2 million bigots tea baggies to DC

Alright. On to Cromwell. Surely he sold slaves. Surely there is documentation...Yes? NO.

You find out right lies. Here is one.

In 1742, a document entitled Thurloe's State Papers, published in London, opined that:

"..It was a measure beneficial to Ireland, which was
thus relieved of a population that might trouble the planters; it
was a benefit to the people removed, which might thus be made
English and Christians ... a great benefit to the West India
sugar planters, who desired men and boys for their bondsmen, and
the women and Irish girls... To solace them."(4)

Oh sure, I can find the document. But, not the text. Just made up, I guess. Total HOAX>

http://www.british-history.ac.uk/catalogue.aspx?gid=101
Collections of Thurloe, Secretary of State 1652-8, ed. Thomas Birch (7 volumes).

Your search - "a great benefit to the West India sugar planters" - did not match any documents.

jason1976 said:

wow, simple minded people are so funny. how do we as people move forward in life when the truths of past are so blatently left behind,and dug up only when the need is suited? ill never understand the shallow beliefs that people have. good luck on "i think id have heard of it since im irish"bs. youd think people inm the us would know that we nuked ourselves in the 50s too, but no one does. nations have a way of not letting people know what really happened or transpired during the time period. id say believe it or not. stay shallow,its safer there.

Click to expand...

your source has been refuted, there was no such proclamation, Transportation To The Colonies was not slavery it was PRISON, and had nothing to do with Indentured Servitude.

becoming a Bondman was voluntary, while Transportation was punishment for crimes or insurrection.

selling the labour of criminals whose punishment includes labour for the state is still practiced today as part of the penal system in EVERY country.

or do you think convicts make licesne plates and work on road gangs for their personal fulfillment and self actualization?

Doer said:

Alright. On to Cromwell. Surely he sold slaves. Surely there is documentation...Yes? NO.

You find out right lies. Here is one.

In 1742, a document entitled Thurloe's State Papers, published in London, opined that:

"..It was a measure beneficial to Ireland, which was
thus relieved of a population that might trouble the planters; it
was a benefit to the people removed, which might thus be made
English and Christians ... a great benefit to the West India
sugar planters, who desired men and boys for their bondsmen, and
the women and Irish girls... To solace them."(4)

Oh sure, I can find the document. But, not the text. Just made up, I guess. Total HOAX>

http://www.british-history.ac.uk/catalogue.aspx?gid=101
Collections of Thurloe, Secretary of State 1652-8, ed. Thomas Birch (7 volumes).

Your search - "a great benefit to the West India sugar planters" - did not match any documents.

Click to expand...

http://luna.folger.edu/luna/servlet/view/all/what/[Proclamations. 1625-08-04] By the King. A proclamation prohibiting the keeping of Bartholomew Faire, and Sturbridge Faire./when/1625?os=0&pgs=50

this proclamation of 1625 was made by charles the first...

i can find no reference to the asserted "proclamation of 1625" in any form except a repetition of the exact prose used in the refuted source.

copy/paste once again rules the interwebs, and serious discussion falls to it's predation.

yep. it's HORSESHIT

EDIT: so i did some more digging, and came up with this essay which repeats the same claims, but this time with FOOTNOTES!

http://www.ewtn.com/library/HUMANITY/SLAVES.TXT

which led me to the source of the assertions of the alleged proclamation of 1625, found in footnote 2

Abbot E. Smith, Colonists in Bondage, 1607-1776

but i can find no electronic version of this tome, from which to extract HIS source, though apparently it's a Hot Topic for footnoting.

one would think a book published in 1965, and reprinted dozens of times through the ensuing years, and so frequently cited as a source would be available someplace, but sadly no.

i found no source for the refuted essay's "proclamation", under proclamations, royal decrees, or any other official document from the crown.

wherever Abbot E Smith got his source, apparently only he knows about it, and he kept his secret so carefully that nobody ever sources the actual "proclamation" only his discussion of it, using strangely consistent prose every time.

so i guess plagiarism is now what all the cool kids are doing in their essays...

jason1976 said:

wow, simple minded people are so funny. how do we as people move forward in life when the truths of past are so blatently left behind,and dug up only when the need is suited? ill never understand the shallow beliefs that people have. good luck on "i think id have heard of it since im irish"bs. youd think people inm the us would know that we nuked ourselves in the 50s too, but no one does. nations have a way of not letting people know what really happened or transpired during the time period. id say believe it or not. stay shallow,its safer there.

