posted
Ten Best Lies of Black History BY THE NATION OF ISLAM RESEARCH GROUP JAN 29, 2013 - 12:25:42 PM
In this special month devoted to our history, The Final Call explores some of the most outrageous and false stories, accounts, and sentimental tales commonly told.
1. Whites were the first people on earth. 2. Blacks in slavery were only cotton pickers and maids. 3. Lincoln freed the slaves. 4. Blacks ate each other in Africa. 5. Blacks were cursed black by God. 6. The United States government has helped Blacks succeed. 7. Jews built the pyramids. 8. Blacks sold other Blacks into slavery. 9. There was no slavery in the North. 10. Columbus discovered America.
Lie #8 - Blacks sold other Blacks into slavery.
One of the most unseemly manifestations of Black self-hatred is the often violently held belief that 500 years ago Africans sold other Africans into centuries of slavery. It is erroneously believed that after thousands of years of African life, Blacks all of a sudden collapsed into internecine strife and started killing each other, selling their fellow kinsmen to foreigners for profit.
The fact is that Portuguese “explorers” mastered a pattern of European conquest that is 6,000 years old. They deliberately created mixed-race subgroups with the intention of using them to capture and enslave the native African populations. Arriving on the Cape Verde islands in the late 1400s, Jewish slave merchants kidnapped and raped African women, and the mixed-race offspring, called lançados, were raised on the islands as European Jews, practicing Judaism and respecting Jewish authority. These lançados were sent into the African mainland to set up an international “trading post” to at first market the fine fabrics being produced by the Africans. But soon they turned on their hosts and began trading in Black human beings. The lançados were strictly trained in the Jewish family business of slave-dealing. It was these half-breed, mixed-race (or mulatto) “half-ricans” who infiltrated the Black African communities, seeking to satisfy the European lust for Black labor.
Historian Walter Rodney described these “AFRICAN” slave traders thus: “Many of the private traders were mulattoes, already linked to the Africans by blood, and there were those who had become so integrated into African life that they wore tribal tattoos. It was these who were the authentic lançados, literally ‘those who had thrown themselves’ among the Africans.”
Source: Walter Rodney, A History of the Upper Guinea Coast, 1545-1800 (Oxford, 1970); Tingba Muhammad, “Did African Slave Traders Sell Us Out?” The Final Call, June 14, 2012; Tingba Muhammad, “Echoes of Mr. Yakub after Patmos,” The Final Call, June 28, 2012.
_____________________________
wikipedia:
Lançados
The Lançados (literally the thrown out ones) were settlers and adventurers of Portuguese origin in Senegambia, the Cape Verde Islands, and other areas on the coast of West Africa. Many were Jews, often New Christians, escaping persecution from the Portuguese Inquisition. To gain protection and advantageous trading ties, the Lançados took African wives from local ruling families. They established clandestine trading networks in weaponry, spices, and sometimes slaves, garnering anger from the Portuguese Crown due to its inability to collect taxes.
Although never large in numbers, mixed-race children born to the Lançados and their African wives and concubines served as crucial intermediaries between Europeans and native Africans. These "half-caste traders" wielded significant power in the early development of port economies such as Bissau and Cacheu.
They were the progenitors of the Crioulo language and culture. ____________________________________________
My question is how wide spread were the Lançados and does it mean that slavery was not practiced in Africa before they came about? Also this #8 does not seem to address the East African slave trade at all
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Oh horseshit! You know full well slavery in Africa is documented since antiquity. And tell me about lançados in Akan, Fon, Edekiri, or Bantu H lands please.
Listen some of the descendants of the financially successful African slavers apologized for their ancestors' acts.
quote: I had to travel across the Atlantic Ocean to West Africa to hear the words “Sorry, brother.”
As it turns out, mine was not a singular event. Many West African nations and tribes have issued apologies for their role in the transatlantic slave trade to black Americans, and even to specific African-American individuals who have traced their ancestry to certain locales and who would otherwise have never received an apology. In 1999 the president of Benin, a neighbor of Nigeria, apologized for his nation’s role in slavery. In 2006 Ghana apologized to American descendants of slaves. A few months ago a Cameroonian chieftain apologized to an African American who’d traced his lineage to a couple of local clans. Other West African tribal leaders have done the same.
The reason for these apologies is the role that some West African tribes and clans played in trading away people from neighboring tribes that they’d captured in war or kidnapped. Though this may appear to have been Africans selling Africans into slavery, it was not that simple. As many scholars have noted, calling all participants “African” presumes a unified identity among captors and captives that did not exist during the transatlantic slave trade. Different tribes saw themselves as completely distinct and held no inherent loyalties to one another, just as people today in Montreal, Mexico City and Washington, D.C., do not see one another as American brothers simply because they sit on the same continent.
However, many West African nations now feel compassion and a sense of responsibility for the descendants of those taken from African soil. They recognize the atrocity and the complicity of some of their ancestors in allowing it to occur. And so they have apologized—without condition.
In general I don't pay any attention to articles that read the way yours does, highly apologetic and solely subjective
Ever read NOI on Tippu Tib or foreign Muslim slavers and the bridge of bones across the Sahara?
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
ACROSS THE NATION. Benin Officials Apologize For Role In U.s. Slave Trade May 01, 2000|By From Tribune News Services.
1055 RICHMOND, VIRGINIA — Officials from the West African nation Benin apologized during a ceremony here for their country's role in once selling fellow Africans by the millions to white slave traders.
The group is making several stops in Virginia and Washington, D.C., to publicize President Mathieu Kerekou's recent apologies for his country's participation in the slave trade.
"We cry for forgiveness and reconciliation," said Luc Gnacadja, minister of environment and housing for Benin. "The slave trade is a shame, and we do repent for it."
Benin, a country of 4.7 million people, was called Dahomey in the 17th Century, when it was a major supplier of slaves for white exporters shipping from what was called the Slave Coast. Some accounts say Dahomey rounded up more than 3 million people for sale to slave traders.
Gnacadja spoke Saturday at a James River dock where, before the Civil War, slaves were shipped into Richmond, unloaded and marched across a bridge to downtown holding pens to await auction.
From the Web Why Aren't People Using This Trick To Get Grants* For School Online? *Qualified Students – ClassesUSA Homeowners Are in for a Big Surprise in 2016 HarpRefiQuotes I’m a Woman Who Joined Dollar Shave Club. Here’s What Happened... Dollar Shave Club See The Online Furniture Store That Has Retailers Worried Wayfair This Year's Top New Denim Trends Crossroads Trading Co. Don't purchase a new Samsung until you've read this! YesBackup Subscription Huge Misconceptions About Cloud Security in Euro FNCL Sector IBM 9 Bizarre and Weird Places in Utah Utah.com by Taboola Sponsored Links MORE: New Owner Demolishes O.j. Simpson Mansion Young mother shot in the head on South Side: 'My baby's fighting for her life' Nicole Simpson's Grisly Death Described To Jury Princess Grace`s Fatal Crash: Her Daughter`s Account 10 reasons why you want the job Fuhrman Bargains Out Of Jail Time
Related Articles Under the peel in Curacao November 19, 2006 Germany commemorates D-Day February 16, 2004 To Forgive Is Not To Forget January 24, 1999 The past affects the present March 25, 2007 Bush vows help for war-torn Liberia July 9, 2003 Find More Stories About Slave Trade Benin Terms of Service Privacy Policy Index by Date Index by Keyword www.chicagotribune.com Connect Like us on Facebook Follow us on Twitter
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
MORE SEARCH SECONDARY NAVIGATION SCIENCE NEWS
SCIENCE OCT 27 2013, 7:49 AM ET Genetic quest leads to African apology for role in slave trade by ALAN BOYLE, SCIENCE EDITOR SHARE advertisement
Genealogy researcher William Holland, left, stands beside the Fon of Bakou, Ngako Ngalatchui, during a visit to Cameroon. African-American businessman William Holland's royal ancestors were subjected to slavery in Virginia — but they were handed over into slavery by Africans. Now a descendant of those tribespeople has issued a formal apology to Holland for his ancestors' role in the 18th-century slave trade.
The head chieftain for the Cameroonian town of Bakou, Ngako Ngalatchui, told NBC News that he signed the statement on Saturday.
"We are sorry and issue an official apology for our involvement and the involvement of our ancestors in the horrible institution of transatlantic slavery," the statement read. "The United States of America, France, and the United Kingdom should issue similar formal apologies for this evil institution that broke up families and caused generational hardships that continue to the present day."
This isn't the first time Africans have acknowledged the historical role their forefathers played in slavery. It's long been known that, in centuries past, warring tribes took captives and traded them to white slave merchants. That marked the first step in the long road to the plantations of the American South. advertisement Matthieu Kerekou, the president of the West African nation of Benin, caused a sensation in 1999 when he apologized to African-American clergy for his country's role in the slave trade. Ever since then, officials from Benin have been traveling to the United States to offer their regrets and seek reconciliation.
