Racially incorrect—fact: 28 percent of free blacks in America owned slaves, including White slaves, aka "indentured servants". 

In some cities during some decades in the 19th century, more than 75 percent of the free black population was comprised of slave holders.

One glaringly inconvenient truth that, odds are, few folks of any race are aware is that the very first legal slave owner in America was one Anthony Johnson — a black man.  

Some other interesting — racially incorrect—facts:

For four decades (1630-1670), those Africans who became freedmen owned white slaves aka white indentured servants. MORE here: http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/263533/slavery-racially-incorrect-facts-jack-kerwick


Blacks, Amerindians, and Jews all owned slaves in America, but we hear nothing of this. Jewish slave trader Aaron Lopez, who built the oldest synagogue in America, is but one of a long list of jews who profited greatly from slavery, but Hollywood jews will never make movies that detail their tribe’s massive involvement in the African slave trade, instead blaming Whites for everything. These jewish movies will neglect to mention that it was Black Africans who first enslaved their kin and sold them to the traders. Also, did you know than an estimated 3,000 Blacks owned a total of 20,000 Black slaves in 1860? It is also estimated that 28% of free Blacks owned slaves, which is a much higher proportion than that of free whites who owned slaves, which was a mere 1.4% of White Americans at the height of slavery.

It is estimated that between 10 to 15 million Africans were enslaved and shipped to the New World, but only around 6% (400,000) were sent to the Northern Hemisphere. The vast majority of slaves went to South America, but we certainly don’t see countries like Brazil receiving the brunt of the slavery guilt trip. This is because the true history of slavery does not fit into the anti-White, anti-Western paradigm that has been set up.

Our textbooks, movies, and current culture have completely covered up the very real history White enslavement in America and around the world. Many White Americans are actually descendants of White slaves, as 2/3 of ALL Whites came to the colonies in bondage. There were actually more White slaves than Black slaves in the colonies in the 1600s. We are not seeking any reparations, just an acknowledgement of historical facts!

Bringing the issue into the present day, Blacks in America have the absolute highest standard of living of any Black population on earth. Their average per capita income is up to fifty times higher than in any of the African countries. Do you think any American Black in his or her right mind would actually want to relocate to the black-run, “liberated” countries of Zimbabwe, the Democratic Republic of Congo, or South Africa? Many Whites led the effort to end all forms of slavery, fighting and dying so that Blacks can be free from bondage.

What thanks do we get for all our efforts? We get “white guilt”, the notion of “white privilege”, and anti-White discrimination laws such as Affirmative Action, which ensure there are less White people in schools and the work force. Oh yeah, we also are rewarded with “the knockout game”.

Did you know that up to 200 million humans are currently enslaved worldwide? Why not focus on this current tragedy in our world instead of making movies that incite anti-White violence, such as 12 Years a Slave, Django Unchained, or Amistad? Whites are being collectively punished (a war crime under the 1949 Geneva Convention), for possibly being descendants of people who enslaved Blacks centuries ago, which was not even a crime at the time. 

Most Whites were under such hardship and oppression in Europe that they were willing to go to the far reaches of the globe and tame wild lands in their search for freedom. In the Americas, this put them into direct conflict with Amerindians, greatly reducing Amerindian numbers as detailed previously. In places like South Africa, the Black populations actually increased dramatically after the Whites introduced Western medicine and agricultural practices. Now that the Blacks have complete control and greatly outnumber the Whites, Whites are being killed en masse (as reported by Genocide Watch). Anti-Whites argue that this is just payback for colonization and “racism” by Whites, which is another disgusting way of justifying genocide.

We hear all about the evil White conquerors, but why don’t we ever hear about the invasion and domination of much of Western Europe by the North African Islamic Moors for 500 years? When they subjugated Spain and Portugal, the Moors actually demanded 100 White virgins every year for use in their harems. And what about the invasion and domination of Eastern Europe by the Jewish Khazars, the Asiatic Mongols, Huns, and Magyars, or the Muslim Turks of the Ottoman Empire? They all raped and pillaged the White Slavs (whence we get the word “slave”).

For many centuries the Ottoman Turks took 1,000 White babies every year to be raised and enslaved as the Empire’s elite guard, known as the Janissaries.

It’s no wonder this history is left out of the mainstream narrative. More here: http://www.renegadetribune.com/destroying-the-anti-white-arguments/


We are keenly aware of the atrocities of the black slave trade in Africa, but not many know that there was also an active white slave trade on the continent between the 1600s and 1800s.

In 2014 we would hope that all trade in people is confined to history but this is not so. The trade, now called ‘human trafficking’, which includes people of every creed and colour, remains a highly lucrative and thriving industry.

The United Nations has identified it as one of the fastest-growing and most profitable illegal industry in the world, second only to drug trafficking. The UNs’ latest estimate is that at any one time some 2.5 million people are being trafficked. Human trafficking networks are currently earning annual profits of around US$32billion.

The UN crime-fighting office estimates that 80% of those trafficked are being exploited as sex slaves, the rest are trafficked for slave labour, including in homes and sweatshops. Two out of every three victims are women.

