In point of fact, according to British law, every Christian was equal before the law, and judgments were based upon being Christian or non-Christian, not race. If blacks served out their indentured periods or became Christians, they were, as other Europeans, granted their freedom.
History should be an accurate, truthful presentation of factual events. In other words, we expect historians to tell it like it is. That would include the good, the bad and the ugly, as long as it is what actually transpired. Anything more or less is propaganda:Â Information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view.Â An unbiased overview of black history should, therefore, include the accurate, truthful presentation of factual events.
Apparently âReverendâ Al Sharpton, et al, have so completely resolved the less serious problems in the black community that they can now focus their attention on theÂ realÂ problems in the make-believe world of Hollywood. Well, I guess the good news is, if we can now focus our attention on the home of Cinderella, Peter Pan and Tinker Bell, then we must have arrived in Neverland.
Moderate Muslims have proclaimed, with apparent sadness, and with real or feigned anger, that extremists have hijacked the real Islam â the âreligion of peace.â If the moderate Muslims â âthe good peopleâ â truly believe their âreligion of peaceâ has been hijacked by extremist elements that do not represent the teachings of the prophet and of Islam, why do they not step forward and speak up?
The founders were so convinced they fought a war to secure our right toÂ âlife, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.âÂ Americans have believed in that concept not only for ourselves but for nations around the world. According to several sources, almost 2.8 million Americans have died fighting to secure these rights for ourselves and our allies.
Just this week (again) I saw on TV a full hour devoted to the âblack/white race issueâ here in America. I was absolutely disgusted by programâs end. Why? Because not one single person on the show presented a shred of factual evidence of bona fide racism to support their allegations. Just one example: I recall the claim by members of the Conservative Black Caucus of being racially harassed by tea party members. If memory serves,Â Andrew Breitbartâs $100,000 challenge for video of sameÂ went unclaimed.
Not having served as a member of law enforcement or the judiciary, I am not conversant with exactly how the law is supposed to be enforced, so perhaps one of the individuals who may be apprehended while robbing or looting someoneâs business establishment as a means of protest (for something or other) would be able to answer that question. Are police only supposed to enforce those laws that the neighborhood says are in agreement with the local âcodeâ? Only a certain type of crime or criminal should be apprehended and only in accordance with the âhomeyâsâ assessment of his guilt?
President Obama just made a speech in which he plans to essentially grant amnesty to theÂ poor, unfortunate, illegal aliensÂ who have flooded across our borders. Government funds are going to be made available to assist them in the resettlement process.
Admittedly, I am not a history major; however, I seem to remember something about the American colonies taking exception to being ruled by executive orders. In fact, if Iâm not mistaken, they spent a great deal of time, effort, expense and human life to ensure that they would be free from the continuation of such actions. They wrote a document called the Declaration of Independence and followed it up with another called the Constitution of the United States, whereby they specifically articulated their refusal to be governed by executive orders. Of course, back in the day they were not called âexecutive orders,â they were called the âkingâs commandsâ and, like todayâs âexecutive orders,â had the power of law.