The Truth About Reparations
- From: "Ben Cramer" <[remove]bencramer7@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 14:03:50 +1000
The Truth About Reparations
by V.S. Herrell
Deadria Farmer-Paellmann is the most recent black instigator against
justice. Recently, she filed suit against three major corporations, Aetna,
CSX, and FleetBoston Financial Corporation for reparations. Farmer-Paellmann
claims the suit is being filed on behalf of 35 million black descendents of
the 8 million or so slaves brought to America between the early 1600's and
mid-1800's. While not an attorney, as she has not passed the bar, Deadria
Farmer-Paellmann is at the forefront of the issue. Of course, this is a hot
topic of discussion in the Jewish media. Some even claim to be against
reparations for slavery in America, citing several reasons: statute of
limitations, ex post facto law, etc. In other words, legalists claim that
the so-called "crime of slavery" is too old and wasn't illegal at the time.
What everyone is failing to miss is the most important point of all. What is
the crime in slavery? Even Aetna and CSX are failing to mount the
appropriate defenses. Aetna released the statement that it did not believe
"a court would permit a lawsuit over events which - however regrettable -
occurred hundreds of years ago. These issues in no way reflect Aetna today."
And CSX stated that slavery was "a tragic chapter in our nation's history
.... its impacts cannot be attributed to any single company or industry."
The one question Americans are not asking themselves is, Why is slavery a
crime or who says slavery is a crime? In making slavery a heinous sin and
evil beyond measure, anyone who has ancestors who owned slaves must now
believe that those ancestors are condemned to hell.
This is not to say that a crime was not committed, for indeed there was. The
true crime is that Negroes were ever brought to this country in the first
place and given a higher standard of living; the crime is that they were
allowed to live in a white society. It is a crime that they were ever told
they could adhere to the same standards as whites. It is a crime that the
law of God has been violated, and that whites and blacks have participated
in miscegenation, which is death to both the black and the white races. But
who is guilty of this crime?
It is well known that Jews, though a small percentage of the population,
were indeed active in the slave trade, overwhelmingly so. The Jewish Talmud
was used to encourage the enslavement of blacks in America.
"But the justification for the enslavement of Black people came from the
Jewish interpretation of the Hamitic Myth from 'the Talmudic and Midrashic
sources' ... This interpretation came from the Babylonian Talmud, not the
Jerusalem Talmud" (Charshee McIntyre, The Continuity of the International
Slave Trade and Slave System, 1990).
Even the Jews are not afraid to admit their involvement:
"Jews also took an active part in the Dutch colonial slave trade; indeed,
the bylaws of the Recife and Mauricia congregations (1648) included an
imposta (Jewish tax) of five soldos for each Negro slave a Brazilian Jew
purchased from the West Indies Company. Slave auctions were postponed if
they fell on a Jewish holiday. In Curacao in the seventeenth century, as
well as in the British colonies of Barbados and Jamaica in the eighteenth
century, Jewish merchants played a major role in the slave trade" (Rabbi
Marc Lee Raphael, Jews and Judaism in the United States: A Documentary
History, 1983, p. 14).
"Dutch Sephardic Jews played a certain part in this slave traffic from
Curacao. They had excellent contacts with Portugese New Christians, in both
the Caribbean and Brazil. Firms directed by conversos in Amsterdam were also
concerned. By 1702, the Dutch Sephardic community on Curacao of perhaps six
hundred accounted for over a third of the wealth of the island. Curacao
flourished, and perhaps four thousand slaves were exported from there every
year between 1668 and 1674. Yet in 1668, because of difficulties over
slaves, more than three thousand slaves had to be held in the island's
'storage facilities'" (Hugh Thomas, The Slave Trade: The Story of the
Atlantic Slave Trade: 1440-1870, 1997, p. 213).
What Thomas is calling New Christians are Jews who began calling themselves
Christians after the Spanish Inquisition, also known as conversos.
