Moors: explain this shit to me

[Black Boy King]

I'm not rejecting anything. Thousands of black scholars have spent years of their lives trying to find ties to Africa lol.

You keep saying your a Moor but there's no proof. Those documents do not prove you are a moor or have ever been a moor.

Doesn't prove you or anyone else are moors. It only says moors are not negroes to them but free people. And LOL at thinking an old S. Carolina legal book holds any weight. Even if it were law it has no jurisdiction in Georgia, Alabama etc

Moors were present when the Constitution was written, this is why it was important for them to notify the Sultan of Morocco of the government change and ensure that it went along with the Constitution (the Supreme Law)

moors being "present" (rather true or untrue ) does not mean you or any one else is one...and LOL at the King of Morocco having he ability to do anything in the Americas. When has a king ever let his subjects be ruled by someone else, oh yeah he didnt right? Lol like White folks could be trusted to let any random black person call himself a "Moor" and free himself from bondage. That's ludicrous, it's not even remotely logical.

The Moorish Divine and National Movement is for all Black

And herein is the issue. There's no proof that every black person is a moor or of moorish descent. Remember "moor" is a general term...

Moorish is a nationality. You can tie yourself to it by looking at your family's history. If you know your ancestors are from America (North, Central or South) or Africa, then you are considered a Moor.

So it's both a nationality and a general term? So what's the purpose of the nationality if every one is one regardless? Again makes no sense.

Moor as a general term for blacks, all blacks in fact is just a title placed on you by some ol dead white folks just like Negro...all blacks were called negroes too at one point and that point is far more recent than any of these documents brought forth today. So even if you want to use legal terms the word "Moor" does not even apply today. Laws are written in the political language of the day. Laws for or against blacks have several synonyms. "African-American", "Black", "Negro" etc. "Moor" was most likely the term of the day.

The Treaty is to allow the US to operate on their land for fifty years.

No it doesn't. Lol it's a treaty, not one time did they ask for permission to do anything. Moors did not "own" Americas if so, once again, when has a King ever allowed his subjects to be ruled by another?

Fam.... First off... Not all Moors are Negros............ This is beyond obvious.......... ALL NEGROS ARE MOORS.......... This is in the dictionary.............. look up the word "blackamoor"....

it means........ "a Negro"........................ coming from the phrase......... "black Moor"..................

you say you aren't rejecting the information................. but you are rejecting it........... clearly.......what is wrong with you....?

.....South Carolina state legislature may not mean anything to you....... but it was the law of the land (and i have no real reason to believe it isn't now besides how people "feeeeel" things are changing) in SC..............

you say "Moors being present during the making of the Constitution doesn't make you one"....... Duh........ It means that Moors have direct ties to this land........... and have authority in this land along side the European sovereigns.................

Moor is not synonymous to "Black"..... that doesn't make sense.................. what would be the use for the English word "blackamoor"? it means "blackablack" ? "a black Black"..........?

You may choose to dismiss the information........... but if you choose to refute it, please use valid arguments........... slandering a valid source is a bad way to start..............

 

[Black Boy King]

So let me get this straight: the Moroccan king who owns vast amounts of land and is probably generating money from the inhabitants here (much like the King of England was) is going to let some Europeans come in and change his system?

Doesn't sound like much of a king to me.

"....let some Europeans come in and change his system"

"let"

lol.....

African-European relations were/are much deeper than that...... lol @ "not much of a king to me".... More irrelevant opinions...

