PDA

View Full Version : the generic thread discussing SKIN COLOR


LHX
06-01-2006, 05:59 PM
go to town

all other threads will be locked or merged into this one
until a better approach can be determined

any threads started with an innovative or progressive angle will probably be kept open

anybody who has any disagreements with the closure of a particular thread can send me a PM



like i said before - this forum belongs to yall

i just want to help keep things moving

PEACE

Kephrem
06-01-2006, 06:09 PM
This was in response to HAN88 in the now closed thread "White gods":


i may not know about what asians listen to but im pretty sure in china they aint big fans of r&b.

Who suggested that they were "big fans of R&B"? Somebody suggested that the world is "involved with black culture", I added that those music genres are influential in Asia (unquestionably in Japan, and influential in India) and in the Middle East.


as for middle easterns i know for sure that the culture is not influenced by

Who said anything about their "culture being influenced by music", please stop interjecting your own words into the statements that have/had already been made.


all the listed music genre's.

The youth listen/ed to house music in Lebanon (in clubs), to rap music in Iran (according to ABC World News some time back) to all those previously mentioned genres in the land of Israel, and in Japan. You were saying?


how do i know this turkish music is the same, mainly oriental based and it stems from the middle eastern culture.

So you're saying that the youth of these areas listen to traditional "oriental based" music when they're kicking it with eachother, or when they're dancing with females in the clubs?




and lets leave football(soccer) out of this arguement, there are as many good black players as there are white players. you cannot say that one race has the better players,

I never brought soccer into the arguement, some other kid did. Pele, who some consider the best of the best is a world famous black Brazilian player from some decades back, which he/you was probably not even aware of.

Iron Fist
06-01-2006, 06:21 PM
Isn't it possible to merge White Dependance and White Gods in this thread?

LHX
06-01-2006, 06:28 PM
sure - if some of yall want me to merge them i will merge them

i dont know if it will put all the threads out of order tho

Kephrem
06-01-2006, 06:33 PM
Lets not play semantics, Europe is, and will always be, Europe, and the concepts of Eastern vs. Western Europe wasn't based on anything but politics. -- Kephrem

europe is just the name of a continent,


No shit. And "Eastern Europe", which you had claimed to not have any connection to the oppression of black people/people of color, was merely a *modern political term* as I proved in the other thread.

just as asia is the name of another. the nations inside europe have very different lifestyles. this has been since the wars between rome and the barbarians.


Regardless of there having had "different lifestyles" my previous statement stands firm.


Why did you have to go deep into Europe (that is, Ukraine and Lithuania, as brought up by denurat (sp?)) to prove that all so-called white people did not play a shameful part within so-called black history? It's Europe *in general* and so-called white people *in particular* representing Europe as a geograpohic location within a specific time period (spanning several centuries culminating with institutionalized "racism" or rather opression) who are to blame for those recorded atrocities, therefore any attempts to trivilaize that by bringing up small states within the whole of Europe shows intellectual cowardice in owning up to said history.


If the Russians didn't care about "skin color" why did they mock their greatest writer, Alexander Pushkin, regarding his? -- Kephrem

russians although may be seen as a prodominatly caucasian nation, it is not, look at the east of the country and siberia.

Listen stop trying to change the subject, the majority of what the world knows as Russians are white people, caucasians, and what you asserted of them not having been concerned with skin color was proven to be less then the truth as in the case with one of their most famous sons.


also a reason why i stated that the russians wouldnt care about the skin colour is that the country has a very low black population. some may have never seen a black person in their life.

Were we in fact dealing with the modern Russian nation? No, we were not, but rather with Europes' (meaning WHITE PEOPLE) expansive and exploitive machinations upon global people of color within a specific time period.

HANZO
06-01-2006, 06:39 PM
The youth listen/ed to house music in Lebanon (in clubs), to rap music in Iran (according to ABC World News some time back) and to pop music in the land of Israel. You were saying?

they are not going to play arabesk music in clubs. lebanon like all the other middle eastern country is going through forced modernism. this is when the people want to be western. not specifically black or white. i have no doubt that a select few listen to rap, i know they do. it is very underground. but they choose rap for the reason that it can be used to express feelings.

So you're saying that the youth of these areas listen to traditional "oriental based" music when they're kicking it with eachother, or when they're dancing with females in the clubs?

how many clubs you think there is in saudi arabia??? by oriental based i mean close to their culture. what is the original cultural music of black people. it aint rap thats for sure. thats the thing that is hard to understand that people in the middle east still stay close to the old cultures. it still remains like thats.
i know in turkey i not denying rap music. but its only listened by few. pop on the other hand is much larger, but it has great oriental influences.

I never brought soccer into the arguement, some other kid did. Pele, who some consider the best of the best is a world famous black Brazilian player from some decades back, which he/you was probably not even aware of.

man i live eat sleep football, i know who pele is probably the greatest there was. but you can make the same arguement with maradona. i can make two teams with 11 black players and 11 white players and you wouldnt know the winner. it will most likely be a draw.

Iron Fist
06-01-2006, 06:45 PM
I just want to say one thing. It really FREAKS me out to think some people consciously want me dead. I'll use a metaphor to formulate how I feel : I feel just like a Jew in front of a Nazi. It's not perfectly true though, cause the Jew probably wants the Nazi dead too, but I don't.

HANZO
06-01-2006, 06:48 PM
Why did you have to go deep into Europe (that is, Ukraine and Lithuania, as brought up by denurat (sp?)) to prove that all so-called white people did not play a shameful part within so-called black history? It's Europe *in general* and so-called white people *in particular* representing Europe as a geograpohic location within a specific time period (spanning several centuries culminating with institutionalized "racism" or rather opression) who are to blame for those recorded atrocities, therefore any attempts to trivilaize that by bringing up small states within the whole of Europe shows intellectual cowardice in owning up to said history.

isnt this stereotyping a race. there are many stereotypes to black people, i can use them in the same terms of you using this statement. russians didnt invade africa. neither did the states of eastern europe. are all germans nazi's???? can we blame every german for the killing of jews.

denaturat
06-01-2006, 06:49 PM
No shit. And "Eastern Europe", which you had claimed to not have any connection to the oppression of black people/people of color, was merely a *modern political term* as I proved in the other thread.




Regardless of there having had "different lifestyles" my previous statement stands firm.


Why did you have to go deep into Europe (that is, Ukraine and Lithuania, as brought up by denurat (sp?)) to prove that all so-called white people did not play a shameful part within so-called black history? It's Europe *in general* and so-called white people *in particular* representing Europe as a geograpohic location within a specific time period (spanning several centuries culminating with institutionalized "racism" or rather opression) who are to blame for those recorded atrocities, therefore any attempts to trivilaize that by bringing up small states within the whole of Europe shows intellectual cowardice in owning up to said history.




Listen stop trying to change the subject, the majority of what the world knows as Russians are white people, caucasians, and what you asserted of them not having been concerned with skin color was proven to be less then the truth as in the case with one of their most famous sons.




Were we in fact dealing with the modern Russian nation? No, we were not, but rather with Europes' (meaning WHITE PEOPLE) expansive and exploitive machinations upon global people of color within a specific time period.

you are blinded by your ideology and lump all white people into one group. again, eastern europe had nothing to do wiht oppressing blacks, black slavery or anything of that sort. it's a generalization. you make conlusions that suit your ideology and you only take into consideration evidence that supports your conclusions. blacks are fully justified to feel resentment towards their opressors, but you are not justified in dragging all white people into that category of opressor. it's not an intelligent position and only works against you. you lose force of persuation because of your explicit bias. it's not an academic approach and therefore not knowledge.

Wu-tang Fan
06-01-2006, 06:53 PM
Hey there. I think that people who hate on a certain race for what happened 500 years ago is very stupid and illogical. What do these people who hate on the race what that particular race to do? Go back and change history? I have more points but I have gone blank for some reason:-S

Iron Fist
06-01-2006, 06:55 PM
isnt this stereotyping a race. there are many stereotypes to black people, i can use them in the same terms of you using this statement. russians didnt invade africa. neither did the states of eastern europe. are all germans nazi's???? can we blame every german for the killing of jews.
Yeah you're right. Not all Germans were Nazis. Just look at Schindler. German were all brainwashed by Hitler, a sick guy in the head. He was to blame but not the majority of Germans.

denaturat
06-01-2006, 06:59 PM
RE PUSHKIN


Although the vast majority of African Americans are unfamiliar with Pushkin's monumental works, most students of literature are at least aware of his "Blackamoor of Peter the Great," an unfinished romance which relates the biographical data of the poet's great-grandfather, Ibrahim Petrovitch Gannibal his black great-grandfather.
Some early critics wrongly suspected that Pushkin attempted to aggrandize the African lineage of this black forebear by playing up the family tradition that he was an Ethiopian princeling. However, Pushkin certainly did not need to embellish his ancestor's own personal history. For the accomplishments of Ibrahim Petrovitch Gannibal are proof of what any man - despite his colour - could rise to, given the opportunity. Ibrahim was treated as no less than a member of the royal family at court and, in the biographical notes on him written either by his wife or by someone in her family shortly after his death, the following statement is made:
"....he (Peter) wished to make examples of them and put (Russians) to shame by convincing them that out of every people and even from among wild men - such as Negores, whom our civilized nations assign exclusively to the class of slave, there can be formed men who by dint of application can obtain knowledge and learning and thus become helpful to their monarch."

Visionz
06-01-2006, 07:05 PM
I see no point in trying to hide from what happen in the past. I'm certainly not proud of European history. It is a tale of exploitation, imperialism and death. What white person is on these boards and doesn't think this is the case? This usually brings the response of "Well, that didn't have anything to do with me" Well that may very well be the case but at the same time you have to realize that the past has defined what is happening today, and today defines what will happen tomorrow. If you were in public schools in America (I can only speak from what I know) then you recieved a Eurocentric education. Same as the black kid that was sitting next to you. You were taught to celebrate a murdering savage as a hero. And this is just one example. It's time to embrace the truth and start the healing. peace

Kephrem
06-01-2006, 07:08 PM
they are not going to play arabesk music in clubs. lebanon like all the other middle eastern country is going through forced modernism.

Hmm, so you're suggesting that black cultural influenced club/house music in Lebabnon was/is the result of "forcred modernism"??


this is when the people want to be western.

Dancing/enjoying that form of music (which is among the least commercialzed genres) is not wanting to be "western" in the least, you point here is laughable.






not specifically black or white.

Man, stop trying to throw bullshit into the debate, no one suggested (at least to my knowledge) that listening to, or being involved with, any of these genres implies that they want to be black.



i have no doubt that a select few listen to rap, i know they do. it is very underground. but they choose rap for the reason that it can be used to express feelings.

