“A Discussion about the Talking Points – Afrikan Ancestry and Heritage”
“A Discussion about the talking points for people who refuse to claim their Afrikan Ancestry and Heritage and those who don’t know that the term Black predates the Caucasian Bastardized version of that term.”
First of all, before we get started some parameters must be set. Here is what one must bring to any discussion such as the one we are about to have.
You should be able to provide the following to support and substantiate your assertions:
(1) Evidence. This includes quotes, video footage, articles, books, periodicals, scientifically researched studies, scientific data (numbers and percentages) i.e. Archaeology, Anthropology, Linguistics, Etymology, Radiocarbon dating, Terra Cotta, etc.
(2) Know the Correct definitions of the terms you are using, as well as the correct definitions of the terms being used by others.
(3) The correct timeline
(5) Statistical Data where necessary
(6) Have a working knowledge of the particular Geographical area being discussed; both in the current time, as well as in ancient time, if necessary.
(7) Do not commit, allow, nor accept deflections from the actual topic of discussion.
(8) There shouldn’t be any name-calling or hurling of insults. Name-calling and insults cannot be tolerated and only prove you have nothing of substance to offer the current discussion.
Be prepared to be challenged. If you cannot provide this type of evidence to support and substantiate your assertions, the only thing you are doing is presenting your belief. Belief is not good enough any longer. We need the facts, not emotional tirades. Facts will trump belief and faith every time. If you come to any discussion without the following above, you are completely unprepared to even be in such a discussion. So, be prepared. Do your homework first.
Finally, be honest enough to acknowledge when you are wrong. Be honest enough to admit you don’t know something if you don’t know it. It doesn’t make you any less of a person for doing so. In fact, it makes you more of an honest person for doing so. It shows honesty and integrity in you. It proves you are willing to continue to learn and to grow, as a human being. As I like to say, “Each of us must strive for perfection in ourselves, knowing full well we, as individuals, shall never attain it. However, it is in that striving that each of us become better human beings.” None of us is correct 100% all of the time or knows everything-none of us.
“Be not arrogant because of your knowledge. Take Counsel with the ignorant, as well as with the wise. For the limits of knowledge in any field have never been set, and no one has ever reached them. Wisdom is rarer than emeralds, and yet, it is found among the women at the grindstones.—”The Teachings of Ptah-Hotep”
So, let us discuss these ideas and influences and where these ideas and influences were derived. The first talking point claimed is that we couldn’t be Afrikan because all of the lands were connected; what is referred to as The Pangea. The problem with such a theory is their misuse of the correct timeline of the separation of the various continents. Generally, most scientists have concluded that the Pangea began to split apart about 250-300 million years ago. And that this process was completed some 60 Million years ago. There is no evidence that has been discovered so far, proving there were any human beings on this planet at this time. The earliest evidence of human existence discovered so far found on this planet is dated about 4.5 million years ago, in the Great Lakes region of Central-East Afrika, around the Olduvai Gorge. The earliest evidence of the existence of Homo Sapien Sapiens discovered so far on this planet has been found in the Great Lakes region of Central-East Afrika, as well as, in South Afrika, and in Morocco, with the earliest date of about 300,000 years ago. So far, there has been no evidence discovered anywhere else on this planet proving any Homo Sapiens being older or dated prior to the dates I’ve provided, earlier than those discovered in Afrika.
It is from these general areas of Afrika where Afrikans left Afrika, to people the rest of the planet. This migration out of Afrika and subsequent peopling of the rest of the planet only started occurring circa 50,000 years ago.
There are also those who claim that the first humans to come to the Western Hemisphere were Black people. However, there is no evidence discovered so far proving this assertion. Thru the Genome DNA sequencing of the evidence of the human remains discovered so far, dating back to circa 13,000 years ago, in Montana, and South in Mexico proves those people are the direct ancestors of what we refer to as Native Americans i.e. Cherokee, Seminoles, Blackfoot, Chickasaw, Choctaw, Comanche, Sioux, Apache, Navajo, etc. So far, the Genome DNA sequenced evidence discovered does not link these early remains to Black people at all.
The next talking point is the reference to the Olmec Civilization in Southeastern Mexico, located in La Venta, Vera Cruz, and Tabasco. Yes, that there is plenty of evidence proving that at least the leaders of the Olmecs were Blacks from Afrika. There is no doubt about this fact. And perhaps, the overall population themselves were Black. However, more research needs to be done to prove that the overall population was Black. But we can safely say that the leaders definitely were Blacks from Afrika. The colossal 8ft, 20 Ton Olmec stone heads and other artifacts discovered in these areas of Southeastern Mexico proves this fact. The Olmec Civilization has been dated to as early as circa 1500 B.C.E. See the research conducted in the book entitled, “African Presence In Early America”, by Dr. Ivan Van Sertima for evidence of this fact.
