I Pre-Ordered Hidden colors 3

[rivertemz]

Since I'm in the Uk and it only premièred nationally in the US. so now it's coming out on DVD on the 4th of July.

So did anyone make it to the premier? If so, how was it ? !

I have both DVDs 1 & 2 and I'm expecting 3 to reach here by the end of the month. Have there been previous threads on these documentaries directed by Tariq Nasheed?

And what are your views on the specific topics in each of the films such as the Religious aspects and the Historical connections with other continents.

[truthteacher2007]

Jul 1, 2014 20:05:36 GMT -5 rivertemz said:

Since I'm in the Uk and it only premièred nationally in the US. so now it's coming out on DVD on the 4th of July.

So did anyone make it to the premier? If so, how was it ? !

I have both DVDs 1 & 2 and I'm expecting 3 to reach here by the end of the month. Have there been previous threads on these documentaries directed by Tariq Nasheed?

And what are your views on the specific topics in each of the films such as the Religious aspects and the Historical connections with other continents.

Never heard about this. Can you give more info? What is it about?

[rivertemz]

Jul 2, 2014 8:48:38 GMT -5 truthteacher2007 said:

Jul 1, 2014 20:05:36 GMT -5 rivertemz said:

Since I'm in the Uk and it only premièred nationally in the US. so now it's coming out on DVD on the 4th of July.

So did anyone make it to the premier? If so, how was it ? !

I have both DVDs 1 & 2 and I'm expecting 3 to reach here by the end of the month. Have there been previous threads on these documentaries directed by Tariq Nasheed?

And what are your views on the specific topics in each of the films such as the Religious aspects and the Historical connections with other continents.

Never heard about this. Can you give more info? What is it about?

Oh really? I'll post the trailers to all three films, tell me what you think.

[Deleted]

Mostly the same nonsense afraid. Looking at the 3rd video, African-Americans still (!) claiming millions or hundreds of thousands of black people were lynched, when only 4,743 people were (including whites).

www.examiner.com/article/oprah-winfrey-wrongly-claims-millions-of-blacks-lynched

4,743 were lynched between 1882 and 1968 — not the millions claimed by Winfrey.

Of the 4,743 people lynched during that period, about one in four — 1,297 — were white.

law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/shipp/lynchingsstate.html

[rivertemz]

Jul 3, 2014 12:41:16 GMT -5 @ben said:

Mostly the same nonsense afraid. Looking at the 3rd video, African-Americans still (!) claiming millions or hundreds of thousands of black people were lynched, when only 4,743 people were (including whites).

www.examiner.com/article/oprah-winfrey-wrongly-claims-millions-of-blacks-lynched

4,743 were lynched between 1882 and 1968 — not the millions claimed by Winfrey.

Of the 4,743 people lynched during that period, about one in four — 1,297 — were white.

law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/shipp/lynchingsstate.html

First of all, I can never take you seriously on this forums since you've been on here, so you're not fooling me or most people on here my friend.

So back to topic, it's lovely how the toll of lynchings you were able to find as data and proof of anything substantial as evidence; that would give a sensible reason to your problem with this documentary series, EVEN IF that was reliably dependant on "written" accounts of lynchings. 
It's just like when they claimed the Jewish genocide had falsified numbers of victims, yet disregarding the lives lost no matter what the death polls were.

Many lynchings took place "undocumented", you gave a time frame 1882-1968, hence lynchings must have occurred before that period to an even larger extent than what has been recorded in the early 20th century.

Sometimes people like you just need to do one thing only to keep the topic at hand moderately sane and informative;

Keep calm and move on

[rivertemz]

losangeles.cbslocal.com/video?autoStart=true&topVideoCatNo=default&clipId=10330626

[truthteacher2007]

Jul 4, 2014 8:31:26 GMT -5 rivertemz said:

Jul 3, 2014 12:41:16 GMT -5 @ben said:

Mostly the same nonsense afraid. Looking at the 3rd video, African-Americans still (!) claiming millions or hundreds of thousands of black people were lynched, when only 4,743 people were (including whites).

www.examiner.com/article/oprah-winfrey-wrongly-claims-millions-of-blacks-lynched

law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/shipp/lynchingsstate.html

View Attachment
First of all, I can never take you seriously on this forums since you've been on here, so you're not fooling me or most people on here my friend.

