Muhammad is a White Man?
-
Salaam Al Khidr,
You're absolutely right. This kind of racism was prevalent then, and it is still prevalent, even throughout the Islamic world. The only people who don't see this are those who have blinded themselves from reality. The original Arabs and Hebrews were Nubians, but throughout the world, they are presented as white people. And they're not even illustrated as "pale Arabs"; they're actually illustrated to be white Europeans!
I completely agree. The only way we can solve this problem is if we identify it. Islam (general) is the fastest growing religion in the world, and if we don't identify and put and end to these racist fabrications and ideologies, our system will become just like what Christianity is today. The Christian depictions of a white Jesus teach Christians that white means "purity" and even "God-like", and that black is evil and demonic. This is the same standard spreading throughout sectarian Islam by their depictions of a white Muhammad, a white Abraham, a white Jesus, a white Moses, and displaying all the other prophets as white too. One thing I've realized is it's influencing the mindset of the so-called "Quranists" too, and this thread is evidence of the fact that it has crept into some people's beliefs, and many of the white Muslims on here who don't consider themselves having racial prejudices still deny that racism even exists in the Islamic world...
So, for that reason, Al Khidr, we need strong brothers like you who are willing to take a stand for the truth, even if it means other will reject it. Your speaking out on the issues of racism in Islam is certainly noticed, acknowledged, and appreciated by all those who see the truth.
Peace,
Ahmad
Salaam Ahmad Bilal
Thanks my Nubian brother for all the comments and compliments that you have said and the same goes for you to brother.
And your statement below is 100% HAQQ
"This is the same standard spreading throughout sectarian Islam by their depictions of a white Muhammad, a white Abraham, a white Jesus, a white Moses, and displaying all the other prophets as white too. One thing I've realized is it's influencing the mindset of the so-called "Quranists" too, and this thread is evidence of the fact that it has crept into some people's beliefs, and many of the white Muslims on here who don't consider themselves having racial prejudices still deny that racism even exists in the Islamic world..."
-
Peace,
I think it would prove interesting to study the root Black in Arabic. Saada or seen, alif dawd means to predominate, to be master/chief of and alot of other positive things. And sawwada (second form) in addtion to 'to make black', means 'to make master or lord/master, predominant.' Sayyid is from this same root. It kind of gives a clue as to the original Arabs and why Aswad is connected to this root. And then you can see some of the derivations of the Aswad only (as in the verb Aswadda) and see how they became negative and particularly 'to be disgraced, to be dishonored' etc etc. This tells us what the role of black people was originally (they were the predominant and chief kind of people among the Arabs) among Arabic speakers (Classical Arabic of course) and what happened to them (they were conquered over a period of time by Caucasians, NOT FROM EUROPE but from Southern Russia and south of Modern day Russia) and after time disgraced and dishonored.
I want to add that white people don't just come from Europe. They are also in all of the lands of Eastern Russia, Southern Russia and the areas directly south of Russia. And Caucasians made their way into the Middle East and India from these areas. They made their way into Africa and the Americas from Europe. In Most areas they had been mixing with native blacks for a very long time leading to the not so white populations, but still relatively fair skinned, of Southern Europe, North Africa, the Middle East and Northern and Central India. Their blood even made it as far down as Ethiopia and in more recent times Southern Egypt and Northern Sudan (Because of the Ottomans and the influx of European slaves to Egypt and Sudan as well as already mixed individuals (like Arabs, Copts and Berbers) having children with more pure Blacks in those regions). And this is why they look like they have Caucasian (NOT necessarily EUROPEAN) admixture. Have you ever seen Haile Selassie? He looks like what a more pure Black person would look like if we mixed that Black person up and gave him some signficant Caucasian ancestry. If you find a black person who looks like that in the Americas or in Mauritania or North African it is becuz he has a good dose of Caucasian ancestry. So that mixing in the Middle East bled into Ethiopia, Eritrea and Djibouti.
And if you don't believe me I think a trip to Latin America would do you some good. I recommend the Dominican Republic, Northern Brazil, Western Colombia, Loiza or Carolina in Puerto Rico, Cuba, southern Mexico, panama and some other places. But in this way you all can see what black people who have significant European ancestry start to look like compared to other black people from those same populations who have less. really all you have to do is start paying attention to Caucasian-Negroid mixes even here in the States, taking into consideration if the Black person already has some European in him. And then it will start o become clear why Arabs, Indians, Southern Europeans, North African and many Latin Americans (mostly the stereotypical ones we see on TV) look like they do. (this even will account for why Southeast Asians look like they do, once you realize that the Papua New Guineans, Melanesians, and Negritos were black. And the Northern Mongoloids migrated into most of their territories and mixed in with them)
Then hopefully maybe we can loosen up on the purely genetic/racial tone of Negroid and Caucasiod being incompatible antipathies, and realize that what we need to address is a cultural phenomenon caused by historical clashes between Caucasoid cultures and Negroid civilizations/cultures in the ancient world, and where Caucasoids happened to come out the winners. Why exactly all this negativity towards the Negroid populations that the Caucasoids mixed into and came to generally dominate in the ancient world? I think it has to do with the psychologies that Caucasoid CULTURES developed in their places of origin AND through their conflicts with Negroid civilizatons. But its persistence to this day PRIMARILY has to do with the WORLD WIDE effects of the PSYCHOLOGY OF EUROPEAN COLONIALISM, which trumped (and enhanced) any prejudicial attitudes that the original caucasians who came to these lands ever brought.