The next talking point is the claim that all Blacks in the Western hemisphere, as well as elsewhere throughout the world are Moors. So, who were/are the Moors? Well, the Moors in History were a group of several different ethnic groups in Northern and Northwestern Afrika, in areas now known as Libya, Chad, Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco and Mauritania, and who had been conquered and colonized by the Arabs, somewhere between 702 & 705 A.D., after several battles with Queen Dihya, who was the Queen of Numidia, which was a Confederation of several different Ethnic groups in Northwest Afrika. These groups and had come to be known as Moors throughout medieval history. Included among these different ethnic groups of Northern and Northwestern Afrika who became known as ‘Moors’. Included among and classified as Moors during this time period were ethnic groups who had been known as the Numidians were these different Ethnic groups: the Afra, Afer, the Tuareg, Ifaroukas, Imazighen, etc., as well as other Berber groups and others of that general geographical area.
Before the 7th century A.D., there were no such people who referred to themselves as ‘Moors’ or any people known as ‘Moors’. As early as the 3rd century B.C. these same ethnic groups had united and fought alongside Hamilcar Barca and his son, Hannibal Ar Barca (who in ancient texts was known as Hannibal ‘the Afer’) as Carthaginians (Khart Haddas) against the Roman empire. The term Afrika etymologically derives from the terms Afra and Afer. And the use of the term Afrika was in use long before Scipio the Younger defeated Hannibal. After these various groups were conquered and colonized by the Arabs in the 7th century A.D., those various groups united with the Arabs and then invaded Spain in 711 A.D. They successfully ruled Spain for 781 years. Finally, being expelled from Spain in 1492. Now, where does the term Moor derive? It etymologically derives from the Greek term Mauros. And yes, The Greeks did borrow the Phoenician alphabet in the development of their own written language. However, the Greeks are not using the spoken language of the Phoenicians. The Greeks are using their own Indo-European spoken language; a language that evolved around the region of the Black and Caspian Seas and the Caucasus Mountains. The Phoenician language is a Semitic language. It is not an Indo-European language. So, let us examine the etymological origin of the term Moor.
The Etymological origin of the term Moor
“North African, Berber,” late 14c., from Old French More, from Medieval Latin Morus, from Latin Maurus “inhabitant of Mauretania” (northwest Africa, a region now corresponding to northern Algeria and Morocco), from Greek Mauros, perhaps a native name, or else, cognate with Mauros “Black” (but this adjective only appears in late Greek and may as well be from the people’s name as the reverse). Being a dark people in relation to Europeans, their name in the Middle Ages was a synonym for “Negro;” later (16c.-17c.) used indiscriminately of Muslims (Persians, Arabs, etc.) but especially those in India.
Now, there are those who want to claim that the original Greeks were Black, as a way of deflecting away from the fact that ‘Mauros’ is etymologically a Greek term. Additionally, any such assertion of the original Greeks being Black is completely false. The first people to inhabit that geographical area, now known as Greece was indeed Black people. But they were known as the Grimaldi. They weren’t known as Greeks at all. And there are no known writings where the Grimaldi referred to themselves as Greeks either. By the time this area was known as Greece, and its people known as Greeks, it was primarily inhabited by Caucasians. The Caucasians who now inhabited that land mass were the first people to refer to that land mass as Greece and refer to themselves as Greeks. The Greeks, therefore, were and are Caucasians. The ancient people who call themselves Greek were not African or descended from Africans. Yes, the original people who populated the land mass we now call Greece were Afrikans and migrated up out of the Mother Continent to that area. However, they were not referred to as Greeks, nor did they refer to themselves as Greeks either.
The original Greeks (Indo/European) migrated out of the Andulus, Armenia, Iran, Turkey, and the Caucasus Mountains and surrounding areas of the Black and Caspian Seas and settled in the area now referred to as Greece, much later. Here is a link proving thru the use of DNA evidence that the Greeks aren’t Black people and never have been.
Here is an article about the first people to inhabit the land mass now known as Greece.
DNA evidence of the origins of the Greeks.
Herodotus was born in 484 B.C.E.
An eye-witness to what the ancient Kemetu (Egyptians) looked like.
If you read “The Book of Histories” (Book #Two) you’d know that Herodotus said, “The Egyptians did, however, say that they thought the original Colchians were men from Sesotris’ army. My own idea on the subject was based first on the fact that they have Black skins and woolly hair (not that that amounts to much, as other nations have the same), and secondly, and more especially, on the fact that the Colchians, The Egyptians, and the Ethiopians are the only races which from ancient times have practiced circumcision. The Phoenicians, and Syrians of Palestine, themselves who lived near the rivers Thermodon, and Parthenius, as well as their neighbors the Macronians, say they all learned it only a short time ago, from the Colchians. No other nations use circumcision, and all these are without a doubt are following the Egyptian lead…”
So, why would Herodotus describe the Egyptians (Kemetu) so differently than himself, in phenotype, hair, skin color, and Culture, etc., from himself, if he looked like them? The reason he did so was that as an eye-witness, he had eyes and could clearly see what they looked like. And he could clearly see the Kemetu didn’t look like him. Nor did the ancient Egyptians (Kemetu/Anu) look like the Arabs either; who are invaders of Kemet (Egypt) themselves, and who inhabit most of that Country and rule it today.
Here’s another quote from “The Book of Histories” (Book #Two):
“It was the Egyptians who first made it an offense against piety to have intercourse with women in the Temples, or to enter Temples after having intercourse, without having previously washed…”The Egyptians are meticulous in their observance of this point, as indeed they are in everything else which concerns religion”.
