“European-American historians and egyptologists, as other writers, who call themselves ‘AFRICANIST’ and ‘AUTHORITY ON AFRICA,’ among many other such names constantly distort this period of Africa’s glorious history and High-Culture in order to attribute all of the developments and creations of the Nile Valley Africans, Egypt in particular, to some sort of people they have given the name ‘SEMITES’ and/or ‘CAUCASIANS OF NORTH AND EAST AFRICA;’ all of this in keeping with the RACIST and RELIGIOUS BIGOTRY of the ‘CHOSEN PEOPLE’ myth and the ‘NEGRO-LESS NORTH AND EAST AFRICA’ syndrome. Why? Because Ramses II was the reigning Pharaoh of all Egypt and Nubia when the Haribu [the so-called ‘JEWS’] were allegedly driven out of Egypt and Nubia with an African they called ‘MOSES.’ Also, without the Africans of the Nile Valleys, particularly those of Egypt and Nubia, there is no FIVE BOOKS OF MOSES, and more specifically the FIRST and SECOND — otherwise called ‘GENESIS’ and ‘EXODUS,’ thus, there would have been no ‘ADAM AND EVE, GARDEN OF EDEN, EXODUS OF THE ISRAELITES FROM EGYPT [Africa],’ and/or ‘JEHOVAH’ and ‘JESUS CHRIST,’ equally ‘ALLAH.'”

Whew! Dr. ben was the TRUTH! Wish he were still alive today. We desperately need the wisdom and knowledge he (and all of the other master teachers who have left this Earth) had. R.I.P.

Source: Dr. Yosef ben-Jochannan. Black Man of the Nile. pg. 356. 1970.

Advertisements

at SZA’s “The CTRL Tour”!

This is my second time catching her in a week and her performance at Irving Plaza in NYC was even better than the first!

The show was great from beginning to end. The opening acts, Rayvn Lanae and Smino, were also pretty amazing! There’s a few more dates left on the tour, so if it isn’t already sold out in your city, you should definitely go!

“While, in 1964, outlawing purposeful discrimination was the principal goal of Congress, in 1972 Congress reiterated in even stronger terms than in 1964 the need to combat disparate impact discrimination. The recognition that “institutional” barriers were a type of discrimination different from discrimination motivated by animus was more pronounced.[FN35] And, the pervasiveness of institutional discrimination had become clear from the six years of Title VII litigation that preceded the 1972 amendment process.”

Source: WestLaw

“Congress had two principal goals in enacting Title VII. While the main thrust, initially, was to prohibit purposeful discrimination, “it was clear to Congress that “[t]he crux of the problem [was] to open employment opportunities for Negroes in occupations which have been traditionally closed to them,’… and it was to this problem that Title VII’s prohibition against racial discrimination in employment was primarily addressed.”[FN26] Eradicating intentional discrimination and opening up opportunities historically closed served another congressional purpose. The committee reports and debates are replete with references to Congress’s intent to improve the economic status of blacks[FN27] and the realization that discrimination was “a pervasive practice” throughout the country that “permeate[d] the national social fabric—North, South, East and West.”[FN28] The recognition that equal employment opportunity required Congress to address both “overt and covert discriminatory selection devices, intentional or unintentional,”[FN29] was evident. The embodiment of Congress’ broad prohibition of practices resulting in the denial of employment opportunities was contained in Section 703(a)(2) of Title VII.”

Source: WestLaw

“Chief Justice John Roberts has hired a lot of clerks since joining the court in 2005 — and 92 percent of them have been white. Over that same period, 88 percent of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s clerks have been white. And at the court as a whole over those years, male clerks outnumbered women two to one. Supreme Court correspondent Tony Mauro’s detailed study of clerk demographics reveals glacial movement on racial and ethnic diversity — and little effort by the justices to speed that up.”

Of course racially biased judges are making racially biased employment decisions! This helps explain even further why this predominately white court didn’t want to review my case against William Morris! They are essentially doing the same as William Morris to maintain a predominately all-white workforce.

Source: Law.com. December 10, 2017.