Chris Mathews apologizes on behalf of white people....

Also why are you quoting yourself, wake up

Stop trying to make me seem like an intellectual giant here.

- - - Updated - - -

But how far are you willing to go is the question.

quit trying to patronize, it doesnt suit you trust me.

The picts,

lets discuss, you were saying....what was your point again?

 

Pity you can't then feel guilt for people murdered by Americans with drone strikes.

 

You really are ignorant, aren't you?

Maybe this will help (oh, and what's this? It's even from one of your own news sources? Tony Blair also apologizes for England's participation the slave trade too? Waaaa?...lolololol).

African chiefs urged to apologise for slave trade

Nigerian civil rights group says tribal leaders' ancestors sold people to slavers and should say sorry like US and Britain.

Traditional African rulers whose ancestors collaborated with European and Arab slave traders should follow Britain and the United States by publicly saying sorry, according to human rights organisations.

The Civil Rights Congress of Nigeria has written to tribal chiefs saying: "We cannot continue to blame the white men, as Africans, particularly the traditional rulers, are not blameless."

The appeal has reopened a sensitive debate over the part some chiefs played in helping to capture their fellow Africans and sell them into bondage as part of the transatlantic slave trade.

The congress argued that the ancestors of the chiefs had helped to raid and kidnap defenceless communities and traded them to Europeans. They should now apologise to "put a final seal to the history of slave trade", it said.

"In view of the fact that the Americans and Europe have accepted the cruelty of their roles and have forcefully apologised, it would be logical, reasonable and humbling if African traditional rulers ... [can] accept blame and formally apologise to the descendants of the victims of their collaborative and exploitative slave trade."

Estimates vary that between 10 million and 28 million Africans were sent to the Americas and sold into slavery between 1450 and the early 19th century.

More than a million are believed to have died in transit across the so-called "middle passage" of the Atlantic due to inhumane conditions aboard slave ships and the brutal crushing of any resistance.

Three years ago Tony Blair described Britain's participation as a "crime against humanity" and expressed his "deep sorrow". The US Senate voted for an apology this year.

Shehu Sani, head of the congress, said it was calling for traditional rulers to apologise now because they were seeking inclusion in a forthcoming constitutional amendment in Nigeria.

"We felt that for them to have the moral standing to be part of our constitutional arrangement there are some historical issues for them to address," he told the BBC World Service. "One part of which is the involvement of their institutions in the slave trade."

He said that on behalf of the buyers of slaves, the ancestors of the traditional rulers "raided communities and kidnapped people, shipping them away across the Sahara or across the Atlantic".

Many slaves captured inland in Africa died on the long journey to the coast.

The position was endorsed by Henry Bonsu, a British-born broadcaster of Ghanaian descent who examined the issue in Ghana for a radio documentary. He said some chiefs had accepted responsibility and sought atonement by visiting Liverpool and the United States.

"I interviewed a chief who acknowledged there was collaboration and that without that involvement we wouldn't have seen human trafficking on an industrial scale," said Bonsu, the co-founder of digital station Colourful Radio.

"An apology in Nigeria might be helpful because the chiefs did some terrible things and abetted a major crime."

The non-government organisation Africa Human Right Heritage, based in Accra, Ghana, supports the campaign for an apology. Baffour Anning, its chief executive, said: "I certainly agree with the Nigeria Civil Rights Congress that the traditional leaders should render an apology for their role in the inhuman slavery administration." He said it would accord with the UN's position on human rights.

But the issue was not a high priority for most African citizens, according to Bonsu. "In my experience it's mainly the African diaspora who want an apology. People aren't milling around Lagos or Accra moaning about why chiefs don't apologise. They are more concerned about the everyday and why they still have bad governance."

Fred Swaniker, the founder of the African Leadership Academy, said: "I'm not sure whether an apology is needed, but it would be worth looking at and acknowledging the role Africa did play in the slave trade. Someone had to find the slaves and bring them before the Europeans."

The shameful history of some traditional leaders remains an awkward subject on which many politicians prefer to maintain silence. One exception was in 1998 when Yoweri Museveni, the president of Uganda, told an audience including Bill Clinton: "African chiefs were the ones waging war on each other and capturing their own people and selling them. If anyone should apologise it should be the African chiefs. We still have those traitors here even today."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/nov/18/africans-apologise-slave-trade

 

Reminiscent of Vietnam, in reverse.