Again, the question that should be asked is this: why would he describe the Kemetic Culture as being so vastly different from that of Greece, if the Greeks were Kemetu (Egyptians) and were already practicing the exact same Culture and were the same people? The Kemetu and the Greeks are not the same people at all.
So, what was/is the primary Religion, Culture, and Language of the ‘Moors’? What was the spiritual system of those various ethnic groups before the Arabs invaded, conquered, and colonized them in the 7th century A.D.? These are important questions because a people generally are known by ‘land, history, and culture’. The ‘Moors’ primary language is Arabic. Their Religion is Islam. Their Culture is primarily a mixture of Arab, Afrikan, and Euro-Asian Culture. So, what is the correct definition of Culture?
A set of ideas, concepts, beliefs, behavior, language, and practices agreed on and adhered to by a large group of people, usually along racial and ethnic lines. It is collective in scope and practice. It is ideology, philosophy, spirituality, language, the arts, architecture, and other manifestations of human intellectual achievement regarded collectively, etc.
synonyms: the arts, the humanities, intellectual achievement, literature, music, painting, philosophy, the performing arts, etc. It usually manifests itself in all areas of people activity.
What should be particularly of note is this: The indigenous people of North and Northwest Afrika didn’t always refer to themselves as Moors. Others did. We know that after 711 A.D. (C.E.), once ‘the Moors’ invaded and conquered Spain that name seemed to stick. The Moors ruled Spain for 781 years, from 711 A.D – 1492 A.D. Initially, racially, the overwhelming majority of those who were referred to as ‘Moors’ were Black Afrikans. However, after miscegenation between these ‘Moors’, Arabs, Berbers, and Caucasians for 781 years they no longer looked like they did when they first conquered and colonized Spain. Not only did their racial makeup change but so too, did they mentality change, as well. They no longer saw themselves as Blacks and Afrikans. After being expelled from Spain in 1492 A.D. within 100 years, in 1591, these same ‘Moors’ invaded, sacked, and destroyed the last great empire of Afrika: the Songhay empire. The people of the Songhay empire had by the time converted to Islam and were essentially Muslims, just as the ‘Moors’ were. The difference was that the people of the Songhay empire were Black and Afrikan and knew and accepted that they were Black and Afrikan, while the ‘Moors’ by the time, no longer saw themselves as such. The ‘Moors’ invaded, sacked, and destroyed the Songhay Empire in 1591, and they carried off all of their greatest Afrikan scholars of the time back to Morocco, including Ahmed Baba, where they were all held as prisoners for several years.
The Songhay empire, whose empire was well known for their structure of Governance, the Benevolence of their Kings, their morality, hospitality, their scholarship in the various known Arts and Sciences of the time; including Mathematics, Medicine, Architecture, Engineering, Philosophy, etc. all being taught at the University Of Jene’, and at the University of Timbuktu. They maintained and held onto many of the age-old indigenous Afrikan-Centered principles, traditions, and practices, etc. All of this was destroyed by the Moors. Why would they do this? I’ll tell you why. The ‘Moors’ wanted to take control of the Gold and the Salt mines that were owned and controlled by the Songhay empire. That’s why. So my question is this: why would any Black person or Black people in general, want to claim to be a part of a Nation of people who invaded and destroyed one of our crown jewels of Afrikan Civilization?
Another talking point is the claim that “The Treaty of Peace and Friendship” in 1787, as well as “the letter George Washington sent to the Sultan of Morocco” in 1789, proves ‘The Moors’ are Sovereign in the United States of America. However, there is nothing contained within either document that proves such a claim at all. Neither the ‘Treaty of Peace and Friendship’, nor the letter George Washington sent to the Sultan of Morocco even mentions the term Sovereignty at all. ‘The Treaty of Peace and Friendship’ says absolutely nothing about the ‘Moors’ either individually or collectively, being able to operate independently outside of the laws of the United States of America, while within the boundaries of the United States of America. In fact, that ‘Treaty’ only mentions the term Moor 6 times. The ‘Moors’ are only mentioned twice in Article #6, once in Article #11, twice in Article #21, and finally, one last time, in the last additional Article, where it starts off with ‘Grace to the only God’. This ‘Treaty’ says absolutely nothing about Sovereignty at all. And there is nothing contained within that ‘Treaty’ or the ‘letter’ that says anything about anyone being Sovereign at all.
“The Treaty of Peace and Friendship”
“Letter of 1789 from George Washington to The Sultan of Morocco”
And for those who wish to introduce ‘The Moors Sundry Act of 1790’, as if that act grants the ‘Moors’ Sovereignty. That act never became law.
“The Free Moors, Francis, Daniel, Hammond and Samuel petitioned on behalf of themselves and their wives Fatima, Flora, Sarah and Clarinda. They explained how some years ago while fighting in defense of their country, they and their wives were captured and made prisoners of war by an African king. After this a certain Captain Clark had them delivered to him, promising they would be redeemed by the Moroccan ambassador residing in England, and returned to their country. Instead, he transported them to South Carolina, and sold them for slaves. Since then, “by the greatest industry,” they purchased freedom from their respective masters. They requested that as free born subjects of a Prince in alliance with the U.S., that they should not be considered subject to a state law (then in force) known as the negro law. If they be found guilty of any crime or misdemeanor, they would receive a fair trial by lawful jury. The matter was referred to a committee consisting of Justice John Faucheraud Grimké, General Charles Cotesworth Pinckney and Edward Rutledge.
