You're simply lying, which is what liars do. I provided no link to any such page. Try looking here;
cause "negroes" to "rise in value,"
-----
You're simply lying, which is what liars do. I provided no link to any such page.
So this webpage:
http://books.google.com/books?id=xEC9K7quBoEC&pg=PA83&lpg=PA83&dq=alexander+gillon+slavery&source=bl&ots=rZZI0hOQml&sig=QcO_ozMjeeJq8X245q_S7iAQND4&hl=en&sa=X&ei=dWVCUYiHKMPxqQGTs4HgAw&ved=0CFsQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=alexander%20gillon%20slavery&f=false
THAT YOU POSTED.....
Means I'm the liar?
------
Well, I guess I shouldn't be surprised. Your last multitude of posts showed you were a purveyor of excremental projectiles flailing about in a vain hope for adherence to a vertical surface.
I guess it's my own fault for thinking your last one would be any different.
Yes, it goes to that web page. And that web page displays a Google books page which clearly says, "Closing the trade, Charleston merchant Alexander Gillon predicted, would trigger 'negroes' to 'rise in value,' and allow 'the debtor who sold slaves' a 'better chance of satisfying his creditors."
And that's what I get, no matter what browser I use or whether I'm signed in to Google or not.
There's nothing wrong with the reference. It's a perfectly legitimate reference.
Why you would make a big deal about not liking this particular reference is an absolute mystery anyway, since it's the ONLY reference out of the three that even seems to be a point in favor of the birther theory that David Ramsay was being an unselfish humanitarian, instead of a self-interested sore loser, by writing his little treatise on citizenship that quite conveniently argued that Smith was not a citizen and therefore ineligible to take the seat he had won in the House.
This is what birthers do.
First, IGNORE all of the historical evidence - which in this case indicates that yes, David Ramsay WAS a sore loser, and had no great humanitarian anti-slavery motive for trying to have Smith declared ineligible, and Alexander Gillon installed instead.
Then, find some stupid little tiny thing that means absolutely nothing, that you can focus on to try and declare the person who actually PRESENTED the EVIDENCE a "plant." Or a "paid shill."
Heck, it doesn't even matter if you want to criticize some point that the person providing the EVIDENCE included because it was IN FAVOR OF YOUR ARGUMENT.
ANYTHING will do. Anything to try and distract people from the FACT that your claims have not the slightest basis in history or in law.
You and Windflier are simply despicable people.
You will do anything to oppose the evidence and the truth. You would do anything to try and shut up the person who actually tells the TRUTH about what the Founding Fathers and our early legal experts meant.
There’s no name you won’t call.
Again, it’s not me you’re opposing. It’s our history, our laws, our Constitution, and the great men who founded this country and gave us the great nation we have.