Arabs enslaving Africans: How did this happen?(Graphic pics)

Libya3...

In March 2011, NATO launched a war in Libya expressly aimed at toppling the government of longtime leader Muammar Qadhafi. The US and its allies flew some 26,000 sorties over Libya and launched hundreds of cruise missiles, destroying the government’s ability to resist rebel forces.

US President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, along with their European counterparts, insisted the military intervention was being carried out for humanitarian reasons. But political scientist Micah Zenko (Foreign Policy3/22/16) used NATO’s own materials to show how “the Libyan intervention was about regime change from the very start.”

NATO supported an array of rebel groups fighting on the ground in Libya, many of which were dominated by Islamist extremists and harbored violently racist views. Militants in the NATO-backed rebel stronghold of Misurata even referred to themselves in 2011 as “the brigade for purging slaves, black skin”—an eerie foreshadowing of the horrors that were to come.

The war ended in October 2011. US and European aircraft attacked Qadhafi’s convoy, and he was brutally murdered by extremist rebels—sodomized with a bayonet. Secretary Clinton, who played a decisive role in the war, declared live on CBS News (10/20/11), “We came, we saw, he died!” The Libyan government dissolved soon after.

In the six years since, Libya has been roiled by chaos and bloodshed. Multiple would-be governments are competing for control of the oil-rich country, and in some areas there is still no functioning central authority. Many thousands of people have died, although the true numbers are impossible to verify. Millions of Libyans have been displaced—a staggering number, nearly one-third of the population, had fled to neighboring Tunisia by 2014.

Corporate media, however, have largely forgotten about the key role NATO played in destroying Libya’s government, destabilizing the country and empowering human traffickers.

Moreover, even the few news reports that do acknowledge NATO’s complicity in the chaos in Libya do not go a step further and detail the well-documented, violent racism of the NATO-backed Libyan rebels who ushered in slavery after ethnically cleansing and committing brutal crimes against black Libyans.

Libya4...

The flashy CNN multimedia report included bonuses galore: two videos, two animated gifs, two photos and a chart. But something was missing: The 1,000-word story made no mention of NATO, or the 2011 war that destroyed Libya’s government, or Muammar Qadhafi, or any kind of historical and political context whatsoever.

Despite these huge flaws, the CNN report was widely celebrated, and made an impact in a corporate media apparatus that otherwise cares little about North Africa. A flurry of media reports followed. These stories overwhelmingly spoke of slavery in Libya as an apolitical and timeless human rights issue, not as a political problem rooted in very recent history.

In subsequent stories, when Libyan and United Nations officials announced they would launch an investigation into the slave auctions, CNN (11/17/1711/20/17) again failed to mention the 2011 war, let alone NATO’s role in it.

One CNN report (11/21/17) on a UN Security Council meeting noted, “Ambassadors from Senegal to Sweden also blamed trafficking’s root causes: unstable countries, poverty, profits from slave trading and lack of legal enforcement.” But it failed to explain why Libya is unstable.

Another 1,200-word CNN follow-up article (11/23/17) was just as obfuscatory. It was only in the 35th paragraph of this 36-graf story that a Human Rights Watch researcher noted, “Libyan interim authorities have been dragging their feet on virtually all investigations they supposedly started, yet never concluded, since the 2011 uprising.” NATO’s leadership in this 2011 uprising was, however, ignored.

An Agence France-Presse news wire that was published by Voice of America (11/17/17) and other websites similarly failed to provide any historical context for the political situation in Libya. “Testimony collected by AFP in recent years has revealed a litany of rights abuses at the hands of gang leaders, human traffickers and the Libyan security forces,” the article said, but it did not recount anything that happened before 2017.

Libya5...

In an account of the large protests that erupted outside Libyan embassies in Europe and Africa in response to reports of slave auctions, Reuters (11/20/17) indicated, “Six years after the fall of Muammar Gaddafi, Libya is still a lawless state where armed groups compete for land and resources and people-smuggling networks operate with impunity.” But it did not provide any more information about how Qadhafi was toppled.