Free Moors Petition: Committee report
Edward Rutledge reported from the committee on the petition on the same day and the House agreed to the report, which read as follows Vizt: “They have Considered the same and are of opinion that no Law of this State can in its Construction or Operation apply to them, and that persons who were Subjects of the Emperor of Morocco being Free in this State are not triable by the Law for the better Ordering and Governing of Negroes and other Slaves.” Because the report was not forwarded to the state Senate for concurrence, it did not have the force of law but served as an advisory opinion offering the sense of the House. The report was later published in the Charleston City Gazette and the Charleston State Gazette of South Carolina.” 
As we can see, that act was never passed into law. It was only an advisory opinion that was passed by the South Carolina Legislature. In order for any legislation to become law within the state of South Carolina, it would need to be presented to both Houses of the South Carolina Legislature, passed by both Houses of the South Carolina legislature, and signed into law by the Governor of South Carolina (The Chief Executive Officer of South Carolina). This never occurred. So, ‘The Moors Sundry Act of 1790’ never became law in South Carolina. In addition, in order for any legislation to become Federal law, it would have needed to be presented to both Houses of the U.S. Congress, and passed by both Houses of the U.S. Congress and signed into law by the President of the United States of America (The Chief Executive Officer of The United States of America), not only passed into law in the South Carolina. Such Legislation has never been presented to both Houses of the U.S. Congress, nor passed by the both Houses of the U.S. Congress, nor signed into Law by any U.S. President. ‘The Moors Sundry Act of 1790’ never became a law in any State within these United States of America and it never became Federal law either, despite anyone believing it has become law.
With your claiming identity with Morocco and its government you are giving tacit approval of a Government and its people (‘The Moors’), who destroyed the Songhay empire and in effect, was instrumental in weakening the Afrikan coastline for our eventual enslavement. In addition, this destructive act contributed to the eventual colonization of the entire Afrikan continent. By claiming you are a Moor, you are by extension, celebrating the enslavement of Black people and the subjugation of us, as a race of people by Caucasians, without even knowing it. You are also giving tacit approval of the annihilation of the indigenous people of this land and falsely claiming this land as your own, now known as America, as well. And what you are doing without realizing it is you are celebrating the system of white-Supremacy.
All Cultures and races on this planet acknowledge and accepts the scientific DNA genetic evidence that all people evolved from the first Homo Sapien Sapiens to ever walk the face of this Earth—the Afrikan. All people accept this scientific, historical fact except the ‘Moors’ and the so-called ‘Hebrew-Israelites’. The ‘Hebrew-Israelites’ claim of not being Afrikan is rooted in the same self-hatred that the ‘Moors’ have. However, their ideology is also incorrectly based on the Bible; a book that is not a History book and is severely flawed beyond measure. It contradicts itself in many places, has books mention within its pages but those very books mentioned are not contained anywhere within its pages. It has plagiarized many of its concepts and practices from much earlier indigenous Nile Valley Afrikan concepts and practices, etc.
For proof of this, see the article entitled, “Is The Bible The Word of God or The Work of Man”, by Olatunji Mwamba
Here are some scientific facts that those who claim to be ‘Native American’ or who claim they are not Afrikan need to research. There are certain Genetic characteristic makers that are only prevalent in certain races.
(1) ‘The Sutter and Henshaw factors’ are only found among Blacks, be they from the Diaspora, or from the Continent of Afrika.
(2) ‘The Diego factor’ is only found among the Yellow race of the Far East, and the so-called ‘American Indian’ and certain Nepalese people (probably of mixed blood).
(3) ‘The Kell factor’ is found only among the Neanderthal-Cro-Magnon-Troglodyte-Mutant-Leucoderms (whites).
So, just because ‘your Grandmother’ told you that you have ‘Native American’ (American Indians) Ancestry doesn’t prove that what she said is true. You claiming this idea without DNA evidence markers, or you claiming to be so-called ‘American Indians’, or that you are ‘indigenous’ to America, doesn’t prove it true either. You need to do some DNA and genetic research into yourselves before claiming such. Why do you assert that you are not Afrikan? You really need to analyze the reasons why you deny this idea that you are Afrikan, which is based far more on facts than the other way around. As to myself, I’m good and have accepted that I am an Afrikan. I’ve seen no DNA or other Genetic evidence to prove otherwise. Me? I’m good. I love what I see in the mirror. I am unapologetically Afrikan and proud of it.
See- the book entitled, “Civilization or Barbarism: An Authentic Anthropology”, The Introduction on pp 2-3, by Dr. Cheikh Anta Diop
This is an extremely informative book, full of scientific documentation. I know. I’ve read it 4 times.