It should be noted, though, that in the introduction of the book, Hugh
Thomas tries to take some of the blame off the Jewish slave traders, stating
that "one would be hard put to find more than one or two Jewish slave
traders in the Anglo-Saxon traffic." He then mentions Aaron Lopez and his
father-in-law, Jacob Rodrigues Ribera. This statement is only a half-truth,
when one considers that what Mr. Thomas calls the "Anglo-Saxon" traffic was
indeed only a small part in world-wide slave trading.
"In fact, in all the American colonies, whether French (Martinique),
British, or Dutch, Jewish merchants frequently dominated. This was no less
true on the North American mainland, where during the eighteenth century
Jews participated in the 'triangular trade' that brought slaves from Africa
to the West Indies and there exchanged them for molasses, which in turn was
taken to New England and converted into rum for sale in Africa. Isaac Da
Costa of Charleston in the 1750's, David Franks of Philadelphia in the
1760's, and Aaron Lopez of Newport in the late 1760's and early 1770's
dominated Jewish slave trading on the American continent" (Rabbi Marc Lee
Raphael, Jews and Judaism in the United States: A Documentary History, 1983,
p. 14).
"The Jews of the Joden Savanne [Surinam] were also foremost in the
suppression of the successive Negro revolts, from 1690 to 1722: these as a
matter of fact were largely directed against them, as being the greatest
slave-holders of the region" (Cecil Roth, History of the Marranos, 1932).
In fact, the Jews even admit to their participation in the genocide of the
black race through miscegenation or race-mixing. They even prove claims that
it was primarily the Jews who race-mixed with black slaves, not whites.
"The female slave was a sex tool beneath the level of moral considerations.
She was an economic good, useful, in addition to her menial labor, for
breeding more slaves. To attain that purpose, the master mated her
promiscuously according to his breeding plans. The master himself and his
sons and other members of his household took turns with her for the increase
of the family wealth, as well as for satisfaction of their extra-marital sex
desires. Guests and neighbors too were invited to that luxury" (Louis
Epstein, Sex Law and Customs in Judaism).
W.E.B. DuBois discusses the role of the Jew in the South in his book The
Souls of Black Folk, 1903:
"The Jew is the heir of the slave-baron in Dougherty; and as we ride
westward, by wide stretching cornfields and stubby orchards of peach and
pear, we see on all sides within the circle of dark forest a Land of Canaan.
Here and there are tales of projects for money-getting, born in the swift
days of Reconstruction, - "improvement" companies, wine companies, mills and
factories; nearly all failed, and the Jew fell heir ... This plantation,
owned now by a Russian Jew ... hard tales of cruelty and mistreatment of the
chained freemen are told, but the county authorities were deaf until the
free-labor market was nearly ruined by wholesale migration. Then they took
the convicts from the plantations, but not until one of the finest regions
of the "Oakey Woods" had been ruined and ravished into a red waste, out of
which only a Yankee or a Jew could squeeze more blood from debt-cursed
tenants."
Later, when attempting to republish the book in the late 1950's, DuBois was
coerced by publishers to change the word Jew to foreigner.
Slave ships such as Abigail, Crown, Nassau, Four Sisters, Anne and Eliza,
Prudent Betty, Hester, Elizabeth, Antigua, Betsy, Polly, White Horse,
Expedition, Charlotte Caracoa, and others were owned by Jews. Jewish names
such as Lopez, Levy, Franks, Simpson, Bosch, Abrams, Cruger, Phoenix,
Roosevelt, Sweevts, and Gomez abound. Jews were prominent in buying,
selling, and trading slaves. They were ship owners, auctioneers, overseers,
and so on. They owned shops which advertised slaves for sale. You will find
their names in newspapers under advertisements and postings regarding
runaway slaves. And we are just discussing black slavery, not the white
slavery and prostitution that the Jews continue to run in Israel and other
countries.