The Articles of Confederation is not a government....... a government is made up of people that rule over a land enclosed in boundaries.... the government was the US Republic, which had 8 Presidents before GW....for which George Washington said they are "giving commerce with your (Sultan of Morocco) dominions"..... Trading with your land..... Farming with your land..... dominions is land

you're attempting to change definitions of words but I have both a well renown Oxford dictionary set and a 4th edition Black's Law dictionary at my disposal... you can't shake me from the truth.... your feelings and opinions cannot deter me...

dominions means land in this instance.... you say "retained dominion over his subjects"... implying dominion = authority, here... that does not make sense... he said

The encouragement which Your Majesty has been pleased, generously, to give to our commerce with your dominions...make a deep impression on the United States and confirm their respect for and attachment to Your Imperial Majesty.

give commerce with your dominions... i guess you need to look up what "commerce" means? or what "with" means? idk dude.... it's pretty blatant

 

[jono]

.....South Carolina state legislature may not mean anything to you....... but it was the law of the land (and i have no real reason to believe it isn't now besides how people "feeeeel" things are changing) in SC..............

No it literally means nothing. I live in Michigan and we don't have to follow any laws S. Carolina writes lol. Provide an updated version....and it still wouldn't be relevant outside S. Carolina. Lol

Moor is not synonymous to "Black"..... that doesn't make sense.................. what would be the use for the English word "blackamoor"? it means "blackablack" ? "a black Black"..........?

Lol whatever bruh. Nobody even uses "blackamoor", its an old term. But take a look at this definition from Oxford:

noun

dated offensive

a black African; a very dark-skinned person.
http://oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/blackamoor



you say "Moors being present during the making of the Constitution doesn't make you one"....... Duh........ It means that Moors are direct ties to this land........... and have authority in this land along side the European sovereigns.................

No they don't. Provide a document saying they do. You posted a treaty that allows free trade between nations not any "authority" lol. There are no European sovereigns either for the record.

Fam.... First off... Not all Moors are Negros............ This is beyond obvious.......... ALL NEGROS ARE MOORS.......... This is in the dictionary.............. look up the word "blackamoor"....

Okay then lol

You may choose to dismiss the information........... but if you choose to refute it, please use valid arguments........... slandering a valid source is a bad way to start...........

What source was valid? Your treaty is bunk, and the S. Carolina legal book is old and not relevant to all states. Those are facts. So if you wanna call that "rejecting" then consider it rejected.

 

[jono]

From the link I posted:

Faced with serious economic and political difficulties, he was searching for a new method of governing which required changes in his economy. Instead of relying on a standing professional army to collect taxes and enforce his authority, he wanted to establish state-controlled maritime trade as a new, more reliable, and regular source of income which would free him from dependency on the services of the standing army. The opening of his ports to America and other states was part of that new policy.

Later on:

The Sultan issued a declaration on December 20, 1777, announcing that all vessels sailing under the American flag could freely enter Moroccan ports. The Sultan stated that orders had been given to his corsairs to let the ship "des Americains" and those of other European states with which Morocco had no treaties-Russia Malta, Sardinia, Prussia, Naples, Hungary, Leghorn, Genoa, and Germany-pass freely into Moroccan ports.

From your link:

To all Persons to whom these Presents shall come or be made known- Whereas the United States of America in Congress assembled by their Commission bearing date the twelvth day of May One thousand Seven hundred and Eighty four thought proper to constitute John Adams, Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson their Ministers Plenipotentiary, giving to them or a Majority of them full Powers to confer, treat & negotiate with the Ambassador, Minister or Commissioner of His Majesty the Emperor of Morocco concerning a Treaty of Amity and Commerce, to make & receive propositions for such Treaty and to conclude and sign the same, transmitting it to the United States in Congress assembled for their final Ratification, And by one other (commission bearing date the Eleventh day of March One thousand Seven hundred & Eighty five did further empower the said Ministers Plenipotentiary or a majority of them, by writing under the* hands and Seals to appoint such Agent in the said Business as they might think proper with Authority under the directions and Instructions of the said Ministers to commence & prosecute the said Negotiations & Conferences for the said Treaty provided that the said Treaty should be signed by the said Ministers: And Whereas, We the said John Adams & Thomas Jefferson two of the said Ministers Plenipotentiary (the said Benjamin Franklin being absent) by writing under the Hand and Seal of the said John Adams at London October the fifth, One thousand Seven hundred and Eighty five, & of the said Thomas Jefferson at Paris October the Eleventh of the same Year, did appoint Thomas Barclay, Agent in the Business aforesaid, giving him the Powers therein, which by the said second Commission we were authorized to give, and the said Thomas Barclay in pursuance thereof, hath arranged Articles for a Treaty of Amity and Commerce between the United States of America and His Majesty the Emperor of Morocco, which Articles written in the Arabic Language, confirmed by His said Majesty the Emperor of Morocco & seal'd with His Royal Seal, being translated into the Language of the said United States of America, together with the Attestations thereto annexed are in the following Words, To Wit.

