19 votes

Jon Stewart tries to school Judge Napolitano

Denunciation Proclamation (WHOLE SHOW) http://www.thedailyshow.c...

(SHORT VERSION)

http://www.thedailyshow.c...
(EXTRA LINK) http://www.rawstory.com/r...




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Look up..............Jonathan Stuart Leibowitz

AKA: Jonathan Leibowitz
AKA: Jon Stewart
AKA: Jonathan Stewart

Thomas DiLorenzo: Jon Stewart is Very, Very Afraid of Us

http://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/jon-stewart-is-very-very...

Also the Judge has the link to the Daily Show piece on his Facebook page:
https://www.facebook.com/JudgeNapolitano

If you are a Facebook user you can go to give some love to the Judge there. The Judge comments it himself: "The Daily Show and Larry Wilmore discuss my contrarian take on #Lincoln legacy. Really enjoyed this!"

"Air is the very substance of our freedom, the substance of superhuman joy....aerial joy is freedom."--Gaston Bachelard--

Did he really just suggest

that these slaves were free beforehand. It was actually people of their own race by whom they were enslaved to start with.

Some of them were free prior,

Some of them were free prior, some were not. Africans enslaved each other, and also white people came with a demand for slaves, and Africans went out and captured other Africans to provide a supply.

Africans having slaves too, just proves that some of them have messed up morals just like some white people. Two wrongs don't make a right though, and people enslaving each other is not made a little more OK by someone else doing it too.

Do some research about the tribe that dominated the

slave trade. Oh yea watch out you will be called anti termite or what ever their nasty propaganda buzz word is when faced with true history.

This was a Rothschild trade. A Zionist Jewish banker group that did the majority of the slave trade. Yet every white person even generations later are always blamed for the blacks slavery. Even worse the sense of entitlement, as this third intentional financial collapse occurs and they start to take away food stamps and other hand outs outrage will occur and will be deflected into a race war.

I just hope that enough people can see the real criminals, the ones who control the false national debt and the extorted theft tax collection system.

sovereign

You are using today's values to judge yesterday's behavior.

Prior to the 20th century people were very much tribal in their outlook; People within the tribe were human and those outside it were not. Slavery was nothing new to world when it was brought to the European colonies. Slavery came in all sorts of varieties. Indentured servitude was one version. Apprenticeship was another. The losers in an inter-tribal war on most continents became slaves, if they were outright killed. Native Americans tribes practiced cannibalism in eating members of other tribes considered enemies. Russia has slaves called 'serfs' up to 1861. Africa continues to have slavery in one form or another to this day.
When someone says Africans enslaved fellow Africans, they did not view it that way. In selling an enemy to a trader who was willing to give him something and make that enemy go far away it was a good deal. The alternative might be to kill him or her outright.

[F]orce can only settle questions of power, not of right. - Clyde N. Wilson

I would say that today people

I would say that today people are very much tribal in the outlook, hence Muslims being OK to drone strike, as just one example.

See my comment a little lower down, I think you will find we agree a lot. I am going to look into cannibalism among native americans, I didn't ever think of that one. I do know that cannibalism was wide spread in war ravaged Liberia in the 1990's. I highly recommend the Vice Guide to Liberia documentary if you haven't seen it yet.

There were people back everywhere at every time period that saw slavery as wrong, so I feel I can judge the socially acceptable behavior of owning other humans, as morally wrong, despite the time period.

I am sure we agree about a lot.

I view slavery as wrong because it is based on force. The slave doesn't enter into the relationship freely, nor can he leave it freely. However, that doesn't mean the slave is powerless and has no influence, or responsibility, over the situation. Slaves often saved money and purchased their freedom. Others simply ran.
Abolitionists wanted slaves to kill their owners. They wanted to see Southerners harmed more than they wanted to see the black man free. There was some tribal animosity between New England and Virginia that dated back to the English Civil War if not farther back. Abolitionists were once labelled "Monsters with moral pretensions." We still see many of those around today.