You're saying this as if this is not readily understood.


how many clubs you think there is in saudi arabia???

Is Saudi Arabia the whole of the Middle East?? Again, you have no point here either. And BTW I specifically brought up LEBANON, IRAN, and ISRAEL, that you bring up Saudi Arabia asking me what amount of clubs they have is close to being a Straw Man arguement.



by oriental based i mean close to their culture.

No one brought up black culture usurping their own culture, once again no relevant point is being made here.


what is the original cultural music of black people. it aint rap thats for sure.

once again no relevant point is being made here.



thats the thing that is hard to understand that people in the middle east still stay close to the old cultures. it still remains like thats.


No one brought up black culture usurping their own culture, once again no relevant point is being made here.


i know in turkey i not denying rap music. but its only listened by few. pop on the other hand is much larger, but it has great oriental influences.

Where do you think "pop" had/has its most greatest influence in America?


man i live eat sleep football, i know who pele is probably the greatest there was

Ok, so then tell that to the cat who implied blacks can't begin to compare when it comes to that sport.

denaturat
06-01-2006, 07:09 PM
^ to add, yes, even though a white person is not a racist, you cannot say that he has nothing to do with the past. a white person has the leg up in terms of opportunities, because he enjoys a more priveleged status in western society - a privelege which stems from that nasty past.

Visionz
06-01-2006, 07:24 PM
to add, yes, even though a white person is not a racist, you cannot say that he has nothing to do with the past. a white person has the leg up in terms of opportunities, because he enjoys a more priveleged status in western society - a privelege which stems from that nasty past. Precisely why it does not anger me to see a black person upset with current condition of today's society. We built it upon their backs and then try to keep them from eating at the same table. That's a bullshit thing and I'd like to see it rectified in all areas of society.

Kephrem
06-01-2006, 07:27 PM
isnt this stereotyping a race.

No, it's not "stereotyping a race", it's CHARGING a race with recorded acts of crimes against humanity.


there are many stereotypes to black people, i can use them in the same terms of you using this statement.

Actually you couldn't, I'm dealing with historic acts which are a great mark of contention upon white European people, and not those exaggerated characteristics which usually entails "stereotyping".


russians didnt invade africa.

Russians are also not considered to be part of Europe. Your point on Russia however was someting along the lines that they didn't mind a persons skin color, which I then challenged by citing a great source of debate concerning that very subject.


neither did the states of eastern europe.

There were no clearly defined "eastern states of Europe" in the time period in question, this has already been shown to you.

As a term, the origins of "Eastern Europe" are fairly recent.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Europe


are all germans nazi's????

There was no "nazi party" in the time period on question, thus you have no point here.


can we blame every german for the killing of jews.


Yes, in fact you can, as a people usually pay for the crimes committed by their leaders. (as we have seen with your countys good friend America, and their unjust dealings with Iraq and Afghanistan)

Iron Fist
06-01-2006, 07:29 PM
For all those who only blame whites for what happened in America years ago (slavery), KNOW that you are half-wrong. Who do you think sold you to whites ? It was YOUR ancestors, the africans, that sold you to the white people. That automatically makes them half-responsible for what happened, and making half-responsible the whites. It also makes you look fucking stupid right now cause YOUR OWN NATION partly caused all the "problems" you have right now, which you blame only on the white nation for it. Yeahhhh I just broke every white hater here.

Visionz
06-01-2006, 07:42 PM
For all those who only blame whites for what happened in America years ago (slavery), KNOW that you are half-wrong. Who do you think sold you to whites ? It was YOUR ancestors, the africans, that sold you to the white people. That automatically makes them half-responsible for what happened, and making half-responsible the whites. It also makes you look fucking stupid right now cause YOUR OWN NATION partly caused all the "problems" you have right now, which you blame only on the white nation for it. Yeahhhh I just broke every white hater here.

^Actually a bullshit arguement because white superiority is still ingrained in a lot of american culture. And to say that the blame is a 50/50 split is crazy. Nobody made whites beat and rape their slaves, nobody made whites institute jim crow laws, nobody make white institute segregation laws. It seems you take an attack against a white institution personal. Why is that? Fuck the white institutions of america and anywhere else. Thats not hate against white people just the system that places white and their history above all others. Do you have a problem being as equal as everyone else?

denaturat
06-01-2006, 07:53 PM
^Actually a bullshit arguement because white superiority is still ingrained in a lot of american culture. And to say that the blame is a 50/50 split is crazy. Nobody made whites beat and rape their slaves, nobody made whites institute jim crow laws, nobody make white institute segregation laws. It seems you take an attack against a white institution personal. Why is that? Fuck the white institutions of america and anywhere else. Thats not hate against white people just the system that places white and their history above all others. Do you have a problem being as equal as everyone else?

I second that. again to add to what you said - just because some blacks were slave drivers, those individuals were immoral and by universal standards criminal. this did not justify whites buying slave. furthermore, if there had been no demand for slaves in europe, those few black criminals would not be involved in slave trade in the first place.

denaturat
06-01-2006, 07:56 PM
No, it's not "stereotyping a race", it's CHARGING a race with recorded acts of crimes against humanity.




Actually you couldn't, I'm dealing with historic acts which are a great mark of contention upon white European people, and not those exaggerated characteristics which usually entails "stereotyping".




Russians are also not considered to be part of Europe. Your point on Russia however was someting along the lines that they didn't mind a persons skin color, which I then challenged by citing a great source of debate concerning that very subject.




There were no clearly defined "eastern states of Europe" in the time period in question, this has already been shown to you.






There was no "nazi party" in the time period on question, thus you have no point here.





Yes, in fact you can, as a people usually pay for the crimes committed by their leaders. (as we have seen with your countys good friend America, and their unjust dealings with Iraq and Afghanistan)

do you suggest that all americans are to blame for the actions of Bush? even those who did not vote for him?

Iron Fist
06-01-2006, 07:56 PM
^Actually a bullshit arguement because white superiority is still ingrained in a lot of american culture. And to say that the blame is a 50/50 split is crazy. Nobody made whites beat and rape their slaves, nobody made whites institute jim crow laws, nobody make white institute segregation laws. It seems you take an attack against a white institution personal. Why is that? Fuck the white institutions of america and anywhere else. Thats not hate against white people just the system that places white and their history above all others. Do you have a problem being as equal as everyone else?
I don't mind being superior, inferior or equal. The only thing that fucks me up is black people blaming us for what happened.

By the way, in the beginning if africans didn't sell THEIR kids nuthin would have happened. And this argument was just to prove not only whites were to blame. This was also to prove that devil not only hides inside white people but also black people.

LHX
06-01-2006, 07:58 PM
it would be nice if we could point the finger at somebody to blame


too bad it doesnt work so neatly

Iron Fist
06-01-2006, 07:59 PM
I second that. again to add to what you said - just because some blacks were slave drivers, those individuals were immoral and by universal standards criminal. this did not justify whites buying slave. furthermore, if there had been no demand for slaves in europe, those few black criminals would not be involved in slave trade in the first place.
GOD!!! Did I say whites were right for buying slaves ? Whites were wrong for this, but my argument is that some BLACKS also were devils and wrong for their action.

Iron Fist
06-01-2006, 08:05 PM
No race is to blame, make that clear in your head. Be they blacks, whites, yellow, red, Money and Power drives every men to act strangely, selfishly and ... wrong. The best examples are corporations exploiting poor kids and thinking only in a mind of profit. Are whites to blame for this. Every great disaster on earth is directly is linked to money and power.

denaturat
06-01-2006, 08:13 PM
No race is to blame, make that clear in your head. Be they blacks, whites, yellow, red, Money and Power drives every men to act strangely, selfishly and ... wrong. The best examples are corporations exploiting poor kids and thinking only in a mind of profit. Are whites to blame for this. Every great disaster on earth is directly is linked to money and power.

to that end I agree with you, that it is certain people in a certain time and space that are to blame. not white people as a whole. but that is not to say that in north america in particular it is in fact all white people that are now in a more advantaged position vis-a-vis black people as a result of historical oppression by a significant portion of worlds white population.

Iron Fist
06-01-2006, 08:19 PM
to that end I agree with you, that it is certain people in a certain time and space that are to blame. not white people as a whole. but that is not to say that in north america in particular it is in fact all white people that are now in a more advantaged position vis-a-vis black people as a result of historical oppression by a significant portion of worlds white population.
On this subject I really can't discuss with you, but to what I heard I think you''re right. I live in Québec, up north where it's very cold :), and I can tell you there is not much black people here, well in the city I live in. I don't really know what's happening right now in the united-states but I know the government is surely responsible for it, and yes I fear it is majorily (can I say that?) composed of whites.

Iron Fist
06-01-2006, 08:22 PM
I'm quite happy to find someone I can arguee with, cause with people like Aquaous Moon, anything a white can say is wrong.

Visionz
06-01-2006, 08:22 PM
I don't mind being superior, inferior or equal. The only thing that fucks me up is black people blaming us for what happened.

By the way, in the beginning if africans didn't sell THEIR kids nuthin would have happened. And this argument was just to prove not only whites were to blame. This was also to prove that devil not only hides inside white people but also black people. I don't think their problem is with you or any other white individual that ain't helpin run the show, I think their problem is the white institutiion. And I feel 'em cuz I'm like " fuck the white institution and everything they stand for." So I think it all boils downto how you view yourself. I see myself as an ally to anybody down with the struggle, regardless of color. So when I see white devil this or white devil that, I don't take offense, they're not talking bout me. They're talking about the Bildeburgs, the Carlyle group, etc. Evil, white, ruthless, power hungry sonsabitches who would destroy the world for their own self-interest.

Kephrem
06-01-2006, 08:23 PM
you are blinded by your ideology and lump all white people into one group.

And you are blinded by your preconcieved notions of my well defined arguement.


again, eastern europe had nothing to do wiht oppressing blacks,

And again, as a term, the origins of "Eastern Europe" are fairly recent.

I'll also paraphrase from my statement within one of the closed threads:

Murder is murder, and slavery is slavery, and benefitting off of these crimes makes one just as guilty as the perpatrators. So if those three states of Spain, France, England were the trinity of ruthlesness, the white people from Eastern Europe, Scotland, Ireland, etc., who subsequently settled America were co-conspirators and accessories to those very crimes.


black slavery or anything of that sort. it's a generalization.

And one that is based on merit.


you make conlusions that suit your ideology and you only take into consideration evidence that supports your conclusions.

If those conclusions and pieces of evidence are based on some actual occurences then yes.



blacks are fully justified to feel resentment towards their opressors,

Blacks are not the only issue here but people of color worldwide within a historic context.


but you are not justified in dragging all white people into that category of opressor.