So back to topic, it's lovely how the toll of lynchings you were able to find as data and proof of anything substantial evidence; would give a sensible reason to your problem with this documentary series, EVEN IF that was reliably dependant on "written" accounts of lynchings. 
It's just like when they claimed the Jewish genocide had falsified numbers of victims, yet disregarding the lives lost no matter what the death polls were.

Many lynchings took place "undocumented", you gave a time frame 1882-1968, hence lynchings must have occurred before that period to an even larger extent than what has been recorded in the early 20th century.

Sometimes people like you just need to do one thing only to keep the topic at hand moderately sane and informative;

Keep calm and move on

You know we must be something special since he/or she.... whatever can't get enough of us. You'll never find me trolling any white supremacist forums because I don't consider those folks worthy of my attention. There's nothing about them I find interesting or attractive, so..... So when you see someone running up on a forum devoted to people of African descent repeatedly, that tells you something. Either they have no life, or despite their protestations, there's something about us that they find deeply attractive, or both.

As for the level of ..... not even intelligence, but human conciousness.... Who cares what the exact number is? Who cares about how many whites were also lynched, the issue is the barbarity of a society that would do something like that in the first place. When it's your mother, father, sister brother or friend that is brutally murdered, there is no such thing as ONLY XYZ amount of people were killed. If it was one of his relatives or friends that got killed would he want to hear the police tell him, "quite your bitching! This was ONLY the 3rd murder to happen in this town in 5 years!" But you see, it's that kind of psychotic disregard for human life that made lynching possable in the first place. It's that kind of mentality, that way of being able to look past the humanity of the person standing in front of you that is at the heart of the major conflicts around the world today. Not saying that only white people are guilty of being psychopaths, but the mentality of the people in this country's government and society who allowed it to happen was psychotic. In fact, it's an ingrained part of their historical culture. One can't look at this sort of behavior and disregard the legacy of the Inquisition, the witch trials etc. Even before that there was a legacy of blood thirsty barbarism in the human sacrifices of the Celts and the bog sacrifices. There is a long history of barbaric psychosis in their world view. The people who orchastrated the lynchings of people of color in the US are the same people who are responsable for the turmil we are now seeing unfolding in the Middle East, Central and Latin America.

I would love to see the film, but what I would love even more is to see more films, forums etc devoted to the solutions. I think we are all aware of the what whas dones. The why is simple. It has nothing ultimately to do with color. It had to do with greed. There is a certain class of people who will do anything in order to hord as much power as they can get. We have to step back and look at the bigger picture to understand. Before they had Africans to shit on, they did it to their own people, serfs, servants, peasants. Then to other Europeans. Tnere wasn't even any honor amongst theives. Their literature tells you what they're about, Machiaveli's The Prince, Mackbeth. Look what was done to the Irish, the Welch, the Scotts. So what makes anyone think that Africans, Natives or any other people standing between them and what they wanted would change the mind of the raging beast? The sad thing in all of this are the delusional pupets like some people running around here, (not mentioning any names....), who fail to see that they are nothing more than the ultimate house niggers. Look across this country and you will see hundreds of thousands of people who benifited from the segragationist policies of the 50's and 60's who are now high and dry. They moved to the suburbs and had good jobs in company towns where everything was lilly white with nice picket fences. Comes the 70's and those companies, who were making a profit mind you, realize they can make even more if they move to Mexico or the Phillipines where they don't have to pay benifits or living wages. Left their "white" brothers in the dust without even a second thought. But these fools are so brain washed, they can't see that they wre just a means to an end all along and are convinced their lives are crap because of the crumbs that the government is throwing to monorities. They are so hungry for status they willingly blind themselves to the truth. It makes no sense trying to argue with Duck Dynasty, Honey BoBo bumkins like... you know. Like it or not, we will not only survive, we will thrive. No matter what our detractors say or do, change is inevitable. They can either get with the program or go the way of the dinasaur.