From my link:

Barclay and the Moroccans quickly reached agreement on the Treaty of Friendship and Amity. Also called the Treaty of Marrakech, it was sealed by the Emperor on June 23 and delivered to Barclay to sign on June 28. In addition, a separate ship seals agreement, providing for the identification at sea of American and Moroccan vessels, was signed at Marrakech on July 6,1786. Binding for 50 years, the Treaty was signed by Thomas Jefferson at Paris on January 1, 1787, and John Adams at London on January 25, 1787, and was ratified by Congress on July 18, 1787. The negotiation of this treaty marked the beginning of diplomatic relations between the two countries and it was the first treaty between any Arab, Muslim, or African State and the United States.

I guess they just conveniently left out all the "dominion" the king held?

 

[jono]

So let me get this straight: the Moroccan king who owns vast amounts of land and is probably generating money from the inhabitants here (much like the King of England was) is going to let some Europeans come in and change his system?

Doesn't sound like much of a king to me.

"....let some Europeans come in and change his system"

"let"

lol.....

African-European relations were/are much deeper than that...... lol @ "not much of a king to me".... More irrelevant opinions...

The Articles of Confederation is not a government....... a government is made up of people that rule over a land enclosed in boundaries.... the government was the US Republic, which had 8 Presidents before GW....for which George Washington said they are "giving commerce with your (Sultan of Morocco) dominions"..... Trading with your land..... Farming with your land..... dominions is land

you're attempting to change definitions of words but I have both a well renown Oxford dictionary set and a 4th edition Black's Law dictionary at my disposal... you can't shake me from the truth.... your feelings and opinions cannot deter me...

dominions means land in this instance.... you say "retained dominion over his subjects"... implying dominion = authority, here... that does not make sense... he said

The encouragement which Your Majesty has been pleased, generously, to give to our commerce with your dominions...make a deep impression on the United States and confirm their respect for and attachment to Your Imperial Majesty.

give commerce with your dominions... i guess you need to look up what "commerce" means? or what "with" means? idk dude.... it's pretty blatant

To all to whom these Presents shall come, we the undersigned Delegates of the States affixed to our Names send greeting.

Articles of Confederation and perpetual Union between the states of New Hampshire, Massachusetts-bay Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia.

I.

The Stile of this Confederacy shall be

"The United States of America".

II.

Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.

III.

The said States hereby severally enter into a firm league of friendship with each other, for their common defense, the security of their liberties, and their mutual and general welfare, binding themselves to assist each other, against all force offered to, or attacks made upon them, or any of them, on account of religion, sovereignty, trade, or any other pretense whatever.
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/artconf.asp

 

[Black Boy King]

lol you say you live in Michigan so old SC law means nothing to you.... fine.... but South Carolina state officials at the time knew Blacks were the ancient Berbers. That was written in State law. Not the news. Not an editorial. Not some blog from an anonymous government official. Not some guy's post in a hip hop message board. It was written in State law. And mind you, this is just one example I had in reach of the government knowing who you really are.

There's no point in continuing this exchange with you, bro. I can't lie, I stopped reading after you dispelled blackamoor as an old term (subjective) as if that has anything to do with if its a real English word or not. That's a fool's argument. You even proved it with the definition that it means Negro but then just said "lol nah whatever i dont believe that". What? lol... "lead a horse to water but can't make him drink". Maybe one of the other conscious Moors will come and continue to spread the knowledge; I'm done repeating the same thing over and over again.