I do realize that some of your brethren were not and will never be in the position to oppress, being merely pions to the upper eceholn and middle class of white global dominance, I however also realize that the scraps that those lower classes recieved were/are soaked with blood.


it's not an intelligent position and only works against you.

Works against me in what sense? My positions are clear, and I needn't any support or sympathy in regards to them.


you lose force of persuation because of your explicit bias.


Perhaps you have confused the explicit historic bias inherent within the subject with what you percieved to be my own.



it's not an academic approach and therefore not knowledge.

Should we then divert at this point from the discussion to read what the world of academia has to say on the matter?

http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/westn/imperialism.html

denaturat
06-01-2006, 08:25 PM
On this subject I really can't discuss with you, but to what I heard I think you''re right. I live in Québec, up north where it's very cold :), and I can tell you there is not much black people here, well in the city I live in. I don't really know what's happening right now in the united-states but I know the government is surely responsible for it, and yes I fear it is majorily (can I say that?) composed of whites.


remember there was slavery in Canada as well, though I am not sure that Candian economy was built on it to the same degree as in the US

Aqueous Moon
06-01-2006, 08:25 PM
For all those who only blame whites for what happened in America years ago (slavery), KNOW that you are half-wrong. Who do you think sold you to whites ? It was YOUR ancestors, the africans, that sold you to the white people. That automatically makes them half-responsible for what happened, and making half-responsible the whites. It also makes you look fucking stupid right now cause YOUR OWN NATION partly caused all the "problems" you have right now, which you blame only on the white nation for it. Yeahhhh I just broke every white hater here.

"Though apologists for black oppression enjoy pointing out that Africans often sold other Africans into slavery, this too indicates just how dependent whites have been on black people: having to pay and bribe Africans to catch their own and deliver them to us so as to fatten the profits of European elites. We couldn't even do that by ourselves."
- Breaking the cycle of white dependence.



And to add to the above quote........ Africans didn't know how cruel the whites would treat their people.

Chattle slavery was not known to Africa. White people took away their African slaves' humanity....they were no longer human, according to whites, and they were treated like animals.

Machete
06-01-2006, 08:31 PM
Fuck discussing what went wrong. What would it take to make the mentalities even? Would hanging whitey from a tree make you feel better?
All those who feel supressed and robbed, what would it take for you to not feel that feeling anymore?

If nothing can take that feeling away, do you plan on living a life of resentment towards people who bleed the same color?

Solutions are what we need. Not a bunch of tampons crying about what happen yesterday.

denaturat
06-01-2006, 08:34 PM
And you are blinded by your preconcieved notions of my well defined arguement.




And again, as a term, the origins of "Eastern Europe" are fairly recent.

I'll also paraphrase from my statement within one of the closed threads:

Murder is murder, and slavery is slavery, and benefitting off of these crimes makes one just as guilty as the perpatrators. So if those three states of Spain, France, England were the trinity of ruthlesness, the white people from Eastern Europe, Scotland, Ireland, etc., who subsequently settled America were co-conspirators and accessories to those very crimes.




And one that is based on merit.




If those conclusions and pieces of evidence are based on some actual occurences then yes.





Blacks are not the only issue here but people of color worldwide within a historic context.




I do realie that some of your brethren were not and will never be in the position to oppress, being merely pions to the upper eceholn and middle class of white global dominance, I however also realize that the scraps that those lower classes recieved were/are full of blood.




Works against me in what sense? My positions are clear, and I needn't any support or sympathy in regards to them.





Perhaps you have confused the explicit historic bias inherent within the subject with what you percieved to be my own.





Should we then divert at this point from the discussion to read what the the world of academia has to say on the matter?

http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/westn/imperialism.html

please demonstrate the connection between slavery and latvia for example? global interconectedness was not as extensive as it is now. do not over-estimate it. again, you generalize and I take issue with that. you make it seems as though all of white race was responsible for black slavery and all whites now benefit from this. this is not true.

the arttile you posted has not foot notes and is posted on a web site of some community college I've never heard of. it hardly constitutes the "world of academia." furthermore is just a superficial survey of a persiod in history and does not adress the point we have been discussing.

Visionz
06-01-2006, 08:37 PM
I do realize that some of your brethren were not and will never be in the position to oppress, being merely pions to the upper eceholn and middle class of white global dominance, I however also realize that the scraps that those lower classes recieved were/are full of blood.
In these sentences you seem to imply that it is merely our position in society that keeps us from being oppressors. I am not tryin to disagree with you on the basis of your original arguement, just to point out that some of us would not be oppressors no matter how much power we might gain because of the inherent morality within outselves. I place myself in this category. In regards to the scraps, anybody that has an actual job in america probably belongs in this category as coorperations are the modern -day slave drivers, so this would be regardless of color, it's not a white phenomina exclusively. Even more troubling, is that all races support these slave drivers by handing their money over to them. There is a lot of things that need to be done to get things headed in the right direction.

Kephrem
06-01-2006, 08:38 PM
do you suggest that all americans are to blame for the actions of Bush? even those who did not vote for him?


Whether they are to blame or not, that wasn't my suggestion, that many will certainly feel the reprecussions of the American governments actions, are certainly true.


Yes, in fact you can, as a people usually pay for the crimes committed by their leaders

Aqueous Moon
06-01-2006, 08:39 PM
I don't mind being superior, inferior or equal. The only thing that fucks me up is black people blaming us for what happened.

By the way, in the beginning if africans didn't sell THEIR kids nuthin would have happened. And this argument was just to prove not only whites were to blame. This was also to prove that devil not only hides inside white people but also black people.

This statement must be proven....Prove to me that Africans were selling their very own children.

In fact, provide proof that any African willingly participated.

Especially, with it being that Whites had lots of guns and advanced warfare weapons with the means for mass murder....

It seems more likely that Africans were forced to comply.

So...proof please!

Iron Fist
06-01-2006, 08:44 PM
This statement must be proven....Prove to me that Africans were selling their very own children.

In fact, provide proof that any African willingly participated.

Especially, with it being that Whites had lots of guns and advanced warfare weapons with the means for mass murder....

It seems more likely that Africans were forced to comply.

So...proof please!
I do not have to prove this, it is an historical fact. Have you seen the movie Amistad ? This is a true story. Watch it, you'll learn some historical stuff about your people. Don't come with the argument it was directed by a white devil. Steven Spielberg is a Jew, who are still very distinguished.

Kephrem
06-01-2006, 08:45 PM
In these sentences you seem to imply that it is merely our position in society that keeps us from being oppressors.

No it wasn't my implication, but rather that some white people were/are not built like that.

I do realize that some of your brethren were not and will never be in the position to oppress, *being merely pions* to the upper eceholn and middle class of white global dominance, I however also realize that the scraps that those lower classes recieved were/are full of blood.




In regards to the scraps, anybody that has an actual job in america probably belongs in this category as coorperations are the modern -day slave drivers, so this would be regardless of color, it's not a white phenomina exclusively.

Those scraps entail much more then jobs, how about , to give a great example, the portioned off land that they walk on? (for those of you in Canada, the United States and Latin America)

Iron Fist
06-01-2006, 08:48 PM
remember there was slavery in Canada as well, though I am not sure that Candian economy was built on it to the same degree as in the US
I don't think there was slavery actually. But Canada was the land of Amerindians (Amerindiens in french, didn't know how to translate ; Indians from America) and Europeans (again white people, yes) robbed their land. Quite awfull also. They also almost completely destroyed their culture when they gave them l'Eau-De-vie (french word), i.e. alcohol.

denaturat
06-01-2006, 08:49 PM
Whether they are to blame or not, that wasn't my suggestion, that many will certainly feel the reprecussions of the American governments actions, are certainly true.

Han88 said: can we blame every german for the killing of jews? and you replied: yes in fact you can

so by analogy, you would also have to say that you can blame every american for the war in Iraq.

please explain this contradiction?

Iron Fist
06-01-2006, 08:52 PM
Sorry to bring the subject again, but I just have the perfect example of a black devil : Colin Powell. Yes I could name many white devils like Bush, Dick Cheney and all the clique, but just to disagree with five-percenters that there aren't only WHITE DEVILS.

Visionz
06-01-2006, 08:54 PM
Those scraps entail much more then jobs, how about , to give a great example, the portioned off land that they walk on? (for those of you in Canada, the United States and Latin America) But there is a full range of humans occupying these lands you speak of. Yes the ground we walk on is covered with blood, but we're all walking on it. What is the point that you're trying to make here?

denaturat
06-01-2006, 08:55 PM
I don't think there was slavery actually. But Canada was the land of Amerindians (Amerindiens in french, didn't know how to translate ; Indians from America) and Europeans (again white people, yes) robbed their land. Quite awfull also. They also almost completely destroyed their culture when they gave them l'Eau-De-vie (french word), i.e. alcohol.

YES, BLACK SLAVERY EXISTED IN CANADA. it is a fact that is little known in Canada because Canadians want to be perceived as a boy scout country. http://collections.ic.gc.ca/magic/mt40.html - this by this is a government website, btw.

Aqueous Moon
06-01-2006, 08:56 PM
I do not have to prove this, it is an historical fact. Have you seen the movie Amistad ? This is a true story. Watch it, you'll learn some historical stuff about your people. Don't come with the argument it was directed by a white devil. Steven Spielberg is a Jew, who are still very distinguished.

IF it is an historical fact, then provide proof.

Hollywood is not a reliable source, neither is your claim about Jews as proof.

Visionz
06-01-2006, 08:57 PM
Sorry to bring the subject again, but I just have the perfect example of a black devil : Colin Powell. Yes I could name many white devils like Bush, Dick Cheney and all the clique, but just to disagree with five-percenters that there aren't only WHITE DEVILS. I think if you were able to have a reasonable conversation with them, they'd tell you that there are black devils walking the earth. Any NGE care to confirm this?

Aqueous Moon
06-01-2006, 08:58 PM
Sorry to bring the subject again, but I just have the perfect example of a black devil : Colin Powell. Yes I could name many white devils like Bush, Dick Cheney and all the clique, but just to disagree with five-percenters that there aren't only WHITE DEVILS.

Black People can act like devils.

But, Blacks can't be devils.

Visionz
06-01-2006, 09:00 PM
Aqua what defines someone as a devil?

Iron Fist
06-01-2006, 09:00 PM
YES, BLACK SLAVERY EXISTED IN CANADA. it is a fact that is little known in Canada because Canadians want to be perceived as a boy scout country. http://collections.ic.gc.ca/magic/mt40.html - this by this is a government website, btw.
Well my dad, an historian, tells me he's sure there never was. He even adds that blacks in that time that fled from slavery came to take refuge here in Canada.