“The Afrikan Origin of Civilization”, featuring Dr. Cheikh Anta Diop
In addition, the Moors even co-opt and plagiarize other people’s ideas, concepts, etc. claiming them as their own. A case in point is the plagiarizing much of the information contained in their “Circle 7 Koran”, from content contained in the book entitled, “The Aquarian Age Gospel of Jesus, The Christ of The Piscean Age”, by Levi H. Dowling. “The Aquarian Age Gospel of Jesus, The Christ of The Piscean Age”, by Levi H. Dowling was published in 1908, while “The Circle 7 Koran” by Noble Drew Ali was published in 1913. If you doubt this get both books and make a comparative analysis. You’ll see that I am correct. The Moors also like to sometimes take on ancient Kemetic (Egyptian) surnames while, at the same time, claiming not to be a part of the ancient indigenous Kemetic (Egyptian) Culture, and spirituality at all. Sometimes, they’ll even try to infuse the terms Moor/Mauros/Mauri into the ancient Kemetic (Egyptian) name, Ta-Merri (Land of the Beloved or the beloved Land), when they know etymologically and linguistically they cannot justify nor prove the terms Moor/Mauros/Mauri, etc. derive from Ta-Merri at all. The terms Moor/Mauri/Mauros are not written on any Temples, Tombs or Papyri anywhere in ancient Kemet. So, stop trying to create a ‘Strawman’s argument’ to claim a History and Culture that isn’t your own, simply to rationalize that false narrative and incorrect ideas of Afrikan History and Culture.
Another talking point is their claim of Sovereignty. What is Sovereignty? Is it collective or individual? And how can the claim of Sovereignty help us collectively? How does a person become Sovereign unto himself? Why do I need to file papers/notification within Caucasian ‘Courts of Law’ and ‘Courts of Admiralty’ to assert that I am Sovereign? How does such filing make one Sovereign? People that want to declare themselves Sovereign and Separate; be it from the United States of America or any other Nation, do so collectively, not individually. In addition, true Sovereignty can only come at the ‘end of the barrel of a gun’. You claim you are natural and indigenous to this land, but you must file a paper of notification in the ‘Courts of Law’ and ‘Courts of Admiralty’ with Caucasian foreign immigrants/invaders of the very land you claim you are Sovereign in, asking them to recognize your status as a free, indigenous, and Sovereign individual. How did the Caucasians declare themselves Sovereignty in this land? The answer is thru Warfare. And they did so collectively, not individually. So, I reiterate, true Sovereignty can only come at the ‘end of the barrel of a gun’.
Then there is the claim of Universal Law. We must first know what the term Universal actually means. Universal derives from the term Universe. And Universe derives from the term Uni, which means one. There is no one Universal law that Governs this planet. There are different laws in each Country. What you are describing is not Universal Law at all. What you are describing is International Law. And International Law comes directly out of the Euro-Centric paradigm. The Only Universal law that governs the Universe is Ma’at (“Truth, Justice, Righteousness, Balance Reciprocity, Harmony, and Order”). The concept of Ma’at evolved out of indigenous Nile Valley Afrikan Thought, Philosophy, Spirituality, Ideology, Culture, etc., and that thought, Philosophy, Spirituality, Ideology, Culture, etc. predates the Moorish Science acronym for Islam, I Self Am Law and Master by thousands upon thousands of years. In fact, that acronym isn’t what Islam actually means at all. The term Islam derives from the Arabic language. Islam derives from root of aslama “he resigned, he surrendered, he submitted,” causative conjunction of salima “he was safe,” and related to salam “peace.” Simply put, Islam means ‘Peaceful submission to the will of Allah’, and Allah does not mean ARM, LEG, LEG, HEAD. Allah simply means The God in Arabic. Allah is a compound word. The term Allah Broken down correctly, Al (The)+ Lah (God) Al+Lah=Allah (The God).
And your claim of not being Black and Afrikan is clearly based out of a Euro-Centric paradigm and Black’s Law Dictionary, which was only copy written in 1891, as well as the definitions from other English Dictionaries. What you’ve proven is you are ashamed of being classified as Black and Afrikan. What you should really be ashamed of is your own ignorance of the facts of History and our own indigenous terms, our ancient indigenous Afrikan Ancestors created out of our own indigenous Afrikan languages. And which we referred to ourselves before The Trans-Atlantic slave kidnappings occurred. We were referring to ourselves as Black and Afrikan, thousands of years ago before Black’s Law Dictionary or any other English Dictionaries were copywritten, let alone, even thought of. You refuse to acknowledge and accept being Black and Afrikan, but you readily accept calling yourselves ‘Moorish American’. Isn’t America named after Amerigo Vespucci? Instead of challenging the Caucasians’ disrespectful, heinous, insidious ‘Caste system’ of Racism white-Supremacy that castigates us as being ‘dead’ and ‘void of humanity’, as the term Black is defined in various English Dictionaries, you have acquiesced to it.
Now, you even have some foolishly claiming that there is no evidence of any slave ships and that the Trans-Atlantic Slave kidnappings never happened. Such silly nonsense. They’re now asking the question, where are the ships? To this question, I assert that there is plenty of evidence proving this event occurred. There are Slave Dungeons all along the Coast of West Afrika. This is where we were brought once captured by the ‘slave hunters’ until we were marched thru ‘the door of no return’ and placed on those ships that brought us to the Western hemisphere. Also, see this website below for further evidence proving the Trans-Atlantic Slave kidnappings did occur:
Just from the estimates total from this website below is 12,521,337. And keep in mind, these are only estimates.