Godbless,
AnwarAnwar
Here is what you are misinformed about. When the white man came to Nubian countries around the world and raped the women, the offspring is still Nubian (Black) not White because of the dominant gene and their recessive gene. And it does not matter what the complexion is, even if the offspring has light skin or white skin, genetically they are Nubian (Black). Race is not necessarily classified by complexion. We have Black people in our race that can pass for white due to their complexion and fair features but they still are Nubian (Black). Race is classified by genetics not necessarily complexion of the skin. Also there is not one prototype feature that identifies an African (Nubian) man because we have all kinds of features, hair textures, complexions all in the Motherland.
Another point that you are misguiding people on is the fact that Europeans have dominated the world by conquering and enslaving during ancient times as well as today. It is not the Nubians who have some caucasion blood in them who are ruling the world, it is the Eurpeans/Cacausion who are ruling the world.
One thing the white man has learned about himself is after he traveled around the world and raped women of Black, Brown, Red, Yellow and saw that the offspring was a none European, he then realized that he had the weakest (recessive) gene on the planet.
-
Peace,
I understand your point here. This was Malcom X's point. I really don't know what to say. I agree with this tendency of Caucasian civilization to devalue and undermine black civilization. And I do agree that there are a number of issues that black people (mainly just American Blacks, North, Central and South American) need to work out solo, becuz of the legacy we've inherited from Eurocentric domination. Unfortunately, many Caucasian people haven't gotten past their own Eurocentricity (many find it to be normal and even academic). And extreme Afro-centricity is not a real answer either. Only truth is. Unfortunately, many Eurocentrists will brand the truths of the Negroid influence in the world as Afrocentricity when it is just truth. But I have seen abuse on both sides. Afro-centrists refuse to take into account or recognize the validity of mixture and how Caucasians have been mixing with Negroids for a long time around the globe (as well as Mongoloids with Negroids) in such a way that we can learn to see the truth of our conflicts as a matter of demonic cultural tendencies and not demonic races. However I know that there will be no real progress unless there is some real alternative being presented in the form of successful civlizations that offer truth and a way of thinking that transcends Eurocentrism, Afrocentricism, the greedy rat race, anti-nature-ism, anti-Godism, poverty and dependence. Civilizations that embrace the truths (positive and negative) of our Negroid, Caucasoid and Mongoloid ancestors, and most of all how significant areas of the world have populations that have originated in large part from the mixture of 2 or all three of these elements.
When I say civilizations, I mean an organizations that could be tight connections of small communities spread about, or tight connections of large communities over large areas. But the key to understanding this is that civilzation = organization and Quranic civilization = organization with a Quranic agenda, an agenda of telling all truths and exposing all lies, and an agenda of self-sustenence and indepedence from un-Quranic and anti-Quranic elements in the world. An agenda which we are horribly failing at, mainly becuz of our disunity, lack of comprehension and extreme individuality.
But we should be careful not to mix the appropriateness of cultural trends for the good of humanity with racial associations. In the end the masses (all masses, Caucasiod, Negroid, Mongoloid or mixtures of these three) usually have their cultures shaped by brainwashers, false-leaders, false-prophets, soothesayers and hate-mongerers. And Mankind himself is often motived by very base ambitions unless he has godly aspirations.
And as it stands, ideas with money and social influence behind them make the world go around. The golden rule whoever has the gold, makes the rules. I think we can intelligenty imagine the fear, the envy and the harsh social world that Caucasians developed coming from Glacier stricken areas and threatened by the military and other technologies within the Negroid civilzations south of them during ancient times. Envy and fear breed hatred, and it is very likely that as Caucasian socieities began to filter into Negroid civilizations and benefit and mix from the contact that those advances along with the natural faltering of Negroid civilizations (all civilzations rise and fall) that the invasions by the cultural stong-holds of the "barbarians" of the day led to the anti-negroid sentiment we find in India, the middle east, North Africa, Southern Europe and even among the Mongoloid-Negroid mixed populations of Indonesia. These sentiments died down in many places, in other places these sentiments flared up from time to time and in some places the awkward relationships have remained although in many cases lying dormant. And all of you know what I see as happening with the advent of European colonialism into most of these countries (Latin America is relatively new to this scene as well as the color-mentality of Afro-Americans both of which share the same symptoms as the older scenarios in Southern Europe, North Africa, the Middle East, India and Indonesia).
I say all that to say that although these are the truths of this issue, someone's race does not make them 100% subject to the cultural ideas they grew up in. ALTHOUGH most people who grow up in certain cultural contexts do not surpass the cultural ideas they grew up with (positive or negative). That may seem contradictory but the first has to do with genetic taint (which does not exist) and the second with mental taint (which does exist). So I agree with Malcom's suggestion and yours that Afro-Americans need to establish their own so they can work their own problems out. HOWEVER, this does not take into account the psychology of Afro-Americans who have developed a mindset that needs White people in the picture. And our culture has been deeply shaped by the (mostly demeaning) presence of Caucasiods. Unfortunately anything that the Caucasiod mainstream (mostly in the American context) offers Afro-Americans, they will go along with despite the truth, and that is a human mental disorder (following the mainstream or people who you think are better) as well as an Afro-american mental disorder.
To illustrate this sickness, I know an Afro-American girl who told me once while we were talking that she wanted to travel the world and get outside of the U.S. That's understandable, right? Well, when I mentioned going to Africa (as this is a very important thing to do for the psyche of a black person in the Americas, especially going to West Africa) she absolutely objected to going to Africa (and I've seen this scenario many times over). The crazy part is she ended up telling me that she really wanted to go to Spain becuz the people there (white people of course) LOOOVE (her emphasis) black people. That made me upset, but she (along with many other Afro-Americans) don't get how much they have been affected by Eurocentrism/Caucaso-centrism. What made me more upset is that she didn't get the gravity of what she was saying.
