KravenMorehead™
Barrel Brothers.®
Excerpt from a conversation on another site. Copied and archived with permission by me years ago. Printed here with permission gotten way before the fact.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Wesley Williams PhD - Black Arabia and the African Origin of Islam
That's definitely the issue. Always trying to grasp something outside of Africa and seeing him do his thing online over the years, it's also accompanied by trying to denigrate Africa and African People in some way while doing so. He comes off bougie as hell too. Thinks his phd legitimizes his shoddy ass work. Shaka Ndugu alone has put this guy to shame and he's just a regular dude like many of us here who knows how to do research. I remember seeing him on a site attempting to justify the genocides that muslims have carried out against African People by pointing to a relief on the walls of Kemet showing bound prisoners and calling THAT genocide. They always show me who/ what they're down for first and foremost regardless of the color of the company they keep.
Heard a wack ass audio of him on youtube too where he admitted that the mother of Farad Muhammad was white, but that the baby(farad) inside of her that she got from "Alfonzo"(who we know JACK shyt ABOUT) STRIPPED her of her devil nature. And it's very important that when you say STRIPPED, you change your intonation and say it a lil' louder than you were saying the other words leading up to it because it helps to distract folks from the wackness.
Plus he's just trying to superimpose certain elements of African religion upon Islam, in an attempt to make it more African-centered in appearance, but only ends up contradicting the quran. Like you said, they're ashamed of who they really are and where they really come from. Sure there were Black People in Arabia. We were the first EVERYWHERE on the planet. No doubt about that. And we are the ones that came up with the culture and religion that was there in Arabia PRIOR to islam. Just like we were the ones that came up with the culture and religion in Canaan PRIOR to judaism and just like we were the ones that came up with the culture and religion in Kemet PRIOR to christianity.
WE BY OURSELVES didn't come up with those 3 pseudo-religions, however. Those 3 b*stardizations were born AFTER mass invasions of our countries by foreign peoples e.g. the Habiru/ Apiru and other peoples from the aryan invasions into Canaan prior to judaism, the greeks and more importantly the romans into Kemet prior to christianity and christianized Axum and later Persia into Arabia prior to islam. I kid you not. Check the record. In each case you will find African People practicing their own traditional religions for thousands of years and ONLY IMMEDIATELY AFTER some major invasion where power changes hands do you see a religion pop up that is inherently hostile to the religion that had always been practiced in the region in question. How long had the Black People in Arabia been there practicing their traditional religion? But then we have Aksum, which became christianized around 333 a.d. They've always had contact with Arabia, often times setting up strongholds there for brief periods of time. Then in the 6th century, they occupied Arabia for almost 100 years until they were chased out by the invading persians. That's TWO major invasions, the most important being the one that lasted longer and where the power structure of the invading force was CHRISTIAN. All of a sudden, in the 7th century, tadaaaaaaaa, islam is born.
This is what they always do. African religions have certain commonalities, one of the main ones being that they are NOT based on evangelism or proselytism. Why? Because the traditional African understanding is that everybody has their own personal access to the spirit or NOT. Simple as that. We practice ancestral religions and you can't change your ancestors.
From the book "La Grande Geste Du Mali, Volume 1: Des Origines a la Fondation de L'Empire, Karthala-Arsan, Paris, 2000 (second edition) we have the following from the griot Wa Kamissoko:
"When Islam overcame the traditional religion, each clan was ordered to select an ancestor from among the personalities mentioned in the "four books that came down from heaven, " that is to say, the four books God revealed to the prophets. That is how Djon Bilali, or Bilal, bondsman to the prophet Mahomet, came to be the ancestor of the Manding. But in fact, as everyone knows, the ancestors of the Keitas and the Konates lived a long time in Wagadou before migrating to Mali, where their descendants have lived for over 2, 700 years. (Vol. 1, p.26)."
