese
were the largest slave traders.

Slaves were brought here throughout much of the 19th Century.

Not legally, after 180

There are estimates that twelve to fifteen million Africans were brought
over as slaves, but many died in the transit. Their survivors lived in
slavery in this country beyond the Civil War, even though they were
emancipated. There are ways to enslave people without calling them slaves.

That gets us back to my contention that the civil war was unnecessary.
Perhaps if slavery was ended in a way that did not cost us 600,000
lives and destroy half of the country, the transition might have been
faster and less contentious. At least you admit the war did not make
the slaves equal. The process took 150 years, just to get where we are
now.


I see you are still promoting the idea that slavery was an ok thing. If
the former slaves are not equal, it is the fault of whitey.

I never said it was OK. I just said that the war was not the best way
to resolve the issue and you are simply proving the futility of that
method.


It wasn't futile; it was necessary. How many more generations of slavery
would have been acceptable to you and the rest of you white conservatives?

You are the one who said "Their survivors lived in slavery in this
country beyond the Civil War, even though they were emancipated"

How many generations was that?

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 02:57:39 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 21:54:58 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 9:05 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 15:46:12 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 2:25 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 09:11:43 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 12:20 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 02:39:13 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

And it was the British who brought a lot of the slaves to America. And
the Carib. They only freed them in England, not in any colonies.

Make that pretty much all the slaves. 18 years after we kicked the
British out the congress passed a low barring any more importation of
slaves. Most were already here before 1776, brought here on British
ships.


Portugal, England, Spain, France, the Netherlands, among other European
nations, engaged in bringing slaves to the "New World." The Portuguese
were the largest slave traders.

Slaves were brought here throughout much of the 19th Century.

Not legally, after 180

There are estimates that twelve to fifteen million Africans were brought
over as slaves, but many died in the transit. Their survivors lived in
slavery in this country beyond the Civil War, even though they were
emancipated. There are ways to enslave people without calling them slaves.

That gets us back to my contention that the civil war was unnecessary.
Perhaps if slavery was ended in a way that did not cost us 600,000
lives and destroy half of the country, the transition might have been
faster and less contentious. At least you admit the war did not make
the slaves equal. The process took 150 years, just to get where we are
now.


I see you are still promoting the idea that slavery was an ok thing. If
the former slaves are not equal, it is the fault of whitey.

I never said it was OK. I just said that the war was not the best way
to resolve the issue and you are simply proving the futility of that
method.


It wasn't futile; it was necessary. How many more generations of slavery
would have been acceptable to you and the rest of you white conservatives?

You are the one who said "Their survivors lived in slavery in this
country beyond the Civil War, even though they were emancipated"

How many generations was that?


I expect that to go into the unanswered bin.

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

On 7/17/18 2:57 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 21:54:58 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 9:05 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 15:46:12 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 2:25 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 09:11:43 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 12:20 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 02:39:13 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

And it was the British who brought a lot of the slaves to America. And
the Carib. They only freed them in England, not in any colonies.

Make that pretty much all the slaves. 18 years after we kicked the
British out the congress passed a low barring any more importation of
slaves. Most were already here before 1776, brought here on British
ships.


Portugal, England, Spain, France, the Netherlands, among other European
nations, engaged in bringing slaves to the "New World." The Portuguese
were the largest slave traders.

Slaves were brought here throughout much of the 19th Century.

Not legally, after 180

There are estimates that twelve to fifteen million Africans were brought
over as slaves, but many died in the transit. Their survivors lived in
slavery in this country beyond the Civil War, even though they were
emancipated. There are ways to enslave people without calling them slaves.

That gets us back to my contention that the civil war was unnecessary.
Perhaps if slavery was ended in a way that did not cost us 600,000
lives and destroy half of the country, the transition might have been
faster and less contentious. At least you admit the war did not make
the slaves equal. The process took 150 years, just to get where we are
now.


I see you are still promoting the idea that slavery was an ok thing. If
the former slaves are not equal, it is the fault of whitey.

I never said it was OK. I just said that the war was not the best way
to resolve the issue and you are simply proving the futility of that
method.


It wasn't futile; it was necessary. How many more generations of slavery
would have been acceptable to you and the rest of you white conservatives?

You are the one who said "Their survivors lived in slavery in this
country beyond the Civil War, even though they were emancipated"

How many generations was that?



The slavery to which I was referring was no longer the actual
slavery...you didn't perceive that?
White racism towards people of color in this country will never die out.
The actual slavery in the south would not have ended sans the Civil War.

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 08:11:36 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 7/17/18 2:57 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 21:54:58 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 9:05 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 15:46:12 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 2:25 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 09:11:43 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 12:20 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 02:39:13 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

And it was the British who brought a lot of the slaves to America. And
the Carib. They only freed them in England, not in any colonies.