"I knew one day I wanted to come to this land and ask forgiveness of my black brothers and sisters," one of Benin's provincial kings told a gathering in Alabama this summer. Leaders from other West African nations, such as Ghana and Nigeria, have issued or at least discussed similar apologies.
The town of Bakou is northwest of Cameroon's capital, Yaounde The apology signed by Ngalatchui, a member of Cameroon's tribal nobility who is also known as the Fon of Bakou, is unusual in that it's directed toward a specific family. Genetics has something to do with that. Over the course of several years, Holland has employed DNA tests to narrow down the area where his African ancestors lived. For Holland and millions of others whose forebears came to America unwillingly as slaves, such genetic testing provides the only way to trace ancestry back more than a few generations.
After some fits and starts, Holland's genetic findings pointed to a connection with Cameroon's Oku clan — and that opened the way to deeper historical revelations.
advertisement Modern-day members of the Oku clan tell of a time in the 1770s when scores of their ancestral kin were abducted by rival clans, and passed on to the slavers. That time frame matches up with the transatlantic voyage that Holland's great-great-great-great-grandfather took to Virginia, where he was sold as a slave.
The genetic tests, as well as genealogical pedigrees and tribal stories, suggested that Holland's roots go back to Bailack, a well-known patriarch of northwest Cameroon's Nso clan who came to Oku centuries ago.
Revisiting history As Holland forged deeper ties with the royalty of Cameroon's clans, all that history became a major focus of discussion. This January, the Georgia-based businessman restored three long-lost ceremonial masks to the Oku and Nso clans — and took the opportunity to show them chains and shackles that were used on slaves in America.
Holland said the Cameroonians were shocked by the story he told. "They said, 'It's time to make amends with the gods. It's time to do something with the families and re-establish a relationship,'" he recalled.
That's how the letter of apology got its start. Although the document specifically mentions Holland and his family, Holland emphasized that the expression of regret doesn't apply merely to one African-American clan.
advertisement "It also represents thousands of other people who have an ancestral tie to Cameroon, one way or another," he told NBC News before his departure for Cameroon. "They're apologizing for that situation."
Last week, Holland and eight traditional leaders in Bakou's jurisdiction — including Ngalatchui himself — toured the sites where the slave trade was conducted.
The tour came to a dramatic climax during a ceremony on Saturday, when all of the leaders were to issue their formal apology in Bakou, in front of hundreds of local residents. At the last minute, the leaders balked at signing the English-language document that Holland had prepared. Instead, they put their names to a different document that was drawn up in French, Cameroon's other official language.
The paper-shuffling snag created some bad feelings on what was meant to be a day of transatlantic reconciliation. "I'm still hot about it," Holland said by telephone from Cameroon. Later in the day, Holland brought his own document to the Fon of Bakou's palace, and Ngalatchui agreed to endorse the apology as written.
advertisement "Personally I signed the document," Ngalatchui told NBC News on Sunday.
As he prepared for his return to America, document in hand, Holland said he was processing the week's emotional ups and downs. There's a lot to process — stemming not only from the proceedings in Bakou, but also from the visits to places that his ancestor almost certainly passed through, bound in the chains of slavery.
"It's overwhelming," he said.
Previous chapters in the African saga: 2010: DNA points to royal roots in Africa 2011: Family roots get tangled up in Africa 2011: Black history saga comes full circle 2011: Africans visit their American cousins 2011: Genes tell a tale as big as Africa 2012: African-American's roots revised 2012: Tribal treasures recovered through eBay 2013: Treasures returned amid history lesson African American news from theGrio Correction for 8 p.m. ET Oct. 29, 2013: The map accompanying the original version of this item did not reflect the location of Bakou correctly.
Update for 10:05 p.m. ET Jan. 11, 2014: I've updated the headline and some of the references in the item to better reflect the Holland family's royal roots.
Alan Boyle is NBCNews.com's science editor. Connect with the Cosmic Log community by "liking" the log's Facebook page, following @b0yle on Twitter and adding the Cosmic Log page to your Google+ presence. To keep up with Cosmic Log as well as NBCNews.com's other stories about science and space, sign up for the Tech & Science newsletter, delivered to your email in-box every weekday. You can also check out "The Case for Pluto," my book about the controversial dwarf planet and the search for new worlds. ALAN BOYLE, SCIENCE EDITOR TOPICS SCIENCE NEWS FIRST PUBLISHED OCT 27 2013, 7:49 AM ET
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
I accept Our website uses cookies to improve your experience. Read more
10 September 2006 | Travel & Tourism Ghana apologizes to slaves' descendants
By Star
`Project Joseph' Government campaign hopes to attract more black visitors with tours that show how Africans aided European slavers.
Even in the dank and dim corners of Elmina Castle, behind whitewashed walls made of thick stone blocks, one can hear the angry sound of the ocean heaving waves against the shore.
For centuries, those waves brought slave merchants who carried off millions of people, packed tightly in rickety ships bound for the Americas.
Most of those who survived the perilous Atlantic crossing were condemned to lives of hard labour and humiliation.
As Ghana prepares for next year's 50th anniversary of gaining its independence — the first country in sub-Saharan colonial Africa to do so — it is launching a major tourism campaign aimed at blacks scattered across the globe by the slave trade.
"Project Joseph" is an invitation to blacks who trace their history to the slave trade to reconnect with the land of their ancestors. It's an invitation that comes with an apology — not from the Western countries usually associated with slave masters, but from Ghanaians themselves.
UNESCO, the United Nations' culture and education agency, estimates that 17 million people were forced to leave western Africa in wooden ships bound for the Americas.
Millions more died anonymously, far from home and without proper burial, during the brutal overland march to reach the slave trading forts like Elmina Castle, where blacks were kept shackled in dungeons, then branded with hot iron rods before being packed like "pieces of ebony" into waiting ships.
Ghana, with more than 50 monuments featuring relics of the slave trade, is considered a sort of mecca for blacks exploring their roots.
"We have something we call the healing, a program that we've dubbed the healing to take care of that aspect of the relationship because we cannot gloss over it," says Hagan.
"We just want to say sorry, let's back down, let's calm down on these things. Naturally, if you say sorry to somebody, no matter how hard the feeling is, once you say sorry, it mellows things."
Thousands of African-Americans visit the slave-trade fortresses each year, many of them coming during Black History month in February. Guides say they've seen all sorts of reactions, from utter devastation to rage to a kind of serenity.
American expatriate Toni Manieson says she felt almost nothing when she visited the ancient forts with a group of jazz musicians. Her most vivid memory is of how hot it was that day.
Like the people Project Joseph now hopes to attract, Manieson was a teacher and counsellor when she moved to Ghana with her husband nine years ago. She now runs her own business and employs 22 local people.
"I didn't really feel anything," Manieson says from the Accra jazz club she opened four years ago. "I went and I saw it and I recognized it as history."
Although she says she was never really into the idea of "return to Africa," she feels a spiritual connection with the country that she now calls home.
"I feel something here that I didn't feel in America," she says. "I wouldn't trade the experience for anything. I feel like I'm really living life."
The project's name is taken from the Old Testament story of Joseph, an Israelite who was sold into Egyptian slavery by his jealous brothers.
"Joseph was sold by his own brethren ... but eventually he prospered in the land of his own affliction," explains tourism official Hagan.
"He became prime minister in the pharaoh's government. He became very powerful and he went back and helped his own brethren who had cast him away.
"So, we're saying no matter what happened, the people should feel comfortable to come back to Africa and even help Africa to develop because they are better off than us."
"Ultimately, we also hope there are some who will come and invest — and even stay."
