Pages: 1 2 3  Next -- Posted by ronpaul691 at 5:10 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 That's why Ethiopia is the envy of Africa. Population: 82,544,840 GDP (purchasing power parity): $56.05 billion (2007 est.) GDP - per capita (PPP): $700 (2007 est.) https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/et.html -- Posted by Doghouse at 5:11 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 kthnxbai -- Posted by StereoRock9 at 5:11 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 AKA the biggest ghetto on the planet? -- Posted by sub800 at 5:13 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 Quote: from Stereorock9 at 8:11 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 AKA the biggest ghetto on the planet? -- Posted by xPicturesOfYou3 at 5:13 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 Nice. -- Posted by StereoRock9 at 5:14 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 Quote: from sub800 at 8:13 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 Quote: from Stereorock9 at 8:11 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 AKA the biggest ghetto on the planet? That wasn't racist, I meant that as its the msot widly known third world country -- Posted by Bud2400 at 5:36 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 Ethiopia was actually on the road to industrializing its economy around the late 19th century.  Conditions there weren't nearly as bad as much of the rest of Africa.  They were in the process of extending electricty throughout their whole country (during a period when electricity wasn't as common even in more developed nations, and especially in Africa - had it been successful, factories and the like could have been built in Ethiopia). However, during that time, the Italians decided that they weren't content with just Libya and Somalia as colonies, so they decided to go for Ethiopia, too, and Ethiopia had a pretty devastating war resisting the Italians in the 1890s which they won.  The Italians under Mussolini made another run for Ethiopia again in the 30s and created massive destruction for what little they got going in that aftermath, and this time the Italians won and occupied Ethiopia, however, Ethiopia's resistance gave them hell, which Italy returned, and with Italy's loss in WWII, Ethiopia was free yet again.  Only this time, after two devastating wars, it was in a much worse state than ever, without any aid to help its economy to recover to what it was in the late 19th century. With all the other colonies in Africa gaining independence, the rest of Africa went into the gutter, and as Ethiopia was no better at this point, it went down with it.  Now it's stuck in debt to international organizations like the World Bank, WTO, and IMF, whose policies imposed on them does not allow them to recover vital industries, like their agricultural industry, and they essentially remain in debt indefinitely.  While Ethiopia may not have been colonized, it probably would have been better off if it had and not resisted the Italians.  Ethiopia, more clearly than any other African country, can put much of its blame on Europe. -- Posted by kidd rune at 5:41 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 Lol, Ethiopia. In 1542 the Portuguese helped the Ethiopian tribesmen fight off slave-trading Arabs. Then, the Ethiopians expelled the Portuguese in 1632. Emperor Menelik II defeated an Italian force in 1896 and became the first African state. 90 years later Ethiopia collapsed because of overpopulation and shitty farming methods - causing soil erosion. That was the worst man-made famine ever. That year, 1986, Whites all around Europe and the USA felt the need to come to Ethiopia's aid. Anyone know about (or remember) the "Live Aid" fund raising pop concerts for that? -- Posted by Bud2400 at 5:52 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 Quote: from kidd rune at 5:41 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 In 1542 the Portuguese helped the Ethiopian tribesmen fight off slave-trading Arabs.   Then, the Ethiopians expelled the Portuguese in 1632. To be fair, you misrepresented quite a bit of this. Ethiopia was at war with Egypt, and it had nothing to do with the East African Slave Trade. It was something about an army of Muslims from Egypt overrunning Ethiopia via a lowland country in the southeast. Portugal, considering this act atrocious, then offered to lend Ethiopia a force under Vasco da Gama's son from India. With Portugal's help, Ethiopia was able to beat back the Egyptians. This wound up giving Portugal and Ethiopia relatively close ties, however, the Jesuits were active in Ethiopia and the Ethiopians were extremely suspicious of them. Given that the Ethiopians were monophysites (which, according to the Council of Chalcedon in 451, would make them seem heretical in Europeans' eyes), the Jesuits took it upon themselves to make them very active there. Ethiopia, in response to this, expelled the Jesuits and all other Portuguese in Ethiopia at the time. The Ethiopians have always closely guarded their religion, whether it be from Muslims or other Christians. -- Posted by kidd rune at 5:56 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 To be fair, you misrepresented quite a bit of this. I summarized it. Did I lie? -- Posted by DeoxysDNA at 6:02 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 Quote: from kidd rune at 5:56 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 To be fair, you misrepresented quite a bit of this. I summarized it. Did I lie? More like Summarize it in a way to imply that people suck without the help of whites. As usual   -- Posted by kidd rune at 6:18 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 More like Summarize it in a way to imply that people suck without the help of whites. As usual I didn't mean to... And, Bud, I think you're speaking of another conflict. I'm speaking of the Ethiopian-Adal War, which was Muslims and Ethiopians. -- Posted by DeoxysDNA at 6:20 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 Quote: from kidd rune at 6:18 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 More like Summarize it in a way to imply that people suck without the help of whites. As usual I didn't mean to...   