Make that pretty much all the slaves. 18 years after we kicked the
British out the congress passed a low barring any more importation of
slaves. Most were already here before 1776, brought here on British
ships.


Portugal, England, Spain, France, the Netherlands, among other European
nations, engaged in bringing slaves to the "New World." The Portuguese
were the largest slave traders.

Slaves were brought here throughout much of the 19th Century.

Not legally, after 180

There are estimates that twelve to fifteen million Africans were brought
over as slaves, but many died in the transit. Their survivors lived in
slavery in this country beyond the Civil War, even though they were
emancipated. There are ways to enslave people without calling them slaves.

That gets us back to my contention that the civil war was unnecessary.
Perhaps if slavery was ended in a way that did not cost us 600,000
lives and destroy half of the country, the transition might have been
faster and less contentious. At least you admit the war did not make
the slaves equal. The process took 150 years, just to get where we are
now.


I see you are still promoting the idea that slavery was an ok thing. If
the former slaves are not equal, it is the fault of whitey.

I never said it was OK. I just said that the war was not the best way
to resolve the issue and you are simply proving the futility of that
method.


It wasn't futile; it was necessary. How many more generations of slavery
would have been acceptable to you and the rest of you white conservatives?

You are the one who said "Their survivors lived in slavery in this
country beyond the Civil War, even though they were emancipated"

How many generations was that?



The slavery to which I was referring was no longer the actual
slavery...you didn't perceive that?
White racism towards people of color in this country will never die out.
The actual slavery in the south would not have ended sans the Civil War.

Did you ever think of saying what you mean the first time rather than saying what you think you mean
and then saying what you really mean?

You got backed into the corner again. If not 'actual slavery', what then - virtual slavery? Either
way Greg's got you by the balls.

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 08:11:36 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/17/18 2:57 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 21:54:58 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 9:05 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 15:46:12 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 2:25 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 09:11:43 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 12:20 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 02:39:13 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

And it was the British who brought a lot of the slaves to America. And
the Carib. They only freed them in England, not in any colonies.

Make that pretty much all the slaves. 18 years after we kicked the
British out the congress passed a low barring any more importation of
slaves. Most were already here before 1776, brought here on British
ships.


Portugal, England, Spain, France, the Netherlands, among other European
nations, engaged in bringing slaves to the "New World." The Portuguese
were the largest slave traders.

Slaves were brought here throughout much of the 19th Century.

Not legally, after 180

There are estimates that twelve to fifteen million Africans were brought
over as slaves, but many died in the transit. Their survivors lived in
slavery in this country beyond the Civil War, even though they were
emancipated. There are ways to enslave people without calling them slaves.

That gets us back to my contention that the civil war was unnecessary.
Perhaps if slavery was ended in a way that did not cost us 600,000
lives and destroy half of the country, the transition might have been
faster and less contentious. At least you admit the war did not make
the slaves equal. The process took 150 years, just to get where we are
now.


I see you are still promoting the idea that slavery was an ok thing. If
the former slaves are not equal, it is the fault of whitey.

I never said it was OK. I just said that the war was not the best way
to resolve the issue and you are simply proving the futility of that
method.


It wasn't futile; it was necessary. How many more generations of slavery
would have been acceptable to you and the rest of you white conservatives?

You are the one who said "Their survivors lived in slavery in this
country beyond the Civil War, even though they were emancipated"

How many generations was that?



The slavery to which I was referring was no longer the actual
slavery...you didn't perceive that?
White racism towards people of color in this country will never die out.
The actual slavery in the south would not have ended sans the Civil War.

Slavery has ended in countries throughout the former British colonies
and we are the only one that think we needed a devastating war to do
it.
I thought you were against war. You seem to think economic pressures
are all we need to cure all of the world's ills but this one.
The reality is that slavery was economically based and could have been
brought down with economic pressure. If slave produced goods were no
longer accepted in trade with the north and the rest of the civilized
world, slavery would have ended very fast.

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

On 7/17/18 9:25 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 08:11:36 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/17/18 2:57 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 21:54:58 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 9:05 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 15:46:12 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 2:25 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 09:11:43 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 12:20 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 02:39:13 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

And it was the British who brought a lot of the slaves to America. And
the Carib. They only freed them in England, not in any colonies.

Make that pretty much all the slaves. 18 years after we kicked the
British out the congress passed a low barring any more importation of
slaves. Most were already here before 1776, brought here on British
ships.


Portugal, England, Spain, France, the Netherlands, among other European
nations, engaged in bringing slaves to the "New World." The Portuguese
were the largest slave traders.

Slaves were brought here throughout much of the 19th Century.

