- Feb 27, 2007
- 1,846
- 153
?????????????????????????
This is true enough. If we study African history correctly, we will learn that Pan-Arabism has always been closely connected to Pan-Africanism. This is due, at least, to the fact that it is most impossible to unite Arabia without affecting the African Continent. We must remember also that the Arabs are Africans. They are just one of the many tribes in Africa, much like the Zulus or the Bantus or the Amharics or any other.
The majority of Arabs live in Africa. Egypt is the largest Arab country in the world. There is no doubt that Egypt is the source of much of Arab culture. Plus, there are many Arabs in other countries in North Africa.
In addition, Arabs live in every single country in Africa. They have always been there throughout recorded history. As a matter of fact, if we believe in the Holy Scriptures, they were there even before recorded history. (See the Book of Genesis: http://mb-soft.com/believe/txs/genesis.htm, Chapter 2, Verses 8-17.) The only question is their skin color. It is conceivable that in pre-historic times, Arabs were Black people like the rest of us. However, due to their close proximity to Asia they became inter-mixed with light colored peoples from Asia, much like what has occurred in Ethiopia and Madagascar and many other African countries. One of the things that makes the Arabs a little different, however, is the legacy of the Christian Crusades. During the Crusades, many white people from Europe came to Arabia and Africa. Often the Crusader Armies were defeated and could not find their way back to Europe. Therefore, they settled down locally and were adopted by the local Africans/Arabs. One of the most commendable attributes of Arab culture is known as Arab Hospitality. Arab Hospitality is much like the hospitality that Africans have always shown to immigrants and refugees and travelers. It is also a basic tenet in all of the Three Great Abrahamic Religions: Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
Therefore, the Arabs adopted Europeans into their community. In addition, the Crusaders armies raped local African/Arab women. The children that those rapes produced were also adopted. Thus, over time (the Crusades lasted for about 100 or more years) the Arabs became lighter and lighter in complexion. Therefore, the Arab issue is largely an issue of skin color.
Nevertheless, we cannot neatly dissect the Arabs from the Africans. His Excellency President Gamal Abd el-Nasser was considered an Arab. Osagyfo Dr Kwame Nkrumah was considered an African. But, it is a historical fact that Osagyfo and His Excellency are members of the same extended family. Thus, we see the foremost advocate of Pan-Arabism married to the foremost advocate of Pan-Africanism (http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2000/499/profile.htm.) Therefore, Pan-Arabism becomes one and the same thing as Pan-Africanism.
Most of the people who live in North Africa are Arabs, but Arabs have only recently controlled the region.if this were to happen An Arab nation might stretch from Morocco to Iraq.
Actually, it is the other way around. When we unify the African Continent, the new super-state will extend from Cape Town, South Africa all the way up to Cairo and into Arabia ending at the Tigris-Euphrates River at Irag. This is the only way to unite Africa. We must include the Arabs. By including the Arabs, we include Arabia.
This is non-sense. There is no historical proof that the Arabs “pioneered Black slavery”. What we know is that African slaves were held in the Roman Empire. And, we know that slavery was practiced in Arabia, as well as throughout Africa. But the holocaust occurred in the trans-Atlantic slave-trade and in the Americas after we had been sold into slavery. The Arabs, nor the Africans had absolutely nothing to do with the so-called holocaust.
As a matter of fact, I find it very offensive that you would use the word “holocaust”. It seems to be a concept borrowed from the zionist movement. We must never confuse the African Revolution with zionism in any way, shape, or form.
it is obvious that Arabs are not Pan Africanists.
“Obvious” to whom?
As a final word, let me say that the foremst authoity on the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade, The Honorable Dr. William E.B. Dubois, an African, did extensive and original work on this subject. He has concluded, along with most other credible scholars, that the so-clled "Arab Slave Trade" cannot be proven. Yet, we keep hearing this anti-Arab, anti-Muslim propaganda. I can forgive an un-educated, ignorant African for this type of mistake, once. If you are going to go to the trouble to publish this more that once, than I sugguest to you that you get your facts straight, next time.
What you have said here is really little more than hate speech. It in not acceptable is polite, civilized media and it ought not be acceptable in this forum.
[/QUOTE]Many Arabs have dreamed of combining their individual countries into one pan-Arabic nation.
