February has been officially designated, recognized by many and even celebrated by some as Black History Month or National African-American History Month. While it is acknowledged in some other countries (most notably Canada and the U.K.), it is primarily devoted to the achievements of African-Americans in the U.S. It will, henceforth, include the historical fact that Barack Hussein Obama became the first African-American president of the United States.
However, early American history also reveals another dramatic first involving a black American....
jpw, let me point out that Slavery in Islam provided a source of slaves for America. It is interesting that perhaps whites got worked up about slavery, because so many were taken as slaves by the Muslims? Jefferson Versus the Muslim Pirates. You might say one of the first international actions taken by the U.S. was against slavery--and blackmail.
In any event, Whites certainly did jump onto having slaves, especially after the cotton gin was invented.
History Channel wrote: One inadvertent result of the cotton gin's success, however, was that it helped strengthen slavery in the South. Although the cotton gin made cotton processing less labor-intensive, it helped planters earn greater profits, prompting them to grow larger crops, which in turn required more people. Because slavery was the cheapest form of labor, cotton farmers simply acquired more slaves.
stand for God, I'm not sure what you want, sister in Christ! It was evil! Human slavery today is evil! SteveR has made some good points as to innaccuracy of article which should then be corrected. And Mike was correct, the tribes would help enslave rival tribes. A unified Africa could not have been enslaved.
That's how a people become enslaved is through divide and conquer.
And so is the bond among Christians stronger than skin color?
it takes courage to stand against the principalitites and powers of a generation.
as I say, today, that our "great" philanthropists are sending our finances to convince the farmers of Africa to convert to the selfsuicide seed, that now our farmers are regretting, and our people are getting sick... and so white or black, as far as I'm concerned its time to look at what is happening today.
because if we say we are against slavery and turn our back on our times today, we are no different than the ones who came before that we judge so harshly.
a very interesting topic is covered in a bk, "How Africa Shaped the Christian Mind, Rediscovering the African Seedbed of Western Christianity". Its good to remember that much of Christianity began in Africa.
It is true that some africans profited from man stealing also. A capital crime. However that does not excuse the europeans who drove the demand for it. And yes most Southernets were not plantation owners and many were against slavery. And yes many slaves were treated as members of the owner's family. And yes, the North was hardly an example of equality or compassion. Yet none of these justify slavery and we need to discuss Biblically so that it will never ever happen again.
Mike, Mike, there you go again. It doesn't justify what the white man did to the blacks--raping, beatings, murders. Also, the white man did not have accept Africans if that is true of blacks selling blacks. Not sure about that.
stand for God wrote: This is for the commentator Chris000. Your comments sound extremely racist to me, an African American woman. Regardless of what this article implies, the institution of slavery was cruel and abusive. There us no justification, no excuses whatsoever of what whites did to blacks in that dark period. ---
Very true. Likewise of the blacks who kidnapped and sold blacks to whites.
I wanted to add to Chris000, and others who agree with him that slavery is a sensitive issue that should be viewed with compassion and sensitivity for blacks that were involved. I decided not to waste any more energy on this particular subject by responding to ignorance. I WILL continue to wait for a response from this website to demand why it was posted.
The article should not only be removed from SA, but WND should apologize for issuing a story that is both factually & categorically false. Factually because Massachusetts accepted slavery in the 1630s & officially sanctioned it in 1641. And categorically because this was only a court order dealing with accepted norms in common law 'property.' Johnson hardly fathered slavery in the colonies, not even VA
I noticed this despicable article was written by a self styled Kistian Zionist associated w/ the 700 club. The 700 clubs Pat Robertson backed convicted Liberian criminal Charles Taylor during his crimes against peoples in W Africa. One can only guess that Pats shared gold mine with Taylor influenced his loyalty to Taylor.
stand for God, yes, what they (america, england) did was build a whole economy by stealing the life and labor of kidnapped people.
makes me also think of our practices today, when 200 farmers get sued by the company who makes self-suiciding seeds that are ruining their fields and creating foods that are sickening the nations.
does a man not have a right to God's seed?
and then sending this seed into Africa, hoping to buy off locals enough to convert their farmers to this system.
as we see Indian farmers committing suicide in masse after their conversion to this seed and the ruin of their generations-old farms.
same as it ever was, building an economy off of the backs of another.
I'm glad you wrote in, and I think its good, because these things need to be discussed.
This is for the commentator Chris000. Your comments sound extremely racist to me, an African American woman. Regardless of what this article implies, the institution of slavery was cruel and abusive. There us no justification, no excuses whatsoever of what whites did to blacks in that dark period. I am not going over the atrocities. I really don't have to in this day and age. Anyone who can read and listen and be fair to ones self know deep in his or her heart of what went on in that dark period. I do not care who disagrees with me. God knows and will judge people today who make excuses for the wickedness that happened. Also, I am going to contact this website to demand why they would post this article because it is inappropriate!
Christopher000 wrote: What I took away from the article wasn't about blame being shifted to the black man, but rather that instead of playing the blame game to this day, both whites and blacks need to finally take responsibility. ..together...for such a dark time in our history.
Chris, no whites or blacks living today are responsible for that dark time, so they can't be guilty of any of it. There isn't anything there for which they are responsible.
What I took away from the article wasn't about blame being shifted to the black man, but rather that instead of playing the blame game to this day, both whites and blacks need to finally take responsibility. ..together...for such a dark time in our history.
This man is not the father of american slavery. That distinction would belong to british sugar caners or northern traders who doubled or tripled their money with every man stealing trip.
what an interesting article. kudos to wnd for posting a historical look at the sorrows of slavery. this is how the world works, and often the persecutors are those closest to one another. it is a powerful story because it takes our mind off of skin color and on the general debasement of man. reminds me of the parable of the debtor who begged forgiveness for debt and then slammed his debtor with punishment. good reminder that Christ took on our debt on the cross, otherwise none would be forgiven.
COMMENTS 
locked 
It is interesting that perhaps whites got worked up about slavery, because so many were taken as slaves by the Muslims? 