The fact that Jews, and yes, even whites, played a major role in the slave
trade cannot change the fact that black slave trading would not have been
possible if it had not been for the blacks' own leaders selling them into
slavery. Even Hugh Thomas remarks in his book:
"If one is looking for villains in this matter, and some are, one should
certainly indeed look at royal families more severely than Jewish ones: I am
partly thinking of the rulers of Benin; the kings of Ashanti, Congo, and
Dahomey; and the Vili rulers of Loango, who sold great numbers of slaves
over many generations ..." (p. 13, ibid.)
Under pictorial accounts of slave traders, we find the captions:
"King Tegesibu of Dahomey who made £250,000 a year from selling Africans
about 1750: far more than any English duke received as income" ... "King
Alvare of the Congo who provided slaves to the Portugese" ... "The King of
Benin (c. 1686) whose ancestors refused to sell men; but his descendents
sold everyone."
Hugh Thomas also writes:
"This large labor force would not have been available to the Europeans in
the Americas without the cooperation of the African kings, merchants, and
noblemen. Those African leaders were, as a rule, neither bullied nor
threatened into making these sales (for sales they were, even if the bills
were settled in textiles, guns, brandy, cowrie shells, beads, horses, and so
on). When, in 1842, the sultan of Morocco told the British consul that he
thought that 'the traffic in slaves is a matter on which all sects and
nations have agreed from the time of the sons of Adam,' he could have been
speaking for all African rulers ... But most slaves carried from Africa
between 1440 and 1870 were procured as a result of the Africans' interest in
selling their own neighbors, usually distant but sometimes close, and, more
rarely, their own people. 'Man-stealing' accounted for the majority of
slaves taken to the New World, and it was usually the responsibility of the
Africans. Voltaire's sharp comment that, while it was difficult to defend
the conduct of Europeans in the slave trade, that of Africans in bartering
each other was even more reprehensible, deserves to be better remembered"
(p. 792, ibid.).
History proves that Jews and blacks themselves were instrumental in bringing
black slaves to this country. It is also a proven fact of history that
blacks were sold into slavery by their own chiefs and tribesmen. It is
apparent that Jews have exploited blacks in numerous ways for their own
monetary gains, just as they have done with whites. The Jews in Hollywood,
Al Jolson, Eddy Cantor, George Burns, and dozens of other less known Jews
became famous for their "black face" performances. Millions of dollars have
been made off movies which either cater to blacks or make fun of them. To
the Jew, it makes no difference, as long as they make some money and keep
the focus off the real problem - themselves. Steven Spielberg made a pretty
penny off the historically inaccurate movie, Amistad. The irony is that it
was the Jews who created a situation where such a movie could be made, both
in their participation in bringing slaves to America on one hand and their
so-called "civil rights" activism on the other! The crime is not that blacks
were enslaved. The crime is that whites and blacks are being race-mixed out
of existence. The crime is that whites are being forced into slavery by Jew
masters, just as blacks were. Slavery is still very big business for Jews.
Another issue that is not being addressed is that blacks owned slaves as
well. Whites were enslaved. Many Irishmen were owned by Jews and traded as
slaves. Many white Americans were brought over to America as "indentured
servants" by the British. They were, in fact, slaves. In fact, statistical
information obtained from the 1830 census shows that a small minority of
white people owned slaves, while a disproportionate amount of free blacks
owned slaves. Almost 4,000 blacks owned over 12,000 slaves among them. Larry
Koger writes in his book Black Slaveowners: Free Black Slave Masters in
South Carolina, 1790-1860 that many free blacks owned black slaves. In
Charleston, the 1860 census shows that 92.0% of free blacks were
slaveowners, up from the 1830 census which showed 25.3%. He also states that
one mulatto, James Pendarvis, the offspring of a "white" and his Negro
slave, owned 123 slaves. He records that because James' father was white,
the census counted James as white, although his features clearly showed his
African genes, and his father stated in his will that his children,
including James, "were the offspring of his Negro woman, Parthena" (p. 14).
The author concludes that James Pendarvis was so successful he was able to
marry a white woman and "break the color barrier." Thus, all of his
descendents and the descendents of his brothers and sisters would be equally
descended from slaves and slaveowners. This is but one example from history
of blacks owning blacks. This is also an example of the enslavement of
blacks by whites or vice versa leading to mongrelization or miscegenation,
the true crime which is destroying America.