As you read this historical account of the white slave trade that I am about to share, bear in mind that there are still millions of people all over the world, living in unspeakable circumstances.

Prodded and examined like livestock, the white slaves were sold to the highest bidder.

White men, women and children were regarded as ‘white gold’ by the ruling classes of North Africa’s Barbary States (Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia and Libya) and fetched a handsome bounty. Accordingly, North African pirates known as the ‘Barbary Corsairs’ ruthlessly hunted them from their homes and sold them as slaves.

Compounding the captives’ misery was religion. The rulers of North Africa were part of the expansive Islamic Ottoman Empire. The white slaves, were despised as spiritual enemies and treated as vermin.

Several historians have written about the epoch of white slavery in Africa; some have retraced the steps of the white slaves from their homes where they were captured, and to which most would never return.

In White Gold author Giles Milton gives a vivid account of the white slave trade, based on letters and manuscripts that survived from the time, several written by slaves. In one account Milton describes how in July 1625 a fleet of over twenty ships manned with Barbary pirates arrived in the thick sea mist and headed up the coast of Cornwall.

“The flags on their mainmasts depicted a human skull on a dark green background – the menacing symbol of a new and terrible enemy.”

Many coastal communities were completely destroyed. In 1625 the mayor of Plymouth estimated that the pirates destroyed 1000 fishing boats and a similar number of villagers were carried off into slavery in one summer alone.

Amongst the most notorious slave markets at the time was the souk in the walled city of Sale in Morocco. Milton visited Sale, walking the same path “trodden by wretched European slaves – men, women and children whose steps were slowed by the weight of their iron chains and shackles”.

Once sold, most disappeared without trace, subjected to a living hell, as described by slave Robert Adams who was captured in the 1620 and put to work at a mill “like a horse from morning until night”. He said the slaves’ quarters comprised an underground dungeon with no light except for a small hole, where 150 to 200 of them were forced to live in their own excrement. Their daily diet consisted of a piece of bread and water. Their matted hair and ragged clothes were riddled with lice and fleas, and they were brutally beaten daily.

The manuscript of a Cornish boy from Penryn named Thomas Pellow who was captured at sea in 1715 at the age of 11, which Milton quotes in his book, offers valuable insight into the persecution of the white slaves. He became a personal slave to the Sultan of Morocco, Moulay Ismail, in the imperial capital of Meknes. Despite being subjected to a botched circumcision operation after he was forced to convert to Islam (known as ‘turning Moor’) and thrashed senseless on many occasion, he survived to tell his tale. In 1737 at the age of 33, after 23 years in captivity Pellow managed a successful escape.

He explained that one of the Sultan’s many perverted pastimes was to marry off his slaves. He was particularly fond of mulattos or mixed race slaves and started his own “breeding programme”, matching white male slaves with black North African women while white women slaves were incarcerated in his harem and forced to breed. He would line up his slaves and citizens and call out “that one, take that one”.

The British and European families of the captured slaves begged the church, the crown and associated authorities in their respective countries for help, but often met with a callous lack of concern.

The Barbary empires went into decline from (well into the 1800s) then onwards but the white slave trade continued, albeit to a lesser extent, even after France took control of Algeria and Tunisia in 1830 and 1831, and Britain passed the Slavery Abolition Act of 1833. At the same time European governments passed laws granting emancipation to slaves.

As Europe’s power increased it gradually diminished the power of the sultans, North African merchants and slave traders. 

The people in the coastal villages of Britain and Europe could finally live in relative peace, but not for long. Within a few years, another era of mass slaughter and brutality, human against human (bother against brother). We called this World War I.



Our ancestors suffered more than any plantation labourer. Let no-one lecture us with the pious guilt of the ‘chattering classes.’ Don’t preach to us, Liberal, when it was your kind that emancipated the African slave while leaving our own children to work 16-hour days in the factories.

Whilst the Arabs have been acknowledged as a prime force in the early usage of slaves from Africa, very little has been written about their usage of White slaves, whether they were part of the Russian slave trade or those kidnapped by Arab pirates. However, in recent years, the research of some authors has been bringing this issue to light.

David Brion Davis, in The New York Review of Books, explains that

  • "The origins of African slavery in the New World cannot be understood without some knowledge of the millennium of warfare between Christians and Muslims that took place in the Mediterranean and Atlantic and the piracy and kidnapping that went along with it. In 1627 pirates from the Barbary Coast of North Africa raided distant Iceland and enslaved nearly four hundred astonished residents. In 1617 Muslim pirates, having long enslaved Christians along the coasts of Spain, France, Italy, and even Ireland, captured 1,200 men and women in Portuguese Madeira. Down to the 1640s, there were many more English slaves in Muslim North Africa than African slaves under English control in the Caribbean. Indeed, a 1624 parliamentary proclamation estimated that the Barbary states held at least 1,500 English slaves, mostly sailors captured in the Mediterranean or Atlantic."