Iron Fist
06-01-2006, 09:02 PM
IF it is an historical fact, then provide proof.

Hollywood is not a reliable source, neither is your claim about Jews as proof.
Is Internet a reliable source to you? Cause it's easy to find that on the net.

Aqueous Moon
06-01-2006, 09:04 PM
Aqua what defines someone as a devil?



33. What is devil? ANS. A grafted man which is made weak and wicked. Or, any grafted, live germ from the original is a devil.

This is taken from the 120 lessons that we study. This is what we mean by devil.

Iron Fist
06-01-2006, 09:05 PM
Well my dad, an historian, tells me he's sure there never was. He even adds that blacks in that time that fled from slavery came to take refuge here in Canada.
Ok just saw your link but I responded before you edited to add link. Maybe there was a little slavery but I don't believe it was there very long. But still blacks came to Canada to take refuge.

Aqueous Moon
06-01-2006, 09:07 PM
Is Internet a reliable source to you? Cause it's easy to find that on the net.

You made the statement that Africans (willingly?) sold their own children to white men.

Where is the proof. You need to back up your statement or it should be considered a lie or a big mistake on your behalf.

Visionz
06-01-2006, 09:09 PM
Is Internet a reliable source to you? Cause it's easy to find that on the net. Just to act as a mediator to yall's ongoing conversation, I think Aqua's main point of contention was that you said they sold their own children into slavery. I've always been told the practice of Africans saling slaves to europeans happened between warring tribes and that although these Africans did have slaves of their own they were treated with a level of dignity that American slaves would never know.

Aqueous Moon
06-01-2006, 09:11 PM
33. What is devil? ANS. A grafted man which is made weak and wicked. Or, any grafted, live germ from the original is a devil.

This is taken from the 120 lessons that we study. This is what we mean by devil.


I also went into great detail about this in this thread: http://www.wutang-corp.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10507&highlight=yacub

Iron Fist
06-01-2006, 09:11 PM
You made the statement that Africans (willingly?) sold their own children to white men.

Where is the proof. You need to back up your statement or it should be considered a lie or a big mistake on your behalf.
Yes but I am asking you : WHAT IS A RELIABLE SOURCE ACCORDING TO YOU ??? Cause I'm 100% sure when I show you proof you'll say it's not reliable or it does not make sense. Anyways I ain't going to try and convince you, you're one-way minded and there's no way anybody can change it. I'm not wasting my time discussing with you again.

Iron Fist
06-01-2006, 09:13 PM
Just to act as a mediator to yall's ongoing conversation, I think Aqua's main point of contention was that you said they sold their own children into slavery. I've always been told the practice of Africans saling slaves to europeans happened between warring tribes and that although these Africans did have slaves of their own they were treated with a level of dignity that American slaves would never know.
Even if it's true, that doesn't make them less guilty.

Visionz
06-01-2006, 09:14 PM
33. What is devil? ANS. A grafted man which is made weak and wicked. Or, any grafted, live germ from the original is a devil.

This is taken from the 120 lessons that we study. This is what we mean by devil. A couple of questions. By this definition it seems that would mean that all white people are the devil, do you see that as being the case?

And does this mean that any black person that has white in their bloodline is atleast partially a devil?

Iron Fist
06-01-2006, 09:23 PM
"During the colonial epoch, slavery was a mainstay of the Brazilian economy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_history_of_Brazil), especially in mining (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mining) and sugar cane (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugar_cane) production.
Brazil obtained 37% of all African slaves traded, and more than 3 million slaves were sent to this one country. Starting around 1550, the Portuguese began to trade African slaves to work the sugar plantations once the native Tupi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupi) deteriorated. Although Portuguese Prime Minister Marquês do Pombal abolished slavery in mainland Portugal on the February 12th, 1761, slavery continued in her overseas colonies. The African slaves were useful for the sugar plantations in many ways. First, African slaves had immunities to tropical diseases. The white workers were less able to fend off deadly diseases of the Caribbean, such as malaria. Second, the benefits of the slaves far exceeded the costs. After 2-3 years, slaves worked off their worth, and plantation owners began to make profits from them. Plantation owners made lucrative profits even though there was approximately a 10% death rate per year, mainly due to harsh working conditions."

-taken directly from Wikipedia

So this means Brazilians bought African slaves also. Who are brazilians? Black people according to the NGE.

Aqueous Moon
06-01-2006, 09:25 PM
A couple of questions. By this definition it seems that would mean that all white people are the devil, do you see that as being the case?

And does this mean that any black person that has white in their bloodline is atleast partially a devil?

Gentically, yes....all white people would fall into this categorey of devil. However, this has little to do with charcter. White people are capable of righteousness, and righteousness must be respected.

To your second question - A person can be half original, but since original is black and black is genetically dominate then they would be considered as Black.

Aqueous Moon
06-01-2006, 09:29 PM
]"During the colonial epoch, slavery was a mainstay of the Brazilian economy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_history_of_Brazil), especially in mining (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mining) and sugar cane (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugar_cane) production.

Brazil obtained 37% of all African slaves traded, and more than 3 million slaves were sent to this one country. Starting around 1550, the Portuguese began to trade African slaves to work the sugar plantations once the native Tupi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupi) deteriorated. Although Portuguese Prime Minister Marquês do Pombal abolished slavery in mainland Portugal on the February 12th, 1761, slavery continued in her overseas colonies. The African slaves were useful for the sugar plantations in many ways. First, African slaves had immunities to tropical diseases. The white workers were less able to fend off deadly diseases of the Caribbean, such as malaria. Second, the benefits of the slaves far exceeded the costs. After 2-3 years, slaves worked off their worth, and plantation owners began to make profits from them. Plantation owners made lucrative profits even though there was approximately a 10% death rate per year, mainly due to harsh working conditions."

-taken directly from Wikipedia

So this means Brazilians bought African slaves also. Who are brazilians? Black people according to the NGE.[/quote]

This does not prove that Africans willingly sold their own children to white men. This is not the proof I asked you for.

And, this article is clearly describing Brazil after it was already colonized by white people.

Kephrem
06-01-2006, 09:34 PM
please demonstrate the connection between slavery and latvia for example?

How about I don't choose to do that but refer you back to my previous statements which were: it was Europe in general, white people in particular, within a specific time period, that are implicit in those crimes that also subsequently spawned institutionalized racism or rather oppression against the darker people of the earth.


global interconectedness was not as extensive as it is now.


Europe agreed with what was going down, and if they didn't they certainly saw the new born America as a beacon of light, when behind that light was dead bodies, rape, slavery, and genocide.


do not over-estimate it. again, you generalize and I take issue with that. you make it seems as though all of white race was responsible for black slavery and all whites now benefit from this. this is not true.

Why do you continue to pigeonhole the discussion into the issue of black slavery when it's oppression of *every kind* by Europeans upon people of color which is at the crux of the matter?



the arttile you posted has not foot notes and is posted on a web site of some community college I've never heard of.

I posted no article, I posted a link to a treatsie on European imperialism written by an American proffesor. If you wish, we can further delve into the subject:

http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/European_History/European_Imperialism_and_Nationalism#Imperialism

Iron Fist
06-01-2006, 09:41 PM
This does not prove that Africans willingly sold their own children to white men. This is not the proof I asked you for.

And, this article is clearly describing Brazil after it was already colonized by white people.
Brazil was colonized by PORTUGUESE and SPANISH, who are dark skinned people.

Iron Fist
06-01-2006, 09:42 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery#Slavery_in_the_Americas

Human trafficking

Main article: Trafficking in human beings (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trafficking_in_human_beings) Trafficking in human beings, sometimes called human trafficking, or sex trafficking (as the majority of victims are women or children forced into prostitution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution)) is not the same as people smuggling. A smuggler will facilitate illegal entry into a country for a fee, but on arrival at their destination, the smuggled person is free; the trafficking victim is enslaved. Victims do not agree to be trafficked: they are tricked, lured by false promises, or forced into it. Traffickers use coercive tactics including deception, fraud, intimidation, isolation, threat and use of physical force, debt bondage or even force-feeding with drugs of abuse to control their victims. Whilst the majority of victims are women, and sometimes children, forced into prostitution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution), other victims include men, women and children forced into manual labor.
Due to the illegal nature of trafficking, the exact extent is unknown. A US Government report published in 2003, estimates that 800,000-900,000 people worldwide are trafficked across borders each year. This figure does not include those who are trafficked internally.


Human Trafficking = Pimping --> considered as slavery. So every black proclaiming he's a pimp, definitely means he does slavery.

Iron Fist
06-01-2006, 09:43 PM
Now don't tell me there is no black pimp in America, cause you'll be the most ignorant fool ever.

Aqueous Moon
06-01-2006, 09:45 PM
Brazil was colonized by PORTUGUESE and SPANISH, who are dark skinned people.

Just because they have tanned white skin, that does not make them African.

I asked you for proof that Africans willingly sold their own children to whites.

denaturat
06-01-2006, 09:47 PM
How about I don't choose to do that but refer you back to my previous statements which were: it was Europe in general, white people in particular, within a specific time period, that are implicit in those crimes that also subsequently spawned institutionalized racism or rather oppression against the darker people of the earth.

be specific..western europeans


Europe agreed with what was going down, and if they didn't they certainly saw the new born America as a beacon of light, when behind that light was dead bodies, rape, slavery, and genocide.

I am not sure tha people in eastern europe percieved north america as a beacon of light. in fact russian revolution was a rejectoion of the imperialism of western europe.


Why do you continue to pigeonhole the discussion into the issue of black slavery when it's oppression of *every kind* by Europeans upon people of color which is at the crux of the matter?

ok, opression of every kind, but not by all Europeans, even though you talked about europe's oppression of blacks, that is why I am pigeonholing...anyway, it's western europeans


I posted no article, I posted a link to a treatsie on European imperialism written by an American proffesor. If you wish, we can further delve into the subject:

no need to post links, for the purpose of our discussion I am familiar with european history

Aqueous Moon
06-01-2006, 09:47 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery#Slavery_in_the_Americas

Human trafficking

Main article: Trafficking in human beings (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trafficking_in_human_beings) Trafficking in human beings, sometimes called human trafficking, or sex trafficking (as the majority of victims are women or children forced into prostitution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution)) is not the same as people smuggling. A smuggler will facilitate illegal entry into a country for a fee, but on arrival at their destination, the smuggled person is free; the trafficking victim is enslaved. Victims do not agree to be trafficked: they are tricked, lured by false promises, or forced into it. Traffickers use coercive tactics including deception, fraud, intimidation, isolation, threat and use of physical force, debt bondage or even force-feeding with drugs of abuse to control their victims. Whilst the majority of victims are women, and sometimes children, forced into prostitution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution), other victims include men, women and children forced into manual labor.
Due to the illegal nature of trafficking, the exact extent is unknown. A US Government report published in 2003, estimates that 800,000-900,000 people worldwide are trafficked across borders each year. This figure does not include those who are trafficked internally.