[F]orce can only settle questions of power, not of right. - Clyde N. Wilson

Cannibalism

I talked with a woman who was part Winnebago Indian. She told me she had read in her research the Winnebago tribe used to follow the Anishinabe tribe around. The Anishinabe were a food source. When I replied that I had read about cannibalism among Native Americans before, (Cowboy Wash in Colorado comes to mind) she corrected me. She said it was not cannibalism because the Anishinabe are not human beings like the Winnebago are.

[F]orce can only settle questions of power, not of right. - Clyde N. Wilson

Yup, first you have to

Yup, first you have to dehumanize psychologically.

I just had to respond to this twice....

"It was actually people of their own race by whom they were enslaved to start with."

Really!? So you thought out this statement prior to posting it did you? So there was Africa with no Slavery and they just decided one day to start shackling their brothers and sisters with no outside influence? Hmmm...interesting take.

Africans were enslaving each

Africans were enslaving each other long before the arrival of Europeans. Europeans usually did not want to go venturing into the African interior to round up slaves. Africans would meet them at the coast to exchange slaves for goods, such as rifles so their tribe could consolidate larger areas of land. Europeans were using poor Europeans as slaves before the African slave trade. They can call it something like indentured servant, however in practice it is slavery, just with a kinder name is all.

Right now in Africa there are millions of slaves. Not exactly a lot of black people in America making a fuss about that though, not that many Americans of any color know much about the world. Most white people were subsistence farmers themselves back in the day, and did not own slaves. A very small wealthy percentage of the population actually owned slaves. I bet most of those impoverished confederate foot soldiers didn't own slaves, they were just duped by rich guys into fighting their battles for them.

I would also not confuse the North for saints, those businessmen were not so much humanitarians as they were not liking competing in the market place against competitors with substantially lower labor costs.

As an interesting little story, I worked in Iraq as a civilian contractor and I was walking with a black American coworker, and he said something about a mercenary security guard from Uganda. I don't remember what he said but I asked him what he was talking about and he explained to me that a lot of the Ugandans on the base were talking smack about American blacks as if they were inferior because their ancestors were "weak" and allowed themselves to serve as slaves. It blew my mind at the time. Between that incident and a black woman I worked with telling me a guy that liked her was too dark colored to date, I have a new appreciation for racism within the black community itself.

Bottom line is that there are good and bad people of every color, and it is inappropriate to shame one race as evil, when every race has evil. One could say that white people where just the most efficient at evil, and that would be pretty accurate.

Yeah...shouldn't they

Yeah...shouldn't they technically be mad at their own peeps for selling them?

I don't think there are any

I don't think there are any pre-civil war slaves still alive to be angry. Also if you are mad at a whole race of people, you would be a racist. Lets say the official explanation of the civil war is right and it was all about ending slavery, wasn't it a whole butt load of white people giving their lives so that blacks could be free? Black and white thinking of one whole group of people as bad, one whole group of people as good, is just intellectual laziness, since life happens in the grey areas.

So how about a thank you to those white people? One thing I wondered when I was young was why did they go get black slaves instead of making slaves out of the native americans? Well some natives were slaves, but overall indians loved freedom too much to submit to slavery. Read into that what you will, or by all means correct me if I am in error.

Nope...I agree with you 100%.

Nope...I agree with you 100%. I was just saying that the "white man" has been blamed for all the troubles the black face. Even to this day I hear about it. The truth is...I hear more hate a racist slander coming from them than anywhere else.

Example. My sister recently moved to an area outside of Detroit that is predominately working class black. My 12 year old niece was invited to go to a skating rink where she ended up get pushed around and called names like "cracka ass white btch" and so on. Why? Because she is white. These kids are taught that. This would not have happened in a predominately white neighborhood.