And, Bud, I think you're speaking of another conflict.   I'm speaking of the Ethiopian-Adal War, which was Muslims and Ethiopians. You know you've done it so many times that I think you actually do mean it. You say that you don't but it always seems as if your trying to imply something. Your a sad man...... I wonder if your Even good looking because if not you don't have the right to talk about  white attractiveness  :P -- Posted by kidd rune at 6:22 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 You know you've done it so many times that I think you actually do mean it. You say that you don't but it always seems as if your trying to imply something. Your a sad man...... Maybe you're just paranoid. I do see that you try to over represent Negroes and make them seem better than what they really are. -- Posted by DeoxysDNA at 6:24 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 Quote: from kidd rune at 6:22 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 You know you've done it so many times that I think you actually do mean it. You say that you don't but it always seems as if your trying to imply something. Your a sad man...... Maybe you're just paranoid.   I do see that you try to over represent Negroes and make them seem better than what they really are. NO I don't! That's what you do with white people! I just try to defend them from all your negative implications of them. But just fuck you, not tonight little boy...... I think you just don't see it. with each post you try to lesson other races with your comments. Then when people come to their defense you say we are trying to make them more than they actually are. So your basically saying they can only be little and nothing more while you praise white people all the way through. -- Posted by Bud2400 at 6:29 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 Quote: from kidd rune at 5:56 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 I summarized it. Did I lie? You don't have to lie to misrepresent something.  Instead, you added irrelevent details which would skew peoples' ideas of what the war would be about and Ethiopia's general position.  And then you portrayed the Ethiopians expelling the Portuguese as if they had no reason for doing so. And, Bud, I think you're speaking of another conflict. I'm speaking of the Ethiopian-Adal War, which was Muslims and Ethiopians. That is indeed what I'm referring to, although I was wrong to say it was just Egypt (and "Muslims" in general really isn't specific enough). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abyssinian-Adal_War It was primarily Somalia (hardly "slave trading Arabs" BTW) and the Ottoman Empire (which would primarily be Egypt under Ottoman rule, which is why you'll see quite a few sources mix the two up) against Ethiopia and then Portugal. -- Posted by kidd rune at 6:30 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 NO I don't! That's what you do with white people! I just try to defend them from all your negative implications of them. But just fuck you, not tonight little boy...... Yes you do, actually. Remember when I gave you a link proving that Black "Inventions" weren't really inventions? You said I looked, it didn't really disprove much, other than your an ego maniac devoted to trying to prove that whites are superior even though you deny it so many times Just looking at the first five I have come to the conclusion that it's a lot more credible than a chart with only a name and date like your beloved websites. The first cites a US patent (You can check those online). The second cites specific names of examples that you can look up yourself. The third was labeled "Unknown" because there is no patent or any proof at all of this invention - nor does any patent for that invention exist. I don't even know what an auto-cut off switch is! The fourth was disproven with the patent of the invention itself. The fifth had a cited patent and more info. Where is the lack of proof? That's just one example. EDIT: Disregard the third invention - it's a myth. Granville T Woods wasn't alive in 1839, when he supposedly invented the auto-cut off switch according to http://www.black-collegian.com/african/inventions605.shtml He was born April 23, 1856 -- Posted by DeoxysDNA at 6:33 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 Quote: from kidd rune at 6:30 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 NO I don't! That's what you do with white people! I just try to defend them from all your negative implications of them. But just fuck you, not tonight little boy...... Yes you do, actually. Remember when I gave you a link proving that Black "Inventions" weren't really inventions? You said I looked, it didn't really disprove much, other than your an ego maniac devoted to trying to prove that whites are superior even though you deny it so many times   Just looking at the first five I have come to the conclusion that it's a lot more credible than a chart with only a name and date like your beloved websites. The first cites a US patent (You can check those online). The second cites specific names of examples that you can look up yourself. The third was labeled "Unknown" because there is no patent or any proof at all of this invention - nor does any patent for that invention exist. I don't even know what an auto-cut off switch is! The fourth was disproven with the patent of the invention itself. The fifth had a cited patent and more info. Where is the lack of proof? That's just one example. I do? So despite the fact that You twist things around to give a different impression(which is usually negative) on a race I am the one who gives blacks too much credit? My point with the inventions still stands. But seriously troll, Go die slowly and painfully in a dith somewhere   -- Posted by kidd rune at 6:34 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 You don't have to lie to misrepresent something.  