Select an ancestor? The only time BULLshyt like that ^^^ is done is when we're dealing with one of these conversion based religions. And white folk have been trying to do the same thing with African religions on the West Coast, most notably the Yoruba religion. Whenever they come into things, they try to make it universal somehow so that they get accepted into it. This is how they infiltrate and become our rulers. So when they(white folk) come in, they start talking about how Eshu is the devil, Obatala is a white man and Oshun & Yemaya are homosexual and are the matron saints of lesbians. Since ancient times, white people's main thing has been finding ways to make THEM and their PERVERTED CULTURES a part of "the divine whole" or a part of nature. So in making Eshu the devil, evil has become sanctioned now as a part of divinity rather than what we have traditionally put forth that it comes from individuals' choices rather than by divine design. Obatala has always been known as the Lord of the White (Oosala). The color associated with him is white. There are colors associated with all Orisas, Arusi, Vodu, Nommo, Nkisi, Abosom, Neteru etc. And there are spiritual/ metaphysical reasons for it, but they went with RACEand said Obatala was an actual WHITE MAN aka caucasian. Now, this is BULLshyt according to the traditional religion that's there, but for various reasons having to do with us being a conquered people some African priests have gone along with this bullshyt. Brings more white folk with money into it too. I doubt I'll have to explain the homosexual thing, but as we can see this is the last great barrier that they're trying to break through with us.
You can take it all the way back to the greek invasion of Kemet and find this kind of thing going down. Some of us wouldn't accept them as our rulers so they had to "marry" into the power structure. Often times what we're dealing with as it concerns the Ptolemies or greek rule in Kemet in general are mulattoes i.e. Barrack Obamas. Most of us still said fukk that and went back further into Africa. Soter I creates Serapis which is a fusion of Ausar and Apis with HIS appearance. He then closes down all other temples to other Neteru and makes it so that only Serapis in HIS IMAGE is to be worshiped. This is all jedi-mind trick bullshyt meant to make being conquered(and thus acceptance of whites and their ways) palatable to us so that we put up less and less resistance.
Nothing against Bullet1987. By all means, folks can get the book if they want it for the record. We were definitely involved in the creation of these religions. No way we couldn't be because not only were those foreigners getting the bulk of the religious information from us, but also WRITING ITSELF. None of them were literate before contact with us so these religions depended on collabos.
I'm good with the original that our people came up with by themselves though.
I don't know. I disagree a little. Knowing your ancestry in West Africa is one thing, correcting the disinformation put out by Western academics and others is something totally different. Should we not speak on blacks in India and the great things they did? We speak on the Moors all the time and not all of them were West African in origin...only the Almoravid and Almohads. The Ummayads however weren't West African...they were Black, but not West African.
That's definitely the issue. Always trying to grasp something outside of Africa and seeing him do his thing online over the years, it's also accompanied by trying to denigrate Africa and African People in some way while doing so. He comes off bougie as hell too. Thinks his phd legitimizes his shoddy ass work. Shaka Ndugu alone has put this guy to shame and he's just a regular dude like many of us here who knows how to do research. I remember seeing him on a site attempting to justify the genocides that muslims have carried out against African People by pointing to a relief on the walls of Kemet showing bound prisoners and calling THAT genocide. They always show me who/ what they're down for first and foremost regardless of the color of the company they keep.
Heard a wack ass audio of him on youtube too where he admitted that the mother of Farad Muhammad was white, but that the baby(farad) inside of her that she got from "Alfonzo"(who we know JACK shyt ABOUT) STRIPPED her of her devil nature. And it's very important that when you say STRIPPED, you change your intonation and say it a lil' louder than you were saying the other words leading up to it because it helps to distract folks from the wackness.
Plus he's just trying to superimpose certain elements of African religion upon Islam, in an attempt to make it more African-centered in appearance, but only ends up contradicting the quran. Like you said, they're ashamed of who they really are and where they really come from. Sure there were Black People in Arabia. We were the first EVERYWHERE on the planet. No doubt about that. And we are the ones that came up with the culture and religion that was there in Arabia PRIOR to islam. Just like we were the ones that came up with the culture and religion in Canaan PRIOR to judaism and just like we were the ones that came up with the culture and religion in Kemet PRIOR to christianity.