[Deleted]

there is 'good' and 'bad' african revisionism or afrocentrism. hidden colors is the latter, in fact its audience is people with low self-esteem. Here's a review I found covering the nonsense:

Mansa Musa and Montezuma were the same person. lolz.

It is asserted that Mansa Musa and Montezuma are in fact the same person which is a ridiculous claim. Musa I (Mansa Musa) lived from c. 1280 - c. 1337, while Montezuma I lived from c. 1398-1469. A half century separates them, not to mention the fact that it is generally accepted by serious historians that no transatlantic travel occurred prior to the Vikings (though there is some evidence to suggest that individual boats may have made the trip - entirely by accident after having been caught in great storms).

Beethoven was part-black. WTF?

- It is asserted that Beethoven was part African. This is a bold-faced lie, with essentially no evidence to support it beyond the contemporary accounts as to him having slightly darker skin. We must keep in mind that though he was part Flemish, he also had Spanish ancestry. Amongst very pale Germans, the darker Spanish (Mediterranean) complexion would have been very noteworthy, but there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that that was African ancestry.

Someone else has pointed out this was a case of mistaken identity, however this still shows the poor research behind the movie.

They say that Beethoven was mulatto. Well, he wasn't. The filmmakers have confused Beethoven (who had well-documented German and Belgian lineage) with George Bridgetower, a brilliant violinist who actually WAS a mulatto. (His mother was Polish and his father was Afro-Caribbean.)

In the video it also says stonehenge was built by a black man, again no evidence whatsoever provided. This is just racism plain and simple, trying to rob the heritage of other peoples. Now the milk white celts of brtiain (as described by ancient greek writers) are black? Total nonsense.

[Deleted]

Another ridiculous claim in the trailer is statues of white people don't exist before 1500 AD. All pre-1500 AD statues instead are apparently black people or "africoids".

So what about the hundred's of thousands of ancient greek or roman statues that look like this? Are these then fakes?

[truthteacher2007]

Jul 4, 2014 16:10:06 GMT -5 @ben said:

there is 'good' and 'bad' african revisionism or afrocentrism. hidden colors is the latter, in fact its audience is people with low self-esteem. Here's a review I found covering the nonsense:

Mansa Musa and Montezuma were the same person. lolz.

It is asserted that Mansa Musa and Montezuma are in fact the same person which is a ridiculous claim. Musa I (Mansa Musa) lived from c. 1280 - c. 1337, while Montezuma I lived from c. 1398-1469. A half century separates them, not to mention the fact that it is generally accepted by serious historians that no transatlantic travel occurred prior to the Vikings (though there is some evidence to suggest that individual boats may have made the trip - entirely by accident after having been caught in great storms).

Beethoven was part-black. WTF?

- It is asserted that Beethoven was part African. This is a bold-faced lie, with essentially no evidence to support it beyond the contemporary accounts as to him having slightly darker skin. We must keep in mind that though he was part Flemish, he also had Spanish ancestry. Amongst very pale Germans, the darker Spanish (Mediterranean) complexion would have been very noteworthy, but there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that that was African ancestry.

Someone else has pointed out this was a case of mistaken identity, however this still shows the poor research behind the movie.

They say that Beethoven was mulatto. Well, he wasn't. The filmmakers have confused Beethoven (who had well-documented German and Belgian lineage) with George Bridgetower, a brilliant violinist who actually WAS a mulatto. (His mother was Polish and his father was Afro-Caribbean.)

In the video it also says stonehenge was built by a black man, again no evidence whatsoever provided. This is just racism plain and simple, trying to rob the heritage of other peoples. Now the milk white celts of brtiain (as described by ancient greek writers) are black? Total nonsense.