And as we all know this Eurocentrism has affected even purely African countries through their ruling classes mostly, but also through the commericials and all the other whistles and bells of capitalism catered to Europeans and totally oblivious to all others. So even where we have all black nations they still have not worked out their problems. Look at Liberia and Sierra Leone (where Afro-Americans were expatriated), and look at the rest of the continent still caught up on the Eurocentric, white supremacist mindsets that Colonialsm convinced them about. So with these examples out there, think of what fully Westernized (for centuries) Afro-Americans would do if they got their own country, their own communities, their own schools. They would try to employ a system that really doesn't work for anyone but the people at the top, and these people at the top would employ it badly unfortunately becuz they would find themselves negotiating with bigger powers because all they care about is themselves. Which is where we find most African, Carribbean and Latin American countries to this day. The proof of what would happen is already out there.
Caucasiods are not as united as we might think. A trip to a few trailer parks or Eastern Europe would prove that. Those who would have proven to be a threat to the lies (financial and racial) have been targeted since the beginning through brainwashing and appeals to the baser elements of the human mindset; vanity. So unfortunately many caucasoids have been convinced to target their anger and dejection towards non-Caucasiods as the cause of their problems and the stepping stone (that they must step on) for their self-pride. Hence they become puppets, ignorant accomplices and contributors to the demonic games being played by those same brainwashers, false-leaders, false-prophets, soothesayers and hate-mongerers who make sure that they get some worldy benefit from the mischief and destruction that they wreak.
But personally I think we might want to give up the idea of trying to save Afro-Americans or even humanity from themselves, but rather focus on building our own Quranic communities that uphold the truth, good and bad, of all peoples, and establish a Quranic agenda for our good and hopefully for the good of all who wish for good. We are all going to come with baggage, which is why we must sit at the table first and make clear what our prirorities are and what is non-negotiable for us. And I for one, can FULLY understand how bringing to light the integral part of the Negroid influence in the world and the lies of Caucaso-centrism and the centrism of any people can be a non-negotiable. I can fully agree with that. But let's try to get to know the real reasons for all these things, nor take things too far. And let's deal with ALL the issues as they are. So we need to see these "racial" issues as the incorrectness of our cultures, not the incorrectness of our races.
Ahmad, I know you see where I'm coming from perfectly, so all of this wasn't directed towards you, but to everyone interested in the truth.
Godbless,
Anwar?But personally I think we might want to give up the idea of trying to save Afro-Americans or even humanity from themselves, but rather focus on building our own Quranic communities that uphold the truth, good and bad, of all peoples, and establish a Quranic agenda for our good and hopefully for the good of all who wish for good.?
I have read your post and you have made some good points but like always you seem to inject concepts that are designed to keep us enslaved and disunited and fragmented. There is no way on earth that the people you are calling ?Afro-Americans? will accept this notion to give up the idea of trying to save their people. What you are promoting here is the same divide and conquer tactics that has always been used on Nubians (people of color) to keep them divided amongst themselves. But All Praise be to Allah for strong leadership such as Noble Drew Ali, Marcus Garvey, Elijah Muhammad, Malcolm X, Farrakhan, Khallid Muhammad, Ashra Kwesi, just to name a few and I say that because they all had the vision of not forgetting or abandoning or giving up on their race but rather that we need to unite and save our people from oppression and also link up and unify with all Nubians whether they are in Africa or throughout the world to counter global white supremacy.
-
Peace FAR,
What color are Arabs?
Firstly, it depends on what you mean by "Arabs". Different people in different regions have different complexions, especially the one who've mixed with the Europeans... Secondly, it depends on what time period you're referring to. Centuries ago, most likely even during the time of Muhammad, Arabs were a separate ethnicity distinguished from the mass population. They hadn't become intermixed with Europeans and Russian, and therefore, the Arabs of that time were (most likely) black people. Most of the Arabs of today, however, are mixed with European and Eastern ancestry, and they therefore have lighter skin complexions and more common recessive features... If you relay the concept of a "pure" Arab, completely unmixed and characteristic of his original forefathers, this "pure" Arab would look a lot like an African/Nubian with very dark skin and dominant genetic features...
Peace,
Ahmad
-
Salaam Al Khidr,
When the white man came to Nubian countries around the world and raped the women, the offspring is still Nubian (Black) not White because of the dominant gene and their recessive gene. And it does not matter what the complexion is, even if the offspring has light skin or white skin, genetically they are Nubian (Black). Race is not necessarily classified by complexion. We have Black people in our race that can pass for white due to their complexion and fair features but they still are Nubian (Black). Race is classified by genetics not necessarily complexion of the skin. Also there is not one prototype feature that identifies an African (Nubian) man because we have all kinds of features, hair textures, complexions all in the Motherland.
Thanks for pointing this out, brother. This is absolutely correct. Many people base their visual perceptions of black/Nubian people on the concept of having "dark skin". In reality, though, this is not the case. Plenty of black people have light skin complexions, and some of them are nearly as light as Europeans... Here's a big factor of racial intermixing
If a black man reproduces with a white woman, their child will be considered BLACK. And if this child grows up and reproduces with another white person, their child will be considered BLACK. And even then, if their child grows up to reproduce with a white person, they will still produce a BLACK CHILD. No matter how many times this is repeated, because of the weaker (recessive) genes present in the blood of white people, once a Nubian is mixed within their blood pattern, they can never produce another purely white, European child. Their children, children's children, and children's children's children will still be black, and they will still have dominant Nubian features, regardless of how light their skin complexion might be. White people know this too, they just refuse to accept it... White people generally like to play upon the significance of verbal opposites (i.e. white=pure, black=dirty; white=godly, black=demonic, etc.), and this is why their languages are the way they are today. However, if you base this same rule on the true definition of black (i.e. "originality", "strong", "dominant", what exactly is this saying about white people?