Professor Robert Davis, in his book Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters: White Slavery in the Mediterranean, the Barbary Coast, and Italy, 1500-1800, estimated that 1 million to 1.25 million White people were enslaved by North African pirates between 1530 and 1780. North African pirates abducted and enslaved more Europeans from coastal villages and towns. Italy, Spain, Portugal and France were hardest hit but the raiders also seized people in Britain, Ireland and Iceland. They even captured 130 American seamen from ships that they boarded in the Atlantic and Mediterranean between 1785 and 1793. 

Arab pirates and White Slaves 

Interest in the Arab slaving of Europeans was rekindled in the 1990s by the discovery of the site of a Barbary Coast shipwreck at Moor Sands on the South Devon coast in England. Icon Films produced a documentary on the subject, and published some of their findings.

  • "For England after 1625 there were great periods, particularly in Devon and Cornwall, Dorset, even around Bristol, where ships couldn't leave port. The first of the Muslims showed up in 1625 it caused enormous panic. It was the suddenness. It was a surprise, the fact that there was so many of them and the fact that the English had a coastline which was virtually unprotected."

    "After looking at some dozens of population estimates from a number of different kinds of sources we have an average, year in year out, especially between the years 1580 and 1680 of about 35,000, 34,000 slaves at any given time. Well, knowing this it then becomes a question of estimating simply how many slaves it would be necessary to be taken every year to keep that number. I've have estimated overall that between 1530 and 1780, that is about two and a half centuries, something of the order of a million to a million and quarter white Europeans were enslaved and taken to Barbary."

    "Arab pirates plagued the south west coast of England and Ireland throughout the seventeenth century, but the height of this activity was around the 1630s, when England's navy was at its weakest. While anything of value was fair game, their main quarry was slaves.

    In the beginning they targeted the crews of West Country fishing boats, but as the pirates grew bolder they came ashore to find victims, such as the entire congregation of a village church in Cornwall and most of the inhabitants of Baltimore in Southern Ireland. A successfully ransomed sailor reported "If the hands be smooth, they was ransomed, but if the hands be rough, they was sold as slaves". He told that a slave would fetch £40, a ransomnable captive £80 and a fair maiden up to £300.

    By 1629 west country merchants were losing so many ships that James 1st was forced to send a fleet to North Africa to demand the return of the captives. It failed completely, but Admiral Mansell stated on his return that he believed there were between 25 and 30,000 Christian slaves in captivity."

White Slaves, African Masters 

Reviews have praised White Slaves, African Masters: An Anthology of American Barbary Captivity Narratives, a book that has revealed the slavery of North American colonists by Barbary privateers.

  • "Some of the most popular stories in nineteenth-century America were tales of whites captured and enslaved in North Africa. White Slaves, African Masters for the first time gathers together a selection of these Barbary captivity narratives, which significantly influenced early American attitudes toward race, slavery, and nationalism.

    Though Barbary privateers began to seize North American colonists as early as 1625, Barbary captivity narratives did not begin to flourish until after the American Revolution. During these years, stories of Barbary captivity forced the U.S. government to pay humiliating tributes to African rulers, stimulated the drive to create the U.S. Navy, and brought on America's first post-revolutionary war. These tales also were used both to justify and to vilify slavery."

Slavery Under Islam 

Books such as Islam's Black Slaves: The Other Black Diaspora by Ronald Segal and Race and Slavery in the Middle East: A Historical Enquiry by Bernard Lewis have made available a wider knowledge on Arab slavery.

  • "The author [Bernard Lewis], a venerable authority on the Near and Middle East, using many Arab and Persian sources in the original languages, traces the connexion between slavery and status, both in theory and practice, in the Islamic world from the 7th century to the present. Until quite late in the 19th Century, when the Russians closed the Caucasus route, white slaves were imported; after this, black slaves became preponderant. On the whole Lewis demolishes the somewhat idealised (and guilt-generated) Western perception of Islamic slavery as being more benign that its Western counterpart and its culture non-racist. He demonstrates that freed blacks rarely rose to high positions and quotes anti-black opinions about it when they did."

Arab rulers even had white eunuchs (slaves with their testicles cut off). In Islam's Black Slaves, Ronald Segal reveals that the Caliph in Baghdad at the beginning of the tenth century had seven thousand black eunuchs and four thousand white ones in his palace. Ibn Hawqal, writing in the 970s, remarked that "among the most famous exports [from al-Andalus to other Muslim lands] are comely slaves, both male and female from Frankish and Galician regions" and that "all Slavic eunuchs on earth come from al-Andalus, because they are castrated in that region".

These are just a few examples of information available on the Arab trade in White slaves; however, this information rarely comes to light in biased Multiculturalist education systems, as they prefer to concentrate on the issue of Black slavery to the exclusion of all other types of slavery. In pushing a guilt complex upon white children, as part of their ideological fight to promote Multiculturalism and attack "White racism", activist teachers would be aware that telling the truth about widespread White slavery would not be helpful in their promotion of Multiculturalist propaganda: http://www.ironbarkresources.com/slaves/whiteslaves07.htm


Many of the native peoples that Whites encountered in North America had ALREADY genocided the peoples who preceded them. (There is a great deal evidence that has been unearthed (and then quickly buried) that indicates that White people were in North America before the Amerindians. More here: http://www.renegadetribune.com/destroying-the-anti-white-arguments/ 

Whites in North America did NOT follow in that mold, but set aside protected lands to preserve the peoples they encountered. That it didn’t work like a liberal’s fairytale dream doesn’t convert that basic fact into genocide.