« Prev StoryNext Story » Send your articles to editor@modernghana.com for publication.
blackstar777 | 3/16/2007 2:14:00 AM
HEY I CAME THERE THIS PAST DECEMBER I HAD A GREAT TIME IN GHANA. I HAVE TO SAY THIS IF WEST AFRICAN COUNTRYS WANT TO FORGIVENESS FOR SLAVERY THEN WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO BECOME CITIZEN OF ANY WEST AFRICAN COUNTRY WE CHOSE. BUT WE HAVE TO GOOD CITIZEN IN THE US OR CARIBBEANS MUST OF US WANT TO HELP BUT WE FELL UNWANTED BY THE US AND AFRICA SO YOU TELL HOW CAN AFRICA HELP IT'S LOST PEOPLE Reply Nattina | 9/27/2013 11:04:00 PM
It appears that the apology is shallow, they want our forgiveness for their part in the enslavement our our ancestorsand now that they feel that we are better off then they are they now want us to forgive them and come back to help them prosper? Really? Well this just slaps you in the face doesn't it! "I know that we thought that your ancestors were trash and not worth keeping so we sold them to the white man and now that the white man got greedy and turned on us, we need your help to get us back the beautiful land that it used to be before the white man trashed it so please forgive us, hey it turned out good for you, you are doing better than us, so please forgive us and help us get better too!' That is what this article says to me. Reply Nicole | 1/17/2014 9:32:00 AM
This is the same exact thing I was thinking. I am obliged by the apology, but then I think where is this really coming from though? Is it sincere or is it to pump money into their economy. Now, don't get me wrong I'm all for the betterment of Africa and I will visit, but don't use us God knows we had enough of that. I was feeling the article until the break down of what "Project Joseph" really is. Please don't try and capitalize off of our (not speaking for the diaspora) sorrow and many other emotions that go into being kidnapped, raped, sold, separated from families, then hung, whipped, burned etc. in America. Yes, some of us (black Americans) are doing better than Ghanians, but don't think for a second it didn't come with a price. Reply mickeymouse | 1/20/2014 6:25:00 PM
wow sooooo I see the truth for what it really is,,,BLACKS started slavery,interesting....hmmmmm so good I am tired of all the lies and BS about whitey owing blacks for slavery F UUUUU all....The only nation on the face of this earth to fight a war over slavery and to end it and her only people ,whites,murdering each other over blacks is THE UNITED STATES...white families killing white families for nothing...we do not need any of your BS and do not need blacks in this country,,,WHITEY DID ALL THE WORK...and invented everything around you....you people disgust me and blacks in America today are still animals ,still live in the stone age...you blacks owe me and all the whites that sacrificed for nothing setting your sorry asses free..... Reply Gina | 3/24/2014 2:51:00 PM
Your ignorance is freaking AMAZING! Yes, Africans sold other Africans, but WHO did they sell them to?.....WHITES;-/ It was the Whites that RAPED, LYNCHED, and BEAT slaves. The freaking Civil War was NOT about ending slavery, it was about economics. Southern whites were able to amass large fortunes because ALL of the "employees" worked for FREE! Btw, from reading your post it's clear that you are the TRUE ANIMAL!!! Reply World is Ours | 7/17/2014 9:56:00 PM
The percentage that was sold to Whites by Africans is UNDER 10%. The other 90 belongs to your thieving, murdering grandfather. Reply a good man | 1/19/2015 10:07:00 PM
Ignorance is a racist man's bliss Reply Barack | 12/3/2015 3:32:00 AM
You must be retarded there was even slaves in the Bible but not the kind you people came up with Reply Coringa | 3/4/2014 1:56:00 AM
I've always felt a connection to afrika and i want to go and live there.i don't think were better off in the US because i am a afrikan american male and i get harassed frequently by the police never arrested but just harassed this place is not for afrikans it is a backwards country where white peolpe get away with murdering afrikan people and never do a day in jail.It's not fair here and i wish white people got what they dished out i wanna go home Reply JustReal | 3/8/2014 4:07:00 PM
O.K- fed up to my back teeth of those forever postulating that we Africans had a major part to play in the slave trade as we sold our own people into slavery....
Hmmm... Anyone who has done their homework on melanin may grasp this easier than those who believe it to be solely or primarily a skin pigmentation factor but that significance is for another chapter... To topic then... maybe because at that time the definition of slave as understood within the Africans own personal frame of reference was only akin to a labour indenture commonly imposed upon captives /losers in battles & the reprehensible , wholesale barbarism that those without melanin then superimposed upon the term to facilitate their murderous intent & mass business opportunity because they are inherently low in empathy was not a methodology or mindset that was conceivable to the African mindset at that time… For real though... ( mis-informed ) folks always putting forth ,this 'selling of us into slavery -by us' as though the African sellers were fully complicit... Nah mate - 'slavery' as was 'affected upon us' by the European who initially bought, then stole us. had NO correlation with what that term signified prior, what so ever! EVERY arbitrator as regards the necessity of a CONTRACT ( of sale) will tell you there is NO SALE if there is ' no meeting of the minds' - & the Caucasian’s mindset has never been similar with any indigenous people of this world to have ever affected a TRUE meeting of the minds...African, Aboriginal or Carib Indian (aka American Indians) the Caucasian’s spoken/ written word never revealed the intent of his mindset until it was often too late...when they more often than not negated / changed agreements... Ergo.. even the 'selling' aspect of this assertion is challengeable in my mind.. but then the insidiousness of language as a favoured tool of oppression has always been clearly understood by our oppressors -hence why it is so important to understand how definitions out of context of even a singular word is all that is necessary to perpetuate a myth & influence another’s perceptions... Reply melvin | 12/12/2014 4:35:00 AM
Yes this apology does scream throw me a life line. Andd im all for it, we have to start somewhere. the people who are there now want to come together and make some progresss as a whole. they are offering a piece of the country. can anyone imagine how beautiful that would be. to wake up everyday and not feel the hate that floods these streets of america just because the color of the skin. Reply Michael | 2/26/2015 6:42:00 PM
First of all we weren't their people from the beginning. We were settling on that land,because about a thousand years earlier WE fled out of Israel fleeing the romans. The people that were in west AFRICA were remnants of the twelve tribes of Israel. WE ARE NOT AFRICANS,AND NEVER WERE. That's why they also us out because they knew we weren't the same people. They can keep their apology. Reply Michael | 2/26/2015 6:55:00 PM
That's why they sold us out. The fake jews funded the ship's the arabs built the ship's,and the africans sold out. ISRAELITES wake up. No excuses for ignorance anymore,all the resources you need are at your fingertips to find these things out. DEUTERONOMY 28:68. PSALMS 84:1-6 Reply Michael | 2/26/2015 9:43:00 PM
Sorry PSALMS 83:1-6 Reply Michael | 2/27/2015 5:43:00 AM
I would like to be in our true homeland! ISRAEL!!! Reply ardmus | 3/30/2015 6:10:00 AM
Wonderful it's time to start healing but keep one open until you get someone to cover your back Reply Add Your Comment
Post Comment
Other Stories
Akyem Nkronso Inaugurates Road Project To Start The Construction Of Akyem Nkronso Township Dilapidated Roads 8 March 2016 09:59 CET
Kperisi Fires Pelpuo For Criticizing Bawumia Over Desk Promise 8 March 2016 09:41 CET
We Goofed! Isd Accepts Blame For Errors 8 March 2016 09:41 CET
Nana Opposes Business Crippling Policies 8 March 2016 09:41 CET
Gnpc Blows Gh¢5m On Rent 8 March 2016 09:41 CET
Little To Celebrate 8 March 2016 09:41 CET
A Leader Expects An Attack On His Home Base 8 March 2016 09:41 CET
Odike Secretary Joins Ayariga 8 March 2016 09:41 CET
Serial Fraudsters Nabbed 8 March 2016 09:41 CET
Korle Bu Eye Department To Close Down For Construction Works 8 March 2016 09:36 CET Load More Stories.... by Taboola Sponsored Links From The World Your pregnancy: 2nd trimester Bundoo See Brooke Shields & Andre Agassi and 19 More Celebrity Couples You Forgot Were Once Married CloserWeekly 21 Weird and Wonderful Animal Hybrids Flipopular Top 20 Richest Doctors In The World Your Daily Dish
posted
The NOI is very accurate on all points. Minister Farrakhan has explained that people from a variate background were envolved in the Trans Atlantic Slave Trade. Including the Africans. Which makes sense. Also Jews and Arabs are called out.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mindovermatter: what about the role that black europeans played in the slave trade?
Since the lying gatekeepers of history, by virtue of their conquest and murder of the Black gatekeepers, (the Albinos), never acknowledge Black anybody except sub-Saharan Africans, it is impossible to accurately determine the role played by Black Europeans.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Ten Best Lies of Black History BY THE NATRION OF ISLAM RESEARCH GROUP JAN 29, 2013 - 12:25:42 PM
In this special month devoted to our history, The Final Call explores some of the most outrageous and false stories, accounts, and sentimental tales commonly told.
1. Whites were the first people on earth. 2. Blacks in slavery were only cotton pickers and maids. 3. Lincoln freed the slaves. 4. Blacks ate each other in Africa. 5. Blacks were cursed black by God. 6. The United States government has helped Blacks succeed. 7. Jews built the pyramids. 8. Blacks sold other Blacks into slavery. 9. There was no slavery in the North. 10. Columbus discovered America.
Lie #8 - Blacks sold other Blacks into slavery.
Is this a real thing, or is lioness just being lioness?
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
THE NATRION OF ISLAM RESEARCH GROUP is hiztorictally inaccurate on pt # 8.