Thus, it is entirely likely that many of the estimated 35 million
descendents of slaves were also descendents of slave owners. This is
especially true if they are descendents of the families of the Congo who
sold their own people into slavery. Do they pay themselves reparations? What
if some of the blacks to benefit from this proposed suit were not descended
from slaves at all, but only slave-owners? How would the money be
distributed and overseen? The arguments for reparations for black slaves is
absurd, but even more absurd is the allegation that slavery in itself is an
intrinsic evil. In order to make this claim, one would have to believe that
the inhabitants of every nation to the beginning of recorded time are
condemned to hell for owning, trading, buying, selling or benefiting from
slavery - even when the slaves were happy to remain with their masters when
offered "freedom." There is no known country - white or black dominated -
which has not at some time participated in slavery. The mongrel nations
themselves have both enslaved and been enslaved. Even today, blacks are
still buying and selling each other in Africa.
"While the voyage of the MV Etireno and the possible fate of any other
children that may have been on board is unclear, it remains a fact that some
200,000 children are sold into slavery every year in West and Central
Africa. Aid workers say parents are often tempted to sell their children for
as little as $15, in the hope that they may find work in richer West African
states, usually on cocoa or coffee plantations"
(http://www.worldrevolution.org/Region.asp?RegionName=Africa).
Thus, it is apparent that the blacks in this country today would consider
their own relatives still in Africa to be evil and morally corrupt for
owning slaves and that slaves who do not desire freedom are inferior - even
when freedom means a worse or unimaginable state of being. Would not a child
sold into slavery by uncaring parents for as little as $15 be better off
with a kind and benevolent master who cared for all his needs in exchange
for menial labor or some other type of work? Would not a slave loyal to his
master be considered valuable, and be defended and protected from the
onslaught of AIDS and black uprisings which are ravishing Africa? We are not
by any means endorsing so-called cruel or inhumane treatment of anyone. We
are simply bringing to mind many relevant questions. We cannot forget that
thousands of white slaves were cruelly mistreated and beaten, and that many
whites are still being unwillingly enslaved today as children in the Zionist
prostitution-slave crisis in Israel.
In suing for reparations, why bring down the very nation that ended black
slavery? If slavery was such a travesty in Farmer-Paellmann's eyes, then why
not send thank you notes to the government that ended it and sue the
descendents of the black slave traders of the Congo and Dahomey, who made
far more money off the slave trade than so-called Anglo-Saxon slave traders?
Why is Deadria Farmer-Paellmann suing large American corporations for
reparations? The answer is simple - she is seeking to follow in the
fingerprints of the Jewish extortion racketeers as she seeks to create a
"Black Holocaust". Her actions have nothing to do with justice, right, or
truth. She and her Jewish partners are simply after many dollars.
Maybe she should ask some of those 35 million descendents of slaves who may
work at these three companies if they want to be part of this suit.
Estimates for the amount of money involved are as high as $1.4 trillion. A
settlement of that sort would no doubt bankrupt the companies involved, CSX,
FleetBoston, and Aetna, as well as several other companies yet to be named.
Perhaps the millions of black employees who may now lose their jobs would
like to be heard before Deadria Farmer-Paellmann continues with this suit.
Perhaps the black families insured by Aetna or who have loans through
FleetBoston would like to be heard.
Why does Farmer-Paellmann not address the true perpetrators of the slave
trade in this country? Why not go after the descendents of the slave ship
owners or auctioneers? We all know the answer - it would be much harder to
get $1.4 trillion out of them. They know where the money is. I guess the Jew
did teach the black something after all. I can just see it now, first
reparations money, then book rights, movie rights, donations ...
One final aspect of this absurd debate that the Jewish media refused to
address openly, is the fact that under the Constitution of the United States
of America all citizens supposedly had protection for their property, and
could not be relieved of their property with a due course of law or "just
compensation" (Bill of Rights, Amendment V).