Human Trafficking = Pimping --> considered as slavery. So every black proclaiming he's a pimp, definitely means he does slavery.

Wow...you are reaching with this one, grasping at straws, huh?

Iron Fist
06-01-2006, 09:48 PM
Just because they have tanned white skin, that does not make them African.

I asked you for proof that Africans willingly sold their own children to whites.
I already told you that I will not continue arguing with you. Anything I'll show you, you will contradict it's validity. And I do not have to prove this, it is a known historical fact. It is not my problem that you do not know your nation's history properly.

Aqueous Moon
06-01-2006, 09:50 PM
Now don't tell me there is no black pimp in America, cause you'll be the most ignorant fool ever.

I have never met a Black pimp in all my life.

But, if you are talking about 36 mafia....let me tell you that they are not really pimps.

That song just made them a lot of money and it won them a grammy because white people obviously like to reward blacks when they degrade themselves.

Iron Fist
06-01-2006, 09:50 PM
Just because they have tanned white skin, that does not make them African.

I asked you for proof that Africans willingly sold their own children to whites.
It doesn't make them African but it makes them NON-WHITE ---> so according to your beliefs BLACKS

Aqueous Moon
06-01-2006, 09:52 PM
I already told you that I will not continue arguing with you. Anything I'll show you, you will contradict it's validity. And I do not have to prove this, it is a known historical fact. It is not my problem that you do not know your nation's history properly.

Then you should be considered a liar!

Either admit that you can't prove it, you just assume it.

Or

Admit that you don't know what you are talking about.

Iron Fist
06-01-2006, 09:53 PM
God !! you are overwhelmed by historical proofs and you still can't accept the fact that non-white ("black") people were also deeply involved in human trafficking, or slavery or whatever you may call it.

Aqueous Moon
06-01-2006, 09:53 PM
It doesn't make them African but it makes them NON-WHITE ---> so according to your beliefs BLACKS

No, I consider them white.

Spainards and the Portugese were white.

Aqueous Moon
06-01-2006, 09:55 PM
God !! you are overwhelmed by historical proofs and you still can't accept the fact that non-white ("black") people were also deeply involved in human trafficking, or slavery or whatever you may call it.

You have yet to prove that it is a historical fact that Africans sold their very own children to white men.

Kephrem
06-01-2006, 09:55 PM
"During the colonial epoch, slavery was a mainstay of the Brazilian economy, especially in mining and sugar cane production.
Brazil obtained 37% of all African slaves traded, and more than 3 million slaves were sent to this one country. Starting around 1550, the Portuguese began to trade African slaves to work the sugar plantations once the native Tupi deteriorated. Although Portuguese Prime Minister Marquês do Pombal abolished slavery in mainland Portugal on the February 12th, 1761, slavery continued in her overseas colonies. The African slaves were useful for the sugar plantations in many ways. First, African slaves had immunities to tropical diseases. The white workers were less able to fend off deadly diseases of the Caribbean, such as malaria. Second, the benefits of the slaves far exceeded the costs. After 2-3 years, slaves worked off their worth, and plantation owners began to make profits from them. Plantation owners made lucrative profits even though there was approximately a 10% death rate per year, mainly due to harsh working conditions."

-taken directly from Wikipedia

So this means Brazilians bought African slaves also. Who are brazilians? Black people according to the NGE.


Your own source here tells you who those "Brazilians" were, and they sure wern't the amerindian or black kind.

Iron Fist
06-01-2006, 09:57 PM
Then you should be considered a liar!

Either admit that you can't prove it, you just assume it.

Or

Admit that you don't know what you are talking about.
You are the only one on this thread not facing the facts. Wonder why nobody but you contradicts the fact that Africans sold their own child ? They all know it's truth cause they know their history. I'm a white and I know properly your nation's history but you don't even know this !! You are very ignorant, I must say. Did you really think Europeans went to Africa, took a whole lot of blacks and left, without them fighting back? You must be stupid to think that.

Iron Fist
06-01-2006, 10:00 PM
Your own source here tells you who those "Brazilians" were, and they sure wern't the amerindian or black kind.
I've seen Aqueous Moon say on other posts that every NON-WHITE human being was BLACK. No portuguese aren't the color black, but they aren't white either. I'm just stating this cause it totally contradicts Aquauoues MOon's previous posts.

Kephrem
06-01-2006, 10:02 PM
What is your arguement, is it that they "sold their own child" or that they fought against Europeans, you can't be making both arguements as they essentialy rule eachother out.

Aqueous Moon
06-01-2006, 10:02 PM
You are the only one on this thread not facing the facts. Wonder why nobody but you contradicts the fact that Africans sold their own child ? They all know it's truth cause they know their history. I'm a white and I know properly your nation's history but you don't even know this !! You are very ignorant, I must say. Did you really think Europeans went to Africa, took a whole lot of blacks and left, without them fighting back? You must be stupid to think that.

I never said that Africans didn't fight back!!!

let me spell it out -

I AM ASKING FOR PROOF THAT AFRICANS SOLD

THEIR VERY OWN CHILDREN TO WHITEMEN.


^^^ that is what YOU said. Where is the proof??

Iron Fist
06-01-2006, 10:05 PM
What is your arguement, is it that they "sold their own child" or that they fought against Europeans, you can't be making both arguements as they essentialy rule eachother out.
The Brazil post is a totally different argument, just ot prove not only White people did slavery.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery#Slavery_in_the_Americas

Read this and you'll see what I mean.

Aqueous Moon
06-01-2006, 10:07 PM
I've seen Aqueous Moon say on other posts that every NON-WHITE human being was BLACK. No portuguese aren't the color black, but they aren't white either. I'm just stating this cause it totally contradicts Aquauoues MOon's previous posts.

People are not magic markers.

So if you find it confusing....I'll clarify it again.

The Portugese who colonized Brazil were white, this is quite obvious thanks to the wikipedia article you posted.

Iron Fist
06-01-2006, 10:09 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/africa/features/storyofafrica/9chapter2.shtml

Kephrem
06-01-2006, 10:10 PM
Please explain in great detail how the Portuguese people are not "white".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portuguese_people

Visionz
06-01-2006, 10:10 PM
I don't think Africans every sold their own children into slavery. And the only reason Spainiards and Portugese aren't all pasty white is because of the Moors. Before the Moors invades everyone on the Iberian penisuala was just as pasty as the rest of europe.

Iron Fist
06-01-2006, 10:11 PM
People are not magic markers.

So if you find it confusing....I'll clarify it again.

The Portugese who colonized Brazil were white, this is quite obvious thanks to the wikipedia article you posted.
Do you consider latinos as white people ?

Kephrem
06-01-2006, 10:16 PM
The Brazil post is a totally different argument, just ot prove not only White people did slavery.

Right, it was a totally different arguement made by you, and I wasn't confused in that regards, what you quoted of my post was in regards to your statements to Aqueous.

Wonder why nobody but you contradicts the fact that Africans sold their own child ? They all know it's truth cause they know their history. I'm a white and I know properly your nation's history but you don't even know this !! You are very ignorant, I must say. Did you really think Europeans went to Africa, took a whole lot of blacks and left, without them fighting back? You must be stupid to think that. -- You


What is your arguement, is it that they "sold their own child" or that they fought against Europeans, you can't be making both arguements as they essentialy rule eachother out. -- Me

Iron Fist
06-01-2006, 10:16 PM
I'm gone to bed now. I'm tired of discussing in vain. Maybe I will continue later.

Kephrem
06-01-2006, 10:20 PM
I don't think Africans every sold their own children into slavery. And the only reason Spainiards and Portugese aren't all pasty white is because of the Moors. Before the Moors invades everyone on the Iberian penisuala was just as pasty as the rest of europe.


That's open to debate.

Iron Fist
06-01-2006, 10:22 PM
http://www.grouchyoldcripple.com/archives/000043.html

Ending source. Good bye

Aqueous Moon
06-01-2006, 10:24 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/africa/features/storyofafrica/9chapter2.shtml

This doesn't prove that Africans sold their own children to whitemen.

You must have been just talking out of assumption, since you can't provide proof for your claims.

Aqueous Moon
06-01-2006, 10:27 PM
http://www.grouchyoldcripple.com/archives/000043.html

Ending source. Good bye

Please direct me to the proof in this article that shows that Africans sold their very own children to whitemen.....

Yasir Allah
06-01-2006, 10:34 PM
I see no point in trying to hide from what happen in the past. I'm certainly not proud of European history. It is a tale of exploitation, imperialism and death. What white person is on these boards and doesn't think this is the case? This usually brings the response of "Well, that didn't have anything to do with me" Well that may very well be the case but at the same time you have to realize that the past has defined what is happening today, and today defines what will happen tomorrow. If you were in public schools in America (I can only speak from what I know) then you recieved a Eurocentric education. Same as the black kid that was sitting next to you. You were taught to celebrate a murdering savage as a hero. And this is just one example. It's time to embrace the truth and start the healing. peace

Peace

Righteous post!

Yasir Allah
06-01-2006, 10:44 PM
I don't think their problem is with you or any other white individual that ain't helpin run the show, I think their problem is the white institutiion. And I feel 'em cuz I'm like " fuck the white institution and everything they stand for." So I think it all boils downto how you view yourself. I see myself as an ally to anybody down with the struggle, regardless of color. So when I see white devil this or white devil that, I don't take offense, they're not talking bout me. They're talking about the Bildeburgs, the Carlyle group, etc. Evil, white, ruthless, power hungry sonsabitches who would destroy the world for their own self-interest.

Peace!

Another righteous post!

Kephrem
06-01-2006, 10:48 PM
Han88 said: can we blame every german for the killing of jews? and you replied: yes in fact you can

Germany was committing their crimes *at home* and *among its neighbors*.


so by analogy, you would also have to say that you can blame every american for the war in Iraq.

No, not neccisarily, again what can be said is they will feel the reprecussions for the U.S. governmenrts actions abroad.

please explain this contradiction?

The only "contradiction" here was a question comparing Nazi Germany who attacked its neighbors and its citizens with the United States who attacked a sworn enemy half way across the globe.

denaturat
06-01-2006, 10:55 PM
Germany was committing their crimes *at home* and *among its neighbors*.