 

[kzzl]

we're not talking about the "sovereign citizen" scam-type Moors, i hope

If you proclaim your nationality, you are 'sovereign'.

Moorish is a nationality.

The Moors Sundry Act of 1790 was passed by South Carolina legislature, granting special status to the subjects of Sultan of Morocco, Mohammed ben Abdallah. It recognized Moors as white people with Jury duty as a privilege. Moors were not to be subjected to laws governing blacks and slaves.

Therefore, Moors are sovereign. Same with any other nationality (Irish, German, Saudi Arabian, etc.). There are "dirty Moors" that trick people into buying nationality packages and crap, as well as agents of COINTELPRO that go into temples and create chaos (like they did with the Black Panthers). Truth is nationality is FREE...! And the Prophet Noble Drew Ali established the Moorish Science Temple of America for Blacks cut off from their ancestors can reclaim their identity.

That's why you have (oh no, dare I say it) do your own research. Know thy self.

So I'm I understanding this right?

If we're to let this treaty define it, this seems to make Moors distinct of blacks and slaves. Therefore, those of us that are not servants, or descendants of servants, of the sultan couldn't claim Moor.They would not be allowed the privileges of being recognized as white and would still be subject to negro laws. Which leads me to assume the moors nation is Morocco as well.

If that's how it is, it's just a bunch of foreigners that get a pass while the rest still get thrown in chains. If a black person can't proof they're of the nation, if theirs not Moor identity to reclaim, what then? Covert or be infidels?

 

[Black Boy King]

For those reading, I'll drop one more gem for this thread... The United States is the only nation to have ever had a "dual seal". No longer do we use the coin anymore, but if you look on the back of your classic $1 dollar bill, you will find both seals.

Every US official speaks under that bird you see with the Star of David over it. It the US's seal.

Have you ever seen anyone speak under that pyramid?

Hell no.

Hell muthafuckin no.

Because it's not their's, it's yours. And there is loads of symbolism in it. It represents the Al Moroccan empire. Contrary to what you may have been led to believe, ain't no gotdamn pyramids in Europe (where these "Americans" came from).

With that, I'm through here.

 

[zombie]

The only law that means anything is the law of the gun it the law that holds everything together. You think the people who rule this world today give a fuck about some treaty that was signed in seventeen-whenever -the fuck with a kingdom that no longer exist hell the fuck no.

 

[jono]

lol you say you live in Michigan so old SC law means nothing to you.... fine.... but South Carolina state officials at the time knew Blacks were the ancient Berbers. That was written in State law. Not the news. Not an editorial. Not some blog from an anonymous government official. Not some guy's post in a hip hop message board. It was written in State law. And mind you, this is just one example I had in reach of the government knowing who you really are.

There's no point in continuing this exchange with you, bro. I can't lie, I stopped reading after you dispelled blackamoor as an old term (subjective) as if that has anything to do with if its a real English word or not. That's a fool's argument. You even proved it with the definition that it means Negro but then just said "lol nah whatever i dont believe that". What? lol... "lead a horse to water but can't make him drink". Maybe one of the other conscious Moors will come and continue to spread the knowledge; I'm done repeating the same thing over and over again.

National laws > State laws (it's in the Constitution).

Laws of S. Carolina have no place anywhere else in the nation. I don't see how you can't accept that, it's very clear. It's clear in every document that puts this country together and that is each state governs itself and no other, it writes its own laws to which citizens under its jurisdiction are obligated to follow said laws.

There's 50 states in the United State of America as you come with one legal book from one state and that book is over 100 years old. Sorry but that just doesn't fly.

But to make it even more damning check this out;

NEGRO LAW OF SOUTH CAROLINA.

CHAPTER I.

The Status of the Negro, his Rights and Disabilities.

Section 1. The Act of 1740, sec. I, declares all negroes and Indians, (free Indians in amity with this Government, negroes, mu-P L lattoes and mestizoes, who now are free, excepted) to be slaves:—7Sls the offspring to follow the condition of the mother: and that such slaves are chattels personal.