WE BY OURSELVES didn't come up with those 3 pseudo-religions, however. Those 3 b*stardizations were born AFTER mass invasions of our countries by foreign peoples e.g. the Habiru/ Apiru and other peoples from the aryan invasions into Canaan prior to judaism, the greeks and more importantly the romans into Kemet prior to christianity and christianized Axum and later Persia into Arabia prior to islam. I kid you not. Check the record. In each case you will find African People practicing their own traditional religions for thousands of years and ONLY IMMEDIATELY AFTER some major invasion where power changes hands do you see a religion pop up that is inherently hostile to the religion that had always been practiced in the region in question. How long had the Black People in Arabia been there practicing their traditional religion? But then we have Aksum, which became christianized around 333 a.d. They've always had contact with Arabia, often times setting up strongholds there for brief periods of time. Then in the 6th century, they occupied Arabia for almost 100 years until they were chased out by the invading persians. That's TWO major invasions, the most important being the one that lasted longer and where the power structure of the invading force was CHRISTIAN. All of a sudden, in the 7th century, tadaaaaaaaa, islam is born.
This is what they always do. African religions have certain commonalities, one of the main ones being that they are NOT based on evangelism or proselytism. Why? Because the traditional African understanding is that everybody has their own personal access to the spirit or NOT. Simple as that. We practice ancestral religions and you can't change your ancestors.
From the book "La Grande Geste Du Mali, Volume 1: Des Origines a la Fondation de L'Empire, Karthala-Arsan, Paris, 2000 (second edition) we have the following from the griot Wa Kamissoko:
"When Islam overcame the traditional religion, each clan was ordered to select an ancestor from among the personalities mentioned in the "four books that came down from heaven, " that is to say, the four books God revealed to the prophets. That is how Djon Bilali, or Bilal, bondsman to the prophet Mahomet, came to be the ancestor of the Manding. But in fact, as everyone knows, the ancestors of the Keitas and the Konates lived a long time in Wagadou before migrating to Mali, where their descendants have lived for over 2, 700 years. (Vol. 1, p.26)."
Select an ancestor? The only time BULLshyt like that ^^^ is done is when we're dealing with one of these conversion based religions. And white folk have been trying to do the same thing with African religions on the West Coast, most notably the Yoruba religion. Whenever they come into things, they try to make it universal somehow so that they get accepted into it. This is how they infiltrate and become our rulers. So when they(white folk) come in, they start talking about how Eshu is the devil, Obatala is a white man and Oshun & Yemaya are homosexual and are the matron saints of lesbians. Since ancient times, white people's main thing has been finding ways to make THEM and their PERVERTED CULTURES a part of "the divine whole" or a part of nature. So in making Eshu the devil, evil has become sanctioned now as a part of divinity rather than what we have traditionally put forth that it comes from individuals' choices rather than by divine design. Obatala has always been known as the Lord of the White (Oosala). The color associated with him is white. There are colors associated with all Orisas, Arusi, Vodu, Nommo, Nkisi, Abosom, Neteru etc. And there are spiritual/ metaphysical reasons for it, but they went with RACEand said Obatala was an actual WHITE MAN aka caucasian. Now, this is BULLshyt according to the traditional religion that's there, but for various reasons having to do with us being a conquered people some African priests have gone along with this bullshyt. Brings more white folk with money into it too. I doubt I'll have to explain the homosexual thing, but as we can see this is the last great barrier that they're trying to break through with us.
You can take it all the way back to the greek invasion of Kemet and find this kind of thing going down. Some of us wouldn't accept them as our rulers so they had to "marry" into the power structure. Often times what we're dealing with as it concerns the Ptolemies or greek rule in Kemet in general are mulattoes i.e. Barrack Obamas. Most of us still said fukk that and went back further into Africa. Soter I creates Serapis which is a fusion of Ausar and Apis with HIS appearance. He then closes down all other temples to other Neteru and makes it so that only Serapis in HIS IMAGE is to be worshiped. This is all jedi-mind trick bullshyt meant to make being conquered(and thus acceptance of whites and their ways) palatable to us so that we put up less and less resistance.