As expected they blame it on Jews without a peep about Arabs Muslims.
I reissue the challenge to tell about lançado operations in the Gulf of Guinea to the Angola Plateau.
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: The NOI is very accurate on all points. Minister Farrakhan has explained that people from a variate background were envolved in the Trans Atlantic Slave Trade. Including the Africans. Which makes sense. Also Jews and Arabs are called out.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
by Richard Lobban
The role of Jews in the slave trade is confirmed in Cape Verde, but it is essential to realize that they were only brokers within a system fully endorsed by the Portuguese kings who made the greatest fortunes of all. Moreover for those who engaged in finger-pointing in their analysis of the slave trade we must not forget that the was also active African participation and coordination as they sought to control this economy in Africa's interior. The celebrated ancient African empires of Ghana, Mali and Songhai were all built upon the slave export business as much as the plantation south in the USA is intimately linked to slave imports and as much as Samuel Slater's famous industrial textile mill wove cheap cotton which had been cultivated, picked, and transported by slaves. This business has few heroes. For those who single out Jews in this sorry traffice in humans, it must also be recalled that African Muslims were earlier into the trade across the Sahara, down the Nile and in the Indian ocean; it is in those regions of Muslim Africa that this cruel trade still contines to the very present.
As is said, when you point your finger of blame you may have three other fingers aimed in your own direction.
quote:Originally posted by Mindovermatter: what about the role that black europeans played in the slave trade?
Siegfried knows about that. I read his essays on Dutch forums, years ago.
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: THE NATRION OF ISLAM RESEARCH GROUP is hiztorictally inaccurate on pt # 8.
As expected they blame it on Jews without a peep about Arabs Muslims.
I reissue the challenge to tell about lançado operations in the Gulf of Guinea to the Angola Plateau.
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: The NOI is very accurate on all points. Minister Farrakhan has explained that people from a variate background were envolved in the Trans Atlantic Slave Trade. Including the Africans. Which makes sense. Also Jews and Arabs are called out.
This is not true, I have heard Farrakhan himself say that Arabs were involved in it as well, in fact he has repeated this a few times.
This is one of the reasons why I listen to his speeches. I like to hear the raw version, not the twisted and altered version.
Here is Wesley Muhammad at the Oxford Union, addressing this specific part of history.
We should not get emotional when addressing this history. Objectively is needed. The Trans Atlantic Slave Trade was lucrative, so all kinds of folks involved. But it is a fact that Jews had plantations in the "new world", all over the Caribbean.
All one has to do is look at the sites, and read about the history. It's not like it's a secret.
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Well then, don't get emotional.
Anecdote aside, like the time Minister invited me and some Arabs to the platform, the OP article pt # 8 totally ignores the transSaharan and Indian Ocean trade originating and run by Arabs.
Its authors write as if Senegambia Guinea lançados introduced the concept when in fact Arab slavers and African suppliers carried on a full 500 years earlier.
Pt # 8 is historically inaccurate made to distract Arab Muslim older and more expansive slave trade
(Excerpt from Dr Wesley Muhammad, "God's Black Prophets: Deconstructing the Myth of the White Muhammad of Arabia and Jesus of Jerusalem")
It has been demonstrated here that the Hellenization process which transformed the small, black skinned Jesus of history into the tall, ruddy white skinned Christ of the orthodox iconographic tradition is directly paralleled by an Aryanization process which transformed a black skinned Prophet of Arabia named Muhammad into the ruddy white skinned Muhammad of the orthodox Islamic iconographic tradition.
This Aryanization of Islam involved a massive Persian influence on Islamic tradition consequent to the misnomered Abbasid Revolution which toppled the Umayyads, Islam’s first historical dynasty. This process changed the demographic face of the Muslim world in general from black to mainly white....
The fact that the original Arabs and Arab followers of Muhammad were black-skinned is well-documented. So too is the fact that these original Muslims have been lost within an influx of non-Arab converts to Islam. ...
This demographic shift is part of what I have called the Aryanizatum of Islam: the transformation of Islam's culture, ideology, spirit, and face from Semitic (black Arab) to Indo- Aryan (largely Iranian but also Turkic and Byzantine). Dana Reynolds-Marniche notes:
“The black nationalistic views and horrifying racism of the original Arabs towards fair skinned peoples settling in Arabia is aptly illustrated by early writings and expressions from individuals of Mohammed's own tribe in Arabia.”
This Arab black nationalism was that of the Umayyad (661-750 CE), Islam's first political dynasty which was a black Arab dynasty." It was toppled in 750 by what has been called, erroneously, the "Abbasid revolution.' It is true that the Banu 'Abbas, after which the second dynasty took its name, was a black Arab tribal family like its rival the Banu Umayya. But as Saleh Said Agha (2003) has clearly demonstrated, the "revolution which toppled the Umayyads was neither Arab nor 'Abbasid," it was Iranian.
it was Iranian. J an Resto (2003: 24) says also:
“the Abbasid revolution in 750 was, to a large extent, the final revolt of the non-'arab Muslims against the 'arab and their taking power. This revolt was dominated by the Iranian 'agam (non-Arabs), and the outcome was the establishment of at least formal equality between the two groups.”
comment section:
JavedApril 2, 2014 at 3:51 PM While it's one thing to point out that the bitterness Persians had towards the Arabs who subjugated them after Muhammad fostered Aryan pride over their Semitic masters, it's another thing to say that this hatred extended beyond Semites to Africans and that such a racist ideology in Islam can be attributed squarely to early Persian Muslims.
Yes, the original Arabs, like all Semites, had a great deal of African heritage, but it is laughable to think that Arabs ever identified or identify today with Africa, as they have been and remain today among the most anti-African bigots. Arab slavery subjugated both white and black peoples but it's no secret that Arabs today still refer to one of those peoples as '3abeed,' meaning 'slaves.' In 2014 an entire group of people, regardless of their social status, are called 'slaves' in Arab society. And they're not referring to white people either!
If the Umayyads cared so much for their African heritage, why did they implement laws to elevate the status of Arabs and make all other peoples under their sovereignty 'mawali', 'those who have [Arab] guardians'? Why did they systematically deport all non-Arabs out of Medina and Mecca? There's a reason you won't find the graves of prominent African Companions of Muhammad (or any other non-Arab Companion for that matter) who outlived him inside Arabia today.
The Umayyads were really Arabs who saw themselves "Hellenized," which is why they chose Damascus to be their seat of power, instead of another city in Arabia, much less in Africa. And before the Arabs in the East were marrying into Persian families, Arabs who were Umayyad clients had already changed their complexion from generations of marrying into Greco-Roman and Jewish families of Syria and Byzantium. These were the elites of their time before the Persians had any political stake in Islam.
And when the Persians did gain a political stake in Islam with the rise of the Abbasids, intermarriage between Persian and African Muslims, though not exactly significant, became tenfold higher than intermarriage between Arab and African Muslims.
You might want to research the role of Africans in Shu'ubiyyah movements.
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
The points avobe are being addressed in Wesley Muhammad's monologue as well, at the Oxford Union. These things he addressed are historically accurate. Fact is that the "face" of the Arab has been changed of the millennium.
The poster Javed, lacks objectivity. Many wars and slavery amongst have been at Europe. I can use to same argument he is using, trying to discredit European presence and origin. In fact Javed unwilling and unconscious admitted to what Wesley had written about.
Here is what another poster wrote to Javed:
Anonymous April 7, 2014 at 11:12 AM
i like your comments but lacks substances. you did not gave us where your information is from
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Well then, don't get emotional.
Anecdote aside, like the time Minister invited me and some Arabs to the platform, the OP article pt # 8 totally ignores the transSaharan and Indian Ocean trade originating and run by Arabs.
Its authors write as if Senegambia Guinea lançados introduced the concept when in fact Arab slavers and African suppliers carried on a full 500 years earlier.
Pt # 8 is historically inaccurate made to distract Arab Muslim older and more expansive slave trade
Did you look/ listen to Wesley Muhammad's monologue?
Source: Walter Rodney, A History of the Upper Guinea Coast, 1545-1800 (Oxford, 1970); Tingba Muhammad, “Did African Slave Traders Sell Us Out?” The Final Call, June 14, 2012; Tingba Muhammad, “Echoes of Mr. Yakub after Patmos,” The Final Call, June 28, 2012.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
The points avobe are being addressed in Wesley Muhammad's monologue as well, at the Oxford Union. These things he addressed are historically accurate. Fact is that the "face" of the Arab has been changed of the millennium.
What he says at the Oxford Union is different from what he said in 2011 piece I posted. Feel free to quote from the video
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Stop the bait and switch.
The OP says nothing about any Arab Muslim slave trade. It says there was no slavery until the lançados introduced it.