Europeans have dominated the world by conquering and enslaving during ancient times as well as today. It is not the Nubians who have some caucasion blood in them who are ruling the world, it is the Eurpeans/Cacausion who are ruling the world.
Again, this is very true. It may be painful for some to accept, but the Honorable Elijah Muhammad made the most appropriate statement regarding this, when he said, "The truth only hurts the guilty..."
There is no way on earth that the people you are calling Afro-Americans will accept this notion to give up the idea of trying to save their people. What you are promoting here is the same divide and conquer tactics that has always been used on Nubians (people of color) to keep them divided amongst themselves. But All Praise be to Allah for strong leadership such as Noble Drew Ali, Marcus Garvey, Elijah Muhammad, Malcolm X, Farrakhan, Khallid Muhammad, Ashra Kwesi, just to name a few and I say that because they all had the vision of not forgetting or abandoning or giving up on their race but rather that we need to unite and save our people from oppression and also link up and unify with all Nubians whether they are in Africa or throughout the world to counter global white supremacy.
Alhamdulillah, this is a profound statement, and it couldn't be put more simply and accurately. The corruption of this concept (not trying to save the black race) is illustrated by Brother Anwar's usage of the term "Afro-American". What does this mean? I'm not an African-American, or "Afro-American". The late Minister El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz (Malcolm X) spoke directly on this very profoundly in his "The Ballot or The Bullet" speech when he said
I'm not a politician, not even a student of politics; in fact, I'm not a student of much of anything. I'm not a Democrat, I'm not a Republican, and I don't even consider myself an American. If you and I were Americans, there'd be no problem.... Well, I am one who doesn't believe in deluding myself. I'm not going to sit at your table and watch you eat, with nothing on my plate, and call myself a diner. Sitting at the table doesn't make you a diner, unless you eat some of what's on that plate. Being here in America doesn't make you an American. Being born here in America doesn't make you an American. Why, if birth made you American, you wouldn't need any legislation, you wouldn't need any amendments to the Constitution, you wouldn't be faced with civil-rights filibustering in Washington, D.C., right now.... No, I'm not an American. I'm one of the 22 million black people who are the victims of Americanism. One of the 22 million black people who are the victims of democracy, nothing but disguised hypocrisy. So, I'm not standing here speaking to you as an American, or a patriot, or a flag-saluter, or a flag- waver-no, not I. I'm speaking as a victim of this American system. And I see America through the eyes of the victim. I don't see any American dream; I see an American nightmare....
In my opinion, this was, BY FAR, one of the greatest, most profound, truthful speeches ever delivered on the basis of race. Black/Nubian ancestry isn't equal in America. In fact, it's viewed as a curse. There's no truth, justice, equality, or peace between black people and white people in America. Nubians in America aren't living the same "American Dream" that is exhibited all over white, high-class society. In other words, we're not "eating off the plate". So, what makes us "Americans"? Good points, Al Khidr, regarding the message of unity, not just among Muslims but among black people as a whole. If we can successfully unify as a race, then we can eventually unify as a nation. But until there's black unity, there can't really be any unity among black people and white people...
Peace,
Ahmad
-
Peace FAR,
Firstly, it depends on what you mean by "Arabs". Different people in different regions have different complexions, especially the one who've mixed with the Europeans... Secondly, it depends on what time period you're referring to. Centuries ago, most likely even during the time of Muhammad, Arabs were a separate ethnicity distinguished from the mass population. They hadn't become intermixed with Europeans and Russian, and therefore, the Arabs of that time were (most likely) black people. Most of the Arabs of today, however, are mixed with European and Eastern ancestry, and they therefore have lighter skin complexions and more common recessive features... If you relay the concept of a "pure" Arab, completely unmixed and characteristic of his original forefathers, this "pure" Arab would look a lot like an African/Nubian with very dark skin and dominant genetic features...
Peace,
Ahmad
You forgot to provide references.
-
Peace,
You forgot to provide references.
There are plenty of references through books and websites showing that the original Arabs were black, but a significant certainty is even provided in the names of their countries, based on their original languages. For example, just to name a few
Kemet/Khemit Black, or black nation
Sudan Land of the Blacks
Moor (Mur) Black
Saud(ia) Black
Azania Black
Ethiopia Burnt faces
Hind, derivatvie of hindu and India BlackThese are only a few examples, and these are countries which, in today's world, characterize themseleves as Arabs. Having the description of "Arab" doesn't necessarily denote ancestry and ethnic origin. According to the Arab League, the factors that make one an Arab are "liguistics, politics and genealogy". So, basically, an Arab is anyone who considers him/herself to be an Arab, regardless of their racial makeup... Now, that gives an interesting perspective on ethnicity and Arabic culture, considering the fact that, according to a geographical consensus, over 75% of Arabs physically live in Africa. And this so-called Arabic culture is said to spread from central Africa to central Asia... So, since Arabs are mostly migrants from Africa who've migrated eastward and intermixed with the Europeans and Asians, their original ancestors were black people. There are a few interesting articles I've read that relate to this topic.