As can be atested to by the numerous arguments I've had on this forum with certain members, I am no advocate of historical feel good revisionist history. I feel that we have far too much real history, culture and accomplishments to resort to wishstory and poor scholarship. This isse has been addressed several times in various posts in various threads here. I haven't had time to look at the trailers to give my 2 cents yet. What I take issue with you on is the attitude you express towards the legacy of terrorism commited against Afro Americans in this country. There is just no way to defend such attitudes, no matter how you try, you can never make that dirty sheet clean.

[rivertemz]

Jul 4, 2014 16:10:06 GMT -5 @ben said:

there is 'good' and 'bad' african revisionism or afrocentrism. hidden colors is the latter, in fact its audience is people with low self-esteem. Here's a review I found covering the nonsense:



Mansa Musa and Montezuma were the same person. lolz.



It is asserted that Mansa Musa and Montezuma are in fact the same person which is a ridiculous claim. Musa I (Mansa Musa) lived from c. 1280 - c. 1337, while Montezuma I lived from c. 1398-1469. A half century separates them, not to mention the fact that it is generally accepted by serious historians that no transatlantic travel occurred prior to the Vikings (though there is some evidence to suggest that individual boats may have made the trip - entirely by accident after having been caught in great storms).





Beethoven was part-black. WTF?



- It is asserted that Beethoven was part African. This is a bold-faced lie, with essentially no evidence to support it beyond the contemporary accounts as to him having slightly darker skin. We must keep in mind that though he was part Flemish, he also had Spanish ancestry. Amongst very pale Germans, the darker Spanish (Mediterranean) complexion would have been very noteworthy, but there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that that was African ancestry.





Someone else has pointed out this was a case of mistaken identity, however this still shows the poor research behind the movie.



They say that Beethoven was mulatto. Well, he wasn't. The filmmakers have confused Beethoven (who had well-documented German and Belgian lineage) with George Bridgetower, a brilliant violinist who actually WAS a mulatto. (His mother was Polish and his father was Afro-Caribbean.)





In the video it also says stonehenge was built by a black man, again no evidence whatsoever provided. This is just racism plain and simple, trying to rob the heritage of other peoples. Now the milk white celts of brtiain (as described by ancient greek writers) are black? Total nonsense.



Read more: egyptsearchreloaded.proboards.com/post/10223/edit#ixzz36bSjG7WA

I could easily debate you on these points, because I was in the same position, pausing each historical claim that the documentary had made and thoroughly researching each perspective in the revised field of that historical era in however way it's stamped authentic information or not.
Be aware that almost every year there's updates in these fields of European History that has been changed or debunked over and over, especially the time frame in which certain 'documented' events had occurred. So when you claim the authenticity of current academic sources 
As you've not made another remark about the lynching polls you pulled out of your behind..I'm definitely prepared for the next bull you grab onto next.

so first you said
"there is 'good' and 'bad' african revisionism or afrocentrism
"

I'd be glad to know which ones you consider "good" and "bad" studies of Afrocentrism , since it's been evident that you attempt to contradict everything on the study-space of afrocentrism as much as you can.

Then you say you found a REVIEW of all things, covering the so called nonsense. The weakness in your argument just can't get any worse. A secondary source of secondary sources as proof on your behalf, It's just so meek and lacks authenticity. How am I mean't to take you seriously then?

And to be fair this is the reason I started this thread, I wanted to get a point of view from any members on this site that have watched these documentaries and have noticed any claims that might be off in authenticity. I myself have pointed out things in the documentary that I would find contradictory and I'm ready to share my perspective from what I've studied, but yet again out of all the other sources given in these documentaries (each over 2 hours long) the amount of all the information given throughout, overwhelms it's few uncertain revisions on historical attributes.

So from the 1st film, one area the reviewer focused on


Mansa Musa and Montezuma were the same person. lolz.