But since you insist please cut and ppaste where the topic OP says otherwise.
The OP article is historically inaccurate serving to cover Arab enslavement of Africans all across the continent except its southern western region.
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Well then, don't get emotional.
Anecdote aside, like the time Minister invited me and some Arabs to the platform, the OP article pt # 8 totally ignores the transSaharan and Indian Ocean trade originating and run by Arabs.
Its authors write as if Senegambia Guinea lançados introduced the concept when in fact Arab slavers and African suppliers carried on a full 500 years earlier.
Pt # 8 is historically inaccurate made to distract Arab Muslim older and more expansive slave trade
Did you look/ listen to Wesley Muhammad's monologue?
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
The only book listed is Rodney's. The remainder are newspaper articles.
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: Did anyone read any of these books?
Source: Walter Rodney, A History of the Upper Guinea Coast, 1545-1800 (Oxford, 1970); Tingba Muhammad, “Did African Slave Traders Sell Us Out?” The Final Call, June 14, 2012; Tingba Muhammad, “Echoes of Mr. Yakub after Patmos,” The Final Call, June 28, 2012.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: The only book listed is Rodney's. The remainder are newspaper articles.
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: Did anyone read any of these books?
Source: Walter Rodney, A History of the Upper Guinea Coast, 1545-1800 (Oxford, 1970); Tingba Muhammad, “Did African Slave Traders Sell Us Out?” The Final Call, June 14, 2012; Tingba Muhammad, “Echoes of Mr. Yakub after Patmos,” The Final Call, June 28, 2012.
(Excerpt from Dr Wesley Muhammad, "God's Black Prophets: Deconstructing the Myth of the White Muhammad of Arabia and Jesus of Jerusalem")
It has been demonstrated here that the Hellenization process which transformed the small, black skinned Jesus of history into the tall, ruddy white skinned Christ of the orthodox iconographic tradition is directly paralleled by an Aryanization process which transformed a black skinned Prophet of Arabia named Muhammad into the ruddy white skinned Muhammad of the orthodox Islamic iconographic tradition.
This Aryanization of Islam involved a massive Persian influence on Islamic tradition consequent to the misnomered Abbasid Revolution which toppled the Umayyads, Islam’s first historical dynasty. This process changed the demographic face of the Muslim world in general from black to mainly white....
The fact that the original Arabs and Arab followers of Muhammad were black-skinned is well-documented. So too is the fact that these original Muslims have been lost within an influx of non-Arab converts to Islam. ...
This demographic shift is part of what I have called the Aryanizatum of Islam: the transformation of Islam's culture, ideology, spirit, and face from Semitic (black Arab) to Indo- Aryan (largely Iranian but also Turkic and Byzantine). Dana Reynolds-Marniche notes:
“The black nationalistic views and horrifying racism of the original Arabs towards fair skinned peoples settling in Arabia is aptly illustrated by early writings and expressions from individuals of Mohammed's own tribe in Arabia.”
This Arab black nationalism was that of the Umayyad (661-750 CE), Islam's first political dynasty which was a black Arab dynasty." It was toppled in 750 by what has been called, erroneously, the "Abbasid revolution.' It is true that the Banu 'Abbas, after which the second dynasty took its name, was a black Arab tribal family like its rival the Banu Umayya. But as Saleh Said Agha (2003) has clearly demonstrated, the "revolution which toppled the Umayyads was neither Arab nor 'Abbasid," it was Iranian.
it was Iranian. J an Resto (2003: 24) says also:
“the Abbasid revolution in 750 was, to a large extent, the final revolt of the non-'arab Muslims against the 'arab and their taking power. This revolt was dominated by the Iranian 'agam (non-Arabs), and the outcome was the establishment of at least formal equality between the two groups.”
Tukuler what is your commentary on the above. His thesis hers is that Muhammad and Islam began as Black (and he means here not just dark skinned but "Black" in common American social definition) and then a short while later in the Abbasid period Black Islam was overthrown and became white by Persian influence. The Umayyad was a Syrians regime. Should we regard them as 'Blacks' in the mainstream American sense? And what was the ethnic demographics of the motehrland of the empire at the time, the Arabian penninsula? The first caliphate was the Rashidun, then comes the Umayyad and then the Abassid. It was the Ummayyad who overthrew the Rashidun and who themselves were later overthrown by the Abassid
So did the Arabian peninsula experience a population replacement as recent as beginning after 660 AD? So was the Arabian peninsula primarily of African phenotype in Muhammad's time ? Or was it mainly 'mixed' and also including 'intermediate' types?
Wesley Muhammad makes it like Arabia was Black before Iranians came in in the mid 8th century.
However if we go to a much earlier period we find the Ubaid civilization (ca. 6500 to 3800 BCE) had coastal extensions into Arabia. They were from Iraq
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Dana has written a good sum on ancient Arabic populations, tribes. You know very well what this is about. We have seen artifacts as well.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
BY TINGBA MUHAMMAD -GUEST COLUMNIST- | LAST UPDATED: JUN 14, 2012 - 12:18:04 PM
Historian Walter Rodney described these “AFRICAN” slave traders thus: “Many of the private traders were mulattoes, already linked to the Africans by blood, and there were those who had become so integrated into African life that they wore tribal tattoos. It was these who were the authentic lancados, literally ‘those who had thrown themselves’ among the Africans.”
The points avobe are being addressed in Wesley Muhammad's monologue as well, at the Oxford Union. These things he addressed are historically accurate. Fact is that the "face" of the Arab has been changed of the millennium.
What he says at the Oxford Union is different from what he said in 2011 piece I posted. Feel free to quote from the video
I am not going to quote the video. His lecture is 1 hour. At least 30 minutes is about Arab slave trade and the white washing of Arabs. He starts lecturing about slavery at 15:00, he called it the genesis of relationship between Islam and the West. At 20:00 he starts on the The Aryanization of Islam.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
The points avobe are being addressed in Wesley Muhammad's monologue as well, at the Oxford Union. These things he addressed are historically accurate. Fact is that the "face" of the Arab has been changed of the millennium.
What he says at the Oxford Union is different from what he said in 2011 piece I posted. Feel free to quote from the video
I am not going to quote the video. His lecture is 1 hour. At least 30 minutes is about Arab slave trade and the white washing of Arabs.
As I thought, you cannot quote a single sentence from the video. In the video he discusses the barbary slave trade period Not what I quoted from the centuries earlier periods he wrote about in 2011.
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
The points avobe are being addressed in Wesley Muhammad's monologue as well, at the Oxford Union. These things he addressed are historically accurate. Fact is that the "face" of the Arab has been changed of the millennium.
What he says at the Oxford Union is different from what he said in 2011 piece I posted. Feel free to quote from the video
I am not going to quote the video. His lecture is 1 hour. At least 30 minutes is about Arab slave trade and the white washing of Arabs.
As I thought, you cannot quote a single sentence from the video. In the video he discusses the barbary slave trade period Not what I quoted from the centuries earlier periods he wrote about in 2011.
It's not a single sentence, it's a long lecture. SMH
The Aryanization of Islam is being addressed at 20:00 min. The task is very simple, skip to the referred time, and listen to what he says. It's that simple. This way we can avoid misinterpretations as well. However, looking back at it now. I see the part on Aryanization has been shortened.
And now, he wasn't talking about barbary slave trade period necessarily. More so, the Mamluks and Saqalibas.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
The Aryanization of Islam is being addressed at 20:00 min. The task is very simple, skip to the referred time, and listen to what he says. It's that simple. This way we can avoid misinterpretations as well.
No he does not. You simply don't know what you are listening to. There he is talking about black Arabs enslaving whites for 500 years not the "Aryanization of Islam"
As I often tell you. Without quotes you have no argument
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
The Aryanization of Islam is being addressed at 20:00 min. The task is very simple, skip to the referred time, and listen to what he says. It's that simple. This way we can avoid misinterpretations as well.
No he does not. You simply don't know what you are listening to. There he is talking about black Arabs enslaving whites for 500 years not the "Aryanization of Islam"
No, he does not.(?) LOL He literally says "Aryanization of Islam" at 21:36 min. Then continues on for about a minute. Yet he doesn't. Typical lioness ignorance.lol
As I stated before, I see now that the lengt of that part has been shortened. It used to be more in depth. But the point is certainly and unequivocally being addressed. But he has more lectures where he addresses this Aryanization in Islam.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
"As I often tell you. Without quotes you have no argument" LOL
99% of the time you lie. What you tell is not relevant. With that true black/ negroid bullshit white supremacy you propagate. Or should I say Aryanization propaganda.
It is so bad, your nickname is "lying ass".