http//www.africaresource.com/rasta/2006/04/10/hamito-semitic-africa-semites-of-africa-ii/
http//alfredoftexas.tripod.com/blackhistoryfacts/id11.htmlThey even have hadiths (among Sunni Moslems) who state that anyone who speaks Arabic language is an Arab
http//www.islamtoday.com/show_detail_section.cfm?q_id=266&main_cat_id=11Another interesting link is
http//savethetruearabs.com/gpage1.htmlAlso, based on the ancient Semitic languages, the word "asmar" means dark. Very dark, or black, is "adam". Coincidentally, "Adam" is also the name of the first man, shaped from black mud... The Arabs, who were very much aware of this, took pride in their ancestry and skin complexions until the white Europeans started trying to take over. This is why, even now, instead of being renamed, the Arab countries specifying ethnicity have retained their original names referring to the blackness of their skin. A prime example of this is Morocco, a derivative of "moor", meaning black. Here's a good article on the ancient civilization of Moors and Arabs
http//africawithin.com/moors/moors_and_arabs.htmThe original Jews and Hebrews were also black people, even according to the Bible, and they are considered directly related to the Arabs
http//religiouscrossroads.tribe.net/thread/d2844545-c82d-403c-b6b9-79357df761a4
http//yeyeolade.wordpress.com/2007/07/11/black-people-are-the-original-race/
http//www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1037262.html
http//www.angelfire.com/sd/occultic/hebrew.htmlNowadays, instead of accepting their heritage, they've formed lies, speaking about black people being evil and destined for hell. They even promote this kind of nonsense in renditions of today's Bible
http//www.afrostyly.com/english/afro/diverse/curse_of_ham.htmThere are plenty of examples illustrating the fact that both Hebrews and Arabs were originally black/Nubian people, and archaeologists are finding out more information on this subject nearly everyday.
Peace,
Ahmad
-
Peace,
As it concerns Caucasiod-Negroid admixture. See this video
http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=MauBVhmH2j4
Most Latin Americans, Arabs, Berbers and Indians have Negroid (of some sort) admixture. Yet Eurocentric lies tries to make all of thse people white/Caucasian (we're not speaking color-wise, but ethnically). So here is proof that someone who has less than 40 percent Negroid admixture stops looking significantly Negroid and starts to look more Caucasiod (although darker hair, curlier hair and darker skin tones compared to other Caucasiods persist). This woman is for all purposes white, yet she is black only because she has Negroid admixture. And this is the same thing we find in the Arab world, Latin America, India, Persia and Southern Europe. Also Caucasoids have been mixing with Negroids since very ancient times. The ancient indian scriptures (and the phenotypes of the peoples themselves) point out this fact (I'll get some references from the scriptures). The only Caucasiod Europeans that came into the Middle East after the Quran came there as slaves or as the few Crusaders that stayed. And if the population was already Negriod, and was augmented by more Negroid imports from African Arabs wouldn't GENERALLY look as non-negroid as they do. So the mixture between Caucasiods and Negroids in the the Arab world and the middle east as a whole has been going on since before the advent of the Quran. And those Caucasiods didn't come from Europe as much as Eastern and Lower Russia (the Caucasus moutains where the name Caucasian comes from). This is why the hadeeths could claim someone as white colored (not European). And "Black" people who are nearly white as this woman above are that way because of SIGNFICANT Caucasoid ancestry. So I never said Caucasians have been ruling these areas since anceint times, but they have factored into the original Negroid populations of these areas since ancient times as immigrants and then later as conquerers. Why do I say they EVENTUALLY conqured those originally negroid populations? Because we find that during the time of the Quran and after it there is a signficant pro-caucasiod, anti-black sentiment in most of the areas in the middle east (arab and non-Arab), as well as India. Which naturally leads to the conclusion that both of these populations existed in these areas in signficant numbers. And the fact that most of the people in these areas now look like admixtures between Negroid and Caucasiod peoples shows that the groups eventuallly signficantly mixed with each other. And the anti-black sentiment that lingers today is a result of the pro-white, anti-black sentiment before Colonialism which resulted from the situation I just explained (which I dare to say had significantly died down before Colonialism had begun) and the pro-white, anti-black sentiment that Colonialism brought back in full-force (which only stuck becuz they were successful conquerors) which is the main reason why it persists in these countries today.
As it concerns the term Afro-American/African American I'll explain this later.
Godbless,
Anwar -
Saud(ia) means happy not black. Sood means black. Saud is technically sa'ud, and that ' = ayn. Sood has no ayn in it's root. Arabia is called Saudi Arabic because of the Sa'ud family having wrestled the peninsula from other Arab tribes in recent times (the 1900's).
"The current Kingdom was founded by Abdul-Aziz bin Saud, whose efforts began in 1902 when he captured the Al-Saud?s ancestral home of Riyadh, and culminated in 1932 with the proclamation, and recognition of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia though its national origins go back as far as 1744 with the establishment of the First Saudi State. The First Saudi State was established in the year 1744 (1157 A.H.) when Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahhab settled in Diriyah and Prince Muhammad ibn Saud (of Diriyah) agreed to support and espouse Wahhab's cause, with a view of cleansing the Islamic faith from what they considered to be distortions of Islamic practice (see Wahhabism). The House of Saud and its allies rose to become the dominant state in Arabia, first subduing Nejd, then extending their influence over the eastern coast from Kuwait down to the borders of Oman. The Saudis also brought the highlands of 'Asir under their suzerainty, and their Wahhabi forces conducted raids on the frontiers of Iraq and Syria, culminating in the sacking of the Shi'a holy city of Karbala in 1801.
In 1802 Saudi forces brought the region of Hejaz under their control, capturing the two holy cities of Mecca and Medina. This was a massive blow to the prestige of the Ottoman Empire, which had exercised sovereignty over the holy cities since 1517"
Godbless,
Anwar -
Peace,
Ok, I'll explain the Afro-American thing now. Afro = of significant African extract/descent. American = native to the continents of the Americas or the United states. Or having ancestors who are from these areas.
