|
|
Post by azrur on Oct 7, 2013 20:43:17 GMT -5
obviously because you are black supremacists and despise whiteys but they were pretty much the same as inbred british imperialists except they were jihadi lunatics led by arab the only redeemable figure from them is tariq ibn ziyad who himself unfortunately was a jihadi too and their greatest leader who actually cared about important stuff like science architecture and didnt kill all non muslamics and tolerated christians was like 3/4 white
|
|
|
|
Post by justcallmejari on Oct 9, 2013 10:48:11 GMT -5
Its becuase Afrocentrics like the fact that moors controlled a European country(Spain) so they use this as a way of claiming European culture came from Africans and Muslims. Had the Moors not controlled Spain Afrocentrics wouldnt give two cents about them.
|
|
|
|
Post by anansi on Oct 9, 2013 15:15:51 GMT -5
Its becuase Afrocentrics like the fact that moors controlled a European country(Spain) so they use this as a way of claiming European culture came from Africans and Muslims. Had the Moors not controlled Spain Afrocentrics wouldnt give two cents about them. Not sure about that, or even the so-called obsession but when people smell bull chips they react to it,we know Moors or that term existed long before a religion called Islam came into being and that in Euro languages it always meant Black,be they Christians like St.Benedict the Moor or St. Maurice first Christian knight even Othello..and the fact that it used to be a general term for Black folks especially of African descent right up to the present day,in some countries like Jamaica it was not unusual in my youth to tease an especially dark-skinned person as a "Blackie Moor" but when viewed on the silver screen they were constantly portrayed as whites or a little off-white, naturally some folks will react to that no different in my view than the ancient Kemetians and the so-called sons of Ham that used a very effective myth to justify enslavement of Black folks as a curse, but when looked at closely as to who those sons of Ham were as they were founders of early mighty civilizations they again became whitened or at-least non Black,so yes folks will zero in on the disconnect..will some jumped with glee that Islamic era Moors conquered parts of Europe??..why yes..but that is also a reaction to the once widely believed fiction that Europeans are masters of others and especially "Black folks".. the universe, both in the past the present and will be in the future. But I say this other parts of Africa do in fact get their history ignored or down played because they did not have anything to do with Europeans that's also an unfortunate fact. |
|
|
|
Post by azrur on Oct 9, 2013 15:36:28 GMT -5
Its becuase Afrocentrics like the fact that moors controlled a European country(Spain) so they use this as a way of claiming European culture came from Africans and Muslims. Had the Moors not controlled Spain Afrocentrics wouldnt give two cents about them. Not sure about that, or even the so-called obsession but when people smell bull chips they react to it,we know Moors or that term existed long before a religion called Islam came into being and that in Euro languages it always meant Black,be they Christians like St.Benedict the Moor or St. Maurice first Christian knight even Othello..and the fact that it used to be a general term for Black folks especially of African descent right up to the present day,in some countries like Jamaica it was not unusual in my youth to tease an especially dark-skinned person as a "Blackie Moor" but when viewed on the silver screen they were constantly portrayed as whites or a little off-white, naturally some folks will react to that no different in my view than the ancient Kemetians and the so-called sons of Ham that used a very effective myth to justify enslavement of Black folks as a curse, but when looked at closely as to who those sons of Ham were as they were founders of early mighty civilizations they again became whitened or at-least non Black,so yes folks will zero in on the disconnect..will some jumped with glee that Islamic era Moors conquered parts of Europe??..why yes..but that is also a reaction to the once widely believed fiction that Europeans are masters of others and especially "Black folks".. the universe, both in the past the present and will be in the future. But I say this other parts of Africa do in fact get their history ignored or down played because they did not have anything to do with Europeans that's also an unfortunate fact. it exist as name of libya tribe in a word similar to moor the benedict son of 2 africa slave, maurice is of egypt othello is english play man? and i see many of the movie they are portray as black how do you think the moroccan or algerian feel when the westerner with not knowing of history make their ancestor black and yes many africa downplay especially the san bush people very interesting but no one seem to say any about them on here or on the topix or rasta wire or old egypt search why so |
|
|
|
Post by anansi on Oct 9, 2013 16:00:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by justcallmejari on Oct 9, 2013 16:37:12 GMT -5
Not sure about that, or even the so-called obsession but when people smell bull chips they react to it,we know Moors or that term existed long before a religion called Islam came into being and that in Euro languages it always meant Black,be they Christians like St.Benedict the Moor or St. Maurice first Christian knight even Othello..and the fact that it used to be a general term for Black folks especially of African descent right up to the present day,in some countries like Jamaica it was not unusual in my youth to tease an especially dark-skinned person as a "Blackie Moor" but when viewed on the silver screen they were constantly portrayed as whites or a little off-white, naturally some folks will react to that no different in my view than the ancient Kemetians and the so-called sons of Ham that used a very effective myth to justify enslavement of Black folks as a curse, but when looked at closely as to who those sons of Ham were as they were founders of early mighty civilizations they again became whitened or at-least non Black,so yes folks will zero in on the disconnect..will some jumped with glee that Islamic era Moors conquered parts of Europe??..why yes..but that is also a reaction to the once widely believed fiction that Europeans are masters of others and especially "Black folks".. the universe, both in the past the present and will be in the future. But I say this other parts of Africa do in fact get their history ignored or down played because they did not have anything to do with Europeans that's also an unfortunate fact. it exist as name of libya tribe in a word similar to moor the benedict son of 2 africa slave, maurice is of egypt othello is english play man? and i see many of the movie they are portray as black how do you think the moroccan or algerian feel when the westerner with not knowing of history make their ancestor black and yes many africa downplay especially the san bush people very interesting but no one seem to say any about them on here or on the topix or rasta wire or old egypt search why so Dont get me wrong Im not saying the Moors were white or that Moor does not mean black, what Im saying is Afrocentrics obsess with the Moors for one reason, and that has to do with Europe. The funny part that Afrocentrics avoid like the plague is that majority of the Moors in Spain were Native White Converts, Mulladun, or Saqalibba and a whole host of Arab and Near Easterners. The black presence would have been rather insignificant. Abul Rahman III was described as having blue eyes and red hair, so when Europeans portray the Moors as off White they are actually being historically accurate. At the same time Eurocentrics like to pretend that there were no black Moors and that the ones there were slaves which is all a lie. |
|
|
|
Post by azrur on Oct 9, 2013 16:41:55 GMT -5
|
|