Nothing against Bullet1987. By all means, folks can get the book if they want it for the record. We were definitely involved in the creation of these religions. No way we couldn't be because not only were those foreigners getting the bulk of the religious information from us, but also WRITING ITSELF. None of them were literate before contact with us so these religions depended on collabos.
I'm good with the original that our people came up with by themselves though.
I'm attracted to the book less because of Islam (I'm not even a Muslim) and more because of the evidence he can show about what the original Arabs looked like. Something that is missing from...everywhere really. I've heard of al-Jahiz, even had a partial translation of his book about Blacks from a Professor some years back. What shocked me was that here was a book from an Arab in the 8th century CE about Africans that WASN'T derogatory. Even in the Middle Ages, "Arabs" were saying some crabby shyt about Blacks and when I read al-Jahiz I realized something was wrong. Dr.Wesley makes it seem as if the dislike of Blacks took place AFTER the rise of the Abbasid's when Persians came in. I guess because black Arabs and Persians had been warring since before Muhammad was even born. I can't speak on any rivalries he has with other researchers...I don't know about that. There is another researcher named Dana Marniche who wrote a chapter in Golden Age of the Moor. She corroborates some of the things that Wesley Williams says.
I can't speak on what's written in that book of his. I can only go from what I've seen of him online and based on that, my assessment is that you can't correct disinformation with disinformation. I have no problem with knowing our history everywhere we are on the planet. I like a lot of Runoko Rashidi's work to this effect. He's a muslim, but he's less biased than this muslim we're talking about. I love learning about my people's history everywhere, but OF COURSE there needs to be emphasis placed on where we actually come from and that ain't Arabia or India or Malaysia or any of them other places. It's the place that so many of us are embarrassed about because it has suffered so much denigration. And when we DO tell of the history of those of our people in those other places, I'm a lot more receptive to it when we leave OUT the CONTENT of the pseudo-religions created by white people/ arabs WITH Black People whose countries have been invaded and taken over. Those books i.e. the bible, quran, talmud etc. are NOT history books. And they need to tell the truth about the FACT that the creation of these religions are ALWAYS a matter of the collaborative efforts of invading whites/ arabs into the countries of Black People.
This is like the one-drop rule being applied historically to religions and that is inherently a distortion of reality i.e. disinformation.
Why would Black People left to their own devices create religions that forbid their own traditional religions? We know of ONE AFRICAN who ever tried to do that-banning our traditional religions, closing and/ or defacing our temples, banning images of anything but symbols of his personal "religion", erasing certain names and only putting the one he wanted for his own personal "religion" and of course the "religion" placed emphasis on him as the intermediary between humans and the "one and only, true god". After his death, our people promptly banned HIMfrom the face of history.
Aside from that incident in history, the PATTERN that we always see is that whenever our culture and religions are banned or made illegal, it's ALWAYS because of a foreign element involved. And if there is one thing religions like judaism, christianity and islam do, it's denigrate and ban our religions even to the point of making the practice of them a capital offense.
Like I said, snatch the book up for the record. I understand. I think Runoko has a done a great job of showing the historical presence of African People in Asia, but that doesn't mean that more can't be shown. So snatch it up. When it comes to the rest of what you're saying there, that doesn't surprise me. They aren't the only ones who wrote seemingly fondly of our people or even other people that they've conquered. That chasm between their words and their actions is traditional. I've always told folks that when we look at the history, we see that the ACTION/ BEHAVIOR of racism came BEFORE the doctrine. The doctrine was created and refined by certain people later in order to clarify a collective vision and direction. So you're not really going to find a bunch of negative stuff written about Africans prior to being conquered. It's hard to write about us as being beneath them when at the time we had the most advanced civilizations and everyone knew it. But you'll find a mixture of sentiment in the commentaries AFTER they've conquered this and that nation, made some segue into it or at the very least the point at which they've decided to attempt to conquer a nation. It helps to minimize cognitive dissonance.
I always consider their actions first and they began wiping us out in Asia-the "middle east" and India and so on waaaaaay before that 8th century ce time period. What some of that represents is merely the old tactic of flattery-the lubricant of social infiltration. And different groups of them advance at different rates due to many factors including different tactics-the main ones being to this day total annihilation, segregation or miscegenation/ assimilation. The writing (if any) has subtle differences in each case.