Sec. 2. Under this provision it has been uniformly held, that color is prima facie evidence, that the party bearing the color of a negro, Han mulatto or mestizo, is a slave: but the same prima facie result does not follow from the Indian color. g^r<

Sec. 3. Indians, and descendants of Indians are regarded as free

Indians, in amity with this government, until the contrary be shown. MH](

In the second proviso of Sec. 1, of the Act of 1740, it is declared son T ,. , , ... , Dud

that "every negro, Indian, mulatto and mestizo is a slave unless 174.

the contrary can be made to appear"—yet, in the same it is immedi- more ately thereafter provided—" the Indians in amity with this government, excepted, in which case the burden of proof shall lie on the £• * defendant," that is, on the person claiming the Indian plaintiff to be a slave. This latter clause of the proviso is now regardedas furnishing the rule. The race of slave Indians, or of Indians not in amity to this government, (the State,) is extinct, and hence the previous part of the proviso has no application.

Sec. 4. The term negro is confined to slave Africans, (the ancient St,' Berbers) and their descendants. It does not embrace the free in- *nd

'Con

habitants of Africa, such as the Egyptians, Moors, or the negro MUl Asiatics, such as the Lascars. scoi

Stat

Sec. 5. Mulatto is the issue of the white and the Negro. 1 B<

b The

Sec. 6. When the mulatto ceases, and a party bearing some Scot

slight taint of the African blood. ranks as white, is a question for thei'av

solution of a Jury. Stat

2 Hi

So not only is it old and invalid in other states it doesn't even say what you think it says. It says "inhabitants of Africa" are exempt. Clearly it would be difficult to prove you are an inhabitant of Africa but that also collides with your belief that the King of Morocco held court in the Americas.

Both statement are patently false. The King of Morocco held no dominion and had no authority in the United States and only inhabitants of Africa were considered free people in S. Carolina.

Good thing you quit, that's a helluva hole to dig out of. But I owe it to people who are lurking to give them all the info I came across.

 

[Black Boy King]

we're not talking about the "sovereign citizen" scam-type Moors, i hope

If you proclaim your nationality, you are 'sovereign'.

Moorish is a nationality.

The Moors Sundry Act of 1790 was passed by South Carolina legislature, granting special status to the subjects of Sultan of Morocco, Mohammed ben Abdallah. It recognized Moors as white people with Jury duty as a privilege. Moors were not to be subjected to laws governing blacks and slaves.

Therefore, Moors are sovereign. Same with any other nationality (Irish, German, Saudi Arabian, etc.). There are "dirty Moors" that trick people into buying nationality packages and crap, as well as agents of COINTELPRO that go into temples and create chaos (like they did with the Black Panthers). Truth is nationality is FREE...! And the Prophet Noble Drew Ali established the Moorish Science Temple of America for Blacks cut off from their ancestors can reclaim their identity.

That's why you have (oh no, dare I say it) do your own research. Know thy self.

So I'm I understanding this right?

If we're to let this treaty define it, this seems to make Moors distinct of blacks and slaves. Therefore, those of us that are not servants, or descendants of servants, of the sultan couldn't claim Moor.They would not be allowed the privileges of being recognized as white and would still be subject to negro laws. Which leads me to assume the moors nation is Morocco as well.

If that's how it is, it's just a bunch of foreigners that get a pass while the rest still get thrown in chains. If a black person can't proof they're of the nation, if theirs not Moor identity to reclaim, what then? Covert or be infidels?

If someone claims "Black" and "Black" only, then they are an infidel. They are anti-society. Everyone in civilized society is a son/daughter of a nation. The Bible even says honor your mothers and fathers. Unless you are from another planet or your people lived in a jungle in uncharted territory as primitive beasts (serious, not joking). "Black" signifies a race, a species. Nothing more. Nothing more at ALL...