No, not neccisarily, again what can be said is they will feel the reprecussions for the U.S. governmenrts actions abroad.



The only "contradiction" here was a question comparing Nazi Germany who attacked its neighbors and its citizens with the United States who attacked a sworn enemy half way across the globe.

not all germans where involved in crimes at home and abroad...so still cannot blame all germans. you basic premise, earlier on was that people can be blamed for the actions of their government. that would include the US even if action committed abroad. your arguments are inconsistent.

Kephrem
06-01-2006, 11:06 PM
But there is a full range of humans occupying these lands you speak of. Yes the ground we walk on is covered with blood, but we're all walking on it. What is the point that you're trying to make here?

The point is of wholesale murder and genocide that in fact established the very democracy which allowed that "full range of humans" to "occupy" (appropriate word btw) these lands called the Americas.

Those scraps were indeed the jobs, and alotted blood soaked land, and democracy, and every other thing which the elite conjured up to keep their proletariat in check.

LHX
06-01-2006, 11:15 PM
holy shit thats wild

5 hours 100 posts

Kephrem
06-01-2006, 11:23 PM
not all germans where involved in crimes at home and abroad...s

No one suggested that they were.


so still cannot blame all germans.

That it took place in their country and towards their neighbors lays the blame squarely on the German peoples, and upon no one elses feet.


you basic premise, earlier on was that people can be blamed for the actions of their government.

Right, I suggested that historically people can indeed be blamed (or in modern Americas case, feel the consequences) for what their governments did, as in the case with Nazi Germany.


that would include the US even if action committed abroad.


The difference is today modern America is made up of different people unlike Nazi Germany or the slave trading/imperialistic states of 16th-19th century Spain, France, and England.



your arguments are inconsistent.


They're actually not, perhaps your mistake was comparing those homogeneous white countries with 21st century United States?

denaturat
06-01-2006, 11:36 PM
anatomy of your argument:

premise 1: people can be blamed for the actions of their government

premise 2: the german government committed wrongs

conclusion: therefore the german people can be blamed for the actions of their government.

(that is the basic structure of your argument and I will not at this point question the assumptions underlying your premises)

it follows as I said, that you should be prepared to make the same argument in the case of US:

premise 1: people can be blamed for the actions of their government

premise 2: US government committed wrongs

conclusion: therefore the US people are blameworthy for the actions of the US government.

therefore, you must be prepared to:

1. accept the second argument about the US as an argument that follows by analogy from the first

2. do not accept the second argument and admit that your reasoning is inconsistent

3. accept that your first argument is wrong.

Kephrem
06-01-2006, 11:43 PM
RE PUSHKIN


Although the vast majority of African Americans are unfamiliar with Pushkin's monumental works, most students of literature are at least aware of his "Blackamoor of Peter the Great," an unfinished romance which relates the biographical data of the poet's great-grandfather, Ibrahim Petrovitch Gannibal his black great-grandfather.
Some early critics wrongly suspected that Pushkin attempted to aggrandize the African lineage of this black forebear by playing up the family tradition that he was an Ethiopian princeling. However, Pushkin certainly did not need to embellish his ancestor's own personal history. For the accomplishments of Ibrahim Petrovitch Gannibal are proof of what any man - despite his colour - could rise to, given the opportunity. Ibrahim was treated as no less than a member of the royal family at court and, in the biographical notes on him written either by his wife or by someone in her family shortly after his death, the following statement is made:
"....he (Peter) wished to make examples of them and put (Russians) to shame by convincing them that out of every people and even from among wild men - such as Negores, whom our civilized nations assign exclusively to the class of slave, there can be formed men who by dint of application can obtain knowledge and learning and thus become helpful to their monarch."


Was this supposed to show how Russians (or at least their leader) of that era were tolerant of other people as suggested by HAN??

Yasir Allah
06-01-2006, 11:45 PM
A couple of questions. By this definition it seems that would mean that all white people are the devil, do you see that as being the case?

And does this mean that any black person that has white in their bloodline is atleast partially a devil?

Peace

This is how I see devil (not representing the NGE as a whole). That degree speaks of how Elijah Muhammad sees devil not me. I'm God and not a follower of any man's understanding but mine. We study these degrees to develop our own understanding not to simply believe them(not saying you do Aqueous) like people do the Bible or Qu'ran.

This is the understanding understanding degree all being born to Equality, so let's keep it real and deal in Equality. The black man can be a Devil, if you take that degree on face value it says ANY MAN that is MADE weak or wicked, OR any live grafted germ from the original is devil. That means that the black man is not BORN devil but he can be MADE devil. So you can look at the savagery that goes on in the Ghetto and say that they have been MADE devil through slavery because some of the 85% are definitely on some devilish shit, but they don't know better. Then you take the second part: Any live grafted germ from the original is devil. That is talking about the white man. Now that shows that when I say devil I don't always mean evil, because that part of the degree is just speaking of science, genetics, so devil can also mean just the opposite of God, the opposite of black, a weaker form of the original.

Now the way I see it is that the black man has a choice he can be God or Devil (in his ways and actions) G.O.D. I have a video of Papa Wu (Freedom Allah) building on this where he says that the worst devil is black one because he know who the true and living God is and he CHOSE to go the other way. See when you don't know you not responsible for what you don't know, but once you know right and wrong and you chose wrong, you chose to be devil.

The way I see it white people do not have the ability to chose. Why? Right now I am going with the melanin theory. It has now been proven that Melanin is also in the brain. There is still research being done as to what the affects of melanin are on the brain. We know that if the white scientists find that melanin does have a heavy influence on the brain (which they may know already) that information may never get out, or they may just downplay the importance of it just like people on this thread downplay our dominance in the sports we chose to play, and our influence in history. I just can't see a chemical existing in the brain and just not being important. This could explain why white people do the devilishment they do, they just can't help themselves. We already know what melanin and a lack thereof does for people in the sun. Don't you find it a little odd that caucasians cannot be in the sun for an extended amount of time without artificial protection? The sun is the foundation of the universe and needed for life to exist, yet they can't take it? Hmmmmmmm

The white man can be righteous, he can do right, he just can't be God. God is the supreme being Devil is the weaker version of God. The original man is the supreme being on THIS planet.

This is Yasir Allah's PRESENT (it may change knowledge is infinite) understanding of the Devil not the NGE as a whole.

Peace.

Aqueous Moon
06-01-2006, 11:50 PM
denaturat, I just wanted to say fuck blame!

who cares.

those of us with eyes to see and ears to hear knows what has gone down.

just because blacks recite the evil documented deeds of whites don't mean we saying something new!

Just know that the Blackman already knew that whites were gonna do evils deeds on the planet Earth.

there is no need to blame only to understand....

What you think is blaming all white people is really just us telling the truth.

You don't want to be included then don't be.

It's as simple as that....let your actions speak for themselves.

Visionz
06-01-2006, 11:59 PM
This is how I see devil (not representing the NGE as a whole). That degree speaks of how Elijah Muhammad sees devil not me. I'm God and not a follower of any man's understanding but mine. We study these degrees to develop our own understanding not to simply believe them(not saying you do Aqueous) like people do the Bible or Qu'ran.

This is the understanding understanding degree all being born to Equality, so let's keep it real and deal in Equality. The black man can be a Devil, if you take that degree on face value it says ANY MAN that is MADE weak or wicked, OR any live grafted germ from the original is devil. That means that the black man is not BORN devil but he can be MADE devil. So you can look at the savagery that goes on in the Ghetto and say that they have been MADE devil through slavery because some of the 85% are definitely on some devilish shit, but they don't know better. Then you take the second part: Any live grafted germ from the original is devil. That is talking about the white man. Now that shows that when I say devil I don't always mean evil, because that part of the degree is just speaking of science, genetics, so devil can also mean just the opposite of God, the opposite of black, a weaker form of the original.

Now the way I see it is that the black man has a choice he can be God or Devil (in his ways and actions) G.O.D. I have a video of Papa Wu (Freedom Allah) building on this where he says that the worst devil is black one because he know who the true and living God is and he CHOSE to go the other way. See when you don't know you not responsible for what you don't know, but once you know right and wrong and you chose wrong, you chose to be devil.

The way I see it white people do not have the ability to chose. Why? Right now I am going with the melanin theory. It has now been proven that Melanin is also in the brain. There is still research being done as to what the affects of melanin are on the brain. We know that if the white scientists find that melanin does have a heavy influence on the brain (which they may know already) that information may never get out, or they may just downplay the importance of it just like people on this thread downplay our dominance in the sports we chose to play, and our influence in history. I just can't see a chemical existing in the brain and just not being important. This could explain why white people do the devilishment they do, they just can't help themselves. We already know what melanin and a lack thereof does for people in the sun. Don't you find it a little odd that caucasians cannot be in the sun for an extended amount of time without artificial protection? The sun is the foundation of the universe and needed for life to exist, yet they can't take it? Hmmmmmmm

The white man can be righteous, he can do right, he just can't be God. God is the supreme being Devil is the weaker version of God. The original man is the supreme being on THIS planet.

This is Yasir Allah's PRESENT (it may change knowledge is infinite) understanding of the Devil not the NGE as a whole.

Peace. Yasir, I know you don't post on here often but when you do they're very insightfull. The fact you share your outlook is much appreciated, peace

Kephrem
06-02-2006, 12:04 AM
anatomy of your argument:

premise 1: people can be blamed for the actions of their government

premise 2: the german government committed wrongs

conclusion: therefore the german people can be blamed for the actions of their government.

Right, and I gave my reasoning as to why that is the case.


(that is the basic structure of your argument and I will not at this point question the assumptions underlying your premises)

That was the basic structure for my arguement concerning imperialistic Spain, France, and England, and, as brought up by HAN, the government of Nazi Germany. These white homogeneous states within the time periods in question cannot be compared to the diversity of 21st century United States (as far as blaming its citizenry) and the governments actions upon Iraq, unless you're willing to concede here that the WHITE GOVERNMENT of the US is to blame for this war??



it follows as I said, that you should be prepared to make the same argument in the case of US:

I needn't be prepared to make that same arguement, see above.



premise 1: people can be blamed for the actions of their government

premise 2: US government committed wrongs

conclusion: therefore the US people are blameworthy for the actions of the US government.

See above.



therefore, you must be prepared to:

1. accept the second argument about the US as an argument that follows by analogy from the first

2. do not accept the second argument and admit that your reasoning is inconsistent

Aside from these diversionary tactics, my points concerning imperialistic (and white homogeneous) Spain, France, and England and their crimes against humanity have been elucidated upon already.