200 years from now, will a non-White be explaining how the world of the future was founded on the White Genocide of today, to an applauding audience of hypnotized non-Whites whose souls are consumed by a proud hatred of their own race?

Of course not. After the White race that built modern civilization has been genocided, the world will be occupied with its return to savagery.

Anti-racist is a code word for anti-White! More here: http://whitegenocideproject.com/michael-moores-anti-white-version-of-american-history/?cid=313

THIS! Everyone should watch this clip! https://web.facebook.com/antisocialist2.0/videos/285347315256237/


Dontell Williams says “Hello and welcome to my website We Thought They Were White. My name is Dontell Jackson, and like many African-Americans, I was brought up in a culture deeply infused with propaganda designed to lay the blame for all of the black race’s ills on the white man. It was not until I began looking into the actual history of blacks, whites, and other races in America, that I came to realize that many if not most of the resentment that African-Americans harbor regarding our long history of abuse and exploitation has been intentionally misdirected by those who are most responsible for it, to shift the blame away from themselves as a people onto the white race who they regard as their enemies.

The reality is that the white race had little to do with the slave trade that took our ancestors away from Africa and sold them into bondage in the New World. That crime was committed not by White Europeans, but by Jews who were engaged in transatlantic commerce between the Old World and the Americas where they hoped to establish a New Jerusalem from which to rule the world by way of exploiting all races who were not members of their tribe of “chosen people.” In their efforts to accomplish that goal, the white race has been hoodwinked and manipulated as unsuspecting pawns almost as much as the black race has been.

Blacks have been purposely misled by the Jewish people who, in previous centuries, built their fortunes in the transatlantic slave trade, and who continue to manipulate and exploit us even today. Because most black people make no distinction between Jews and whites, it is easy for the Jews to evade justice and escape the blame for the wrongs that they have inflicted on our people for centuries by convincing blacks that it was the white man who did it. In most cases the vast majority of the white race had nothing to do with slavery or other crimes that have been committed against our people. Whites were and continue to be exploited and manipulated by the Jews, the same as blacks, and their race is even more hated by the Jew, where blacks are simply disregarded by the Jews with indifference, as are other races. We are all simply pawns to the Jews who have no other use for us beyond being a source of profit to them and a weapon that can be used to help destroy whites, who they see as their sworn enemies, by encouraging us to breed with them until there are no longer any whites left.

I would like to invite all of my black brothers and sisters to join me in untangling the lies, deceptions and half-truths that have been foisted upon us as a race, and to explore the true history of what has been done to us as a people by those who were more than happy to encourage us to think these wrongs were committed against us by whites, when in reality those crimes were carried out by Jews.

Please feel free to share the information that I have presented on this site with as many of your friends, relatives, and associates as possible, so that we as a people can gain greater freedom through knowledge of the truth which is the only thing that can set us free from the state of subjugation, manipulation, and exploitation at the hands of those who have and who continue to deceive us. Let us educate ourselves as a people by sharing this knowledge of the truth among all of our race so that we can at last break free of the bondage of the lies and superstition that have enslaved our minds and our spirits.”

Visit the website for a fascinating exposé of the hidden truths of slavery: http://american3rdposition.com/we-thought-they-were-white/


This presentation is much shorter than it could be, but space does not allow more.

The documentary record compels us to face the fact that a holocaust was perpetrated against generations of poor White People whose sufferings are far more than is presented here. The horrors they experienced equal anything the more famous sufferers have undergone. Yet, of all the dusty shelves in the dark corners of”SUPPRESSED” history, none has been more completely obscured than the story of WHITE SLAVES!

A famous history professor stated that history was not a science but a continuing investigation into the past; a person’s conclusion is based on their own bias. This story will offer evidence that the Alba, Scots, Irish and Pics have been the longest race held in slavery. 

Alexander Stewart was herded off the Gildart in July of 1747, bound with chains. Stewart was pushed onto the auction block in Wecomica, St Mary's County, Maryland. Doctor Stewart and his brother William were attending the auction, aware of Alexander being on that slave ship coming from Liverpool England.

Doctor Stewart and William were residents of Annapolis and brothers to David of Ballachalun in Montieth, Scotland. The two brothers paid nine pound six shillings sterling to Mr. Benedict Callvert of Annapolis for the purchase of Alexander. He was a slave. Alexander tells of the other 88 Scots sold into slavery that day in "THE LYON IN MOURNING" pages 242‑243. Jeremiah Howell was a lifetime‑indentured servant by his uncle in Lewis County, Virginia in the early 1700's.

His son, Jeremiah, won his freedom by fighting in the Revolution. THERE WERE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF SCOTS SOLD INTO SLAVERY DURING COLONIAL AMERICA. White slavery to the American Colonies occurred as early as 1630 in Scotland.

