Moroccan Moors sold the Black Race into Slavery / “..Morocco against Black Africa..”(Diop quote)
I will do my best not to deal with the importance of Nationality for the purpose of this dialogue because it seems to be a concept widely misoverstood and underutilized. Too many people make inferences that clump anyone claiming that their Nationality (the relationship between one and their state of origin, culture, association, affiliation and/or loyalty)as Moor(ish) derives from some loyalty or derivation to what is now called the Kingdom of Morocco when that is not always the case, nor should be the case relative to those born in Amexem.
And…? True we played the Commerce game and we played hard…Moors were more interested in selling the sell out Christians into Slavery…So called Africans sold so called Africans into slavery not Moors. The Moors were keeping the Albion outside of the interior of so called Afriac…Once they got in there the so called Africans did the damage.Now moving Forward!
Some points I would like to make regarding the use of language in this video and in literature that we use to piece bits and pieces of reference-able materials together to draw some conclusion that ultimately benefits a personal state of mind are as follows:
- The term white being used throughout this video is an adjective! Does anyone have proof that white (or black for this matter) is a race, nation or country, at any point in history. According to Federal Directive 15:
White. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, North Africa, or the Middle East. So in this video those Moroccan Moors would be White based on classification standards today.
Interjection>I have to humor myself because the author of this video makes comments about why we as Moors want to stake claim to everything and further attacks why we stand on National Principles…well, well, well…If not Moor than how are are you living, in Black? For example, TITLE 42 > CHAPTER 21 > SUBCHAPTER I > § 1982: All citizens of the United States shall have the same right, in every State and Territory, as is enjoyed by white citizens thereof to inherit, purchase, lease, sell, hold, and convey real and personal property.
As Moors this **** does not apply to us but it would apply to Blacks or is itWhites ?right? Why do we not have a commercial grip on a thing as a Black Nation. Debtor status as opposed to the Grantor status we were able to make treaties with in the first place. Blacks can’t make treaties.Why no reparations? Because only Nations can get reparations. Back to the points.
- Even to use that paradigm, white etymologically is always traced to black. They are both adjectives so to attempting to use them as a race or group of people is totally inaccurate and is in error.
- There are no white or black countries or nations. Where on Internationally can one travel to white or balck?
- The Amazigh was the original term for the misnomerd ethiopians; the term egyptian was introduced in to literature around the period of the 4th century to replace ethiopian. The same age when the term black was introduced.
- At that time white did not refer to blondes or albino’s it referd to the sovereigns or the nobility, i.e. rulers of the land. As far as ancient times white was not a term at all. So the state that someone was white when applying it to ancient times or any time before the 4th century, is in error, is false, and to continue to use it in that way is a fraud.
- All pedigrees come out of an original seed. There was never a time when a white man, blue man, black man just got dropped on the planet. The orignal moors were moors. Muur/Moor is the true consanguine pedigree of the natural people. The original Human has no origin from Anthropoids or Fish. Moor is older than the word black, so that claim cannot be validated, it is in error to attempt to use modernized terms to classify or identify ancient or even medieval people.The only pale skinned moor referenced in history are the tawny ones… They are described as tawny moors. They came much after the ancient classified periods..
- Kush was not bound to the “african” continent. This is a total misconception. Hebrew literature did not use black to identify Kush until the period of the talmud, after the 3rd century.
Finally our stories need to get straight. So please correct any points that I made that need to be cleaned up. We need not be repeating certain parts of our history. We need to take all of this information being presented in these various venues to restore the honorable presentations of our people and retire as champions, spiritually, mentally, commercially, etc…One. Unify or Die!