Aqueous Moon
06-02-2006, 12:10 AM
This is the understanding understanding degree all being born to Equality, so let's keep it real and deal in Equality. The black man can be a Devil, if you take that degree on face value it says ANY MAN that is MADE weak or wicked


Peace Yasir,

Are you implying here that God can be "made" by the devil?

The only thing a devil can do for God is prove his power.

If the Black Man Is God...then noone can make him be other than himself, but, himself.

When the Black man is not educated with knowledge of self, then he will ACT other than.

But, the Original Asiatic Blackman is God and can BE nothing less.

Peace

Aqueous Moon
06-02-2006, 12:12 AM
understanding understanding is born to equality.

And...this is supreme mathematics.......intended for the supreme being.



Edit: No disrespect intended to you, Yasir. Please, pardon self...I was just seeking claification for further understanding.

Visionz
06-02-2006, 12:18 AM
The point is of wholesale murder and genocide that in fact established the very democracy which allowed that "full range of humans" to "occupy" (appropriate word btw) these lands called the Americas.

Those scraps were indeed the jobs, and alotted blood soaked land, and democracy, and every other thing which the elite conjured up to keep their proletariat in check. I don't disagree with anything you're saying here. Its my outlook ,though, that all races in this day and age help to propel an evil system. I suppose when you look back at it this has always been the case, except now, most do it voluntarily. I would just hope that people realize we are in this together. As a group, the masses have a tremendous amount of power but as long as we remain divided that power will never be realized. As I say this, I understand that we have to acknowledge what happened in the past, that it would be a foolish mistake to rush to the defense of a imperialistic and murderous history as if yesterday's atrocities do not echo on into the here and now. We must continue with and expand on this dialogue so that we can reach a level of true understanding. We must deal with the past so that we can move on to our future. And, believe me, WE MUST MOVE ON.

denaturat
06-02-2006, 12:24 AM
Kephrem:

1. you did nothing to adress my last post. if you know something about logic, then you will understand that if you accept the first argument, then you must accept everything that follows in that post.

2 it is your tactics that are diversionary, I was challenging your arguments on blameworthiness of people, not about imperialism.

3. however if you want to speak of imperialism: the imperial states of europe were considerably less democratic than modern US. consequently there is less direct connection between the ruler and the ruled, in case of imperialist wester europe. so in fact you should argue that americans are actually more blameworthy than europeans. but then again all americans? you would probably say not all. well, from you said above, and correct me if I am wrong, you basically said all white folks are blameworthy in the case slavery in general (again, maybe you didn't, but I am pretty sure you did, since eastern europe was such as sticking point). so now you see how the one does not follow from the other? if you say that not all americans are blameworthy for the war on Iraq, then you cannot say all white people are blameworthy for slavery.

Kephrem
06-02-2006, 11:03 AM
Kephrem:

1. you did nothing to adress my last post. if you know something about logic, then you will understand that if you accept the first argument, then you must accept everything that follows in that post.

We're dealing with nation-states from different eras, centuries, so no, I don't have to accept one arguement for both scenerios. America, it goes without saying, is a unique situation unparralled in history, so unless you want to blame the white government for the unjust war in Iraq your comparisions will continue to be null and void.


2 it is your tactics that are diversionary,

I didn't bring up modern America and their dealings with Iraq YOU did. It's no comparison to 1940's era white Germany (attacking its citizens and neighbors) or those other imperialistic states during European global expansion. (slave trade, genocide, and the settling of land based on these inhumane practices)

I was challenging your arguments on blameworthiness of people, not about imperialism.

I was well aware of this, and my answer to that was that Americans may very well feel the consequences of their governments actions in Iraq, but to blame its diverse citizenry for the Iraq war in comparison to Nazi Germanys actions and white Europes imperialistic endeavors is quite laughable.


3. however if you want to speak of imperialism: the imperial states of europe were considerably less democratic than modern US.
consequently there is less direct connection between the ruler and the ruled, in case of imperialist wester europe.


Who benefited off of the decrees of their European rulers with the settling and the conquering of the United States, Latin America, and Canada during the 16th-19th centurys? It was the ruled who came over here from Europe and who agreed with what their governments did and upheld unjust laws in order to carry out those decrees. (and those who did not agree with their European rulers eventually did the same thing)

so in fact you should argue that americans are actually more blameworthy than europeans.

Are droves of diverse American citizens settling Iraq and using their arms (in conjuction with the army) to take land, while murdering , enslaving, and oppressing Iraqis? Your comparisons sir are ludicrous.


but then again all americans? you would probably say not all.

to blame its diverse citizenry for the Iraq war in comparison to Nazi Germanys actions and white Europes imperialistic endeavors is quite laughable.



well, from you said above, and correct me if I am wrong, you basically said all white folks are blameworthy in the case slavery in general

Yes, the people of Europe represented their geographic location as a specific group of people within a specifc time period when they committed atrocities such as slavery, genocide, rape, murder, land theft, racism and oppression based on white superiority upon the darker people of the earth.


(again, maybe you didn't, but I am pretty sure you did, since eastern europe was such as sticking point).

There was no "eastern europe" at the time (your ignoring this fact doesn't make your assertions of that region any more credible) as it is a modern political term. Or was it your supposition that nobody from so-called "eastern europe" ever settled in these stolen lands, sailed with slave traders, took part in crimes of genocide, oppression, murder, rape, torture, during Europes imperialistic era in the Western Hemishpere, Asia, the Far East and in the Pacific??

so now you see how the one does not follow from the other? if you say that not all americans are blameworthy for the war on Iraq

And I gave strong reason why already.

, then you cannot say all white people are blameworthy for slavery.


The subject was not slavery but crimes against humanity in general, and Europe and its people were/are indeed blameworthy.

zeppelin2k
06-02-2006, 11:25 AM
This was in response to HAN88 in the now closed thread "White gods":


Who suggested that they were "big fans of R&B"? Somebody suggested that the world is "involved with black culture", I added that those music genres are influential in Asia (unquestionably in Japan, and influential in India) and in the Middle East.



lol IN India?

no

not really anywhere but europe and westernized oriental places like hong kong and japan and also in some parts of sudan, most 3rd world countries are too fucked up to have free time to listen to that shit in the first place

Kephrem
06-02-2006, 11:26 AM
I don't disagree with anything you're saying here. Its my outlook ,though, that all races in this day and age help to propel an evil system. I suppose when you look back at it this has always been the case, except now, most do it voluntarily. I would just hope that people realize we are in this together. As a group, the masses have a tremendous amount of power but as long as we remain divided that power will never be realized. As I say this, I understand that we have to acknowledge what happened in the past, that it would be a foolish mistake to rush to the defense of a imperialistic and murderous history as if yesterday's atrocities do not echo on into the here and now. We must continue with and expand on this dialogue so that we can reach a level of true understanding. We must deal with the past so that we can move on to our future. And, believe me, WE MUST MOVE ON.


Yes, it's time we move on, towards a revolution.


The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Prepare slaughter for his children for the iniquity of their fathers; that they do not rise, nor possess the land, nor fill the face of the world with cities.

-- Book of Isaiah chapter 14


PEACE

Kephrem
06-02-2006, 11:43 AM
lol IN India?

no


Yes, perhaps you should one day check out Indian music videos and see if they don't have a mesh of pop, dance, rythm (from R&B) in their music.



not really anywhere but europe and westernized oriental places like hong kong and japan and also in some parts of sudan, most 3rd world countries are too fucked up to have free time to listen to that shit in the first place


So you're saying in some parts of SUDAN (of all places) they have some of these musical genres but not in places such as the Middle East or India?? And I said Japan already so why are you repeating it back to me? And it goes without saying that Hong Kong is up on shit, and even what you call "third world countries" have NIGHT CLUBS (like JAKARTA) where tourists and native born people go and listen to popular western orignated music. (dance, club music, pop, some hip hop, etc) In fact they've been up on black influenced music in Asia as long as the US army has been stationed, or at war, over seas, in places like Vietnam, Japan, etc.


Peep a documentary named MAESTRO and see where they show you how far underground house music and its hybrids has spread across the globe.

Peace

Iron Fist
06-02-2006, 05:17 PM
YASIR ALLAH, I have a question for you. This question is intended for him only, so I will not notice any answers from other people.

You said in a previous post that because afro-americans were killing themselves it was because of the slavery. But how do you explain the fact that blacks in Montreal (Canada) form gangs and also kill themselves. These black people weren't enslaved in the past. They are immigrants from different countries in Europe and Africa. If slavery is not the cause, then what is?

I have another question. You said that melanin was the most important particle on earth, or something like it. So technically blacks have way more melanin then whites, so it makes them more powerfull. But how do you explain the fact that very few blacks are born with as much melanin as a white. I am speaking about albino blacks right there. Yes it does exist. I was born in Africa and my mother told me a long time ago that to her suprise she'd seen white blacks, who were albino. So if they have as much melanin as whites, they'd be considered as weak as whites, wouldn't they?

You are mature and seem to know your history right. Will you approve that blacks in Africa sold their own people to white slave buyers in the past? I know this is right, and you may ask any historian he will agree.

Iron Fist
06-02-2006, 05:21 PM
I'll quote this guy from this site:
http://www.grouchyoldcripple.com/archives/000043.html

"The Egyptians had slaves. The Babylonians had slaves. The Greeks had slaves. The Romans had slaves. And today, slaveryTM exists in Africa. Black Africans are enslaving other black Africans. And guess who sold the slaves to the slave traders during the slave trade with the New World? Why it was black Africans selling other black Africans. I'm sorry. Roots was wrong. Whites did not go into the interior of Africa to capture slaves. They didn't have to. The coastal tribes sold captives from the interior to the traders."

Aqueous Moon
06-02-2006, 05:36 PM
I'll quote this guy from this site:
http://www.grouchyoldcripple.com/archives/000043.html

"The Egyptians had slaves. The Babylonians had slaves. The Greeks had slaves. The Romans had slaves. And today, slaveryTM exists in Africa. Black Africans are enslaving other black Africans. And guess who sold the slaves to the slave traders during the slave trade with the New World? Why it was black Africans selling other black Africans. I'm sorry. Roots was wrong. Whites did not go into the interior of Africa to capture slaves. They didn't have to. The coastal tribes sold captives from the interior to the traders."

This doesn't prove that Africans sold their very own children to whitemen....

In fact, it states that Africans delivered captives from somewhere else in Africa to whitemen....

So, according to your own source you were not being truthfull when you said that Africans sold their own kids to whitemen.

MaShPG
06-02-2006, 05:47 PM
Tengo un pregunta,

Are white people African? Like if a hippy cracker calls himself an African, would he get his ass beat? Cause "African Americans" can call themselves Africans because they're descendants of Africa...but aren't we all?