According to the Egerton manuscript, British Museum, the enactment of 1652: it may be lawful for two or more justices of the peace within any county, citty or towne, corporate belonging to the commonwealth to from tyme to tyme by warrant cause to be apprehended, seized on and detained all and every person or persons that shall be found begging and vagrant.. in any towne, parish or place to be conveyed into the Port of London, or unto any other port from where such person or persons may be  shipped into a forraign collonie or plantation.

The judges of Edinburgh Scotland during the years 1662‑1665 ordered the enslavement and shipment to the colonies a large number of rogues and others who made life unpleasant for the British upper class. (Register for the Privy Council of Scotland, third series, vol. 1, p 181, vol. 2, p 101).

The above accounting sounds horrific but slavery was what the Scots have survived for a thousand years. The early ancestors of the Scots, Alba and Pics were enslaved as early as the first century BC. Varro, a Roman philosopher stated in his agricultural manuscripts that white slaves were only things with a voice or instrumenti vocali. Julius Caesar enslaves as many as one million whites from Gaul. (William D Phillips, Jr. SLAVERY FROM ROMAN TIMES TO EARLY TRANSATLANTIC TRADE, p. 18).

Pope Gregory in the sixth century first witnessed blonde hair, blue eyed boys awaiting sale in a Roman slave market. The Romans enslaved thousands of white inhabitants of Great Britain, who were also known as Angles. Pope Gregory was very interested in the looks of these boys therefore asking their origin. He was told they were Angles from Briton. Gregory stated, "Non Angli, sed Angeli." (Not Angles but Angels).

The eighth to the eleventh centuries proved to be very profitable for Rouen France. Rouen was the transfer point of Irish and Flemish slaves to the Arabian nations. The early centuries AD the Scottish were known as Irish. William Phillips on page 63 states that the major component of slave trade in the eleventh century were the Vikings. They spirited many 'Irish' to Spain, Scandinavia and Russia. Legends have it; some 'Irish' may have been taken as far as Constantinople.

Ruth Mazo Karras wrote in her book, "SLAVERY AND SOCIETY IN MEDEIVEL SCANDINAVIA" pg. 49; Norwegian Vikings made slave raids not only against the Irish and Scots (who were often called Irish in Norse sources) but also against Norse settlers in Ireland or Scottish Isles or even in Norway itself. Slave trading was a major commercial activity of the Viking Age. The children of the White slaves in Iceland were routinely murdered en masse. (Karras pg 52)

According to these resources as well as many more, the Scots‑Irish have been enslaved longer than any other race in the world's history. Most governments do not teach White Slavery in their World History classes. Children of modern times are only taught about the African slave trade. The Scots do not need to be taught because they are very aware of the atrocities upon an enslaved race. Most importantly, we have survived to become one to the largest races on Earth!!!

The record of suppressed records, portions excised in the interests of dogma, politics and all the other alibis of falsehood. We will present to you the truth and follow it wherever it leads, however much it upsets the peddler's cart of the modern pitchmen of recent opinion. Elbert Hubbard tells us that, "It is not deeds or acts that last, it is the written record of those deeds and acts."

Mr. Hoffman, in his book “They Were White And They Were Slaves,” provides a small voice as a memorial to the heroic lives of toil and the indomitable spirit of perseverance of the White Slaves of the past, who are in many cases THE FOREFATHERS AND FOREMOTHERS OF MILLIONS OF AMERICANS ALIVE TODAY; A VITAL PART OF OUR HERITAGE WHICH SHOULD NEVER BE FORGOTTEN!

This is a history of White People that has seldom, if ever, been told in any coherent form, largely because most modern historians have, for reasons of politics or psychology, refused to recognize White Slaves in early America as just that.

MOST HISTORIANS OF TODAY ARE TOTAL COWARDS, AND ARE NOT WILLING TO PRESENT ANYTHING THAT MIGHT UPSET THE ESTABLISHMENT. And if they do display the courage necessary to present the truth, they will be ridiculed and driven from the faculties of the so‑called halls of learning. Others have their own agenda, which has nothing to do with truth; an agenda to present a false historical perspective so as to destroy the faith of White Americans and so destroy their pride in the process.

"They were of two sorts, first such as were brought over by masters of ships to be sold as servants. Such as we call them my dear,' says she, 'but they are more properly called slaves.'" (Daniel Defoe, Moll Flanders)

Today, not a tear is shed for the sufferings of millions of our own enslaved forefathers. Two hundred years of White Slaver in America has been almost completely obliterated from the collective memory of the American people.

"Who wants to be reminded that half ‑‑ perhaps as many as two‑thirds ‑‑ of the original American colonists came here, not of their own free will, but kidnaped, shanghaied, impressed, duped, beguiled, and yes, in chains?...we tend to gloss over it...we'd prefer to forget the whole sorry chapter..." (Elaine Kendall, Los Angeles Times, September 1, 1985)

A correct understanding of the authentic history of the enslavement of Whites in America could have profound consequences for the future of the races: "We cannot be sure that the position of the earliest Africans differed markedly from that of the  White Indentured Servants. The debate has considerable significance for the interpretation of race relations in American history." (Eugene D. Genovese, Roll, Jordan Roll: The World the Slaves Made, p. 31)


With the massive concentration of educational and media resources on the Negro experience of slavery the unspoken assumption has been that only Blacks have been enslaved to any degree or magnitude worthy of study or memorial. The historical record reveals that this is not the case, however.