Not legally, after 180

There are estimates that twelve to fifteen million Africans were brought
over as slaves, but many died in the transit. Their survivors lived in
slavery in this country beyond the Civil War, even though they were
emancipated. There are ways to enslave people without calling them slaves.

That gets us back to my contention that the civil war was unnecessary.
Perhaps if slavery was ended in a way that did not cost us 600,000
lives and destroy half of the country, the transition might have been
faster and less contentious. At least you admit the war did not make
the slaves equal. The process took 150 years, just to get where we are
now.


I see you are still promoting the idea that slavery was an ok thing. If
the former slaves are not equal, it is the fault of whitey.

I never said it was OK. I just said that the war was not the best way
to resolve the issue and you are simply proving the futility of that
method.


It wasn't futile; it was necessary. How many more generations of slavery
would have been acceptable to you and the rest of you white conservatives?

You are the one who said "Their survivors lived in slavery in this
country beyond the Civil War, even though they were emancipated"

How many generations was that?



The slavery to which I was referring was no longer the actual
slavery...you didn't perceive that?
White racism towards people of color in this country will never die out.
The actual slavery in the south would not have ended sans the Civil War.

Slavery has ended in countries throughout the former British colonies
and we are the only one that think we needed a devastating war to do
it.
I thought you were against war. You seem to think economic pressures
are all we need to cure all of the world's ills but this one.
The reality is that slavery was economically based and could have been
brought down with economic pressure. If slave produced goods were no
longer accepted in trade with the north and the rest of the civilized
world, slavery would have ended very fast.


Oh, yeah...that free market bull****. Loonytarianism.

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 10:01:15 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/17/18 9:25 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 08:11:36 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/17/18 2:57 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 21:54:58 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 9:05 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 15:46:12 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 2:25 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 09:11:43 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 12:20 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 02:39:13 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

And it was the British who brought a lot of the slaves to America. And
the Carib. They only freed them in England, not in any colonies.

Make that pretty much all the slaves. 18 years after we kicked the
British out the congress passed a low barring any more importation of
slaves. Most were already here before 1776, brought here on British
ships.


Portugal, England, Spain, France, the Netherlands, among other European
nations, engaged in bringing slaves to the "New World." The Portuguese
were the largest slave traders.

Slaves were brought here throughout much of the 19th Century.

Not legally, after 180

There are estimates that twelve to fifteen million Africans were brought
over as slaves, but many died in the transit. Their survivors lived in
slavery in this country beyond the Civil War, even though they were
emancipated. There are ways to enslave people without calling them slaves.

That gets us back to my contention that the civil war was unnecessary.
Perhaps if slavery was ended in a way that did not cost us 600,000
lives and destroy half of the country, the transition might have been
faster and less contentious. At least you admit the war did not make
the slaves equal. The process took 150 years, just to get where we are
now.


I see you are still promoting the idea that slavery was an ok thing. If
the former slaves are not equal, it is the fault of whitey.

I never said it was OK. I just said that the war was not the best way
to resolve the issue and you are simply proving the futility of that
method.


It wasn't futile; it was necessary. How many more generations of slavery
would have been acceptable to you and the rest of you white conservatives?

You are the one who said "Their survivors lived in slavery in this
country beyond the Civil War, even though they were emancipated"

How many generations was that?



The slavery to which I was referring was no longer the actual
slavery...you didn't perceive that?
White racism towards people of color in this country will never die out.
The actual slavery in the south would not have ended sans the Civil War.

Slavery has ended in countries throughout the former British colonies
and we are the only one that think we needed a devastating war to do
it.
I thought you were against war. You seem to think economic pressures
are all we need to cure all of the world's ills but this one.
The reality is that slavery was economically based and could have been
brought down with economic pressure. If slave produced goods were no
longer accepted in trade with the north and the rest of the civilized
world, slavery would have ended very fast.


Oh, yeah...that free market bull****. Loonytarianism.

===

I guess you've chosen to ignore the fact that legalized slavery did
end everywhere else around the world without fighting any wars? And
free market economics is far from loony; it's proven in fact. Just
look at what centralized planning did for the old Soviet Union and
Cuba for example.

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

Bill Wrote in message:
True North wrote:
John H

- show quoted text -

"Asshole, maybe. Keeping a long list...not necessary. I've never seen
anyone so afraid to answer a
question."


Y'all are an amusing old fart, Johnny.
Kalif asked me when the Brits were going to make reparations to their
former slaves defendants.
I wouldn't know the answer to that anymore than if a Brit asked when
'mericans were going to come to their senses and run Trump out on a rail.
Judging by the motley crew in here, I'd doubt it will be anytime soon.