Good points. However let's apply this logic to music. Hip-Hop was started by black people, what if 100 years from now Europeans have taken over the genre and made it their own. Would that mean the original creators of that music are now no longer relevant because their music was "conquered?" No of course not. So why put such stipulation on the original Arabs? I don't care for the religious aspect of this because that's not why I'm interested in it. So whether or not the religion of Islam is peuso-historical is more of a religious debate. I don't believe it's HISTORICAL importance should be outright disregarded regardless. And it wouldn't be until well into the Middle Ages before you could say these people were even "conquered." Hell, there are accounts of these black Arab tribes well into the 1800's. Black Arabs in Yemen, Oman, and Saudi Arabia...I can't speak on what's written in that book of his. I can only go from what I've seen of him online and based on that, my assessment is that you can't correct disinformation with disinformation. I have no problem with knowing our history everywhere we are on the planet. I like a lot of Runoko Rashidi's work to this effect. He's a muslim, but he's less biased than this muslim we're talking about. I love learning about my people's history everywhere, but OF COURSE there needs to be emphasis placed on where we actually come from and that ain't Arabia or India or Malaysia or any of them other places. It's the place that so many of us are embarrassed about because it has suffered so much denigration. And when we DO tell of the history of those of our people in those other places, I'm a lot more receptive to it when we leave OUT the CONTENT of the pseudo-religions created by white people/ arabs WITH Black People whose countries have been invaded and taken over. Those books i.e. the bible, quran, talmud etc. are NOT history books. And they need to tell the truth about the FACT that the creation of these religions are ALWAYS a matter of the collaborative efforts of invading whites/ arabs into the countries of Black People.
This is like the one-drop rule being applied historically to religions and that is inherently a distortion of reality i.e. disinformation.
Why would Black People left to their own devices create religions that forbid their own traditional religions? We know of ONE AFRICAN who ever tried to do that-banning our traditional religions, closing and/ or defacing our temples, banning images of anything but symbols of his personal "religion", erasing certain names and only putting the one he wanted for his own personal "religion" and of course the "religion" placed emphasis on him as the intermediary between humans and the "one and only, true god". After his death, our people promptly banned HIMfrom the face of history.
Aside from that incident in history, the PATTERN that we always see is that whenever our culture and religions are banned or made illegal, it's ALWAYS because of a foreign element involved. And if there is one thing religions like judaism, christianity and islam do, it's denigrate and ban our religions even to the point of making the practice of them a capital offense.
Like I said, snatch the book up for the record. I understand. I think Runoko has a done a great job of showing the historical presence of African People in Asia, but that doesn't mean that more can't be shown. So snatch it up. When it comes to the rest of what you're saying there, that doesn't surprise me. They aren't the only ones who wrote seemingly fondly of our people or even other people that they've conquered. That chasm between their words and their actions is traditional. I've always told folks that when we look at the history, we see that the ACTION/ BEHAVIOR of racism came BEFORE the doctrine. The doctrine was created and refined by certain people later in order to clarify a collective vision and direction. So you're not really going to find a bunch of negative stuff written about Africans prior to being conquered. It's hard to write about us as being beneath them when at the time we had the most advanced civilizations and everyone knew it. But you'll find a mixture of sentiment in the commentaries AFTER they've conquered this and that nation, made some segue into it or at the very least the point at which they've decided to attempt to conquer a nation. It helps to minimize cognitive dissonance.
I always consider their actions first and they began wiping us out in Asia-the "middle east" and India and so on waaaaaay before that 8th century ce time period. What some of that represents is merely the old tactic of flattery-the lubricant of social infiltration. And different groups of them advance at different rates due to many factors including different tactics-the main ones being to this day total annihilation, segregation or miscegenation/ assimilation. The writing (if any) has subtle differences in each case.