White People Have Been Sold as Slaves for Centuries!

For instance, among the ancient Greeks, despite their tradition of democracy, the enslavement of fellow Whites, even fellow Greeks, was the order of the day. Aristotle considered White slaves as things. The Romans also had no compunctions against enslaving Whites who they too termed "a thing."

In his agricultural writings, the first century B.C. Roman philosopher Varro labeled White Slaves as nothing more than "tools that happened to have voices." Cato the Elder, discoursing on plantation management, proposed that White Slaves when old or ill should be discarded along with worn‑out farm implements. Julius Caesar enslaved as many as one million Whites from Gaul, some of whom were sold to the slave dealers who followed his victorious legions. (William D. Phillips, Jr., Slavery From Roman Times To The Early Transatlantic Trade, p. 18)

In A.D. 319 the "Christian" Emperor of Rome, Constantine, ruled that if an owner whipped his White Slave to death, "he should not stand in any criminal accusation if the slave dies; and all statutes of limitations and legal interpretations are hereby set aside." (Thomas Wiedemann, Greek and Roman Slaver, selection 187, p. 174)

The Romans enslaved thousands of the early White inhabitants of Great Britain who were known as "Angles," from which we drive the term "Anglo‑Saxon" as a description of the English race. In the sixth century Pope Gregory the First saw blond‑haired, blue‑eyed English boys awaiting sale in a slave market in Rome. Inquiring of their origin, the Pope was told they were Angles. Gregory replied, "Non Angli, sed Angeli" (Not Angles, but Angels). When the Franks [French] conquered the Visigoths in Southern Gual huge numbers of Whites entered the slave markets.

"After Charlemange's conquest of Saxony, during which many Saxons were enslaved, he set up a network of parish churches. To provide for the maintenance of the priest and the church, those living in the parish were to donate a house and land as well as a male and female (Saxon) slave to the church for every 120 people in the parish." (William Phillips, p. 52)

The trade in White Slaves was one of the few sources of foreign exchange for Western European powers in a period when the East produced the goods that Europeans could not procure elsewhere. The Sale of White Slaves to Asia and Africa was one of the few sources of gold for European treasuries.

From the eighth to the eleventh century France was a major transfer point for White Slaves to the Muslim world, with Rouen being the center for the selling of Irish and Flemish Slaves. "At the same time that France was a transfer point for slaves to the Muslim world, Italy was occupying much the same position...Venetians (were)...selling slaves and timber across the Mediterranean. The slaves were usually Slavs brought across the Alps...The Venetians were the earliest successful Italian sea traders and because profits on (slave) trade with the Muslims were lucrative, they resisted efforts to stop them. In return for their exports of timber, iron and (White) Slaves, they brought in oriental luxury products, mainly fine cloths..." (William Phillips, pp. 62)

Slavery, by the way, was not a white institution. The slaves sold in  this country came from Africa, where they were rounded up by other  Africans, marched to seaports, and sold to slave traders. (The Redneck Manifesto, by Jim Goad)

The true history of slavery in this country is a deep dark secret, not  even touched upon by our educators, even during Black History Month. For truth in America today is not politically correct.

The concept of someone owning a slave for life began with a poor indentured servant named John Casor, whose indenture to Anthony Johnson had expired, but Johnson insisted Casor was his for

his natural life. Casor brought the matter to court, and in 1665, a Northumberland court in the Virginia Colony held in favor of Johnson, which started the demand for slaves who were systematically rounded up for sale by their fellow Africans. Both litigants were black Africans. (This very interesting bit of history can be found in your local library in the FEB/MAR 1993 edition of AMERICAN HERITAGE Magazine, Vol. 441).

The article, SELLING POOR STEVEN, also deals with the U.S. Census of 1830 which showed that 3,775 Free Negro's owned 12,760 slaves. Some women owned their husbands (You've come a long way, baby?), and vice versa. 25% of the free Negro's in New Orleans were slave owners.  Free Negro parents sold their children into slavery for fun and profit.

Thomas Young, a free Negro of Chatham Co. GA owned 302 slaves. He leased them out to plantation owners. Many others did likewise. Thomas Young, a free Negro of Chatham Co. GA owned 302 slaves. He leased them out to  plantation owners. Many others did likewise. This is outlined in the book “FREE NEGRO OWNERS OF SLAVES IN THE UNITED STATES IN 1830,” by Carter G. Woodson, a Negro historian.

Their is among them a George Washington of Washington DC. Ironically, the super sensitive black educators of New Orleans changed the name of one of their schools from George Washington, because he was a slave owner. Why are these facts not brought to light by our educators? https://israelect.com/reference/WillieMartin/Slaves%20[A].htm


One of the most potent myths of our age is that the Crusades were little more than an unprovoked attack by a barbarous Europe against a quiescent and cultured Islamic world. According to conventional ideas, the seventh and eighth centuries constitute the great age of Islamic expansion. By the eleventh century — the time of the First Crusade — we are told that the Islamic world was quiescent and settled and that, by implication, the Crusaders were the aggressors. Indeed, the Crusaders are routinely portrayed as a horde of barbarians from a backward and superstitious Europe irrupting into the cultured and urbane world of the eleventh century Near East.