So I'm Afro because i am of signficant African extract/descent and I'm American because i was born here, a significant amount of my ancestors (parents, grand-parents, great grandparents, great great) were born here and the culture in which I grew up is a product that is native to American soils.
Hence I am Afro-American. Get it? Malcom was taking about being an American as a political and nationalist concept, i.e. being a citizen and patriot of the United Sates.As far as the different phenoytpes of Africans, I'm going to state my conclusions from my observations. On the continent of Africa the more straight haired and/or light skinned Ethipians, light skinned/straight haired somalis, Etritreans and North Sudanese, i believe have some Caucasiod admixture. Now there are negroids who have straigter hair (like Australoids/Veddoids), However we don't find many Australiods/Veddoids native to Africa anymore, and straight haired/light skinned Africans can trace some of their ancestry to outside of Africa (barring Capoids in southern Africa, who can be light skinned but never staright haired) especially in the case of the Sudan and Southern Egypt. Take the starighter haired, lighter skinned Eritreans, Nothern Sudanese and Ethiopans (and some Somalis). Do you know who look the most like these people? Afro Americans/Afro-Latinos with signficant European ancestry to give them straighter hair, more European-like features but not enough to take them out of the category of being obviously black. And it is because of these admixtures that I have seen among fellow African Americans and Afro-Latinos and their uncanny similarity to the above mentioned African peoples (who tend to be a little lighter or who are still very dark but have straighter hair and somewhat European influenced features) that I think these people are mixed (from direct or indirect mixture) with Caucasiods. And the fact that these people were in the vicintiy of the mixture of the original Negroid inhabitants of the middle east, it makes perfect sense that this mixture bled over into the the horn of Africa and the African Red sea coast areas.
Just look at the gradient. Start from Europe and Russia and move down. As you move down the people get darker and darker, until they are some sort of of more pure Negroid. And if you move up from Subsaharan Africa and Southern Asia the people get lighter and lighter (with straighter and straighter hair) until your reach pure Caucasiod and Mongoloid populations. This trend is too obvious and too strong to deny the conclusions. And the exceptions are too few and far between to contradict them.
Godbless,
Anwar -
Peace Anwar,
Saud(ia) means happy not black. Sood means black. Saud is technically sa'ud, and that ' = ayn. Sood has no ayn in it's root. Arabia is called Saudi Arabic because of the Sa'ud family having wrestled the peninsula from other Arab tribes in recent times (the 1900's).
Yes, I already know that Saudi Arabia was based on the Sa'ud family; that's common knowledge. However, "saud", based on the original Kemetic languages, in which the Arabic language was adapted, meant "black". It was later adapted as "sud", but I'm not talking about present descriptions; I'm talking about the original languages...
Afro = of significant African extract/descent. American = native to the continents of the Americas or the United states. Or having ancestors who are from these areas.
So I'm Afro because i am of signficant African extract/descent and I'm American because i was born here, a significant amount of my ancestors (parents, grand-parents, great grandparents, great great) were born here and the culture in which I grew up is a product that is native to American soils.
Hence I am Afro-American. Get it? Malcom was taking about being an American as a political and nationalist concept, i.e. being a citizen and patriot of the United Sates.This is completely ridiculous, and this is not what Brother El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz (a.k.a. "Malcolm X" was talking about. He was speaking directly about the social class of black people in America. Regardless of the political aspect of the country, black people have a lower social class (generally) than white people. We're regarded as, in the words of the Honorable Elijah Muhammad, "FIFTH CLASS CITIZENS". America as a country is regarded as a "free country", based on the principles of democracy and diplomacy; but we don't see that anywhere in the black communities of Detroit, Chicago, New York, Mississippi, Louisiana, Georgia, or anywhere else. America has claimed to be a country based on educational and economical equality, but anyone who lives in America, especially a person of Nubian ancestry, knows this is far from the truth. America praises Abraham Lincoln for "freeing the slaves"; but in reality, slavery still exists in America, and it never ended, it just took on a new form... Yes, Minister Malcolm did believe in black nationalism; but there's nothing particularly wrong with certain forms of black nationalism, as long as they aren't used to incite hatred and violence. Brother Khalid Muhammad was a good example of a powerful spokesman for black nationalism. Yes, some of his words were harsh, and some of his ideologies may have been considered "extreme", but he relayed a message, and he made people listen to him. Because of my being victimized by America's unequal and unjust legal and moral system, I refuse to call myself an "African-American". This is an insult to my forefathers. I was born and raised in America, but that doesn't make me an "American".
Also, "Africa" is a named developed by the Greeks, who called the country "africa terra", which is translated to mean "land of dust". It is also possibly an adaptation of "aphrike", meaning "without cold"... Either way, this wasn't the name used by the actual Africans. The earliest civilizations of black people during that time consisted of the Nubians, the Kemites, and the Kushites; and since most modern history of black civilization traces "Nubia" to be the oldest and largest of the three, I prefer the term "Nubian" over being called "African" any day...