Strangely enough it's the Blacks in the Sudan calling themselves Arabs and not African that claim to be black Arabs. Most people have identified this as Arabization, and I'm sure some of that has occurred. But they don't seem to deny their blackness...only their Africanity. They're calling themselves black Arabs and there are groups in Central Africa that do this as well. How do you think Islam was spread? One group of Black people came and spread their religion and cultural identity on ANOTHER group of black people. Those that spread Islam to Ghana then Mali and Bornu were not PERSIAN muslims...they were black Arabs and there are early medieval documents that would lend credibility to this idea. That would be an all-around amazing re-conceptualization of history! The Sayfawa Dynasty of the Bornu Empire CLAIMED to be the descendants of an ancient Yemenite from the Himyarite Kingdom in Ancient Yemen and most people have written it off as wanting to be closer to their religion...but what if we take them for their own word? We accept that Egypt claimed descendency from Punt (supposedly somewhere in the Horn of Africa...which is TRUE), but say different groups in the Yoruba, Fulani, Sayfawa, or Sudan are all crazy and wrong for claiming descendency from Arabia? I don't think any of these groups are denying their blackness. Let's see what Dana Marniche has to say about it...
Other tribes located today both in Arabia and in Africa claiming descent from Himyar and Kahlan, descendants of Qahtan, through Abd Shams Saba or Saba and his sons Himyar and Kahlan are the Afar (Afari or Afariyyah in Arabia), and Danakil or Anagil, (Nakh’l, Nakhawila or An-Nakha al Nakha of Arabia) and many other tribes. Thus, the bulk of the tall Cushytic speakers of Somalia, Djibouti, Eritrea and Puntland are likely derived from African peoples who had settled in ancient times in south Arabia. This settlement very likely began during the Neolithic and/or Copper Age (between 7th and the 3rd millennium B.C. )when elements of the Doian neolithic of Somalia begin to appear in the Rub al Khali and tall, oval-headed “Negroids” as Anati put it, begin to appear in the rock art of the Central Arabian and Syrian Arabian deserts.
Here are the AFAR as mentioned above who reside in BOTH East Africa and Arabia even today! These are not descendants of slaves as they have been living in these regions probably for ages.
The most recent wave of Arabian origin to enter the region of Sudan and East Africa are the people whose names are still found on both sides of the Nile are the Sudanese Arabs who came after the birth of Muhammed and until the 18th century. They include the Manasse’ir (Mansour), Kababish or Kabsh, Beni Amer, Ja’aliya or Ja’aliin, Bishari’in, Humr, Muzeina, Haweitat, Hamar, Rufa or Ruwafa, Khuzam, Salamat,, Hamid, Gerar, Hamran, Mugharba, Lahawi, Ma’aza. Habbaniyya, Mahass, Rashaida, Djerafin (Terapin), Hawara, Kuwahla, Bayza’a, Rikab, Shaikyia, Dhubaniyya and Mesiria to name just a few. These tribes are in part and in full the descendants of tribes of the Arabian bedouin of North Africa Rabia, Sulaym, Hilal, and Ghatafan who began emigrating from the Hejaz area of northwestern Arabia into Egypt as early as the 9th c. A.D. and continued their immigration as late as a few centuries ago. They had originally conquered Egypt and North Africa and finally moved southward into Sudan, Chad and Eritrea.
Early Muslim writers OUTSIDE OF ARABIA were often confused on the origin of the true Arabs. They sometimes divided them into Ishmaelites and Qahtanis or northern Arabians and southern ones. But most northern Arabian bedouin had traditions of coming from the Yemen from the kingdom of Himyar or Humayr and Saba who were descendants of Qahtan, while the dark skinned tribes of Qahtan in the Yemen in fact claimed an African origin.
The ancient Yemite Kingdom the Seyfawa of Bornu claim to be originated from (Himyar) was simply another black kingdom. Also, the Afar are not Arabs...I'm not saying that. They were simply another black group on the Arabian peninsula that originated from Africa like the Arabs. Look up Dana Marniche's essay 'When Arabia was Eastern Ethiopia.' Several websites have it.
Last edited:
Yall be wanting these prostitutes to love you so bad. Shes looking for a Mark which is why shes looking for some cac. If you black and have money she'll rock with you though. If you a cac, she'll take the seed and hit you with child support. Learn the game.