This at least is the populist language often employed on television and in newspaper articles. In my recent book Holy Warriors: Islam and the Demise of Classical Civilization, I have shown however that before the advent of Islam Christians had no concept of “Holy War” at all, and that it was from the Muslims themselves that Europeans took this idea. I showed too that the Crusades, far from being an unprovoked act of aggression on the part of Christian Europe, was part of a rearguard action aimed at stemming the Muslim advance which, by the start of the eleventh century, was threatening as never before to overwhelm the whole of Europe.

Not with standing the evidence presented in Holy Warriors, the consensus among the majority of medieval historians is that the threat from Islam had very little, if anything, to do with the Crusades; the Muslims were simply the convenient targets of a savage and brutal Europe, mired in a culture of habitual violence and rapine. The “energies” of Europe’s warrior-class, it is held, were simply directed by the Papacy away from internal destruction onto the convenient targets of the Islamic world. This, for example, is the line taken by Marcus Bull in his examination of the origins of the Crusades in The Oxford History of the Crusades. In an article of almost ten thousand words, Bull fails to consider the Muslim threat at all. Indeed he mentions it only to dismiss it:

“The perspective of a Mediterranean-wide struggle [between Islam and Christianity] was visible only to those institutions, in particular the papacy, which had the intelligence networks, grasp of geography, and sense of long historical tradition to take a broad overview of Christendom and its threatened predicament, real or supposed. This is a point which needs to be emphasized because the terminology of the crusades is often applied inaccurately to all the occasions in the decades before 1095 when Christians and Muslims found themselves coming to blows. An idea which underpins the imprecise usage is that the First Crusade was the last in, and the culmination of, a series of wars in the eleventh century which had been crusading in character, effectively ‘trial runs’ which had introduced Europeans to the essential features of the crusade. This is an untenable view.”(Marcus Bull, “Origins,” in Jonathan Riley-Smith (ed..) The Oxford History of the Crusades, p. 19)

With what justification, we might ask, does Bull dissociate the earlier Christian-Muslim conflicts of the eleventh century in Spain, Sicily, and Anatolia from the First Crusade? The answer can hardly be described as convincing. “There is plenty of evidence,” he says, “to suggest that people regarded Pope Urban II’s crusade appeal of 1095-6 as something of a shock to the communal system: it was felt to be effective precisely because it was different from anything attempted before.” (Ibid) Of course it was different: the Pope had called a meeting of all the potentates and prelates of Europe to urge the assembly of a mighty force to march to Constantinople and eventually to retake the Holy Land. It was new because of its scale and its ambition. But to thus dismiss the connection with what went before in Spain and Sicily — and Anatolia — is ridiculous. Such a statement can only derive from a mindset which somehow has to see the Crusaders as the aggressors and to thereby detach them from the legitimate defensive wars which Christians had been fighting in Spain and throughout the Mediterranean in the decades immediately preceding 1095.

The fact is, in the twenty years before the First Crusade, Christendom had lost the whole of Anatolia, an area greater than France, and a region right on the doorstep of Europe. In 1050 the Seljuk leader Togrul Beg undertook Holy War against the Christians of Anatolia, who had thus far resisted the power of the Caliphs. We are told that 130,000 Christians died in the war, but that, upon Togrul Beg’s death in 1063 the Christians reasserted their independence and freedom. This was however to be of short duration, and no sooner had Togrul Beg’s nephew Alp Arslan been proclaimed Sultan than the war was renewed. In 1064 the old Armenian capital of Ani was destroyed; and the prince of Kars, the last independent Armenian ruler, “gladly handed over his lands to the [Byzantine] Emperor in return for estates in the Taurus mountains. Large numbers of Armenians accompanied him to his new home.” (Steven Runciman, The History of the Crusades Vol. 1 (Cambridge, 1951) p.61) Indeed, at this time, the entire Armenian nation was effectively transplanted hundreds of miles to the south and west.

But the Turkish attacks continued. From 1065 onwards the great frontier-fortress of Edessa was assaulted yearly. In 1066 they occupied the pass of the Amanus Mountains, and next spring they sacked the Cappadocian metropolis of Caesarea. Next winter the Byzantine armies were defeated at Melitene and Sebastea. These victories gave Alp Arslan control of all Armenia, and a year later he raided far into the Empire, to Neocaesarea and Amorium in 1068, to Iconium in 1069, and in 1070 to Chonae, near the Aegean coast. (Ibid.)
- - - 
- - - - - -
These events make it perfectly clear that the Turks now threatened all the of Empire’s Asiatic possessions, with the position of Constantinople herself increasingly insecure. The imperial government was forced to take action. Constantine X, whose neglect of the army was largely responsible for the catastrophes which now overwhelmed the Empire, had died in 1067, leaving a young son, Michael VII under the regency of the Empress-mother Eudocia. Next year Eudocia married the commander-in-chief, Romanus Diogenes, who was raised to the throne. Romanus was a distinguished soldier and a sincere patriot, who saw that the safety of the Empire depended on the rebuilding of the army and ultimately the reconquest of Armenia. (Ibid.) Within four months of his accession, Romanus had gathered together a large but unreliable force and set out to meet the foe. “In three laborious campaigns,” writes Gibbon, “the Turks were driven beyond the Euphrates; in the fourth, and last, Romanus undertook the deliverance of Armenia.” (Decline and Fall, Ch. 57) Here however, at the seminal battle of Manzikert (1071), he was defeated and captured and all of Anatolia was irretrievably lost.