All Negros/blacks are Moors. There is no conversion necessary (How can you convert to what you are?). There is no proof necessary. Why prove what the government already knows?

1. They know the Moors are a tribe mixed with Berbers and Arabs. They know the ancient Berbers were Black. Therefore, father of the Moors. Therefore, they must be Moors as well.

2. They forced slaves to forget their previous culture and change their names. Why? To sever their ties with their nation so they could legally be property. These slaves took on the names of Europeans, therefore denying their mothers and fathers aka nations. Therefore, officially "colored people" at law. Fraud. Artificial. Make-believe. They cloth themselves with this artificial covering "Negro/Black" which in fact identifies nothing.

Because "Black" is an adjective (that is only sometimes capitalized).

Chinese is a pronoun.

Irish is a pronoun.

Moorish is a pronoun.

Spanish is a pronoun.

Mexican is a pronoun.

Black is not, I repeat, is NOT a pronoun. Please stop going out into the world and making us look like fools by accepting this foreign ambiguous brand "Black". Every civilized being on this planet that isn't a brainwashed "American" knows that "black" is an adjective, describing someone as being of dark skin. They know who the Moors are though. They drop hints in all your favorite movies.

In "Wild Wild West", the man says to Will Smith "well aren't you a handsome blackamoor?"

In Robin Hood with Morgan Freeman, they say "The Moor knows all"

In Black Knight, they believe Martin Lawrence to be a French Moor. I know 95% of my people had no idea what the fuck they were talking about, and it's sad.

In The Traitor, that Arab tells the darkskinned cat from Sudan (main character, i forget his name), that in regards to fighting for freedom, it's too late for blacks in America "they've already forgotten their history". "Already" because it's barely been 500 years and the black collective in America has completely forgotten who the hell they are. They think they're Europeans.

 

[jono]

Link:http://books.google.com/books?id=r9...utput=html_text&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0

 

[Black Boy King]

Nah, I aint done. I say alot of shyt but I love talking about history and spreading Truth.

Anyway, I posted SC law not to tell you what laws must be abided by, but instead to show you WHO THEY KNEW TO BE THE MOORS. That is all. Please stop these strawman fallacies.

You're not getting it, dude... Or you're trying to fool lurkers...

Sec. 4. The term negro is confined to slave Africans, (the ancient St,' Berbers) and their descendants. It does not embrace the free in- *nd

'Con

habitants of Africa, such as the Egyptians, Moors, or the negro MUl Asiatics, such as the Lascars. scoi

Of course Negro does not embrace the term Moor. BECAUSE MOORS ARE FREE! How is one a Moor? By simply being dark-skinned. How does one claim his rights as a sovereign citizen aka free inhabitant? Proclaim who he is, a Moor! There are legal processes such as written discovery that you can do if you choose to but the main goal is to first come into consciousness.

Most Negros were not given this knowledge on the plantation (it was illegal to even READ!!!), so therefore only knew themselves as Negros as they were taught and force to comply to... But how much force does it take to teach a 5 year old something? Exactly...

I'm glad you've accepted my reference (as you are using it to make a point of your own). It clearly says Moors, Egyptians, etc. are free (which is a redundant phrasing because they are sovereign, aka of a nation). Darkskinned peoples ARE THE MOTHERS AND FATHERS OF THE EGYPTIANS, MOORS, EVERYONE IN AFRICA.

How can you say Moors are free, but their father's aren't? Does not the same blood run in both? Did not the law you quoted state that these "negroes" are ancient Berbers? Aren't Moors mixed with Berber and Arab? If not (they are, very simple google), then who are they? If you don't know, then why are you making arguments on this subject like you know what you're talking about?

 

[jono]

Look B you in your feelings now. Just relax and stop posting, ima just say this; I'm tired lol.

"Inhabitants" of Africa are free in SOUTH CAROLINA IN 1740 that has no bearing anywhere else and because S. Carolina doesn't hold mulattoes and mestizoes in bondage today pretty much means they aren't slaves in 2013. Of course we knew that because slavery was abolished over a century ago (13th amendment). So the book has NO VALIDITY IN ANY COURT OF LAW ANYWHERE IN THE COUNTRY, NOT EVEN SOUTH CAROLINA lol.