A report in the Huffington Post (11/22/17), later republished by AOL (11/27/17), did concede that Libya is “one of the world’s most unstable [sic], mired in conflict since dictator Muammar Gaddafi was ousted and killed in 2011.” It made no mention of NATO’s leadership in that ousting and killing.

Part of the problem has been the unwillingness of international organizations to point out the responsibility of powerful Western governments. In his statement on the reports of slavery in Libya, United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres (11/20/17) did not mention anything about what has happened politically inside the North African nation in the past six years. The UN News Centre report (11/20/17) on Guterres’ comments was just as contextless and uninformative, as was the press release (11/21/17) on the issue from the International Organization for Migration.

Al Jazeera (11/26/17) did cite an IOM official who suggested, in Al Jazeera‘s words, that “the international community should pay more attention to post-Gaddafi Libya.” But the media outlet provided no context as to how Libya became post-Qadhafi in the first place. In fact, Al Jazeera‘s source went out of his way to make the issue apolitical: “Modern-day slavery is widespread around the world and Libya is by no means unique.”

While it is true that slavery and human trafficking happen in other countries, this widespread media narrative depoliticizes the problem in Libya, which has its roots in explicit political decisions made by governments and their leaders: namely, the choice to overthrow Libya’s stable government, turning the oil-rich North African nation into a failed state ruled by competing warlords and militias, some of which are involved in and profit from slavery and trafficking.

When Western governments were hoping to militarily intervene in the country in the lead-up to March 19, 2011, there was a constant torrent of media reports on the evils of Qadhafi and his government—including a healthy dose of fake news (Salon9/16/16). Major newspapers staunchly supported the NATO intervention, and made no secret of their pro-war editorial lines.

When the US government and its allies were preparing for war, the corporate media apparatus did what it does best, and helped sell yet another military intervention to the public.

In the years since, on the other hand, there has been exponentially less interest in the disastrous aftermath of that NATO war. There will be short spikes of interest, as there was in early 2017. The most recent spurt of press coverage was inspired by the publication of CNN‘s shocking video footage. But the coverage invariably rapidly peaks and goes away.

Libya6...

The catastrophe Libya might endure after the collapse of its state had been predictable at the time. Qadhafi himself had warned NATO member states, while they were waging war against him, that they were going to unleash chaos throughout the region. Yet Western leaders—Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton in the US, David Cameron in the UK, Nicolas Sarkozy in France, Stephen Harper in Canada—ignored Qadhafi’s admonition and violently toppled his government.

Even from the small number of media reports on slavery in Libya that do manage to acknowledge NATO’s responsibility for destabilizing the country, nevertheless, something is still missing.

Looking back at Libya’s anti-Qadhafi rebels, both during and after the 2011 war, it is very clear that hardline anti-black racism was widespread in the NATO-backed opposition. A 2016 investigation by the British House of Common’s Foreign Affairs Committee (Salon9/16/16) acknowledged that “militant Islamist militias played a critical role in the rebellion from February 2011 onwards.” But many rebels were not just fundamentalist; they were also violently racist.

It is unfortunately no surprise that these extremist Libyan militants later enslaved African refugees and migrants: They were hinting at it from the very beginning.

Most American and European media coverage at the time of NATO’s military intervention was decidedly pro-rebel. When reporters got on the ground, however, they began publishing a few more nuanced pieces that hinted at the reality of the opposition. These were insignificant in number, but they are enlightening and worth revisiting.

Three months into the NATO war, in June 2011, the Wall Street Journal‘s Sam Dagher (6/21/11) reported from Misrata, Libya’s third-largest city and a major hub for the opposition, where he noted he saw rebel slogans like “the brigade for purging slaves, black skin.”