Also, watch this video below for further evidence proving this event happened exactly as we’ve asserted it happened.
“The Last Slave Ship Survivor Gave an Interview in the 1930s”
And the numbers of enslaved Afrikans aren’t being exaggerated in the Trans-Atlantic Slave kidnappings at all, given all of the numbers here, as well as elsewhere in the Western Hemisphere. Keep in mind, we’re talking about the records and documents from England, France, Holland, Germany, Spain, Portugal, the Moors of Morocco, and the Arabs, etc. And we haven’t even dealt with the amount of enslaved Afrikans who were eventually brought to the U.S. from the Caribbean Islands, Central, and South America. And there were many brought here from the Caribbean and Central and South America, long before they started bringing enslaved Afrikans straight to the United States of America from Afrika. The question is this: Do you actually think they kept pristine records of all of the enslaved Afrikans these evil Monsters kidnapped and brought to the Western Hemisphere? Of course, they didn’t. And for those who are taking a short clip of Dr. John Henrik Clarke advocating Nationality, in support of their nonsense, need to watch that video in its entirety. Because Dr. Clarke never said we weren’t Black. He was emphasizing the importance of Nationality, which we all want. However, he wasn’t talking about Nationality in the sense that the Moors and Hebrew-Israelites continue advocating. He was talking about us having our Nation–Nationhood and what that entails. He wasn’t talking about filing some damn papers within their ‘Courts of Law’ and ‘Courts of Admiralty’, claiming to be ‘Moors’–something we’re not, as these ‘Moors’ have been advocating.
Dr. John Henrik Clarke tells us that our name must link us to ‘Land, History, and Culture’. This is what Dr. Clarke means by Nationality.
But here is the real question I would ask those who deny that the Trans-Atlantic Slave kidnappings took place. Where are the ships that brought Caucasians here from what is now referred to as Europe? How did they get here? I guess those ships didn’t exist either? Or are you saying Caucasians have always been here in the Western Hemisphere?
What you should be doing is lawfully and legally fighting to have such a derogatory term of castigating Black people as being ‘dead’ and void of humanity’ removed from the English Dictionary. Instead of separating yourselves from “The Negro Act of 1740”, you should have been fighting to have it abolished and removed from the books. Your response should not be that you’re not Black and Afrikan, but that you are not the definition of Black or Afrikan, as they have defined it in their ‘Caste system’ of Racism white-Supremacy. What you’ve proven is that you’re ashamed of being classified as Black and Afrikan. You’ve proven that you have accepted our mortal enemy’s definition of us, as opposed to the far more ancient definition of the term Black and Afrikan our ancient indigenous Afrikan Ancestors created for us. What you should be doing is educating our people about the fact that the Caucasian definition of Black is not the correct definition of what Black means, according to our ancient, indigenous Afrikan Ancestors. Why haven’t the ‘Moors’ convened a Conference where we come together and discuss and come up with a name for ourselves based on our original land and indigenous Afrikan languages.
Here is the breakdown of the term Black, as our ancient Nile Valley Afrikan Ancestors defined it.
Our ancient indigenous Afrikan Nile Valley ancestors told us we were Black thousands upon thousands of years ago. Yes, the term Black is defined in the English language. But you are relying on a Caucasians definition of it. The term Kemet means Black. It is correctly defined by our ancient Nile Valley Afrikan Ancestors as the Black Metropolis/Town/City/Country and Kemetu mean the Black people of the Black Country. And we were referring to ourselves as Kemetu for thousands of years before these Neanderthal, Troglodyte, Mutant-Leucoderms (Caucasians) came up with his ‘Johnny come lately’, disrespectful version of term Black. The term, for land and the term for Metropolis, uses entirely different symbols. So, we cannot equate the term land and Metropolis as being the same.
The term Black is a term, that when transposed into any of our far more ancient, indigenous Afrikan languages, particularly those from the Nile Valley of Afrika reveals to us that the meaning of the term Black derives from the indigenous Nile Valley Afrikan terms, Kemet and Kemetu/Kemmiu. The term Kemet was symbolized by the symbols of (1) a charred piece of wood, which symbolized the strongest term for Black in MDW NTR (Hieroglyphs), representing the letter K. (2) an Owl, representing the letter M. (3) a loaf of bread, representing the letter T. (4) And finally, the symbol (ideogram) of a City, to represent the Nation–KMT (Kemet). When using the term Kemetu you add the symbol of a seated man and woman with 3 determinative strikes, underneath, representing a plurality, representing the Black people of the Black Nation. And we were referring to ourselves as Kemetu (The Black people of the Black Nation) for thousands of years before these Neanderthal, Troglodyte, Mutant-Leucoderms came up with his ‘Johnny come lately’, disrespectful version of term Black.
Here are the actual symbols that spell out the term Kemet below.
Here is a photo of the word Kemet written on an Obelisk (Tekhen) for Rameses the 2nd, from the Temple of Luxor.
And here is a Black man, since some say we aren’t Black.