Click to expand...

Oh show something before you say simple. Give me anything of fact....ANYTHING...you cannot. I tried. You did not.

You are showing idiocy. You believe. Well show it. Can go beyond the Wiki lies, Simple Boy?

jason1976 said:

wow, simple minded people are so funny. how do we as people move forward in life when the truths of past are so blatently left behind,and dug up only when the need is suited? ill never understand the shallow beliefs that people have. good luck on "i think id have heard of it since im irish"bs. youd think people inm the us would know that we nuked ourselves in the 50s too, but no one does. nations have a way of not letting people know what really happened or transpired during the time period. id say believe it or not. stay shallow,its safer there.

Click to expand...

What is this about? You are just spreading more lies. These are your opinions. Provide facts, but you can't.

Do you mean the above ground testing NV?

No one is denying that.

Doer said:

Oh show something before you say simple. Give me anything of fact....ANYTHING...you cannot. I tried. You did not.

You are showing idiocy. You believe. Well show it. Can go beyond the Wiki lies, Simple Boy?

Click to expand...

You wouldn't know a Sunni Muslim if he was giving you facts.

abandonconflict said:

You wouldn't know a Sunni Muslim if he was giving you facts.

Click to expand...

You wouldn't know a teabag if it slapped you across the forehead.

im refuse to argue with someine so obviously right. obviously he knows his countries history well enough to be happy with it. you can deny all you want but facts are facts. irish came as slaves. you call it endentured servitude or whatever makes you sleep at night. i call it slavery, bought and sold.

Doer said:

What is this about? You are just spreading more lies. These are your opinions. Provide facts, but you can't.

Do you mean the above ground testing NV?

No one is denying that.

Click to expand...

no i dont mean above ground testing in nevada. i mean the flyover in sc that resulted in a nuclear bomb being dropped on our country by our country. http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/the-u-s-once-dropped-an-atomic-bomb-on-a-south-carolina-town and several other legitimanet sites to show its fact. as i said. we dont know all of our history.

and doer....i dont think you know if your comin or goin my friend. one minute your all hey hes right next your like huh hes not right. smoke some bro and chill.

Dr Kynes said:

http://luna.folger.edu/luna/servlet/view/all/what/[Proclamations. 1625-08-04] By the King. A proclamation prohibiting the keeping of Bartholomew Faire, and Sturbridge Faire./when/1625?os=0&pgs=50

this proclamation of 1625 was made by charles the first...

i can find no reference to the asserted "proclamation of 1625" in any form except a repetition of the exact prose used in the refuted source.

copy/paste once again rules the interwebs, and serious discussion falls to it's predation.

yep. it's HORSESHIT

EDIT: so i did some more digging, and came up with this essay which repeats the same claims, but this time with FOOTNOTES!

http://www.ewtn.com/library/HUMANITY/SLAVES.TXT

which led me to the source of the assertions of the alleged proclamation of 1625, found in footnote 2

Abbot E. Smith, Colonists in Bondage, 1607-1776

but i can find no electronic version of this tome, from which to extract HIS source, though apparently it's a Hot Topic for footnoting.

one would think a book published in 1965, and reprinted dozens of times through the ensuing years, and so frequently cited as a source would be available someplace, but sadly no.

i found no source for the refuted essay's "proclamation", under proclamations, royal decrees, or any other official document from the crown.

wherever Abbot E Smith got his source, apparently only he knows about it, and he kept his secret so carefully that nobody ever sources the actual "proclamation" only his discussion of it, using strangely consistent prose every time.

so i guess plagiarism is now what all the cool kids are doing in their essays...