Dahger indicated that the rebel stronghold of Misrata was dominated by “tightly knit white merchant families,” whereas “the south of the country, which is predominantly black, mainly backs Col. Gadhafi.”

Other graffiti in Misrata read “Traitors keep out.” By “traitors,” rebels were referring to Libyans from the town of Tawergha, which the Journal explained is “inhabited mostly by black Libyans, a legacy of its 19th-century origins as a transit town in the slave trade.”

Dagher reported that some Libyan rebel leaders were “calling for the expulsion of Tawerghans from the area” and “banning Tawergha natives from ever working, living or sending their children to schools in Misrata.” He added that predominately Tawergha neighborhoods in Misrata had already been emptied. Black Libyans were “gone or in hiding, fearing revenge attacks by Misratans, amid reports of bounties for their capture.”

The rebel commander Ibrahim al-Halbous told the Journal, “Tawergha no longer exists, only Misrata.”

Al-Halbous would later reappear in a report by the Sunday Telegraph (9/11/11), reiterating to the British newspaper, “Tawarga no longer exists.” (When Halbous was injured in September, the New York Times9/20/11—portrayed him sympathetically as a martyr in the heroic fight against Qadhafi. The Halbous brigade has in the years since become an influential militia in Libya.)

Libya7...

Like Dagher, the Telegraph‘s Andrew Gilligan drew attention to the slogan painted on the road between Misrata and Tawergha: “the brigade for purging slaves [and] black skin.”

Gilligan reported from Tawergha, or rather from the remnants of the majority-black town, which he noted had “been emptied of its people, vandalized and partly burned by rebel forces.” A rebel leader said of the dark-skinned residents, “We said if they didn’t go, they would be conquered and imprisoned. Every single one of them has left, and we will never allow them to come back.”

Gilligan noted “a racist undercurrent. Many Tawargas, though neither immigrants nor Gaddafi’s much-ballyhooed African mercenaries, are descended from slaves, and are darker than most Libyans.”

Slavery1...

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization assisted these virulently racist rebels in Misrata. NATO forces frequently launched air attacks on the city. French fighter jets shot down Libyan planes over Misrata. The US and UK fired cruise missiles at Libyan government targets, and the US launched Predator drone strikes. The Canadian air force also attacked Libyan forces, pushing them out of Misrata.

In a public relations video NATO published in May 2011, early in the Libya war, the Western military alliance openly admitted that it intentionally allowed “Libyan rebels to transport arms from Benghazi to Misrata.” Political scientist Micah Zenko (Foreign Policy3/22/16) pointed out the implications of this video: “A NATO surface vessel stationed in the Mediterranean to enforce an arms embargo did exactly the opposite, and NATO was comfortable posting a video demonstrating its hypocrisy.”

Throughout the war and after, Libyan rebels continued carrying out racist sectarian attacks against their black compatriots. These attacks have been well documented by mainstream human rights organizations.

Human Rights Watch’s longtime executive director Kenneth Roth cheered on NATO intervention in Libya in 2011, calling the UN Security Council’s unanimous endorsement of a no-fly zone a “remarkable” confirmation of the so-called “responsibility to protect” doctrine.

Roth’s organization, however, could not ignore the crimes anti-Qadhafi militants committed against dark-skinned Libyans and migrants.

In September 2011, when the war was still ongoing, Human Rights Watch reported on Libyan rebels’ “arbitrary arrests and abuse of African migrant workers and black Libyans assumed to be [pro-Qadhafi] mercenaries.”

Then in October, the top US human rights organization noted that Libyan militias were “terrorizing the displaced residents of the nearby town of Tawergha,” the majority-black community that had been a stronghold of support for Qadhafi. “The entire town of 30,000 people is abandoned—some of it ransacked and burned—and Misrata brigade commanders say the residents of Tawergha should never return,” HRW added. Witnesses “gave credible accounts of some Misrata militias shooting unarmed Tawerghans, and of arbitrary arrests and beatings of Tawerghan detainees, in a few cases leading to death.”

Slavery2..

In 2013, HRW reported further on the ethnic cleansing of the black community of Tawergha. The human rights organization, whose chief had so effusively supported the military intervention, wrote: “The forced displacement of roughly 40,000 people, arbitrary detentions, torture and killings are widespread, systematic and sufficiently organized to be crimes against humanity.”

These atrocities are undeniable, and they lead a path straight to the enslavement of African refugees and migrants. But to acknowledge NATO’s complicity in empowering these racist extremist militants, corporate media would have to acknowledge NATO’s role in the 2011 regime change war in Libya in the first place.

Article by Global Research

Prince Harry finds his Mulatto princess: Power move to depopulate Africa?

Royals2..

Social media is going crazy over the news about Prince Harry being engaged to actress Meghan Markle.  It seems many black women and some black men are excited that he is marrying a biracial woman.  They say this is  a big sign of progress for black people.  This is really sad to see this type of mentality is so pervasive.  First things first.  Markle is biracial and not a black woman.  She doesn’t even have any noticeable black features. She looks like she could pass for Puerto Rican of Italian.  And she even says that she is a biracial woman.  But this is NOT black progress.  The British royal family got most of their riches from slavery.  Their wealth comes from the murder and enslavement of African people.  Marrying into this racist parasitic family is not a sign of black empowerment.

Royals1...

Also check out this video(above). I’m not sure if many of you are aware of the fact that Prince William wants to depopulate Africa.  Apparently he believes that that are too many Africans and they’re destroying the ecosystem.  So he says.  So Africans are to blame for the environment.  It’s not the powerful European Jews/Europeans that are putting chemtrails in the air.  It’s not all the toxic garbage they allow to be dumped in the ocean and kills the aquatic life. It’s not all the processed meat,GMO foods and deadly vaccines that are spreading pain and misery.  So it’s the Africans??  Give me a damn break!  This is just a power move to confuse black people.  Prince Harry getting engaged to this half-black woman is just a way to make the masses of black people think the royals are our friends.  To make us think they care about the plight of our people.

Interracial union..

So I hope my subscribers aren’t falling for this.  I would assume that most of you are intelligent to know that this is nothing to celebrate.  Miss Meghan Mulatto marrying this racist family is not helping the African diaspora.  She’s just some biracial gold digging woman who saw an opportunity to marry into a wealthy family.

Milwaukee Charter School-Excellence First!

This is a great video.    It’s by a pair of 11 year old 6th graders from Milwaukee Excellence Charter school.  They borrowed a beat from Tee Grizley’s song,First Day Out.  The two young girls are students of teacher Terrance Sims.  He uses music to connect better with his students. “I wrote this song to get kids excited for the new school year and it picked up steam and turned into a full video,” Terrance explained. “It was a great experience as it kicked off our performing arts club.”  I personally think young black children need more rap songs like this.  They need more positive lyrics that express black pride and to inspire them to achieve greatness.  Too much of rap music today is filled with sex,violence and anti-blackness.  I salute these young black children!  They are already ahead of the game.  This is black genius. This is great to see!  We more hip hop culture to represent like this.

Bakari Henderson beaten to death: Why didn’t his white friends help?

Bakari2...

Bakari Henderson was  beaten to death last week in the Greek Islands. He was only 22 years old with his whole life ahead of him. It was at a nightclub by a group of racist Serbians.  I heard that he had taken a picture with a white women.  And I guess the Serbian guys didn’t like that too much. He was beaten by a bouncer,bartender and six tourists. Henderson was with a group of white “friends”.  His so called friends say how much they loved him and cared for him.  So…why didn’t they intervene?  Since they loved him so much. This is a damn shame!