Here is the symbol that represents land in their language. It is Ta, as in Ta-Merri (Land of the beloved), Ta-Wii (The United Two Lands), Ta-Seti (Land of the Bow), and Ta-Nehisi (Land of the Blacks). As you can see, the symbol for land is not contained or written anywhere within the term Kemet at all.
Another issue that must be discussed is why we can’t claim a particular tribe or ‘Ethnic’ group from Afrika. One of the most important reasons for this were the many ‘Sex Farms’ that Caucasians created on those Plantations, where these sick, evil beings forced the breeding of Black people amongst each other; Mothers with their sons, Sisters with their Brothers, etc. They also forced Homosexuality and Pedophilia on us, as well. So stop comparing what happened to us to what may have happened with any other people. There is no comparison. The reason we can’t claim any particular ‘Ethnic’ group in Afrika is due to the breeding farms these Beasts created where we were all mixing up together, and because they literally ‘beat’ our Ancestral memory out of us. The atrocities that they perpetrated against us are so horrendous and evil many don’t even want to know what occurred. This is the reason for our claim of being Afrikan, and claiming the entire continent, as opposed to just claiming a particular ethnic group in Afrika.
Every Horrendous, inhumane atrocity Caucasians committed against us was specifically designed to disconnect us from our Ancestral past; our Ideology, Philosophy, Culture, Language, Spirituality, etc. This is what Marcus Garvey was trying to restore to us when he came up with the Philosophy of “Afrika for the Afrikans, at home and abroad”. Garvey addressed this issue because we were from different parts of Afrika. So, we now claim the whole of it. This was designed to address the notion of ‘I don’t know what tribe I am from’ and to tie us back to our land of origin. In addition, that Philosophy was designed to be a unifying factor for us, as well. How is it that you have Black people (‘Moors’) mentioning that they are not Black and Afrikan and that they are indigenous to America? Can you provide any qualitative, and quantitative evidence to prove this assertion? Why do you want to be other than what you actually are?
Those who make the claim that we are not Black and that we are not Afrikan have adopted a purely Euro-Centric paradigm without even realizing it. Their very stance comes from a purely Euro-Centric definition—Black’s Law Dictionary and other English dictionaries that followed suit. Black’s Law Dictionary was copywritten in 1891. So, why adopt a definition that comes directly from our mortal enemies, to define ourselves? We must adopt an Afrikan-Centered view of ourselves and the world in which we live, no matter where we live. One that is based on documented Afrikan History, Culture, Ideology, Philosophy, Spirituality, etc., and is completely Afrikan-Centered in its definitions, etc. We must define ourselves, not let others define us, or accept their definitions of us.
How many of you are aware of the fact that the ‘Moors’ helped to destabilize the UNIA (The United Negro Improvement Association)? It was the ‘Moors’ who started pushing these same opposing ideas of ‘I ain’t Black and I ain’t Afrikan’, particularly right after Marcus Garvey was deported from the U.S. They did this by pushing their own, opposing Philosophy and Ideology, rather than accepting the Ideology and Philosophy of the UNIA, and coming into that organization and putting in real work. Now, if you doubt this, read “Race First” pp 75-77, by late, great Garveyite and Afrikan-Centered Historian, Dr. Tony Martin for evidence of this fact. As anyone can see who is paying attention; even among the various ‘Black’ and ‘Race First’ organizations, that exist today, either in real time or online, whenever ‘Moors’ join these groups, the first thing they do is come in and start proselytizing their Moorish Science Philosophy and Ideology. The first thing they say is ‘I’m not Black. ‘I’m not Afrikan’, ‘I’m a Moor’. Such silly foolishness. When they push this nonsense, ask them this simple question. If you are not ‘Black’ and if you are not ‘Afrikan’, why are you trying to join groups and organizations of people who recognize themselves as being ‘Black’ and ‘Afrikan’? Why are the ‘Moors’ trying to join any group of ‘Blacks’ and ‘Afrikans’, while they, themselves continue claiming not to be ‘Black’ and ‘Afrikan’? And of course, this is not to excuse or minimize the destructive contributions to help destabilize the UNIA, done by others; such as W.E.B. Dubois, George Padmore, A. Phillip Randolph, and other self-hating Negroes, who called for and helped J. Edger Hoover and The FBI to arrest Marcus Garvey, having him ultimately deported and to destabilize the UNIA (United Negro Improvement Association). But the ‘Moors’ get no pass for their part in the destruction of the UNIA either.
How many of you are aware that the ‘Moors’ of Mauritania was the last nation on Earth to ‘officially’ outlaw slavery in 1981. But they continue to ‘unofficially’ maintain the enslavement of Black people of North Afrika to this very day? They are still practicing the Institutional Enslavement of Black people and Institutional Racism, stealing their land, their homes, etc., as we speak? Do you support these evil people who are committing these atrocities against Black people there? And why would you want to be identified with a people who obviously do not identify with you?
When I see the stance of the Moorish Science Temple and others who adopt, advocate and adhere to similar Philosophical ideas, as those I’ve alluded to above, I am reminded of a something written by Poet and writer Haki Madhubuti, who said in part, “…Self-definition is the first step towards self-control. We are not a tribe we are a Nation. We are not wondering groups, we are a people. We are not without land, there is Afrika. If we let others define us, our existence will be dependent upon the eyes, ears, and minds of others. Other people’s definitions of us cannot be accurate for us because their hurt is not our hurt. Their laughter is not our laughter. Their view of the world is not our view of the world. And for us to adopt their view of the world is a necessary step towards their continued control over us. And is to assure we will be a tribe. We will be wondering groups. We will be landless. Self-definition is the first toward self-control.”