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
You are the liar, you said 20 not 21:36 but it doesn't even matter. He brings uo his term "aryanization" and doesn't explain any of the history of it He makes no sense in this lecture. At 16:10 he is talking about Muslim Pirates of the 16th and 17th century Blacks enslaving whites (adn this is only partially accurate) . So when he brings up the so called "Aryanization" it has no relation to that time period. It's contradictory.
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: You are the liar, you said 20 not 21:36 but it doesn't even matter. He brings uo his term "aryanization" and doesn't explain any of the history of it That is he makes no sense in this lecture. At 16:10 he is talking about Muslim Pirates of the 16th and 17th century Blacks enslaving whites. So when he brings up the so called "Aryanization" it has no relation to that time period. It's contradictory
As I said, the lecture of that part was shortened. You can hear the cutoff in the video. SMH.
He did address it, thou now we can't hear the indepth part. That's all. But as I stated before. He has other lectures where he dedicates long parts to the Aryanization of Islam. Instead of listening to "ghetto scholars as you at times post. I rather listenin to what has to say.
The lecture makes sense. But it was shorted to bring up relevant parts.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
"He makes no sense in this lecture. At 16:10 he is talking about Muslim Pirates of the 16th and 17th century Blacks enslaving whites."
How does it make no sense. Especially since Europeans were enslaved long before the 16th and 17th century, known as Saqalibas and Mumluks. This is the crux, we deal with. White supremacy only wants to deal with black sold blacks into slavery. And always were slates. Not with the whites sold whites slavery, or taken as slaves. A primal example of this is genetic "studies".
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: [qb] You are the liar, you said 20 not 21:36 but it doesn't even matter. He brings uo his term "aryanization" and doesn't explain any of the history of it That is he makes no sense in this lecture. At 16:10 he is talking about Muslim Pirates of the 16th and 17th century Blacks enslaving whites. So when he brings up the so called "Aryanization" it has no relation to that time period. It's contradictory
As I said, the lecture of that part was shortened. You can hear the cutoff in the video. SMH.
He did address it, thou now we can't hear the indepth part. That's all. But as I stated before. He has other lectures where he dedicates long parts to the Aryanization of Islam.
Why are you wasting my time? No you've got it right. He doesn't elaborate it's cut off. That's why I posted the section of his blog where he details it. The problem is it contradicts what he is saying at the Oxford Union. He idea about "Aryanization of Islam " is centuries earlier than his portrayal of the barbary pirates as the Black "old Arabs". The damn thing was mainly an Ottoman operation! And the tactic is make the enslavement of Blacks disappear
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: [qb] You are the liar, you said 20 not 21:36 but it doesn't even matter. He brings uo his term "aryanization" and doesn't explain any of the history of it That is he makes no sense in this lecture. At 16:10 he is talking about Muslim Pirates of the 16th and 17th century Blacks enslaving whites. So when he brings up the so called "Aryanization" it has no relation to that time period. It's contradictory
As I said, the lecture of that part was shortened. You can hear the cutoff in the video. SMH.
He did address it, thou now we can't hear the indepth part. That's all. But as I stated before. He has other lectures where he dedicates long parts to the Aryanization of Islam.
Why are you wasting my time? No you've got it right. He doesn't elaborate it's cut off. That's why I posted the section of his blog where he details it. The problem is it contradicts what he is saying at the Oxford Union. He idea about "Aryanization of Islam " is centuries earlier than his portrayal of the barbary pirates as the Black "old Arabs". The damn thing was mainly an Ottoman operation! And the tactic is make the enslavement of Blacks disappear
He did elaborate, I have seen the video before, a while back. He did not excuse that black enslavement. But it's a fact that Arabs weren't the people we consider stereotypical Arabs nowadays. The Ottomans, if I recall it correct began at the 11-12 century. Wesley explains in lectures that the Aryanization of Islam started centuries earlier, somewhere at the 9th century. I am not sure to quickly find this. He has a lot out there. But when I do, I will post it.
From what I recall Welsey explains that the enslavement of whites, brought in a processes of "whitening" in Arabs. This was a stage for Aryanization of Islam.
Btw, speaking of Ottomans (Turks). Turkish folks call blacks (African descent people) Arab. Turkish people do so, because there is probably a reason for that, since Turkish folks invaded and conquered Arabia. lol
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
(Excerpt from Dr Wesley Muhammad, "God's Black Prophets: Deconstructing the Myth of the White Muhammad of Arabia and Jesus of Jerusalem")
It has been demonstrated here that the Hellenization process which transformed the small, black skinned Jesus of history into the tall, ruddy white skinned Christ of the orthodox iconographic tradition is directly paralleled by an Aryanization process which transformed a black skinned Prophet of Arabia named Muhammad into the ruddy white skinned Muhammad of the orthodox Islamic iconographic tradition.
This Aryanization of Islam involved a massive Persian influence on Islamic tradition consequent to the misnomered Abbasid Revolution which toppled the Umayyads, Islam’s first historical dynasty. This process changed the demographic face of the Muslim world in general from black to mainly white....
The fact that the original Arabs and Arab followers of Muhammad were black-skinned is well-documented. So too is the fact that these original Muslims have been lost within an influx of non-Arab converts to Islam. ...
This demographic shift is part of what I have called the Aryanizatum of Islam: the transformation of Islam's culture, ideology, spirit, and face from Semitic (black Arab) to Indo- Aryan (largely Iranian but also Turkic and Byzantine). Dana Reynolds-Marniche notes:
“The black nationalistic views and horrifying racism of the original Arabs towards fair skinned peoples settling in Arabia is aptly illustrated by early writings and expressions from individuals of Mohammed's own tribe in Arabia.”
This Arab black nationalism was that of the Umayyad (661-750 CE), Islam's first political dynasty which was a black Arab dynasty." It was toppled in 750 by what has been called, erroneously, the "Abbasid revolution.' It is true that the Banu 'Abbas, after which the second dynasty took its name, was a black Arab tribal family like its rival the Banu Umayya. But as Saleh Said Agha (2003) has clearly demonstrated, the "revolution which toppled the Umayyads was neither Arab nor 'Abbasid," it was Iranian.
it was Iranian. J an Resto (2003: 24) says also:
“the Abbasid revolution in 750 was, to a large extent, the final revolt of the non-'arab Muslims against the 'arab and their taking power. This revolt was dominated by the Iranian 'agam (non-Arabs), and the outcome was the establishment of at least formal equality between the two groups.”
Tukuler what is your commentary on the above. His thesis hers is that Muhammad and Islam began as Black (and he means here not just dark skinned but "Black" in common American social definition) and then a short while later in the Abbasid period Black Islam was overthrown and became white by Persian influence. The Umayyad was a Syrians regime. Should we regard them as 'Blacks' in the mainstream American sense? And what was the ethnic demographics of the motehrland of the empire at the time, the Arabian penninsula? The first caliphate was the Rashidun, then comes the Umayyad and then the Abassid. It was the Ummayyad who overthrew the Rashidun and who themselves were later overthrown by the Abassid
So did the Arabian peninsula experience a population replacement as recent as beginning after 660 AD? So was the Arabian peninsula primarily of African phenotype in Muhammad's time ? Or was it mainly 'mixed' and also including 'intermediate' types?
Wesley Muhammad makes it like Arabia was Black before Iranians came in in the mid 8th century.
However if we go to a much earlier period we find the Ubaid civilization (ca. 6500 to 3800 BCE) had coastal extensions into Arabia. They were from Iraq
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
From what I recall Welsey explains that the enslavement of whites, brought in a processes of "whitening" in Arabs. This was a stage for Aryanization of Islam.
That's a bullshit concept
What does that have to do with the Abassids?
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: There's a reason Hebrew Kush includes Arabia.
Did you not read my letter to BR on Kushite Arabia?
No
"Kushite Arabs" is an term which doesn't make sense, drawing together to far off time periods. It was concocted by a Danish geographer Malthe Conrad Bruun in the 1820s.
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
From what I recall Welsey explains that the enslavement of whites, brought in a processes of "whitening" in Arabs. This was a stage for Aryanization of Islam.
That's a bullshit concept
What does that have to do with the Abassids?
He backed it up with peer reviewed documentation. LOL
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: There's a reason Hebrew Kush includes Arabia.
Did you not read my letter to BR on Kushite Arabia?
No
"Kushite Arabs" is an term which doesn't make sense, drawing together to far off time periods. It was concocted by a Danish geographer Malthe Conrad Bruun in the 1820s.
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: There's a reason Hebrew Kush includes Arabia.
Did you not read my letter to BR on Kushite Arabia?
No
"Kushite Arabs" is an term which doesn't make sense, drawing together to far off time periods. It was concocted by a Danish geographer Malthe Conrad Bruun in the 1820s.
So, why did he concocted it?
Historians don't use the term "Kushite Arabs" .