Instead, you added irrelevent details which would skew peoples' ideas of what the war would be about and Ethiopia's general position.  And then you portrayed the Ethiopians expelling the Portuguese as if they had no reason for doing so. I didn't try to portray that they had no reason to. I just said they expelled them. That is indeed what I'm referring to, although I was wrong to say it was just Egypt (and "Muslims" in general really isn't specific enough). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abyssinian-Adal_War It was primarily Somalia (hardly "slave trading Arabs" BTW) and the Ottoman Empire (which would primarily be Egypt under Ottoman rule, which is why you'll see quite a few sources mix the two up) against Ethiopia and then Portugal. Yeah, because I saw no mention of Egypt at all. -- Posted by kidd rune at 6:36 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 I do? So despite the fact that You twist things around to give a different impression(which is usually negative) on a race I am the one who gives blacks too much credit? Yes, you do. All of those 5 inventions were FRAUDS. I found out the third one was supposedly invented BEFORE the "Inventor" was born! And then you say no proof exists. HA! You won't accept it even when the US patent office slaps you in the face with it! My point with the inventions still stands. Why? Please explain. Or PROVE that they actually did invent them. You can pick any 5, I don't care. But seriously troll, Go die slowly and painfully in a dith somewhere   DEATH THREATS! -- Posted by DeoxysDNA at 6:40 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 Quote: from kidd rune at 6:36 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 I do? So despite the fact that You twist things around to give a different impression(which is usually negative) on a race I am the one who gives blacks too much credit? Yes, you do. All of those 5 inventions were FRAUDS. I found out the third one was supposedly invented BEFORE the "Inventor" was born! And then you say no proof exists. HA! You won't accept it even when the US patent office slaps you in the face with it! My point with the inventions still stands. Why? Please explain. Or PROVE that they actually did invent them. You can pick any 5, I don't care. But seriously troll, Go die slowly and painfully in a dith somewhere DEATH THREATS! I said they were improved greatly as well you may have left out. But you don't want to accept proof from anyone else either! You pull shit out of your ass and it goes back and forth. Also no, I am not threatening to kill you. Though I do pray every night that something really bad happens to you and I kid you not on that part. -- Posted by Bud2400 at 6:48 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 Quote: from kidd rune at 6:34 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 I didn't try to portray that they had no reason to. I just said they expelled them. I know it might sound very nitpicky, but by not mentioning key things like that, you are going to imply assumptions like the Ethiopians having no good reason to in its place. After all, look at what you said: In 1542 the Portuguese helped the Ethiopian tribesmen fight off slave-trading Arabs. First of all, you characterize Ethiopia as largely a tribe.  That is not accurate.  Ethiopia was a kingdom, if not an empire, during this period.  They did not live in little huts, but rather, in cities and villages scattered throughout the countryside.  Their government was far more sophisticated than some tribal system. Secondly, you make the Portuguese sound like they were doing this out of the goodness of their hearts.  You don't attribute any reasons why they might do this, and failure to do this is deceiving.  The Portuguese primarily went in there because they did not want to see a Christian kingdom like Ethiopia (which is the source of the whole "Prester John" legend in Europe) fall and its population forcibly converted to Islam.  I also suspect aggression against the Ottoman Empire had something to do with it as well. Lastly, when you say "helped them fight off the slave trading Arabs", you make it sound as if it was about the Arabs coming in Ethiopia and enslaving the whole populace, and Portugal coming to the rescue.  That's simply not true - the Ethiopians were not generally not enslaved by the Arabs, or at least not to the degree of the rest of Sub-Saharan Africa.  You'd be correct in Portugal coming to Ethiopia's rescue, but you mischaracterized the war (as well as Portugal's intention) by your lack of specificity. Then, the Ethiopians expelled the Portuguese in 1632. Now, after that you've established the Portuguese came to the rescue, you present this without giving Ethiopia's reasoning for doing so.  This suggests that the Ethiopians are ungrateful, and when you suggest as to why they became impoverished afterwards, it makes it appear as if the Ethiopians deserved it.  You make no mention of the Jesuits' activity in Ethiopia and the Portuguese' backing of it.  Any source you'd read about the expulsion of Portuguese from Ethiopia would mention this. It really doesn't take that much to add these few extra details, KR.  If you ever wonder why people think you're racist, it's things like this and it doesn't take much to see why. If DeoxysDNA overrepresents the achievements of blacks, you appear to be underrepresenting them. -- Posted by Moonscar at 6:52 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 Quote: from Bud2400 at 6:48 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 Quote: from kidd rune at 6:34 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 I didn't try to portray that they had no reason to.   