Click to expand...

unbelievable....simply amazed by you...argure that you cant find fact on the web with things you found on the web then call plagerism? go back to sleep alice, wonderland is waiting.

jason1976 said:

im refuse to argue with someine so obviously right. obviously he knows his countries history well enough to be happy with it. you can deny all you want but facts are facts. irish came as slaves. you call it endentured servitude or whatever makes you sleep at night. i call it slavery, bought and sold.

Click to expand...

??

Imma let you finish, but the Obamaphone lady had the best fucked up grammar of all time!

seriously.

are you typing with boxing gloves on?

;vljqeoih prgeoj yrgjnq;j ugrdpeipd ghjfu!

i hope you followed that.

further, your assertion failed, your source was impeached, and try as i might i could find no support for your citation besides plagiarized versions of the same citation.

what's more, Indentured Servitude was NOT SLAVERY. it existed long before and long after the british colonial experience.

it never was and will never be slavery.

jason1976 said:

unbelievable....simply amazed by you...argure that you cant find fact on the web with things you found on the web then call plagerism? go back to sleep alice, wonderland is waiting.

Click to expand...

so, your citation got tracked (through a great deal of careful searching) all the way back to the unsupported claims of ONE BOOK from 1965, which is the apparent source for this claim, which has been copied and pasted HUNDREDS OF TIMES with the exact same language, by numerous websites, organizations, essays and "studies" with ZERO documentation for the alleged proclamation claimed by Abbot E Smith in his book with the incredibly lurid and suggestive Literotica title "Colonists In Bondage" (imma have to find that at my local library. i bet i'ts full of heaving bosoms and throbbing manhoods...) yet you persist in claiming you are right.


so sad.

you got your high school diploma from a crackerjack box didnt you?

lets sell your kids and they cant live outside the house and forced to have sexual relations with people whom just like you say it didnt happen so its ok. and tell me theyre not slaves. i remember in american history learning about endentured servants, folks who came here in search of freedom and all the bullshit that followed. i have also heard the term irish trash thrown around a time or ten. open your eyes and accept that it was slavery.

Dr Kynes said:

so, your citation got tracked (through a great deal of careful searching) all the way back to the unsupported claims of ONE BOOK from 1965, which is the apparent source for this claim, which has been copied and pasted HUNDREDS OF TIMES with the exact same language, by numerous websites, organizations, essays and "studies" with ZERO documentation for the alleged proclamation claimed by Abbot E Smith in his book with the incredibly lurid and suggestive Literotica title "Colonists In Bondage" (imma have to find that at my local library. i bet i'ts full of heaving bosoms and throbbing manhoods...) yet you persist in claiming you are right.


so sad.

you got your high school diploma from a crackerjack box didnt you?

Click to expand...

as well as 3 degrees. it was a big box.

jason1976 said:

as well as 3 degrees. it was a big box.

Click to expand...

3 degrees? is that the angle of your micro-cephalic forehead?

jason1976 said:

no i dont mean above ground testing in nevada. i mean the flyover in sc that resulted in a nuclear bomb being dropped on our country by our country. http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/the-u-s-once-dropped-an-atomic-bomb-on-a-south-carolina-town and several other legitimanet sites to show its fact. as i said. we dont know all of our history.

Click to expand...

Two small problems.
1) It wasn't "dropped", which implies a deliberate warshot. It was whoopsied.
2) It did not contain its fissile core (the stuff that makes a bomb nuclear). It did explode on impact, but as a rather expensive and inefficient conventional (chemical) bomb. No radioactives were released.

Choice of terms makes or breaks an argument.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Bluff,_South_Carolina

still it was unknown. that was my point.learned something new today didnt you.

not at all the angle of my forhead. however its funny youd post childish pictures to prove a point to grown adults that your superior and all knowing. do your own research and find what you will. i care not to hear your lips blubber any longer.

Dr Kynes said:

??

Obamaphone

Click to expand...

I looked into this because America Movil is one of the largest communication companies in the world. The company that has this program is called Safelink. They are funded by something called the Universal Service Fund which is controlled by Universal Service Administration Company. They are a non-profit corporation set up by the Federal Communications Commission. They are sustained by contributions from communications companies.

I do not see a link between Obama and this service. It is not paid for by taxes or money given out by the government.