This is Malthe Conrad Bruun' s term:
quote: It would appear, therefore, that Abyssinia, first peopled by an indigenous and primitive race, has received, more especially in its northern and maritime parts, a colony of Arabs, and probably of the tribe of Cush, whose name is, in the prophetic books of Scripture, applied both to a part of Arabia and to Ethiopia P. This Arabian origin of a part of the Abyssinians explains the reason why several of the Byzantine authors have placed the country of the Abaseni in Arabia Felix. The intimate relations which Abyssinia has maintained with the nations of Asia confirm the opinion of their descent from the Kushite Arabs.
-- Universal geography, or A description of all the parts of the world By Malthe Conrad Bruun 1823
This is the context. It's off topic
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Horseshit
Hebrew literature was calling Arabians Kushite before your precious Euros had any idea of what writing is.
Are you the last one left has not read foundational Black historians and their sources ike * Dunjee Houston - Wonderful Ethiopians * John Baldwin - Prehistoric Nations * the Carlisle s - Historical Sketches * Rufus Perry - The Cushite * John G Jackson - Intro to African Civilization
It is from these and others I was able to pen Bible Review on some forgotten aspects of biblical KUSH which I once again repost. And even Sanskrit literature informs Arabia as Kusha Dwipa.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
[quote="alTakruri"][size=9]Something I wrote back in 1998 in response to an article on Kush in Bible Review. However, when they printed the letter they edited out everything I wrote about the Kushite Arabs and Jeremiah's logic concerning leopards, Kushites and sin. Actually their editing wasn't a bad job but it did leave intact the modern anthropological limited view about which people are black in the eyes of the ancients.[/size]
==============================================
Your copyless August cover speaks volumes. The contents page promises that J. Daniel Hays is going to show that yes, there is something out of Africa and it effected the Middle East as well as Greece! I wonder what challenges the readers will make to this article.
I found this foray into one African peoples contributions to the ancient Bible world refreshing and timely. I really enjoyed the article. The switching of notes 28 and 32 threw me off for a moment. So did the Cushite vs Arab dichotomy in note 11. I don't think the term Cush was only a specific for the Cushite nation proper, but applied to all very dark skinned nations or individuals as well. Only the context will tell which is meant.
For instance,Herodotus let's us know that Cushites were in Asia and Africa when he mentions eastern and western Cushites differentiated by hair texture. And Josephus mentions the Western Cushites and seems to class the Sabaeans with them.(Antiquities I.vi.2)
Zerah was most likely a Western Cushite, for the reasons given in the article. But why can't an Arab be Cushite? GENESIS places a Sheba and Dedan in both Shem (GEN 25:2) and Ham's (GEN 10:17) territorial lineage.
code:
(Ham -> Cush -> Ra`amah -> Sheba and Dedan)
(Shem - -> `Eber -> Joktan -> Sheba)
(Abraham -> Jokshan -> Sheba and Dedan) (Abraham -> Midian)
Cushites and Arabians are coupled in Psa 72:10, II Chr 21:16 and especially Isa 43:3. In Arabic the title, [color=darkblue]Zirrih[/color] (magnificent) has the same triliteral root as Zerah. Arabic, Egyptian and Hebrew are all "Afro-Asian" languages.
The incident involving Moses' wife also shows an Arabian Cush. In Exodus Moses only has one wife, Zipporah the Midianite. Miriam calls her a Cushite. The extra-Biblical Ethiopian wife does not travel with Israel in Sinai. Extra-biblical sources do not present her as ever leaving Ethiopia. So Miriam's Cushite is evidently also a Midianite and so Hab 3:7 grouping Cushan with Midian.
Anthropolgy is loathe to classify Africans, Arabs and Indians as one ethnic taxon based on color. The ancients did. It's similar to the moderns classifying Europeans, Arabs, Indians and even Ethiopians as Caucasians.
Was Elijah fed by crows or Arabs or a clan called the Crows of the Arabs? For the Hebrew speakers Arabs, evening, and crows come from the same root and the word play on dusky color is intended.
For me there's no trouble with [color=darkblue]saris[/color] translated as both official and eunuch. Were ancient Semites anything like the Muslim Ottomans? If so, the Kizlar Aghassis testify to the second highest office being in the hands of a "Cushite" eunuch. Why were officials also often eunuchs? There are no worries of lineal ambition leading to disloyal activities.
In Hebrew, to this day, [color=darkblue]Cushi[/color] means a "black"-skinned person. The Israelites evidently had Cushites in their ranks. In the Bible Israelites named Cushi are Yehudi ben Kushi (Jer 36:14), Zephaniah ben Kushi (Zep 1:1) and Kush ben-Yemini (Psa 7:1). The Talmud even refers to Saul in Cushite terms.
Rabbinic midrash makes this all metaphorical though. The reasoning is that Cushi means outstanding. The Greeks thought of the Ethiopians as outstanding too. To them, the people with longest lifespan, the tallest height, the handsomest faces and the most pious actions were Ethiopians.
In light of the above Jer 13:23 can bear a new interpretation. Is there anything intrinsically wicked about Cushites or leopards? Cushites were salesmans of live leopards and leopard skins all over the ancient world. Who'd buy a spotless leopard skin? The spots are its beauty. The Cushites skin is his beauty.
The prophet siezes on this common market connection to sound home his point. "Would the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard its spots? (No!) Then may you also do GOOD that are accustomed to do evil." Answering the question yes destroys the logical conlusion. Be steadfast in doing good and don't exchange it for evil. Be unchanging in doing good instead of flopping with the worthlessness of evil.
J. Daniel Hays, thanks for something delightfully different in Bible Review.
[/quote]
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
From what I recall Welsey explains that the enslavement of whites, brought in a processes of "whitening" in Arabs. This was a stage for Aryanization of Islam.
That's a bullshit concept
What does that have to do with the Abassids?
He backed it up with peer reviewed documentation. LOL
What you don't understand is that the sequence of what he said in that lecture doesn't make sense and does not correspond what he said himself earlier.
In his 2011 lecture is says Islam up to the point of Umayyads was black, black like African Americans look, then non-black Iranians came in and replaced them beginning in the 8th century. But then in the piece you put up he also talks about Turks. However prior to the Abassids this Islamic empire of the Umayyad was run by Syrians and the overthrew, in a war, the first caliphate before them, the one that began right after MUhammad's death. Early Islam is a series of overthrows
You need to study the basic history to see if what he says makes sense. Not just blinded accept everything because he has swag
No we come up to the Oxford lecture. He makes a series of points that don't add up
First he's talking about the barbary pirates enslaving white people. It's a diversion to take your attention away from the fact that Islam was also enslaving black women and castrating black men. But anyway he fails to mention Islam was run by the Ottoman Turks at the time. Recall he had said in his essay he said Islam was whitenized in the 8th century far prior to the Ottoman Turks and far prior to the barbary pirates. So Ish Gebor you are wrong about what he says Then he asks the white in audience to imagine they are slaves of Black muslims and he refers to this barbary period 17th and 18th century and he says the "old Black Arabs" So if Islam was whitenized way back in the 8th what is he talking about? If the topic is the barbary pirates of North Africa, that is mainly under the command of the Ottomans and also the Moroccans. Black Muslims under their command enslaving Europeans would have been berbers not "the old black Arabs" Again he had said in the essay I posted that the Aryanization occurred in the 8th century, ten centuries earlier !!!
And then he says
" the Black Muslim male who is your slave master.... that's that old Arab of Arabia.... that is the genesis of the relationship between Islam and the West.... you think Muslims enslaved Africans and they did but for 500 years the gross majority of the slaves in Islam were Europeans.... the relationship between Islam and the West today, the conflict between ISIS and America the conflict between Israel and Iran these are evidences of the clash between civilizations, of white supremacy... the problem of Islam today is white supremacy"
His whole line of thought doesn't make sense. He talks about Black Arabs enslaving whites for 500 years and then talks about white supremacy. That would be black supremacy.
He does not explain why in his opinion the conflict between Islam and the West today is rooted in the enslavement of white Europeans in the 16 and 17th century. He mentions a 500 year period yet referred to only two centuries.
And his thesis is wrong the conflict in Islam today is largely between Muslims and other Muslims and the conflict between Islam and the West is not rooted in the enslavement of whites in earlier times. That is a false racialization of a political dynamic. The conflict today is not due to slavery. At the time Europeans only partially abolished slavery of their own people. The conflict with Islam today is about territorial control and oil it is not white payback for being slaves in earlier times. The most powerful American politicians probably know next to nothing about European slaves in Islam. To him all political history is about race. It's false
He talks about white supremacy in this lecture being a problem in Islam but refers to a period when according to him blacks were enslaving whites. That makes no sense, that is black supremacy
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: [QB] Ten Best Lies of Black History BY THE NATION OF ISLAM RESEARCH GROUP JAN 29, 2013 - 12:25:42 PM
In this special month devoted to our history, The Final Call explores some of the most outrageous and false stories, accounts, and sentimental tales commonly told.
