Kosmo Kramer aka Michael Richards tries hard to ruin his career...

Someone should make a sig saying: Soultan argues Grey propaganda.

And what, pray tell, are YOUR sources?

Stating the wrong facts over and over is not going to help you.

Eventually, you are going to realize that no one else is substantiating your point of view. No one. Nada.

If it's so true, you think someone MIGHT jump in and back you up. Ever wonder why that never happens?

Tell ya what: in a point by point syllogism, tell me how you can definitively tell ANYONE that INDIANS had it worse than BLACKS in AMERICA.

For the record, I suggest you look up the terms "definitively" and "prove". Also, let me know which "resorts" they moved indians to.

http://memory.loc.gov/learn/features/immig/alt/native_american.html

http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat0.htm#America

http://www.usna.edu/Users/history/kolp/HH345/PRE1492.HTM

Stop me when I'm supposed to believe if even for a moment that your estimate of 112.5 million is a definitive assessment. People haven't bought that idea for 40 years.

Answer me this: how does the number of blacks versus the number of indians prove to anyone who was treated worse?

Tell me again how being enslaved or being killed is better or worse?

Tell me how dying as a slave isn't killing someone? etc. etc. etc.

Tell me how you can definitievely say Indians had it worse than blacks in the U.S.

Tell me how we got on the "in the U.S." status anyway.

How were there 112 million people in america in 1500, and less than 40 million in 1860.

You can't answer the vast majority of these questions. Therefore, you can't definitively tell me or anyone else that indians had it worse than blacks or that blacks did not have it worse than indians.

[dunno]

You can't fault that logic whatsoever. The only way to do so is to prove the unproven, and if you can do that, there isn't an institution of higher learning that wouldn't award you a PhD immediately. You'd answer the question social scientists would not have been able to answer just...ever.

500, 000 compared to 900, 000.

Even though I know the Indian rate was much higher at around 112 million.
I guess I have to deal with your scary Internet link.

Still you lose, because 500,000 is much less than 900,000.


http://www.christianaction.org.za/articles_ca/2004-4-TheScourgeofSlavery.htm

5% africans = out to about 500,000 which is half of a million.

Look under - american slave trade.

Now you can get the FUCK OUT OF MY FACE!


Especially when the fact remains Indian rates are still way down.
compared to Black rates which continue to still grow.

number 1. I wasn't lying, Might have read outdated esitmates but I didn't lie.

number 2. 54 million is more accurate now. Which is still more than 500,000 Africans.

Uh oh, he's breaking out logical fallacies!

yo put it to rest guys....


he's a racist man who came outta the closet by blatantly saying what he said...

nuff said.


there's nothing holding back on it now.

That shit is crazy

ignorance runs all over these two pages....

We need to end this now

Yeah, this entire exchange became circuitous when I had to define both my terms and menaz's [funny]

[dummy]

that wasnt in america, smart guy.