Ivy League Morons

Are you saying indians didn't enslave other indian tribes?

No. But I refer my honorable friend to the question I asked some 3 hours ago.

I've read enough.

ziggy wrote:No. But I refer my honorable friend to the question I asked some 3 hours ago.

Back to the Roundhouse, huh Ziggy?

Aaron can't corner you there.



.

Sam, Aaron couldn't "corner me" in a room with a dozen corners- nor could you.

So are you saying Indian tribes didn't enslave other indian tribes Zig?

Ziggy has no fight, here, Aaron. That is why he went the red herring route and tried to get you to say that you had read Indian histories that quite likely don't exist.

Indians enslaved Indians, blacks enslaved blacks, whites enslaved whites, Aztecs flayed alive other Aztecs, Hutus murdered Tutsis, and it is always bad. What it never is--unique.

Aaron wrote:So are you saying Indian tribes didn't enslave other indian tribes Zig?

No.

But I refer my honorable friend to the question I asked some 30 hours ago.

SheikBen wrote:Ziggy has no fight, here, Aaron. That is why he went the red herring route and tried to get you to say that you had read Indian histories that quite likely don't exist.

Aaron is the one who said that Indians were enslaving other Indians for hundreds, if not thousands, of years before Columbus ever set foot on North America.

A natural question is, in view of a dearth of recorded pre-Columbus Indian histories, how does Aaron come to think or believe that. So that is not a "red herring route".

Despite his penchant for often offering grandiose proclamations without substantial evidence, I do not believe that Aaron is a psychic. So a natural question is what record of Indian histories can Aaron point to to confirm his claims that Indians were enslaving other Indians for "hundreds, if not thousands", of years before Columbus ever set foot on North America..

Aaron wrote:I've read enough.

So that makes you a believer, eh?

As Friedrich Nietzsche said, "Belief means not wanting to know what is true".

ziggy wrote: A natural question is, in view of a dearth of recorded pre-Columbus Indian histories, how does Aaron come to think or believe that. So that is not a "red herring route".

Despite his penchant for often offering grandiose proclamations without substantial evidence, I do not believe that Aaron is a psychic. So a natural question is what record of Indian histories can Aaron point to to confirm his claims that Indians were enslaving other Indians for "hundreds, if not thousands", of years before Columbus ever set foot on North America..

Quit acting the part of an ................., Ziggy.

Historical sites of human habitation in Peru, northern West coast of US and mid-Atlantic coast of US date back to 12,000 - 14,000+ years.

Warfare and slavery has been a cultural trait of humans ever since there have been competiting bands, groups, clans, tribes or nations of people.

In most/many instances it was a necessary "evil" (evil for the slave) to insure survival of the group.

Ziggy,

A webpage from the Minnesota State website.

http://www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/cultural/mesoamerica/aztec.html

Ziggy knows all of this Sheik and Sam. He knows there are references of Indians enslaving Indians in the link to slavery I provided days ago, which is more then enough to back up my statement,.

He also knows a simple google would provide more the same type of proof he pretends to seek. That is why I ask him if stupidity or stubbornness was his reason for not admitting I am right.

Of course there's always the third choice which Sam alluded to.

Ziggy,

One can also see codices of human sacrifice which are primary sources.

Again, you are using a red herring because you realize that the indigenous populations, just like African blacks then and now, engaged in the very same, or worse behavior, than the whites did at the "encounter."

Why not just admit as much? I don't see Aaron or anyone else here defending the white slave trade.

SheikBen wrote:Ziggy,

One can also see codices of human sacrifice which are primary sources.

Again, you are using a red herring because you realize that the indigenous populations, just like African blacks then and now, engaged in the very same, or worse behavior, than the whites did at the "encounter."

Why not just admit as much? I don't see Aaron or anyone else here defending the white slave trade.

Yeah Ben, but you see, Aaron is always boasting that he has proven this and proven that, while having actually proven little or nothing, and demands that those who argue against his political opinions need to put forth some level of "proof" of so and so- but which level of proof evidence is never enough to satify Aaron. So I am trying to help Aaron develop his own credibility by encouraging him to put forth the same level of "proof" of his own claims that he habitually demands of others. Is there something unfair about that?

I don't know if that's a borderline lie or a pathetic excuse for the garbage you've posted on this forum Ziggy.

Which do you think it's closer too?

You and I are biased participants. So I am willing to let the others forum readers decide what they think about it based on what they read here.

My guess is that most of them don't take either of us all that seriously, nor do they lose much if any sleep about it.

Lots of times I even stop watching threads once the two of you get this crapola going.

Show me where I've been biased in this thread!!!

From my first response on this thread, all I've done is question the crap you've posted.

I'll wait patiently.

Aaron wrote:Show me where I've been biased in this thread!!!

Right here:

From my first response on this thread, all I've done is question the crap you've posted.

Often you are your own worst witness.

You had to go to my very last post to find bias in one of my statements and it was about you.

Yes, I admit it.

I am biased against the miss-truths and deceptions you continually post Ziggy.

So why do you post so many?

And are you still claiming that Indians did not enslave other Indians or are you willing to admit you are wrong?

I didn't make any such claim. So you are the one who is wrong about saying I did.

Again, why do you focus so much on what others do not say instead of on what they do say?

Sure you did. That's exactly what you claimed with your continued refusal to admit the truth.

As you still do and will until you acknowledge that Indians enslaved other Indians.

Waiting.

Aaron wrote:Sure you did. That's exactly what you claimed with your continued refusal to admit the truth.

As you still do and will until you acknowledge that Indians enslaved other Indians.

Waiting.

You can wait until hell freezes over. That will not change what I did and did not say.

I don't let Cato and Sam- who are both a heck of a little better at word games than you are, and without whining about getting beat at their own word games like you do- get by with spinning what I said into something I did not say. And I'm not going to let you get by with it either.

Whiner about word games, heal thyself first.

So even though you know Indians did indeed enslave other Indians, and you've been proven wrong not by me but by the truth, because it is me, you would rather continue to be wrong and look like an idiot, until hell freezes over, then admit the truth.

And I'm the one that needs healing.