LHX
06-02-2006, 06:49 PM
a lot of dark-skinned people are white



possibly 999999 out of every 1000000




i remember reading somewhere that white-skinned people make up less than 1/12 of the world population

Iron Fist
06-02-2006, 07:33 PM
This doesn't prove that Africans sold their very own children to whitemen....

In fact, it states that Africans delivered captives from somewhere else in Africa to whitemen....

So, according to your own source you were not being truthfull when you said that Africans sold their own kids to whitemen.
Sorry Aqueuous I think we misunderstood each other. By saying "child" I meant a general "Child", meaning selling their own "people". I wasn't saying something like "One black has a kid and he sells them to a white guy". Sorry for being unclear in my statement. So just replace every "Child" I used by "Own People".

Yasir Allah
06-02-2006, 11:52 PM
YASIR ALLAH, I have a question for you. This question is intended for him only, so I will not notice any answers from other people.

You said in a previous post that because afro-americans were killing themselves it was because of the slavery. But how do you explain the fact that blacks in Montreal (Canada) form gangs and also kill themselves. These black people weren't enslaved in the past. They are immigrants from different countries in Europe and Africa. If slavery is not the cause, then what is?

Peace

I never said slavery was the reason blacks were killing each other. I said that the problems in the black community in America you see today are a result of slavery. As far as what is going on in Canada, I really can't speak on it I don't live in Canada, I didn't even know there were gangs in Canada. When I first started to get knowledge I used to think that back when we actually did rule the earth that everything was all lovely. Then I learned that even back then wars were going on between black people. See everything is real, we have all (black and white) been taught some fairy tale shit about the world we live in. I built on this back in my Devil post the original man has a choice to be GOD God or Devil.

I have another question. You said that melanin was the most important particle on earth, or something like it. So technically blacks have way more melanin then whites, so it makes them more powerfull. But how do you explain the fact that very few blacks are born with as much melanin as a white. I am speaking about albino blacks right there. Yes it does exist. I was born in Africa and my mother told me a long time ago that to her suprise she'd seen white blacks, who were albino. So if they have as much melanin as whites, they'd be considered as weak as whites, wouldn't they?

I never said anything about melanin being an important particle in the earth. Read my devil post again. I have read a book on melanin by a brother named Dr. Richard King and to be honest I need to do the knowledge to it again because it has a lot of scientific terms in it that I am not familiar with. It has been proven that melanin exists in the brain and the way I see it if it exists in the brain the brain controls the body so it must do something. The effects melanin has on people is not yet known (or the public just doesn't know) again I spoke on this in my devil post I also gave the example about the sun. Now in regards to albinos, I have to say I don't know.

You are mature and seem to know your history right. Will you approve that blacks in Africa sold their own people to white slave buyers in the past? I know this is right, and you may ask any historian he will agree.

Yes it's true but it's a lot more to it than what you think. You are just trying to prove that the blame for what happened to blacks in America falls EQUALLY on the shoulders of the white slave traders and the blacks that sold them. There is a book out by John Henrik Clark called Christopher Columbus and the Afrikan Holocaust: Slavery and the rise of European capitalism. I don't have this book yet but I plan on buying it soon, he builds on the differences between black slavery, european slavery, and arab slavery. I do know the tactics used on slaves by Europeans were not used in Africa and that in ITSELF makes it completely different. After that I don't have enough knowledge on it to speak.

Yasir Allah
06-03-2006, 12:14 AM
Peace Yasir,

Are you implying here that God can be "made" by the devil?

The only thing a devil can do for God is prove his power.

If the Black Man Is God...then noone can make him be other than himself, but, himself.

When the Black man is not educated with knowledge of self, then he will ACT other than.

But, the Original Asiatic Blackman is God and can BE nothing less.

Peace

Peace 17

I am not implying God can be made by the devil. I said "if you take that lesson on face value" you can say that. I gave my understanding of that degree further in the post.

Indeed the blackman is God and yes only he can make himself other than himself as I stated when I said The Original has a choice to be God or Devil.

Also there are brothers and sisters with knowledge who still act SAVAGE. So knowledge is not enough you need the wisdom and the understanding to be able to properly show and prove your culture as God or Earth. I'm active in this nation so I know what goes on and those are the so called Gods or Earths who make us look bad and give the 85% ammo to fire negativity at us. Even though it's F'up people in whatever culture, religion, or organization they are a part of they really come at us because we call ourselves Gods and Earths which are heavy titles to carry and it's harder because they compare us to the mystery god they worship in religion. So when we do something wrong it's like, SEE I GOT YA! YOUR NOT GOD!

And yes the Original Asiatic Black Man is God by birth right but just like the son of a King, he can accept that responsiblity or deny himself his birth right, but once he decides he is ready to take on that task no one can stop him but him.

Aqueous Moon
06-03-2006, 12:26 AM
Peace Yasir....I know exactly what you mean.

Thanks for making knowledge born.

Iron Fist
06-03-2006, 12:50 PM
Another thing I wondered. Black man according to the NGE was the first and only man on Earth. If whites aren't from the line of descent of the first blacks, how did whites appear on Earth ? I don't believe in your culture at all, but I'm very curious in hearing how you explain this. I already ask this question before but none answered me.

Thanks

LHX
06-03-2006, 01:13 PM
Another thing I wondered. Black man according to the NGE was the first and only man on Earth. If whites aren't from the line of descent of the first blacks, how did whites appear on Earth ? I don't believe in your culture at all, but I'm very curious in hearing how you explain this. I already ask this question before but none answered me.

Thanks

they are from that line of descent from what i understand

HotSauce
06-13-2006, 12:36 AM
LHX, shouldn't this have a sticky so that people can go round and round on the subject here. Might free up some of the other threads in KTL. just a suggestion.

Kill flowers
06-16-2006, 01:56 PM
I'm glad I'm not black and white. Last week I saw a girl with/in a skirt she had white legs was ugly. Never saw someone that white.

Kill flowers
06-16-2006, 02:05 PM
If I go in the sun then I get brown or browner white people get red and black people get purple or something that white was almost purple or blue too.

MaShPG
06-17-2006, 01:09 AM
I'd like to bring up something that fascinates me. Something I just saw in General Chat. The topic I'd like to discuss is how caucasians (mainly) could love a culture predominately African American, yet still be very racist. Here are my thoughts:

B HOPS POST

holding a grudge over a year on the net is not only lame, but immature and gay....... and I'm not talking the battle field genius, I said "real life" and u callin me a honkey? take your ass back to the cotton field u fuckin jungle bunny bitch, folks like u don't get no "breaks" and next time u respond, I better hear a "yessuh massuh" know your fucking place u godamn coon...the way u cock ride my responses you'd thing I was a piece of fried chicken and watermelon

(u wanna be racist? u get what u give bitch)

MY POST

See, the true nature is exposed. And call me racist, whatever, I'm caucasian anyways. I'd like to delve into something deeper though. Let's take a look at your sig and avatar, a strong, African American man. Let's take a loot at your favorite emcees, Big Daddy Kane, Maestro Fresh Wes, Ghost & Rae, Ice Cube, Public Enemy (...they were talking about people like you), Run DMC, Rakim, DMX, Black Star, Outkast, Big L, Nas, Bone Thugs, Wu-Tang...all African Americans. No wonder you're so angry, you're life is conflicted. Your heroes and role models are African American, yet you hate and stereotype their race. It's even weirder because many of your favorite emcees talk about racism, yet you're oblivious to the fact that they're talking about you. I really wish you said that to all the people above so they could stomp you down. But whatever, your ignorance...good luck surviving without the corp for a month! (you finna get banned dumbfuck, I'd edit quick)




it really amazes me how people can conflict their beliefs so much, can anybody provide me with an explanation to this?

Visionz
06-17-2006, 02:08 AM
For the record, I'm not sure if Hop is actually rascist or just capable of making rascist remarks. Just cause you say something outta anger doesn't neccessarily mean you really feel that way. Context is important. More than anything, he's probably just reacting from the feeling of being called a white devil.



With that being said to answer your question directly, People can hate someone or a whole group of people and still appreciate their artistic expressions. I saw a documentary once that was talking about how Hitler liked to watch certain Jewish movies stars films.

MaShPG
06-17-2006, 02:37 AM
I think that anger is the emotion that lets out true feelings/beliefs/thoughts the most. I think racist remarks reflect racism, because if you weren't racist you'd have no reason to say them. I didn't even call him a white devil, I called him a honkey...and then lmao for him crying about it. Even if I did call him a white devil, it's immature to fight racism with racism.

With that being said, in rebuttal:

I can understand respect, but it seems like (i'll not try to be specific here) Hip Hop fans base a large part of their life off of a culture that was designed as a means for African American expression and communication and then turn around and be complete racists is such an oxy moron to me. Like in your example I can understand your point, but if Hitler was upsessed with movies, posted on Jewish movie forums (I'm tired...work with me), and took a part in that culture (I'm saying theoretically, because movies are things to watch, Hip Hop is a culture) then how could he hate them so much too. I'm tired as fuck and I'm rambling, but heres my main point; It is so conflicting and oxymoronic for Hip Hop enthusiasts to hate the people that created the culture they're in love with.

Visionz
06-17-2006, 02:50 AM
^most hatred in general doesn't make sense. In most cases its due to a lack of understanding. When I came across that kind of situation I try to foster some understanding amongst opposing parties otherwise the conversation really doesn't get you anywhere.

I don't buy the arguement that anger always lets out true feelings. Sometimes it doesn apply and other times it'll have you sayin some dumb shit you really don't mean. I've stood on both ends of the spectrum. I don't think that Hop is actually rascist but I don't actually know the guy so I could be completely wrong about that.

crass
06-19-2006, 11:23 PM
religious vomit. white is black is pink is orange.

JASPER
06-20-2006, 05:53 AM
I think I hate niggers.

Kephrem
06-20-2006, 11:57 AM
I think I hate niggers.

If your thinking that then you should also know that the true nigger (in the twisted modern sense meaning "ignorant person") is the caucasian race, in general, which is beared witnessed by their/our historical record.

june181972
06-20-2006, 01:54 PM
Correct me if I am wrong, but it is impossible for white to come before black (not just skin color) One can explain absolute black, but not absolute white.

Does not all life originate in the darkness?

Wamukota X
06-20-2006, 03:48 PM
Yes, even the Sun, moon, and stars.

JASPER
06-21-2006, 09:58 AM
If your thinking that then you should also know that the true nigger (in the twisted modern sense meaning "ignorant person") is the caucasian race, in general, which is beared witnessed by their/our historical record.I hate people. Let's keep it at that.