Replies

If Rush wants to keep this on the front burner, I would suggest that he introduce the subject by pointing out the abysmal ignorance of the newspaper. Very few--if any--nations can point to a history where those building a civilization always had pay checks or cash paid for all physical labor rendered.

Who built the pyramids? Who the great Cathedrals of France or Germany. (The workers were not getting a weekly pay check in the feudal era.)

The Times seeks to pretend that involuntary servitude was somehow a White American invention aimed at specific intended victims; a deliberate fiction intended to poison American race relations. But neither White nor Black Americans were involved in the thousands of years of such forced labor that proceeded the American experience.

Will anyone deny the vicious intention--the anti-American intention of the Times? Tighten the focus. The intention is indefensible!!

It is worth remembering that the Portuguese brought the first African slaves to the American continent. The Spanish were second. The French, English, Dutch and others were more than a century later.

Why was the Iberian Peninsula first? Because it was controlled by Muslims for more than eight centuries which ended completely only in 1492. The Muslims brought slavery into a world where there was no slavery after the Roman Empire fell.

In fact, they invaded from Africa for much of those 800 years to raid villages and take slaves. It was only when the native populations grew strong enough to resist those raids that the venue moved to the high seas, particularly the Mediterranean, a practice when ended only in the early 19th century when the ships belonged to countries which either (a)paid them regular tribute or (b)would open a can of whoop-@$$ on them as we did on the Shores of Tripoli, 1805.

So, the Iberian powers, in particular, felt it only natural that they be able to return the same favors as had been visited upon them in previous eight centuries. The fact that most of the African peoples pressed into slavery were mostly not Muslim and largely collected and traded by Muslims were lost on them.

Not so different than the fact that all of the white folks targeted by today's Black folks never owned slaves.

Rush must hammer home that this country had legalized slavery for 80 years - from the end of the American Revolution (1783) until the Emancipation Proclamation (1863) - and that in 4 years (2023), will have outlawed slavery for twice as long (160 years) as we allowed it.

The “400 years” lie must be put down for once and for all; our permanent underclass of malcontents can seek address from the perps (England, France, Holland, Spain) of the period from 1619 to 1783 (coincidentally, 163 years - twice as long as the United States of America allowed slavery).

Pushing this race-baiting attack does little more than assure many blacks that they have no hope of competing in Western economies with non-blacks.