Any honest reading of these events leaves us in no doubt whatsoever that the aggressor was Alp Arslan and his Turks, and that Romanus Diogenes’ march into Armenia was a last-ditch counter-attack by the Byzantines to prevent the loss of all of Anatolia.. Yet observe how the battle is described in the recently-published Chambers Dictionary of World History: “The Byzantine Emperor, Romanus IV Diogenes (1068/71), tried to extend his empire into Armenia but was defeated at Manzikert near Lake Van by the Seljuk Turks under Alp Arslan (1063/72), who then launched a full-scale invasion of Anatolia.” (Bruce Lenman (ed.) Chambers Dictionary of World History (London, 2000) p. 585)

We see in the above a graphic example of the disinformation disseminated by the mentality of political correctness, where the victim is transformed into the aggressor and the aggressor portrayed as the victim.

Alp Arslan was killed a year later, and the conquest of Asia Minor, virtually all that was left of Byzantium’s Asiatic possessions, was completed by his son Malek Shah (1074 — 1084). These conquests left the Turks in possession of the fortress of Nicaea, on the southern shore of the Sea of Marmara, and the survival of Constantinople in question.

These then are the major political events which prefigured the First Crusade. Within a space of thirty-five years the Turks had seized control of Christian territories larger than the entire area of France, and they now stood poised on the very doorstep of Europe. We are accustomed to think of the Crusades as first and foremost an attempt by Christians to retake the Holy Land and Jerusalem; but this is a mistake. The Emperor Alexius Comnenus now made his famous plea to the Pope, not to free Jerusalem, but to drive the Turks from his door, to liberate the huge Christian territories in Asia Minor that had so recently been devastated and annexed by the followers of the crescent. It is true, of course, that the Turks, who had also assumed control of Syria/Palestine, now imposed a barbarous regime in that region; and that the sufferings of Christian pilgrims as well as native Christian populations in that region, described so vividly by Peter the Hermit and others, provided a powerful emotional impetus to the Crusading movement among ordinary Europeans; but the relief of pilgrims was not — to begin with at least — the primary goal of the Crusaders. Nonetheless, the barbarous nature of the Turkish actions in Palestine was a microcosm of their behavior throughout the Christian regions which they conquered, and the nature of their rule in the entire Near East is described thus by Gibbon in his usual vivid manner:

“The Oriental Christians and the Latin pilgrims deplored a revolution, which, instead of the regular government and old alliance of the caliphs, imposed on their necks the iron yoke of the strangers of the north. In his court and camp the great sultan had adopted in some degree the arts and manners of Persia; but the body of the Turkish nation, and more especially the pastoral tribes, still breathed the fierceness of the desert. From Nicaea to Jerusalem, the western countries of Asia were a scene of foreign and domestic hostility; and the shepherds of Palestine, who held a precarious sway on a doubtful frontier, had neither leisure nor capacity to await the slow profits of commercial and religious freedom. The pilgrims, who, through innumerable perils, had reached the gates of Jerusalem, were the victims of private rapine or public oppression, and often sunk under the pressure of famine and disease, before they were permitted to salute the holy sepulcher. A spirit of native barbarism, or recent zeal, prompted the Turkmans to insult the clergy of every sect; the patriarch was dragged by the hair along the pavement and cast into a dungeon, to extort a ransom from the sympathy of his flock; and the divine worship in the church of the Resurrection was often disturbed by the savage rudeness of its masters.” (Chapter 57)

The ordinary peasants of Europe may not have been fully cognizant of the danger from the east.

The reader might well wonder why this “revival” of Islamic conquest in the eleventh century seems so uncannily to resemble the Islamic conquests of the seventh and eighth centuries. That indeed is a moot point: one to be discussed in a future article. For the moment, all that needs to be emphasized is that, contrary to popular belief, the tenth and eleventh centuries constitute a period of massive expansion by Islam, an expansion felt all along Islam’s boundary with Christendom. The Crusades were clearly part of an attempt to stem this aggression: http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com.au/2010/02/crusades-response-to-islamic-aggression.html

Whites were roughly 1/3 of the world’s population in 1900 and are now estimated to be less than 10% and dropping fast. It is hard to find the real numbers, but it’s clear White numbers are declining while third world population numbers explode. Unless something is done now, the complete destruction of the White race could be inevitable. That is why it is essential for all awakened White people to stand in solidarity, loving our people and opposing our genocide. More here: http://www.renegadetribune.com/destroying-the-anti-white-arguments/