The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, Volume One

Book Summary:
To appreciate the Jewish attitude and behavior toward America’s Black citizens in the post-slavery era, it is important at the outset to review the substance of the Black–Jewish relationship leading up to that time—from Europe’s “discovery” of America to the Civil War. In 1992, Dr. Abraham J. Peck, of the American Jewish Archives, was unmistakably clear about the history:
The first two centuries of the Black–Jewish encounter in America were highlighted by a fairly extensive record of Jewish slave-holding. Indeed, during the colonial period, in the small Jewish community of the time, almost every Jewish household of any form, North or South, possessed at least one slave.
Jews were essential participants in the formation, growth, maintenance, and profitability of slavery and the slave trade is no longer open to serious debate. The historical record supports every word of that fact. Christopher Columbus—whose trans-Atlantic expeditions initiated the genocide of the Red man and forecasted the African Holocaust—was financed by Spanish Jews and is claimed to be a Jew himself. Jewish merchants owned, insured, and financed slave ships and outfitted them with chains and shackles. Jews were auctioneers, brokers, and wholesalers, keeping the slave economy oiled with money, markets, and supplies. Nine out of ten Africans were shipped to Brazil. Jewish scholar Dr. Arnold Wiznitzer described the early Jewish presence there:
Besides their important position in the sugar industry and in tax farming, they dominated the slave trade....The buyers who appeared at the auctions were almost always Jews, and because of this lack of competitors they could buy slaves at low prices. According to Wiesenthal Center scholar Dr. Harold Brackman, during the 1600s “slave trading in Brazil became a ‘Jewish’ mercantile specialty in much the same way it had been in early medieval Europe.”
Jewish scholar Jonathan Schorsch wrote, “Jewish merchants routinely possessed enormous numbers of slaves temporarily before selling them off.” The Jewish Encyclopedia adds, “Jewish commercial activity” in this time included a “monopoly of the slave trade.”
The synagogue in Brazil imposed a tax on its members’ slaves. Slave auctions were postponed if they fell on a Jewish holiday.

Caribbean & South America
The Jews of Surinam owned plantations with Hebrew names like Machanayim, Nachamu, and Goshen, where, according to Dr. Marcus Arkin, they used “many thousands” of Black slaves. Rabbi Herbert I. Bloom added that the “slave trade was one of the most important Jewish activities here...”
In 1694, Jews owned 9,000 Africans, and by 1791 there were 100 “Jewish mulattoes” in Surinam—the unwanted result of the rape of African women by their Jewish enslavers. Jewish historian Dr. Cecil Roth wrote that the slave revolts in parts of South America “were largely directed against [Jews], as being the greatest slave-holders of the region.”
The Jews of Barbados, wrote one Jewish scholar, “made a good deal of their money by purchasing and hiring out negroes...” All Barbadian Jews—including the rabbi—owned Black slaves.
Jews warehoused so many African slaves in Barbados that Gentile authorities moved to limit the number of captives they could possess. Jews became the major traders in “refuse slaves”—Africans who were weak and sick from the Middle Passage voyage. Jewish traders “fattened them up” and sold them at a profit. Jews set up militias with the sole purpose of fighting the Black Maroons, the escaped Africans who were fighting to free their enslaved breth-ren. The Jewish militias murdered the Maroons and cut off their hands to award as trophies. The first Hebrew poem written in the “New World” was a bitter attack on the Black Maroon leaders. Jewish scholars Isaac and Susan Emmanuel reported that in Curaçao, which was a major slave-trading depot, “the shipping business was mainly a Jewish enterprise.” Rabbi Marc Lee Raphael wrote that in Curaçao in the seventeenth century, as well as in Barbados and Jamaica in the eighteenth century, “Jewish mer-chants played a major role in the slave trade.” A Jewish shipper had a monopoly on trade to the notorious slave dungeon at Gorée Island—the Auschwitz of the Black Holocaust.

American Jewish Slavers
Sugar fueled and expanded the slave trade, and according to Jewish scholars, Jews “acquired large sugarcane plantations and became the leading entrepreneurs in the sugar trade.” The first Jewish settlement in the United States was a Florida sugar plantation supported entirely by the labor of enslaved Africans. When early New Yorkers sought to purchase slaves, they contacted “the jobbers and the Jews,” who were the recognized international dealers. The largest shipments of Africans arriving in New York in the first half of the 1700s were commissioned by Jewish merchants.