Finally, to deny the Trans-Atlantic Slave Kidnappings never actually occurred, means you agree with it. Because that History is well documented and has been more than proven to have happened. It also means you have not come to terms with your own self–hatred that was put in you, while you and your Ancestors were enslaved on those Plantations. This is where Caucasians perfected our self-hate of ourselves and each other. And it further solidifies your using a Euro-Centric paradigm to explain your very existence. The Trans-Atlantic Slave Kidnappings were the most horrendous event to ever occur in human History. The aftermath is still very much affecting us to this very day. The Moorish Science Philosophy is nothing more than an ideology that seeks to explain who we are, by creating and adopting a false narrative of History and the use of incorrect, foreign definitions that justifies Caucasian categorization of us as ‘dead’ and void of humanity’. It is a Philosophy of self-hate disguised and manifested as a pseudo-science.
Our being descendants of Afrikan people is not a curse. It is not something any of us should be ashamed of. In fact, we should be quite proud of this fact of the Divine blessings bestowed on us by our Mother/Father Creator of being Afrikan people, as we are the first people to walk the face of this Earth. We are also the very people who not only peopled the entire planet, but we are the people who created Civilization. And we are the very people brought and taught that Civilization to the entire planet, as well. There would be no Civilization anywhere on this planet had we not brought it and taught it to all 4 corners of the planet. So, our enslavement is not our whole History as a people. In fact, our enslavement is nothing more than an interruption in our History. Stop being ashamed of being what you are– an Afrikan people. We will rise again. We just have to work for it again, the way we brought it forth in the beginning. We are Afrikan people. Wear it like a badge of honor.
I’ll part with these wise words. “Up you mighty race. You can accomplish what you will”.—Marcus Mosiah Garvey
(1) “Golden Age of The Moor” by Dr. Ivan Van Sertima pp 117-118
(2) “The African Presence In Early America” by Dr. Ivan van Sertima
(3) “The Moors of Spain” by Stanley Lane-Poole
(4) “Black’s Law Dictionary”
(5) “The Destruction Of Black Civilization: Great Issues of a Race from 4500 B.C.-2000 A.D.” by Dr. Chancellor Williams
(6) “African Time: Universe To 1896”, volume #1 by Tdka Kilimanjaro PH.D., Ife Kilimanjaro PH.D., Yahra Aaneb, Seba
(7) “The African Origin Civilization: Myth Or Reality” by Dr. Cheikh Anta Diop
(8) “Civilization or Barbarism”, by Dr. Cheikh Anta Diop
(9) “Race First” by Dr. Tony Martin
(10) “Kebuka” by Mwalimu K. Bomani Baruti
(11) “Centered” by Mwalimu K. Bomani Baruti
(12) “The Egyptian Book of Dead”, as translated by Raymond Faulkner
(13) “100 Years of Lynchings” by Ralph Ginzburg
(14) “Enemies: The Clash Of Races” by Haki Madhubuti
(15) “The Book of Histories”, Book #Two by Herodotus
(16) “The African Origin Of The Major Western Religions” by Dr. Yosef Ben Jochannan
(17) “Black Man of The Nile and His Family” by Dr. Yosef Ben Jochannan
(18) “Essays in Ancient Egyptian Studies” by Dr. Jacob Carruthers
(19) “Mdw Ntr: Divine Speech” by Dr. Jacob Carruthers
(20) “The Treaty of Peace and Friendship” in 1787
(21) “Letter of 1789 from George Washington to The Sultan of Morocco”
(22) “The Moors Sundry Act of 1790”
(23) Ancient Greek Origins Revealed Through DNA Analysis
(25) “The Aquarian Age Gospel of Jesus, The Christ of The Piscean Age”, by Levi H. Dowling
(26) “The Circle 7 Koran” by Noble Drew Ali
(27) “When people say The Slave Trade Didn’t Exist”
(28) “The Last Slave Ship Survivor Gave an Interview in the 1930s”
(29) “Slavery’s Last Stronghold”
(30) “Slavery Still shackles Mauritania 31 years later”
(31) Here is an article about the first people to inhabit the land mass now known as Greece.
(32) Dr. John Henrik Clarke tells us that our name must link us to ‘Land, History, and Culture’.
(33) Discovery of Earliest Homo Sapien Skulls backs ‘Out of Africa’ Theory
(34) FOSSILS PUSH HUMAN EMERGENCE BACK TO 195,000 YEARS AGO
(35) The Oldest Homo Sapiens: Fossils Push Human Emergence Back To 195,000 Years Ago
(36) Earliest fossil evidence of Homo Sapiens found in Morocco, rewriting the story of our species
(37) Facts About Pangaea, Ancient Supercontinent
(38) Pangea SUPERCONTINENT
(39) Pangea begins to break up
(40) Oldest Archaeological remains of human remains found in Montana and found in Mexico
(41) “The Afrikan Origin of Civilization”