African American child in Ohio used to spread lie about Slavery in North America

“Both Indian and Negro, besides white servants were bound out to a master for a term of years and received no wages. Of these there were a few in the Pilgrim group.” - Commonwealth History of Massachusetts, Vol.1

Dear friends,

Aside from the fact that a European American or so-called "white" kid could have just as easily been depicted as a "slave", since everyone watching knows that it's only a skit. Consequently it is a pretty uninformed teacher who thinks that only African Americans have a slave past here. Additionally, the notion that using an African American child in Ohio to play a captive worker or so-called slave in a classroom play of some sort, for the purpose of providing himself and his classmates with a more realistic account of North American history is a hideous assault on the truth.

After all, a voluminous amount of literature proves otherwise. For example, in British settlements like Massachusetts Bay Colony, Charlotte M. Waters wrote, "The colonies were used too as dumping ground for prisoners and undesirables generally, in spite of protests from the colonists. Criminals, prisoners of war, and inconvenient Irish were thus got rid of. Royalist prisoners after Worcester shared the fate with 2,000 Irish girls and boys deported by order of the Government. Kidnapping was not uncommon. Such emigrants were sold by auction..." (Waters, An Economic History of England).

Indentured servitude is the name applied to Europeans, particularly the early British settlers, who traded both their human and civil rights to British merchants, usually for a term of four years, in order to gain access to North America, mbecause these indentured servants were unable to feed themselves in their European homelands.

In the Commonwealth History of Massachusetts, Vol.1 it is pointed out about early New Englanders including the famous "Pilgrim" group that landed at Cape Cod, that there was a small servile population. The official document reads: “Both Indian and Negro, besides white servants were bound out to a master for a term of years and received no wages. Of these there were a few in the Pilgrim group.” Huh? The school books lie when they said the Pilgrims came here for religious freedom. If they did, then why were some of them temporary slaves? The so-called Pilgrims came here to get loot. Plain and simple. As a matter of fact, the Pilgrims came then left. They didn’t settle here. Therefore, anyone who says that they had relatives on the Mayflower is a liar, just as the lying mother or grandmother who told them that nonsense.

At any rate, the following passage was written by a priest who wanted to see for himself exactly what European peoples had to go through on the ships that transported them to British North America. This particular six months-long voyage took place around 26 years before the start of the War of Independence (about ten generations ago). "...during the voyage on these ships terrible misery, stench, fumes, horror, vomiting, many kinds of sea-sickness, fever, dysentery, headache, heat, constipation, boils, scurvy, cancer, mouth-rot, and the like, all of which come from old and sharply salted food and meat, also from very bad and foul water, so that many die miserably. Add to this want of provisions, hunger, thirst, frost, heat, dampness, anxiety, want, afflictions and lamentations, together with other trouble, as c.v. the lice abound so frightfully, especially on sick people, that they can be scraped off the body...Children from 1 to 7 years rarely survive the voyage; and many a time parents are compelled to see their children miserably suffer and die from hunger, thirst, and sickness, and then to see them cast into the water." (English Historical Documents, Vol. 9, edited by Merrill Jensen)

Although the above passage resembles the description of an enslaver's ship leaving Africa, obviously, it is not. To be sure, being in bondage was nothing new to any Europeans, especially the British. For instance, during the so-called early Saxon period - this began presumably around 1600 years or 49 generations ago and was supposed to have lasted for about 400 years or sixteen generations. Edward P. Cheyney points out, "In many ways England had gone back to much the same state of barbarism as that in which it had been before the Roman conquest...Gregory, a Roman deacon, in going to the market place and seeing some boys with white skins, fair faces, and fine hair exposed (naked) by a merchant for sale as slaves, was struck with their beauty and asked their race - he was told they were Angles." - (Cheney, A Short History of England)

In the so-called 'later' Saxon period, which has been said to have begun about 1200 years or 48 generations ago - lasting for, perhaps, 200 years: "There were many slaves, some being born bondmen, others captured in war and sold into slavery, and still others reduced to slavery for debt or for crime." (Cheyney, op. cit.)

Apparently, neither whiteness nor Anglo-Saxonism had been invented yet. Another thing proven in Cheyney's last passage - "some being born bondmen" - is that hereditary slavery was not invented by Europeans for Africans as is often claimed by uninformed European American social theorists and a few of their gullible African American counterparts.

Nevertheless, in a few respects, the way that Black captive workers (so-called slaves) were treated in New England was quite different than their Southern counterparts. For one, the concentration of work was, usually, on small farms as opposed to huge plantations. As well, while many were skilled artisans, a number of the Northern captive workers were trained to do things like operating grocery stores, printing presses, and other businesses (see Lorenzo Greene's timeless work, The Negro In Colonial New England). Factually speaking, there was hardly a single occupation that African Americans did not hold in either colonial or post-colonial periods.

In 1656, a Black man named Bus-Bus bought a slave named Angola from a Mrs. Kearney, in the Dorchester section of Boston. In the same book mentioned above Greene pointed out:: "...slaveholding was a class rather than a racial institution is suggested by the fact that at least one Negro family owned slaves in colonial New England, "...he continued, "while six Negro slaveholders were reported from Connecticut" in the first Federal census 202 years or eight generations ago (Greene, ibid.)

Finally, in The Myth Of Black Capitalism, based upon the research of the noted historian John Hope Franklin, author Earl Ofari (now Hutchinson added to his surname) noted that by around 1830 there were an estimated 3, 777 African American slavemasters in the United States. It is believed that some of these folks were merely "buying" their brethren out of bondage and were registered as slave owners. However, there were a number of those who actually held slaves for profit. Some of them held so many captives that they were the envy of their "white" counterparts.

Let’s stop teaching garbage to children and start telling the truth. Then African Americans and European Americans alike can see what these crooks in both government and corporations are about really.

Cheers!

G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2011/03/04/2011-03-04_bad_lesson_ohio_elementary_school_in_trouble_after_black_student_made_to_play_sl.html
Read full post

Great 10 minutes-long video about Corporations, Corrupt politicians, and the corrupt Supreme Court

Please click on the link velow:
http://storyofstuff.org/citizensunited/
Read full post

Isreali and Egyptian armies love US taxpayer dollars

Corruption, endemic in Israel's political culture, has rapidly seeped into the military." - Jonathan Cook

Dear friends,

The enterprise called Israel that resides under the banner of political Zionism, in part, admits to its suspicious legitimacy due to its “peace” contract with Egyptian rulers. Consequently, the here-to-mentioned corrupt enterprise has great stakes in the outcome of the current revolt by Egyptian citizens.

Moreover, for all of the brave words of “freedom and democracy” that, particularly, North American politicians love to bandy about, it is, perhaps, instructive for us to ask: What role will the threat capability (i.e., the military) of Western governments play, along with their allies in Northern Africa and the Middle East, if there is any hope for democratic institutions to flourish in Egypt? That is an especially important question since the very essence of democracy is “non-violent conflict resolution”. Simply having a one person/one vote forum has nothing to do with democracy. Let’s face it. You can have the right to vote in a tyranny, and often do these days. After all, Iraqis had the right to vote under Saddam Hussein. Did they not?

Nevertheless, on the link below, the renowned journalist Jonathan Cook, at least to me, provides a clearer picture than traditional Western journalists do, regarding that whole mess. Cheers!

G. Djata Bumpus
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/articles/39/Israeli-army-will-cash-in-on-Egyptian-revolution.html
Read full post