1. Whites were the first people on earth. 2. Blacks in slavery were only cotton pickers and maids. 3. Lincoln freed the slaves. 4. Blacks ate each other in Africa. 5. Blacks were cursed black by God. 6. The United States government has helped Blacks succeed. 7. Jews built the pyramids. 8. Blacks sold other Blacks into slavery. 9. There was no slavery in the North. 10. Columbus discovered America.
Lie #8 - Blacks sold other Blacks into slavery.
One of the most unseemly manifestations of Black self-hatred is the often violently held belief that 500 years ago Africans sold other Africans into centuries of slavery. It is erroneously believed that after thousands of years of African life, Blacks all of a sudden collapsed into internecine strife and started killing each other, selling their fellow kinsmen to foreigners for profit.
The fact is that Portuguese “explorers” mastered a pattern of European conquest that is 6,000 years old. They deliberately created mixed-race subgroups with the intention of using them to capture and enslave the native African populations. Arriving on the Cape Verde islands in the late 1400s, Jewish slave merchants kidnapped and raped African women, and the mixed-race offspring, called lançados, were raised on the islands as European Jews, practicing Judaism and respecting Jewish authority. These lançados were sent into the African mainland to set up an international “trading post” to at first market the fine fabrics being produced by the Africans. But soon they turned on their hosts and began trading in Black human beings. The lançados were strictly trained in the Jewish family business of slave-dealing. It was these half-breed, mixed-race (or mulatto) “half-ricans” who infiltrated the Black African communities, seeking to satisfy the European lust for Black labor.
Historian Walter Rodney described these “AFRICAN” slave traders thus: “Many of the private traders were mulattoes, already linked to the Africans by blood, and there were those who had become so integrated into African life that they wore tribal tattoos. It was these who were the authentic lançados, literally ‘those who had thrown themselves’ among the Africans.”
Source: Walter Rodney, A History of the Upper Guinea Coast, 1545-1800 (Oxford, 1970); Tingba Muhammad, “Did African Slave Traders Sell Us Out?” The Final Call, June 14, 2012; Tingba Muhammad, “Echoes of Mr. Yakub after Patmos,” The Final Call, June 28, 2012.
^^this is the topic. I'm not going off on diversions about Axum or the original Hebrews. Make a new thread for that. This thread is NOI statements about 15th-19th century AD
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: The NOI is very accurate on all points. Minister Farrakhan has explained that people from a variate background were envolved in the Trans Atlantic Slave Trade. Including the Africans. Which makes sense. Also Jews and Arabs are called out.
The above is a list that appeared in the Final Call of the Nation of Islam. You say that minister Farrakhan said that Africans were involved in the slave trade but you have no quote. If you read the above statement it says that idea that Blacks sold other Blacks into slavery is a lie.
Here's the link front and center in the NOI's newspaper Jan, 2013:
The statement says that Africans did not have slaves until the Portuguese came in and used African/Jewish mulattos to start it.
That is the statement they are making.
And we are not talking about the East African Arab slave trade. They are talking about West Africa where most of the people were not Muslim and they are saying slavery did not exist in those cultures until the Portuguese Jews came in. They are saying that the African involvement began with these mulattos, people who were part African
So talking about the slaves of the Islamic empire is off topic. I shouldn't even have mentioned it
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: There's a reason Hebrew Kush includes Arabia.
Did you not read my letter to BR on Kushite Arabia?
No
"Kushite Arabs" is an term which doesn't make sense, drawing together to far off time periods. It was concocted by a Danish geographer Malthe Conrad Bruun in the 1820s.
So, why did he concocted it?
Historians don't use the term "Kushite Arabs" .
This is Malthe Conrad Bruun' s term:
quote: It would appear, therefore, that Abyssinia, first peopled by an indigenous and primitive race, has received, more especially in its northern and maritime parts, a colony of Arabs, and probably of the tribe of Cush, whose name is, in the prophetic books of Scripture, applied both to a part of Arabia and to Ethiopia P. This Arabian origin of a part of the Abyssinians explains the reason why several of the Byzantine authors have placed the country of the Abaseni in Arabia Felix. The intimate relations which Abyssinia has maintained with the nations of Asia confirm the opinion of their descent from the Kushite Arabs.
-- Universal geography, or A description of all the parts of the world By Malthe Conrad Bruun 1823
This is the context. It's off topic
A Google book search showed several "historians" using the reference " Kushite Arabs".
And yes, I am very well fermilair with the theory proposed by Malthe Conrad Bruun 1823. It's a interpretation and tradition that had no discourse, they have always maintained this, now so in genetics. However, the first people to inhabit the Arabian Peninsula were people from East Africa.
From where did the author get that Abyssinia was, first peopled by an indigenous and primitive race?
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: [QB] Ten Best Lies of Black History BY THE NATION OF ISLAM RESEARCH GROUP JAN 29, 2013 - 12:25:42 PM
In this special month devoted to our history, The Final Call explores some of the most outrageous and false stories, accounts, and sentimental tales commonly told.
1. Whites were the first people on earth. 2. Blacks in slavery were only cotton pickers and maids. 3. Lincoln freed the slaves. 4. Blacks ate each other in Africa. 5. Blacks were cursed black by God. 6. The United States government has helped Blacks succeed. 7. Jews built the pyramids. 8. Blacks sold other Blacks into slavery. 9. There was no slavery in the North. 10. Columbus discovered America.
Lie #8 - Blacks sold other Blacks into slavery.
One of the most unseemly manifestations of Black self-hatred is the often violently held belief that 500 years ago Africans sold other Africans into centuries of slavery. It is erroneously believed that after thousands of years of African life, Blacks all of a sudden collapsed into internecine strife and started killing each other, selling their fellow kinsmen to foreigners for profit.
The fact is that Portuguese “explorers” mastered a pattern of European conquest that is 6,000 years old. They deliberately created mixed-race subgroups with the intention of using them to capture and enslave the native African populations. Arriving on the Cape Verde islands in the late 1400s, Jewish slave merchants kidnapped and raped African women, and the mixed-race offspring, called lançados, were raised on the islands as European Jews, practicing Judaism and respecting Jewish authority. These lançados were sent into the African mainland to set up an international “trading post” to at first market the fine fabrics being produced by the Africans. But soon they turned on their hosts and began trading in Black human beings. The lançados were strictly trained in the Jewish family business of slave-dealing. It was these half-breed, mixed-race (or mulatto) “half-ricans” who infiltrated the Black African communities, seeking to satisfy the European lust for Black labor.
Historian Walter Rodney described these “AFRICAN” slave traders thus: “Many of the private traders were mulattoes, already linked to the Africans by blood, and there were those who had become so integrated into African life that they wore tribal tattoos. It was these who were the authentic lançados, literally ‘those who had thrown themselves’ among the Africans.”
Source: Walter Rodney, A History of the Upper Guinea Coast, 1545-1800 (Oxford, 1970); Tingba Muhammad, “Did African Slave Traders Sell Us Out?” The Final Call, June 14, 2012; Tingba Muhammad, “Echoes of Mr. Yakub after Patmos,” The Final Call, June 28, 2012.
^^this is the topic. I'm not going off on diversions about Axum or the original Hebrews. Make a new thread for that. This thread is NOI statements about 15th-19th century AD
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: The NOI is very accurate on all points. Minister Farrakhan has explained that people from a variate background were envolved in the Trans Atlantic Slave Trade. Including the Africans. Which makes sense. Also Jews and Arabs are called out.
The above is a list that appeared in the Final Call of the Nation of Islam. You say that minister Farrakhan said that Africans were involved in the slave trade but you have no quote. If you read the above statement it says that idea that Blacks sold other Blacks into slavery is a lie.
Here's the link front and center in the NOI's newspaper Jan, 2013:
The statement says that Africans did not have slaves until the Portuguese came in and used African/Jewish mulattos to start it.
That is the statement they are making.
And we are not talking about the East African Arab slave trade. They are talking about West Africa where most of the people were not Muslim and they are saying slavery did not exist in those cultures until the Portuguese Jews came in. They are saying that the African involvement began with these mulattos, people who were part African
So talking about the slaves of the Islamic empire is off topic. I shouldn't even have mentioned it
I have no quote? O_o. I have heard him say this in several lectures. It shows your incompetence. You try to talk about stuff you don't know. You always do this on a billion subjects. SMH
I also doubt that Arabs have little to do with the Trans Atlantic Slave Trade. The new world had Jewish settlements, not Arab settlements.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic