quote:In general I don't pay any attention to
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.
quote: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.
Originally posted by Mindovermatter:
what about the role that black europeans played in the slave trade?
quote:Is this a real thing, or is lioness just being lioness?
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.
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.
quote:Siegfried knows about that. I read his essays on Dutch forums, years ago.
Originally posted by Mindovermatter:
what about the role that black europeans played in the slave trade?
quote: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.
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.
quote:Did you look/ listen to Wesley Muhammad's monologue?
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
quote: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
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
http://youtu.be/IvcCRBk3Ki4
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.
quote:
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:Did you look/ listen to Wesley Muhammad's monologue?
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
http://youtu.be/IvcCRBk3Ki4
http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/Perspectives_1/article_9564.shtml
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.
quote:A lot about Lancandos is covered here:
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.
quote:Tukuler what is your commentary on the above. His thesis hers is that Muhammad and Islam began as Black
Originally posted by the lioness,:
[QB] Wesley Muhammad, Nation of Isam:
http://blackarabia.blogspot.com/2011/07/aryanization-of-islam.html
Tuesday, July 5, 2011
The Aryanization of Islam
(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.”
quote: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.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote: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
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
http://youtu.be/IvcCRBk3Ki4
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.
quote:As I thought, you cannot quote a single sentence from the video.
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote: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.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote: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
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
http://youtu.be/IvcCRBk3Ki4
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.
quote:It's not a single sentence, it's a long lecture. SMH
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:As I thought, you cannot quote a single sentence from the video.
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote: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.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote: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
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
http://youtu.be/IvcCRBk3Ki4
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.
In the video he discusses the barbary slave trade period
Not what I quoted from the centuries earlier periods he wrote about in 2011.
quote:No he does not. You simply don't know what you are listening to.
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
http://youtu.be/IvcCRBk3Ki4
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.
quote: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
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:No he does not. You simply don't know what you are listening to.
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
http://youtu.be/IvcCRBk3Ki4
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.
There he is talking about black Arabs enslaving whites for 500 years not the "Aryanization of Islam"
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
quote:As I said, the lecture of that part was shortened. You can hear the cutoff in the video. SMH.
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
quote: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.
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:As I said, the lecture of that part was shortened. You can hear the cutoff in the video. SMH.
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
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.
quote: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.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote: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.
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:As I said, the lecture of that part was shortened. You can hear the cutoff in the video. SMH.
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
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.
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
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Tukuler what is your commentary on the above. His thesis hers is that Muhammad and Islam began as Black
Originally posted by the lioness,:
[QB] Wesley Muhammad, Nation of Isam:
http://blackarabia.blogspot.com/2011/07/aryanization-of-islam.html
Tuesday, July 5, 2011
The Aryanization of Islam
(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.”
(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
quote:That's a bullshit concept
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
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.
quote:No
Originally posted by Tukuler:
There's a reason Hebrew Kush includes Arabia.
Did you not read my letter to BR on Kushite Arabia?
quote:He backed it up with peer reviewed documentation. LOL
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:That's a bullshit concept
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
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.
What does that have to do with the Abassids?
quote:So, why did he concocted it?
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:No
Originally posted by Tukuler:
There's a reason Hebrew Kush includes Arabia.
Did you not read my letter to BR on Kushite Arabia?
"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:Historians don't use the term "Kushite Arabs" .
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:So, why did he concocted it?
Originally posted by the lioness,:
[qb]quote:No
Originally posted by Tukuler:
There's a reason Hebrew Kush includes Arabia.
Did you not read my letter to BR on Kushite Arabia?
"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:This is the context. It's off topic
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
code:Cushites and Arabians are coupled in Psa 72:10, II Chr 21:16 and
(Ham -> Cush -> Ra`amah -> Sheba and Dedan)
(Shem - -> `Eber -> Joktan -> Sheba)
(Abraham -> Jokshan -> Sheba and Dedan)
(Abraham -> Midian)
quote:http://youtu.be/IvcCRBk3Ki4
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:He backed it up with peer reviewed documentation. LOL
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:That's a bullshit concept
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
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.
What does that have to do with the Abassids?
quote:^^this is the topic.
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.
quote:The above is a list that appeared in the Final Call of the Nation of Islam.
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.
quote:A Google book search showed several "historians" using the reference " Kushite Arabs".
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Historians don't use the term "Kushite Arabs" .
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:So, why did he concocted it?
Originally posted by the lioness,:
[qb]quote:No
Originally posted by Tukuler:
There's a reason Hebrew Kush includes Arabia.
Did you not read my letter to BR on Kushite Arabia?
"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.
This is Malthe Conrad Bruun' s term:
quote:This is the context. It's off topic
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
quote: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
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:^^this is the topic.
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.
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:The above is a list that appeared in the Final Call of the Nation of Islam.
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.
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:
http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/Perspectives_1/article_9564.shtml
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
quote:to try to use " I have heard him " when he has published work that can be quoted show your incompetence. "I have heard" has no credibility.
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote: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
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:^^this is the topic.
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.
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:The above is a list that appeared in the Final Call of the Nation of Islam.
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.
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:
http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/Perspectives_1/article_9564.shtml
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 also doubt that Arabs have little to do with the Trans Atlantic Slave Trade. The new world had Jewish settlements, not Arab settlements.
quote:What doesn't make sense here is that you don't understand that the lecture was cutoff/ shortened. But he had old lectures when Google Video still existed. Back then he already addressed these things in detail.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:http://youtu.be/IvcCRBk3Ki4
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:He backed it up with peer reviewed documentation. LOL
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:That's a bullshit concept
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
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.
What does that have to do with the Abassids?
No he didn't. It was a lecture.
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
quote:
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
Did African Slave Traders Sell Us Out?
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.”
http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/Perspectives_1/article_8941.shtml
I never head of Walter Rodney, so I ha d to look him up.
http://www.walterrodneyfoundation.org/biography/
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness,:
A lot about Lancandos is covered here:
https://books.google.com/books?id=Jq_BLoQLq00C&pg=PA68&dq=%22lan
The Forgotten Diaspora: Jewish Communities in West Africa and the Making of the Atlantic World
Peter Mark, José da Silva Horta - 2013 - [/QB]
quote:I read this years ago, yet Ish Gebor goes to religious lecturers for info
Originally posted by Tukuler:
[QB] ??? How Europe Underdeveloped Africa
was required reading. What happened?
quote:because I was not using it I was questioning it's usefulness
Originally posted by Tukuler:
But why blame Ish for
using religious stuff
when your OP article
is from the Nation?
quote:
the “African” slave traders who “sold us out,” upon closer examination were actually half-European by blood and totally European by mentality. Our African spirit of welcoming every people regardless of color made the African people vulnerable to this wicked “half-original” incursion, and we have been paying a high price for it ever since.
Tingba Muhammad, NOI
quote:You didn't debate him you fool. He has no time for your effortless claims. You don't know 1/10th of what he knows about the subject. Folks were attaching him on him as a person. This is why he quite posting here. He already made it clear that he don't deal with ghetto scholarship.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
You can try messaging Wesley he's an Egyptsearch member.
I've debated him before, he's scared to come out now
The video an official NOI edit so they are responsible for how it is coming across.
Carrying more weight is what is written down. Wesley has written work as well as the Final Call piece I quoted.
Wesley is a representative of a religion so what he says he has to fit into the doctrine of the religion.
He speaks of the Aryanization of Islam and he speaks of modern Arabs being "not quite white" . Yet the founder of his religion, according to their account had a white mother from the Caucus mountains.
quote:Yes, do I go to academic lectures for info. What wrong with that? LOL
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:I read this years ago, yet Ish Gebor goes to religious lecturers for info
Originally posted by Tukuler:
[QB] ??? How Europe Underdeveloped Africa
was required reading. What happened?
I remember he talks about mono crops replacing traditional agriculture and set up dependancy
quote:I have no idea why the article doesn't mention Arab involvement in slavery. Or rather why the author didn't mention it. But I do know that Farrakhan has mentioned it on several occasions, that's why I appose.
Originally posted by Tukuler:
Qwey qwai while I teach and
link Rodney's greatest work
the one Pan Africanists,
Black k Nationalists and
politicocultural conscious
blacks worldwide used
during the apartheid
struggle era.
But why blame Ish for
using religious stuff
when your OP article
is from the Nation?
Surely you know the
Final Call (as in the
last trumpet blast
before Apocalypse)
doesn't pretend to be
anything other than a
subjective cultus-centric
apologetic and polemic
mouthpiece for Minister's
faction of the splintered
Lost Found Nation of Islam.
And no, I'm not saying that's a bad thing,
only vet itas you would any 'tractate' that
comes direct from a religious organization. I'd
say the same about something published in the
Jewish Press weekly newspaper. Its easy to con
vince believers but no reason to be overly skeptic.
quote:The author explains indepth, Tingba Muhammad, NOI.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:because I was not using it I was questioning it's usefulness
Originally posted by Tukuler:
But why blame Ish for
using religious stuff
when your OP article
is from the Nation?
It's an official statement from the NOI suggesting that non-Muslim West Africans never practiced slavery until the Portuguese came.
I haven't even addressed that yet, because we are several posts in and the topic can't even be seen, it's invisible
quote:
the “African” slave traders who “sold us out,” upon closer examination were actually half-European by blood and totally European by mentality. Our African spirit of welcoming every people regardless of color made the African people vulnerable to this wicked “half-original” incursion, and we have been paying a high price for it ever since.
Tingba Muhammad, NOI
quote:stop sucking the man's ball sack, thanks
Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:You didn't debate him you fool. He has no time for your effortless claims. You don't know 1/10th of what he knows about the subject. Folks were attaching him on him as a person. This is why he quite posting here. He already made it clear that he don't deal with ghetto scholarship.
Originally posted by the lioness,:
You can try messaging Wesley he's an Egyptsearch member.
I've debated him before, he's scared to come out now
The video an official NOI edit so they are responsible for how it is coming across.
Carrying more weight is what is written down. Wesley has written work as well as the Final Call piece I quoted.
Wesley is a representative of a religion so what he says he has to fit into the doctrine of the religion.
He speaks of the Aryanization of Islam and he speaks of modern Arabs being "not quite white" . Yet the founder of his religion, according to their account had a white mother from the Caucus mountains.
"He speaks of the Aryanization of Islam and he speaks of modern Arabs being "not quite white" . Yet the founder of his religion, according to their account had a white mother from the Caucus mountains."
This is another dumb argument, which shows you've never debated him, more really seen/ heard his lectures.
He speaks of hats, different hats he wears as a scholar/ or privately, when he approaches subjects. You are confused to what this means.