All this talk about Moors being mixed Berbers and stuff is irrelevant cuz. It's irrelevant for the reason I already gave IF YOU INHABITED AFRICA THEY CONSIDERED YOU FREE!!!! Simply put: IF YOU WERE BLACK (skin color is "prima facie" evidence against you here) YOU WERE A SLAVE....END OF! No exceptions for non inhabitants of Africa and they give no fucks about what you call yourself. BLACK = SLAVE.

How is one a Moor? By simply being dark-skinned.

(prima facie is used to describe the apparent nature of something upon initial observation. In legal practice the term generally is used to describe two things: the presentation of sufficient evidence by a civil claimant to support the legal claim (a prima facie case), or a piece of evidence itself (prima facie evidence)

You were a slave breh. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/_/dict.aspx?rd=1&word=prima+facie

Stop trying to rationalize with dead racist crackers.

 

[Black Boy King]

Nah, I'm not angry or mad or anything if that's what you mean by feelings (i prefer facts). It just is hella awkward when someone isn't getting it and is trying to fire back at you with your own stuff.

Yes, my people were slaves. I honestly think you aren't comprehending what is being said. Or any of the evidence being presented.

The 13th amendment declared INVOLUNTARY servitude as unconstitutional. It didn't grant anyone full citizenship. If you agreed to be Negro, then that is voluntary servitude. In the original articles of the 14th admendment , said in section 20 that "AFRICAN SLAVES OR DESCENDANTS OF SLAVES SHALL NOT BE MADE CITIZENS". They are incorporated and granted priveleges.

Dred Scott case says it all. Blacks/Africans were never meant to be citizens. You can't be a citizen claiming that you're Black. It's not possible. You are a colored aka an artificial entity.

The Treaty affirms that you cannot possibly be a citizen of the US as it is a business arrangement for commerce, just like you said. The United States is a foreign CORPORATION conducting trade and commerce on foreign lands. If you do not understand that the "racist crackers" were not indigenous to America but were FOREIGNERS then that is on you. That's something I'd expect to have to explain in AKA Donkey, not Social Lounge.

 

[Black Boy King]

How is one a Moor? By simply being dark-skinned.

Just so your confusion doesn't mislead onlookers, this is false.

That is like saying a shape is a square by simply being a rectangle.

valid arguments please.

 

[jono]

How is one a Moor? By simply being dark-skinned.

Just so your confusion doesn't mislead onlookers, this is false.

That is like saying a shape is a square by simply being a rectangle.

valid arguments please.

Nah, I aint done. I say alot of shyt but I love talking about history and spreading Truth.

Anyway, I posted SC law not to tell you what laws must be abided by, but instead to show you WHO THEY KNEW TO BE THE MOORS. That is all. Please stop these strawman fallacies.

You're not getting it, dude... Or you're trying to fool lurkers...

Sec. 4. The term negro is confined to slave Africans, (the ancient St,' Berbers) and their descendants. It does not embrace the free in- *nd

'Con

habitants of Africa, such as the Egyptians, Moors, or the negro MUl Asiatics, such as the Lascars. scoi

Of course Negro does not embrace the term Moor. BECAUSE MOORS ARE FREE! How is one a Moor? By simply being dark-skinned. How does one claim his rights as a sovereign citizen aka free inhabitant? Proclaim who he is, a Moor! There are legal processes such as written discovery that you can do if you choose to but the main goal is to first come into consciousness.

Most Negros were not given this knowledge on the plantation (it was illegal to even READ!!!), so therefore only knew themselves as Negros as they were taught and force to comply to... But how much force does it take to teach a 5 year old something? Exactly...