You asked about American reparations. We asked you about British
reparations. You are closer to British than us southern people. And when
the British were,shipping slaves to the America?s Canada was 100% British.



Donnie says he has some Brit blood. Seems like he has all Brit
blood unless he had a transfusion in Quebec. In wich case he's
part croaker.
--
x


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 11:35:52 -0400 (EDT), justan wrote:

Bill Wrote in message:
True North wrote:
John H

- show quoted text -

"Asshole, maybe. Keeping a long list...not necessary. I've never seen
anyone so afraid to answer a
question."


Y'all are an amusing old fart, Johnny.
Kalif asked me when the Brits were going to make reparations to their
former slaves defendants.
I wouldn't know the answer to that anymore than if a Brit asked when
'mericans were going to come to their senses and run Trump out on a rail.
Judging by the motley crew in here, I'd doubt it will be anytime soon.


You asked about American reparations. We asked you about British
reparations. You are closer to British than us southern people. And when
the British were,shipping slaves to the America?s Canada was 100% British.



Donnie says he has some Brit blood. Seems like he has all Brit
blood unless he had a transfusion in Quebec. In wich case he's
part croaker.

Say what? I suppose, like Donna the Fool, they are kind of a mushy fish.

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/742/3...f757b75d_b.jpg

Trying to discover what makes southern boys tick...
 

On 7/17/18 11:28 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 10:01:15 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/17/18 9:25 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 08:11:36 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/17/18 2:57 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 21:54:58 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 9:05 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 15:46:12 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 2:25 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 09:11:43 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 12:20 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 02:39:13 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

And it was the British who brought a lot of the slaves to America. And
the Carib. They only freed them in England, not in any colonies.

Make that pretty much all the slaves. 18 years after we kicked the
British out the congress passed a low barring any more importation of
slaves. Most were already here before 1776, brought here on British
ships.


Portugal, England, Spain, France, the Netherlands, among other European
nations, engaged in bringing slaves to the "New World." The Portuguese
were the largest slave traders.

Slaves were brought here throughout much of the 19th Century.

Not legally, after 180

There are estimates that twelve to fifteen million Africans were brought
over as slaves, but many died in the transit. Their survivors lived in
slavery in this country beyond the Civil War, even though they were
emancipated. There are ways to enslave people without calling them slaves.

That gets us back to my contention that the civil war was unnecessary.
Perhaps if slavery was ended in a way that did not cost us 600,000
lives and destroy half of the country, the transition might have been
faster and less contentious. At least you admit the war did not make
the slaves equal. The process took 150 years, just to get where we are
now.


I see you are still promoting the idea that slavery was an ok thing. If
the former slaves are not equal, it is the fault of whitey.

I never said it was OK. I just said that the war was not the best way
to resolve the issue and you are simply proving the futility of that
method.


It wasn't futile; it was necessary. How many more generations of slavery
would have been acceptable to you and the rest of you white conservatives?

You are the one who said "Their survivors lived in slavery in this
country beyond the Civil War, even though they were emancipated"

How many generations was that?



The slavery to which I was referring was no longer the actual
slavery...you didn't perceive that?
White racism towards people of color in this country will never die out.
The actual slavery in the south would not have ended sans the Civil War.

Slavery has ended in countries throughout the former British colonies
and we are the only one that think we needed a devastating war to do
it.
I thought you were against war. You seem to think economic pressures
are all we need to cure all of the world's ills but this one.
The reality is that slavery was economically based and could have been
brought down with economic pressure. If slave produced goods were no
longer accepted in trade with the north and the rest of the civilized
world, slavery would have ended very fast.


Oh, yeah...that free market bull****. Loonytarianism.

===

I guess you've chosen to ignore the fact that legalized slavery did
end everywhere else around the world without fighting any wars? And
free market economics is far from loony; it's proven in fact. Just
look at what centralized planning did for the old Soviet Union and
Cuba for example.



I'm not going to waste time trying to convince you righties of the error
of your ways on these subjects...Wiki has an answer suitable for you:

While slavery was institutionally recognized by most societies, it has
now been outlawed in all recognized countries, the last being Mauritania
in 2007. Nevertheless, there are an estimated 45.8 million people
subject to some form of modern slavery worldwide. The most common form
of the slave trade is now commonly referred to as human trafficking. In
other areas, slavery (or unfree labour) continues through practices such
as debt bondage, the most widespread form of slavery today, serfdom,
domestic servants kept in captivity, certain adoptions in which children
are forced to work as slaves, child soldiers, and forced marriage.

Slavery still exists.

There's no real "free market economy" anywhere in the world. If you want
to cite the USA as an example, keep in mind that there are many ways
corporations collude with other corporations and governmental entities
to maintain artificially high prices for many items and services.