I'm seriously surprised that you'd take the words of Brother El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz out of context and say he is only referring to his not being "American" in the political and nationalist generalization. That's completely false, and you've shown yourself, indirectly, to be willing to trample your own Nubian people so that you can try to maintain their false standard of being "politically correct"... Next time, if you want to reference Malcolm X, instead of making assumptions as to what you think he was talking about, you should read or listen to his words in context. If you listened to his "The Ballot or The Bullet" speech, you'd know that he was talking about being non-American in the traditional sense of claiming allegiance to another country and government (i.e. Nubia/Africa). If you recall, this is the same action taken by Noble Drew Ali and his followers with the Moorish Science Temple when they declared their concept of black nationalism and pronounced allegiance to the government of Morocco. This was also done by Honorable Elijah Muhammad and a group of his followers when they declared their "independence" from the American government and their allegiance to the African continent and it's people and descendants. This wasn't some kind of political stunt. Malcolm X was a firm supporter of desegragation and black migration back to Africa, and so were the other leaders and members of these nationalist organization. They actually believed and stood behind their concepts and actions. To view it as anything other than that is a biased view of their struggle...
Peace,
Ahmad
-
Salaam Al Khidr,
Thanks for pointing this out, brother. This is absolutely correct. Many people base their visual perceptions of black/Nubian people on the concept of having "dark skin". In reality, though, this is not the case. Plenty of black people have light skin complexions, and some of them are nearly as light as Europeans... Here's a big factor of racial intermixing
If a black man reproduces with a white woman, their child will be considered BLACK. And if this child grows up and reproduces with another white person, their child will be considered BLACK. And even then, if their child grows up to reproduce with a white person, they will still produce a BLACK CHILD. No matter how many times this is repeated, because of the weaker (recessive) genes present in the blood of white people, once a Nubian is mixed within their blood pattern, they can never produce another purely white, European child. Their children, children's children, and children's children's children will still be black, and they will still have dominant Nubian features, regardless of how light their skin complexion might be. White people know this too, they just refuse to accept it... White people generally like to play upon the significance of verbal opposites (i.e. white=pure, black=dirty; white=godly, black=demonic, etc.), and this is why their languages are the way they are today. However, if you base this same rule on the true definition of black (i.e. "originality", "strong", "dominant", what exactly is this saying about white people?
Again, this is very true. It may be painful for some to accept, but the Honorable Elijah Muhammad made the most appropriate statement regarding this, when he said, "The truth only hurts the guilty..."
Alhamdulillah, this is a profound statement, and it couldn't be put more simply and accurately. The corruption of this concept (not trying to save the black race) is illustrated by Brother Anwar's usage of the term "Afro-American". What does this mean? I'm not an African-American, or "Afro-American". The late Minister El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz (Malcolm X) spoke directly on this very profoundly in his "The Ballot or The Bullet" speech when he said
I'm not a politician, not even a student of politics; in fact, I'm not a student of much of anything. I'm not a Democrat, I'm not a Republican, and I don't even consider myself an American. If you and I were Americans, there'd be no problem.... Well, I am one who doesn't believe in deluding myself. I'm not going to sit at your table and watch you eat, with nothing on my plate, and call myself a diner. Sitting at the table doesn't make you a diner, unless you eat some of what's on that plate. Being here in America doesn't make you an American. Being born here in America doesn't make you an American. Why, if birth made you American, you wouldn't need any legislation, you wouldn't need any amendments to the Constitution, you wouldn't be faced with civil-rights filibustering in Washington, D.C., right now.... No, I'm not an American. I'm one of the 22 million black people who are the victims of Americanism. One of the 22 million black people who are the victims of democracy, nothing but disguised hypocrisy. So, I'm not standing here speaking to you as an American, or a patriot, or a flag-saluter, or a flag- waver-no, not I. I'm speaking as a victim of this American system. And I see America through the eyes of the victim. I don't see any American dream; I see an American nightmare....
In my opinion, this was, BY FAR, one of the greatest, most profound, truthful speeches ever delivered on the basis of race. Black/Nubian ancestry isn't equal in America. In fact, it's viewed as a curse. There's no truth, justice, equality, or peace between black people and white people in America. Nubians in America aren't living the same "American Dream" that is exhibited all over white, high-class society. In other words, we're not "eating off the plate". So, what makes us "Americans"? Good points, Al Khidr, regarding the message of unity, not just among Muslims but among black people as a whole. If we can successfully unify as a race, then we can eventually unify as a nation. But until there's black unity, there can't really be any unity among black people and white people...
Peace,
Ahmad
ALHAMDULILLAH BROTHER
-
Peace Anwar,
Yes, I already know that Saudi Arabia was based on the Sa'ud family; that's common knowledge. However, "saud", based on the original Kemetic languages, in which the Arabic language was adapted, meant "black". It was later adapted as "sud", but I'm not talking about present descriptions; I'm talking about the original languages...
This is completely ridiculous, and this is not what Brother El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz (a.k.a. "Malcolm X" was talking about. He was speaking directly about the social class of black people in America. Regardless of the political aspect of the country, black people have a lower social class (generally) than white people. We're regarded as, in the words of the Honorable Elijah Muhammad, "FIFTH CLASS CITIZENS". America as a country is regarded as a "free country", based on the principles of democracy and diplomacy; but we don't see that anywhere in the black communities of Detroit, Chicago, New York, Mississippi, Louisiana, Georgia, or anywhere else. America has claimed to be a country based on educational and economical equality, but anyone who lives in America, especially a person of Nubian ancestry, knows this is far from the truth. America praises Abraham Lincoln for "freeing the slaves"; but in reality, slavery still exists in America, and it never ended, it just took on a new form... Yes, Minister Malcolm did believe in black nationalism; but there's nothing particularly wrong with certain forms of black nationalism, as long as they aren't used to incite hatred and violence. Brother Khalid Muhammad was a good example of a powerful spokesman for black nationalism. Yes, some of his words were harsh, and some of his ideologies may have been considered "extreme", but he relayed a message, and he made people listen to him. Because of my being victimized by America's unequal and unjust legal and moral system, I refuse to call myself an "African-American". This is an insult to my forefathers. I was born and raised in America, but that doesn't make me an "American".