This is true enough. If we study African history correctly, we will learn that Pan-Arabism has always been closely connected to Pan-Africanism. This is due, at least, to the fact that it is most impossible to unite Arabia without affecting the African Continent. We must remember also that the Arabs are Africans. They are just one of the many tribes in Africa, much like the Zulus or the Bantus or the Amharics or any other.
The majority of Arabs live in Africa. Egypt is the largest Arab country in the world. There is no doubt that Egypt is the source of much of Arab culture. Plus, there are many Arabs in other countries in North Africa.
In addition, Arabs live in every single country in Africa. They have always been there throughout recorded history. As a matter of fact, if we believe in the Holy Scriptures, they were there even before recorded history. (See the Book of Genesis: http://mb-soft.com/believe/txs/genesis.htm, Chapter 2, Verses 8-17.) The only question is their skin color. It is conceivable that in pre-historic times, Arabs were Black people like the rest of us. However, due to their close proximity to Asia they became inter-mixed with light colored peoples from Asia, much like what has occurred in Ethiopia and Madagascar and many other African countries. One of the things that makes the Arabs a little different, however, is the legacy of the Christian Crusades. During the Crusades, many white people from Europe came to Arabia and Africa. Often the Crusader Armies were defeated and could not find their way back to Europe. Therefore, they settled down locally and were adopted by the local Africans/Arabs. One of the most commendable attributes of Arab culture is known as Arab Hospitality. Arab Hospitality is much like the hospitality that Africans have always shown to immigrants and refugees and travelers. It is also a basic tenet in all of the Three Great Abrahamic Religions: Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
Therefore, the Arabs adopted Europeans into their community. In addition, the Crusaders armies raped local African/Arab women. The children that those rapes produced were also adopted. Thus, over time (the Crusades lasted for about 100 or more years) the Arabs became lighter and lighter in complexion. Therefore, the Arab issue is largely an issue of skin color.
Nevertheless, we cannot neatly dissect the Arabs from the Africans. His Excellency President Gamal Abd el-Nasser was considered an Arab. Osagyfo Dr Kwame Nkrumah was considered an African. But, it is a historical fact that Osagyfo and His Excellency are members of the same extended family. Thus, we see the foremost advocate of Pan-Arabism married to the foremost advocate of Pan-Africanism (http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2000/499/profile.htm.) Therefore, Pan-Arabism becomes one and the same thing as Pan-Africanism.
Most of the people who live in North Africa are Arabs, but Arabs have only recently controlled the region.if this were to happen An Arab nation might stretch from Morocco to Iraq.
Actually, it is the other way around. When we unify the African Continent, the new super-state will extend from Cape Town, South Africa all the way up to Cairo and into Arabia ending at the Tigris-Euphrates River at Irag. This is the only way to unite Africa. We must include the Arabs. By including the Arabs, we include Arabia.
What i want to know is would non arab countries of AFRICA allow this to happen ?
I know some Pan Africanism has reacted more seriously against White imperialism than the Arab variance that pioneered the Black slavery holocaust and has continued since, becoming even more virulent now under the cloak of subtle religious platitudes.
This is non-sense. There is no historical proof that the Arabs “pioneered Black slavery”. What we know is that African slaves were held in the Roman Empire. And, we know that slavery was practiced in Arabia, as well as throughout Africa. But the holocaust occurred in the trans-Atlantic slave-trade and in the Americas after we had been sold into slavery. The Arabs, nor the Africans had absolutely nothing to do with the so-called holocaust.
As a matter of fact, I find it very offensive that you would use the word “holocaust”. It seems to be a concept borrowed from the zionist movement. We must never confuse the African Revolution with zionism in any way, shape, or form.
it is obvious that Arabs are not Pan Africanists.
“Obvious” to whom?
As a final word, let me say that the foremst authoity on the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade, The Honorable Dr. William E.B. Dubois, an African, did extensive and original work on this subject. He has concluded, along with most other credible scholars, that the so-clled "Arab Slave Trade" cannot be proven. Yet, we keep hearing this anti-Arab, anti-Muslim propaganda. I can forgive an un-educated, ignorant African for this type of mistake, once. If you are going to go to the trouble to publish this more that once, than I sugguest to you that you get your facts straight, next time.
What you have said here is really little more than hate speech. It in not acceptable is polite, civilized media and it ought not be acceptable in this forum.