I just said they expelled them. I know it might sound very nitpicky, but by not mentioning key things like that, you are going to imply assumptions like the Ethiopians having no good reason to in its place. After all, look at what you said: In 1542 the Portuguese helped the Ethiopian tribesmen fight off slave-trading Arabs. First of all, you characterize Ethiopia as largely a tribe. That is not accurate. Ethiopia was a kingdom, if not an empire, during this period. They did not live in little huts, but rather, in cities and villages scattered throughout the countryside. Their government was far more sophisticated than some tribal system. Secondly, you make the Portuguese sound like they were doing this out of the goodness of their hearts. You don't attribute any reasons why they might do this, and failure to do this is deceiving. The Portuguese primarily went in there because they did not want to see a Christian kingdom like Ethiopia (which is the source of the whole "Prester John" legend in Europe) fall and its population forcibly converted to Islam. I also suspect aggression against the Ottoman Empire had something to do with it as well. Lastly, when you say "helped them fight off the slave trading Arabs", you make it sound as if it was about the Arabs coming in Ethiopia and enslaving the whole populace, and Portugal coming to the rescue. That's simply not true - the Ethiopians were not generally not enslaved by the Arabs, or at least not to the degree of the rest of Sub-Saharan Africa. You'd be correct in Portugal coming to Ethiopia's rescue, but you mischaracterized the war (as well as Portugal's intention) by your lack of specificity. Then, the Ethiopians expelled the Portuguese in 1632.   Now, after that you've established the Portuguese came to the rescue, you present this without giving Ethiopia's reasoning for doing so. This suggests that the Ethiopians are ungrateful, and when you suggest as to why they became impoverished afterwards, it makes it appear as if the Ethiopians deserved it. You make no mention of the Jesuits' activity in Ethiopia and the Portuguese' backing of it. Any source you'd read about the expulsion of Portuguese from Ethiopia would mention this. It really doesn't take that much to add these few extra details, KR. If you ever wonder why people think you're racist, it's things like this and it doesn't take much to see why.  If DeoxysDNA overrepresents the achievements of blacks, you appear to be underrepresenting them. Bolded for truth. -- Posted by kidd rune at 6:53 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 It really doesn't take that much to add these few extra details, KR.  If you ever wonder why peopel think you're racist, it's things like this and it doesn't take much to see why. Lol. The whole point of making that was to summarize. You look into it and then you go about your own research. I said they were improved greatly as well you may have left out. But you don't want to accept proof from anyone else either! You pull shit out of your ass and it goes back and forth. Yet you FAILED to give proof of that! Someone tried with the gas mask - they said it was used in the first World War. I disproved this as the evidence pointed to Americans using European gas masks instead of the Black invented one. But I'd like your proof of this. Because you haven't given any and the only one that tried failed. Also no, I am not threatening to kill you. Though I do pray every night that something really bad happens to you and I kid you not on that part. It's those exact comments that got me 3 or 4 warnings. But you won't get warned probably. They like you. -- Posted by Bud2400 at 6:55 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 Quote: from kidd rune at 6:53 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 Lol. The whole point of making that was to summarize. You look into it and then you go about your own research. Be that as it may, it doesn't get rid of the implications that post gives off. -- Posted by kidd rune at 6:57 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 Be that as it may, it doesn't get rid of the implications that post gives off. Implications ≠ truth. If it SEEMS like something - that isn't proof that it's like that. I may SEEM racist but there is no real evidence of it. -- Posted by Moonscar at 6:57 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 Quote: from Bud2400 at 6:55 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 Quote: from kidd rune at 6:53 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 Lol.    The whole point of making that was to summarize.    You look into it and then you go about your own research. Be that as it may, it doesn't get rid of the implications that post gives off. Just don't pay attention to it. We all knew he meant it. And it is true that he under represents blacks and says that people are over representing them as if they aren't meant to have any significant positives   -- Posted by Moonscar at 6:58 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 Quote: from kidd rune at 6:57 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 Be that as it may, it doesn't get rid of the implications that post gives off. Implications ≠ truth. If it SEEMS like something - that isn't proof that it's like that. I may SEEM racist but there is no real evidence of it. I think there's enough. Considering that it's done by you frequently. Also you referring to the color of black people's skin with poop    troll. -- Posted by kidd rune at 6:59 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 Just don't pay attention to it. We all knew he meant it. Oh, you KNEW - did you? You just KNOW what I'm thinking... This is exactly what I'm saying. People use this as 'evidence' all the time and they wonder why people don't think they're credible... -- Posted by kidd rune at 7:02 pm on Jan. 7, 2009 Also you referring to the color of black people's skin with poop I said "Poop is brown" So what? Pages: 1 2 3  Next