Also, "Africa" is a named developed by the Greeks, who called the country "africa terra", which is translated to mean "land of dust". It is also possibly an adaptation of "aphrike", meaning "without cold"... Either way, this wasn't the name used by the actual Africans. The earliest civilizations of black people during that time consisted of the Nubians, the Kemites, and the Kushites; and since most modern history of black civilization traces "Nubia" to be the oldest and largest of the three, I prefer the term "Nubian" over being called "African" any day...
I'm seriously surprised that you'd take the words of Brother El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz out of context and say he is only referring to his not being "American" in the political and nationalist generalization. That's completely false, and you've shown yourself, indirectly, to be willing to trample your own Nubian people so that you can try to maintain their false standard of being "politically correct"... Next time, if you want to reference Malcolm X, instead of making assumptions as to what you think he was talking about, you should read or listen to his words in context. If you listened to his "The Ballot or The Bullet" speech, you'd know that he was talking about being non-American in the traditional sense of claiming allegiance to another country and government (i.e. Nubia/Africa). If you recall, this is the same action taken by Noble Drew Ali and his followers with the Moorish Science Temple when they declared their concept of black nationalism and pronounced allegiance to the government of Morocco. This was also done by Honorable Elijah Muhammad and a group of his followers when they declared their "independence" from the American government and their allegiance to the African continent and it's people and descendants. This wasn't some kind of political stunt. Malcolm X was a firm supporter of desegragation and black migration back to Africa, and so were the other leaders and members of these nationalist organization. They actually believed and stood behind their concepts and actions. To view it as anything other than that is a biased view of their struggle...
Peace,
Ahmad
As Salaamu Alaykum Ahmad Bilal
I am so glad that you got to this lost and mentally dead negro (Anwar/Progod) before I did.
"I'm seriously surprised that you'd take the words of Brother El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz out of context and say he is only referring to his not being "American" in the political and nationalist generalization. That's completely false, and you've shown yourself, indirectly, to be willing to trample your own Nubian people so that you can try to maintain their false standard of being "politically correct"... Next time, if you want to reference Malcolm X, instead of making assumptions as to what you think he was talking about, you should read or listen to his words in context."
And this is why I call him an UNCLE TOM and every time he opens up his mouth he proves my statement 10 manifolds. Because he is an UNCLE TOM and MENTALLY DEAD, he comes from branch knowledge rather than root knowledge so he is willing to accept these terms "Afro American/African American" that the white slave master have given our people which you have skillfully demonstrated. How can we be free and independent as a Nation when we are still accepting the terms and labels that the white man has given us for the name of our race! The white man is not our origin, he is not in a position to label us when we predate him; as the Qur'aan teaches us, as revealed by Allah we (Nubians ) are the original people to walk this earth
ALLAH CREATED THE ORIGINAL HUMAN RACE BLACK
http//i329.photobucket.com/albums/l363/kushitex/hamaa/Ch15v26.jpgALLAH CREATED THE FIRST HUMAN BLACK
http//i329.photobucket.com/albums/l363/kushitex/hamaa/Ch15v28hamaablack.jpgAnd since we existed before him we had names for our own race and our own country before this johnny-come-lately slave master came there and conquered and renamed not only our selves but our country and this negro (Anwar) accept these (Afro-American/African American/American) for the name of his race and this negro went to the point of distorting the message of Malcolm X, what an UNCLE TOM he is! Anwar is nothing but a black imp for the white man.
Ahmad, I 100% agree and I was so glad that you pointed this out and that is because you are coming from root knowledge unlike Anwar who is coming from branch knowledge
"The earliest civilizations of black people during that time consisted of the Nubians, the Kemites, and the Kushites; and since most modern history of black civilization traces "Nubia" to be the oldest and largest of the three, I prefer the term "Nubian" over being called "African" any day...
Below is an article from New York Times
http//i329.photobucket.com/albums/l363/kushitex/hamaa/NewYorkTimesNubia.jpg
And below is a dynamic video breaking down what you have presented about Nubia/Nubians
Egypt During The Golden Age
http//kushite.webs.com/egyptgoldenage.htm -
Salaam to you all!
I dont understand your aversion to Anwar?
Who argue on that the Nubians were mighty people?
Al Kidr,the white men were in Africa,long before they came for slaves.In european museums you will find paintings of white mans meetings with Kings and Queens,the white men on their knees in front of black people dressed in silk and gold,and with fierce soldiers.The Kingdoms like in Mali also,under Mansa Mousa,a muslim ruler around year 1345 after christ,recived white men,and traded with them.
Vikings of the scandinavians,were soldiers for rent,in Africa,and middle east.They went to make money,in the powerfull nations,and went back to Norway or Sweeden when their contracts went out.
Some scientists here,even think that they in 1948,found in Sweeden,proof that some of the vikings took Islam with them back,a grave was found,and art effects with muslim inscriptions on it,from year 800 after christ.
No body have the truth alone.Non violence,and unity,beetween human beings,is my longings.
-
We're regarded as, in the words of the Honorable Elijah Muhammad, "FIFTH CLASS CITIZENS".
Who???
Is there a personal angle going on here?
Anyway, my ex-wife (at least I think she is), a decendant of nubians. Well she spent most of her life indoors, after we got married, she had to go out more often for visa and stuff. Well she turned black after a year...
Is it true that even in arab families you can have black and white children?
Then again... according to another hadith, the prophet was neither "black or white".
-
This topic is now locked due to it descending into insults of a foul and racist nature. The mods will look into this and action will be taken if any is deemed necessary.