I don't think so.

Christopher Columbus—whose trans-Atlantic expeditions initiated the genocide of the Red man and forecasted the African Holocaust—was financed by Spanish Jews and is claimed to be a Jew himself. "

Christopher Columbus was not a Jew any more than he was an alien space invader. His journey was financed by Queen Isabella who was instrumental in expelling the Jews from her country.

Sounds like a useless book.

The libertarian

movement is growing. a new memo is out for the MSM to crush it at every turn. the first step is to pervert the word's meaning. notice how stewart said it twice in his one-sided mockery?

"Truth is treason in the empire of lies"
-Ron Paul

how furious the establishment must be that ron is still vital, active, has his own channel and is teaching and influencing new people everyday.

Quote

Ron Paul is quoting someone else when he says that. I think it might be Victor Hugo.

Ron Paul quotes people all the time, e.g., Martin Luther King "policeman of the world."

Please don't attribute the above quote to Ron Paul without making it clear whom he's quoting--it may lose some people.

What do you think? http://consequeries.com/

persnickety?

you'd prefer he would have deleted it from his book?

“Truth is treason in an empire of lies”.
This quote was coined by Ron Paul in his book The Revolution. But he was most likely borrowing from a phrase by George Orwell, who wrote: “In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”
http://kentridgecommon.com/?p=18710

Inconclusive

It's now a given the Daily Show will push an agenda favorable to socialism.

As for the rest of their ilk it seems to be mandatory that Jimmy Fallon, and Seth Myers push this along as well hosting new shows that have garnered both Michelle Obama and Joe Biden nationwide air time.

So long as the spotlight is off their henious acts in office the people can easily be divided and conquered.

I used to watch the Daily

I used to watch the Daily Show and the Colbert Report a couple times a week for the past few years. I was fully aware of their agenda, but there was some funny stuff every once in a while, and it's also not good to make yourself an echo chamber.

But I would encourage everybody here to stop watching their shows. One of my favorite people Peter Schiff got screwed on that show recently, I'm sure most here know what I'm tAlking about. And now just a couple weeks later they're attacking the Judge? Seems to me they have a new agenda, and it's attacking libertarians.

Stewart is worse than Colbert when it comes to propagating

anti-libertarian propaganda...

I think Colbert sometimes shows libertarian leanings and it seems to me he does not spout nearly as much liberal propaganda as Stewart does. Colbert is 10x funnier too.

I'm exactly the same...

Actually, up until about 3-4 weeks ago I was a daily watcher for the last 3 years. While they had an agenda, I always felt their goal was to find legitimately bad arguments on both sides and expose those bad arguments in a funny way...which I enjoyed.

I don't think that's the case anymore (it might have never been).

I think now they just look for arguments which they can mischaracterize into sounding really bad, and then making fun of those mischaracterized arguments.

I have no time for that. It's frustrating, biased, unfair.....and most of all: IT'S NOT FUNNY!!!!

Lincoln quotes

Quote from Lincoln in his 4th debate with Douglas:

"I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races; I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people…"

"I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I, as much as any other man, am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race."

http://www.nps.gov/liho/historyculture/debate4.htm

Holy shit.

Don't remember that from my high school text book.

Must have been an honest oversight...um hmm.

We now have free range

We now have free range slavery, and everybody but our farmers are slaves.

the Corwin Amendment

The Corwin Amendment was an attempt to enshrine slavery into the Constitution by prohibiting any further attempts to abolish slavery.

Abraham Lincoln, in his first inaugural address, had this to say about the Corwin Amendment:

I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution — which amendment, however, I have not seen — has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service....[H]olding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corwin_Amendment

Someone should send them lincolns first inaugural address

And subsequent state of the union for his thoughts on slavery...

Séamusín

Wow

I looked it up and check this out!

"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing Government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it."

How dare you speak against the government Mr. former President Lincoln!

"Once you become knowledgeable, you have an obligation to do something about it."- Ron Paul