I'm glad you've accepted my reference (as you are using it to make a point of your own). It clearly says Moors, Egyptians, etc. are free (which is a redundant phrasing because they are sovereign, aka of a nation). Darkskinned peoples ARE THE MOTHERS AND FATHERS OF THE EGYPTIANS, MOORS, EVERYONE IN AFRICA.

How can you say Moors are free, but their father's aren't? Does not the same blood run in both? Did not the law you quoted state that these "negroes" are ancient Berbers? Aren't Moors mixed with Berber and Arab? If not (they are, very simple google), then who are they? If you don't know, then why are you making arguments on this subject like you know what you're talking about?

 

[Black Boy King]

You took it out of context though, which made it misleading. In my post it was clear I was referring to Negros, whom I spoke of in the sentence preceding that. Why are you trying to be deceptive?

History lesson time:

Circa 1787, Assisted by England, Scotland, Ireland, Netherlands, France, Germany, Finland and Sweden the United States of America ended their war with the Moors (Moroccan Empire) and signed the Treaty of Peace and Friendship with the Emperor Mohammed III (Moorish-Mason). The aforementioned treaty is the longest unbroken treaty in the history of the United States.

from U.S. Moroccan Relations, by Robert G. Neuman, Former U.S. Ambassador to Morocco (1973--1976).

On December 1, 1789. The 9th President of the United States George Washington, apologizes to his Masonic Brother Emperor Mohammed III, for not sending the regular advices (tribute: a payment by one ruler or nation to another as acknowledgment of submission or price of protection, excessive tax). Also, President Washington asked the Emperor to recognize their newly formed government. The Moroccan Empire (Moors) were the first nation to recognize the thirteen colonies as a sovereign nation. Allegedly the Emperor agreed to their recognition because 25 Moors were members of the first Continental Congress.

from The Writing of George Washington from the Original Manuscript Source 1745—1799, Editor John C. Fitzpatrick, Volume 30, pages 474—476.

 

[jono]

Nah, I'm not angry or mad or anything if that's what you mean by feelings (i prefer facts). It just is hella awkward when someone isn't getting it and is trying to fire back at you with your own stuff.

Yes, my people were slaves. I honestly think you aren't comprehending what is being said. Or any of the evidence being presented.

The 13th amendment declared INVOLUNTARY servitude as unconstitutional. It didn't grant anyone full citizenship. If you agreed to be Negro, then that is voluntary servitude. In the original articles of the 14th admendment , said in section 20 that "AFRICAN SLAVES OR DESCENDANTS OF SLAVES SHALL NOT BE MADE CITIZENS". They are incorporated and granted priveleges.

Dred Scott case says it all. Blacks/Africans were never meant to be citizens. You can't be a citizen claiming that you're Black. It's not possible. You are a colored aka an artificial entity.

The Treaty affirms that you cannot possibly be a citizen of the US as it is a business arrangement for commerce, just like you said. The United States is a foreign CORPORATION conducting trade and commerce on foreign lands. If you do not understand that the "racist crackers" were not indigenous to America but were FOREIGNERS then that is on you. That's something I'd expect to have to explain in AKA Donkey, not Social Lounge.

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.[/B]

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv

 

[Black Boy King]

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv

I've been waiting for that... Let's break down legalese. What is "person"?

Here are the exact definitions from Barron's Canadian Law Dictionary, fourth edition (ISBN 0-7641-0616-3):

* natural person. A natural person is a human being that has the capacity for rights and duties.

* artificial person. A legal entity, not a human being, recognized as a person in law to whom certain legal rights and duties may attached - e.g. a body corporate.

You will observe that the natural-person has the "capacity" (i.e. ability) for rights and duties, but not necessarily the obligation. The artificial-person has rights and duties that may be attached (i.e. assigned) by laws.

Very few people have capacity in law. Much less BLACK people. The vast majority are incompetent in law. But it's time to stop playing this stupid game with these crackers and start actually learning the law that governs the land we live in. We don't want anyone to give us privileges. We don't want government dependent programs. We demand to be treated as human beings therefore we want our inalienable human rights respected.