Whether right, wrong, moral, or immoral, before the so-called Emancipation
Proclamation Negroes were legally chattel, that is, property. and therefore
the rights to them were protected by the clear statements of the
Constitution. This protection applied to both slaves in the North and slaves
in the South. In other words, the government had no right to take any
citizen's private property without due course of law and just compensation.
Now, it may be said that the course of law was the North gaining the right
to dictate the tyrannical laws they enforced upon the Southern states that
had claimed their right of secession. This may be considered the due course
of law. However, the North never paid any slaveowner the just compensation
for the property that was literally stolen from the individual.
If there is to be reparation, then let us deal justly with the families who
were robbed of personal property and pay every slaveowning family a just
compensation for the chattel or Negroes that were stolen from them without
the giving of just compensation. If this had been done at the end of the War
of Northern Aggression, then slaveowners would have been able to give some
money to their slaves to aid them in getting a good start, as did happen in
many Southern towns and states. In fact, many slaves fought for the South of
their own free will and were content with the relationship they had with
their bosses. Most Southern plantations were owned by partnerships, usually
consisting of Jews, Anglicans or Catholics, and contrary to Northern Jewish
propaganda, the antebellum South was a very just and fair and decent place
for blacks to live and thrive. They were, after all, the key labor force and
were, for the most part, actually pampered and humored by their owners - so
much so that a great number of blacks stayed on in the South as
sharecroppers, rather than suffer the hypocrisy of Northern prejudice. The
God's truth is that the black man was very much a part of Southern culture.
Additionally, most whites who were farmers and mountain people did not own
slaves. When they did own slaves, it was usually one or two at the most.
The true story of the South has never been told. Most Southerners cared very
deeply for their black slaves and friends. Many blacks were well-respected
in white towns and villages and were never harassed or threatened or
terrorized, as long as they maintained the racial barrier that had been
imposed by God Himself, as is made clear in the Anointed Standard
Translation of the New Testament. Let all contemporary blacks compare their
lives and opportunities to that of their distant cousins in Africa, who, for
the most part, have not survived as tribes and families due to disease and
in-warring among themselves. Let not the blacks in this country believe for
one moment that they are loved and cherished by Africans. The truth is that
Africans do not like American blacks and they resent them.
Finally, let us always remember the amount of money that has already been
spent on blacks through welfare programs and other programs to maintain them
and bring them up to a competitive level. Let us remember that the United
States government has spent the equivalent of billions of dollars setting up
and building the state of Monrovia in Africa so that blacks could be
repatriated to their own ancestral soil. Let us remember the failure of that
fiasco, and let us remember the actions of the blacks or Negroes whenever
they have become the majority in any country, especially the island
countries in the Carribbean. It has always been their history to kill off
all the high-yellows and whites, which is a natural instinct among the
blacks. Today, the de facto Jewish government is flooding in Chinese and
Mexicans, in the hope of preventing white massacres by blacks.
Let us also never forget that we white Americans have never been allowed to
vote to become a mongrelized nation. The immigration policies have been set
by mongrel Jews and mongrel Marxist Communists in our government. Why not
stop importing mongrel negroid people and alleviate the burgeoning crowding
of Germany and other European nations by allowing a mass migration of
Germans? No, that would not follow the Marxist Jewish Communist plan for
Jewish domination of the world and the making of America and Canada into the
first mongrelized international state. This writer believes that Ms.
Farmer-Paellmann and her Jewish friends will be laughed out of court. But if
her extortion attempts work, then there will be no end to the victimization
of all property owners. For that will open the door for the queers and the
sodomites to sue for reparations or compensation for all the thousands of
years they have been treated as perverts. Let us speak up as Christians and
demand a return to the sanity of the New Testament of Jesus Christ.
.
- Prev by Date: The Jewish Problem
- Next by Date: Re: Muslims
- Previous by thread: THE RACIST JEWISH EXTORTION AGAINST SWITZERLAND!
- Next by thread: Re: The Truth About Reparations
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