 

Correct. Just most of it.

 

Dont read your own c&p I see then...

Nowhere in the article did the Afrikan Chiefs apologize for their supposed role, they were asked to but as yet refused.

maybe because they didnt have any role in it?? huh?

 

I'm not suggesting an apology. Only that those who cast stones should recall that stones were once cast at them and vice versa.

 

thanks for playing

 

WTF??? Anyway, I'm not being personally blamed for that. If I were, I'd tell the blamer to fuk themselves. Nice try though.

 

I wonder why the afrikan chiefs never apologized. Im guessing they know more about the situation than anybody in the world.

 

Ok I'll explain the picts to you wake up.

You want them to have their land back??

Go talk to the scandanavians, they took it.

If you need back up just call me, I got all the amo you need.

 

Uh... who are the ones constantly living in the past ?!

 

I know my origins and I have no guilt for anything.

I'm not here to educate you on your own country and it's origins...although you clearly could use some.

 

Your statement

"Quote Originally Posted by J0NAH View Post
Lies. Lies designed and manipulated by neo liberals to exonerate american whites of any wrong doing."

 

What is your heritage?

- - - Updated - - -

and??

Whats your point?

 

Don't know why it said I posted that, it was your statement. All I did was select reply with quote. You are the one who posted:

"Native americans lived all over the americas, Im not sure why the southerners were more advanced in terms of infrastructure, maybe you can explain."

...but I suspect you know that and are just being obtuse.

Yes, the Picts, the Anglo-Saxons, the Normans, the Vikings, the Scoti. What you say you about you and your fellow Englishmen, descended from various tribes who conquered the British Isles?

- - - Updated - - -

If you believe that then you are woefully wrong.

 

Yes, I'm sure they'd all be standing in line to admit their guilt...as most guilty people do.

But you are right, you are guessing, incorrectly.

So what say you about your role as a Brit in it all? Are you making your reparations?

 

But you Englishmen are all a mix of Scandinavians, Scoti, Anglo-Saxons and the various other tribes that invaded the British Isles. You have blood on your hands.

The Picts were just a small part in the upper Isles...and were never really conquered. They continued to thrive and simply converted, if you believe modern history.

 

German, English, Italian, Cherokee Indian.

I asked for your facts to back up your claim of lies and manipulation.

 

Im not english. You can do what you want with them.

- - - Updated - - -

Im guessing incorrectly that African chiefs know more about the situation than anybody? Ok, whatever.

 

i didn't say anything about constantly living in the past

but, the remark you quoted refers to people that seem to want to scrap the civil rights laws

it seems like lots of them are libertarians or anarchists

is your name 'people'?

you don't know what you're talking about

i speak for myself, i assume chris is doing that, too

where did i say i speak for anyone other than myself?

show me where i made an apology

 

Lies and manipulation of facts being 'africans sold themsleves into slavery. That is a manipulation of facts only a deceiver would do. A decipherer would add that the afrikans who did do this were under duress. If you studied this subject you would know.

An example being the Kingdom of Kongo where many were taken captive and sold to europeans. This 'practice' became established decades after the first encounter with europeans. What happened in the years prior to the 'sales' ? Many wars of resistance, there was no end to european invasions. The king wrote letters condemning the practice of the european slavetraders. It's not a straightforward as you think.

Having read much on this it's difficult still for me to provide hard evidence but from what I can gather the 'blacks sold blacks' line is a very simple argument made by white americans. It's easily rebuffed but at the same time the rebuffal is not conclusive, on my part. I'll dig deeper see what I can find.

If I dont find the hard evidence of kings being threatened with slavery by europeans if they didnt comply then there is always the argument that the Afrikan kings did so to acquire the guns needed to withstand the european invasions, which ultimately, albeit at the cost of so called african americans, was the turning point in the 'scramble for afrika'. In the end, the Afrikans were just as powerful militarily and even managed to turn the europeans against eachother see the dutch and english relations deteriorate ultimately leading to the english putting dutch in concentration camps in the south.

 

It's no coincidence that the Afrikans who were cooperating with europeans were the very afrikans who initially engaged with the europeans in warfare on the coasts. This is why the europeans built forts on the coast, because this is where most of the resistance was. Evidence for this is in Elmina forts in Ghana, where the guns face inland. There is also documented evidence of coastal villages being destroyed, presumably if they didnt comply with european 'laws'