It is asserted that Mansa Musa and Montezuma are in fact the same person which is a ridiculous claim. Musa I (Mansa Musa) lived from c. 1280 - c. 1337, while Montezuma I lived from c. 1398-1469. A half century separates them, not to mention the fact that it is generally accepted by serious historians that no transatlantic travel occurred prior to the Vikings (though there is some evidence to suggest that individual boats may have made the trip - entirely by accident after having been caught in great storms).

You're offering me to take yours and the reviewers word for it, if these two Mansa Musa and Montezuma are not the same person, why would the reviewer focus on this? Im not sure of it's relevance but it's VERY CLEAR that today's academic study of the Mali empire and Timbuktu STILL needs thorough revision and insight, because any time frame set between these two names can be worth debating if all sources were completely covered with factual accounts.Like the century differences, it's been claimed already that written accounts of popular military eras is most likely mislead by today's recent scholars and the 20th century flaws of studies. So for now there is NO WAY  to give a substantial disapproval of this area in the documentary. 

You're just always ready to contradict anything that comes out of a scholar of African decent, but you're not ready to debate a radical White Historian that believes The Ancient Egyptian Royals were aliens from mars.

I can debate you from the other quotes you got from the REVIEWER you trust so much, but it's clear there's nothing to grab onto as a point of disapproval.
Beethoven's background, the Stonehenge, the Mulatto Population of the Greek and Iberian era. All these claims are in realms of untapped academic revisions, so there is really no point in attempting to use whatever sources that might discount these claims in any way. 

There are PLENTY of documentaries broadcast on the History channel that range from "lacking further evidence" to "complete bullocks and a clever scam".

Hidden colours today is the Number 1 selling and highly reviewed documentary on Amazon.
And im quite surprised not everyone on this forums is aware of it yet.

I hope so now that I've shared it with you all.

[rivertemz]

Jul 5, 2014 1:01:14 GMT -5 truthteacher2007 said:

Jul 4, 2014 16:10:06 GMT -5 @ben said:

there is 'good' and 'bad' african revisionism or afrocentrism. hidden colors is the latter, in fact its audience is people with low self-esteem. Here's a review I found covering the nonsense:

Mansa Musa and Montezuma were the same person. lolz.

Beethoven was part-black. WTF?

Someone else has pointed out this was a case of mistaken identity, however this still shows the poor research behind the movie.

In the video it also says stonehenge was built by a black man, again no evidence whatsoever provided. This is just racism plain and simple, trying to rob the heritage of other peoples. Now the milk white celts of brtiain (as described by ancient greek writers) are black? Total nonsense.

As can be atested to by the numerous arguments I've had on this forum with certain members, I am no advocate of historical feel good revisionist history. I feel that we have far too much real history, culture and accomplishments to resort to wishstory and poor scholarship. This isse has been addressed several times in various posts in various threads here. I haven't had time to look at the trailers to give my 2 cents yet. What I take issue with you on is the attitude you express towards the legacy of terrorism commited against Afro Americans in this country. There is just no way to defend such attitudes, no matter how you try, you can never make that dirty sheet clean.

Trust me there is no substantial argument in his comments so far. All he gave was a review from someone else, I don't think Ben has even watched the films let alone understood the trailers.

[azrur]

Jul 5, 2014 8:31:56 GMT -5 rivertemz said:

I could easily debate you on these points, because I was in the same position, pausing each historical claim that the documentary had made and thoroughly researching each perspective in the revised field of that historical era in however way it's stamped a
There are PLENTY of documentaries broadcast on the History channel that range from "lacking further evidence" to "complete bullocks and a clever scam".

to be the fair to ben what the hitler channel puts on there tv isn't really what you can call history and not what i think he believe no?

[azrur]

looking more over at the hitler channel i don't think it is something ben would be agreeing on no? 

does tariq nasheed happen to mention anything about olmec in his documentaries 

[rivertemz]

Jul 7, 2014 1:02:45 GMT -5 azrur said:

does tariq nasheed happen to mention anything about olmec in his documentaries 

Yes Tariq does mention the olmecs, in Hidden colors 2.