Bakari1....png

I feel bad for this young brother.  I feel bad anytime there is the loss of black life. I feel for his family as well.   But we have to be honest. He put himself in harms way.  It doesn’t matter if they were Serbians.  Europeans are the same no matter where you go.  First things first. Going out with a white woman and a group of white friends to Europe is a bad move!  No black friends in sight. Europe is rampant with racism.  The anti-blackness is through the roof!  But I think he was young and naïve.  I guess he didn’t know it at the time put he put himself in danger by doing that.  Black people need to understand this when they travel abroad.  Places like Europe and Middle east are very anti-black.  I’m not saying you shouldn’t travel.  I think black people should get a passport and travel more.  But just be smart about it.  Go with someone that has been to the country before.  And go with a group of other black people.  Whether they are family or personal friends.  Just make sure it’s some people that aren’t going to  just stand around like cowards while  you’re getting beat to death.  A lot of our people have bought into the idea of being color blind.  Or that “loves sees no color”.  Well if you think like that you need to snap out of that fantasy.  It could be a matter of life and death. Let Bakari be a lesson to others. Peace.

Blood debts must be repaid- Bobby Wright

Slavery2...jpg

Slavery3....jpg

We must take the unequivocal position that if the Black race is to perish,the world must perish with us. Blood debts must be repaid in blood. We must never accept money and privileges as repayment for the mistreatment of our people. The past Black generations who suffer for no other reason than the color of their skin must be avenged not because of hate but for justice.

Bobby Wright

Halos and Horns- Paul Ifayomi Grant

Angel1...jpg
I have been thinking about how to conceptualise an idea that I think most of you will be aware of, either consciously or subconsciously, but which I sense that a large proportion of the younger generations have not grasped. Now, I should make it clear that I think this lack of awareness is not the fault of the under 30s but is attributable to my generation’s failure to adequately teach them about how racism works, as well as the very skilled way in which Europeans continuously adapt and refine the way they express and operationalise the ideology of white supremacy.

I have previously written about why the idea of ‘Black Firsts’ seems to be so important to Afrikan people and long ago came to conclusion that it is because of the heartfelt, deepseated, aching desire of so many Afrikans to be/feel accepted by Europeans as their ‘equals’. The underlying thinking is that each ‘Black First’ proves to Europeans that we are capable of performing some task; or performing in some arena of life, as competently as Europeans and hence they should abandon their ideology of racial superiority. Of course this theory has been tested to destruction and proven to be utterly without merit, as the ultimate Black First, the election (twice) of Barack Obama proved.

The reason that Black Firsts don’t change they way Afrikans are viewed, no matter how talented the ‘Firstee’ is; or how conspicous their achievement, is because it is an idea that runs completely counter to the fundamental nature of racism.  Racism is an irrational philosophy/ideology/religion, hence its operation is not impacted by evidence or rational arguments. Paradoxically, as well as being irrational racism is also  rational in the sense that it is instrumental, which is to say that it helps Europeans to achieve their primary group goal; which is to exercise power and domination over groups they classify as nonwhite.  Put these two things together and you can understand why Black Firsts never stood a chance as a tactic or strategy to defeat racism.

Angel2...
The above image, from an infamous Benetton advert, almost perfectly depicts the idea I am seeking to convey.
The easiest way to conceptualise halos and horns is to understand that viewed through the lens of the religion/philosophy/ideology called white supremacy; every Afrikan child is metaphorically born with a pair of horns and every European child is born with a halo above their head. In other words all Afrikans are born guilty until proven innocent and all Europeans are born innocent until proven guilty. The practical ramifications of this are that an Afrikan can make one slip in an otherwise blameless life and be condemned to unforgiveable, irredeemable guilt, whereas as European can live a life of exploitative abuse, and except in the most extreme cases, always have the possibility of redemption.

What this means is that the positive things you do can only help yourself whilst the negative things you do will damage other Afrikans. That is to say that your positive deeds and achievements are never generalised to the wider group by Europeans – except in areas of stereotypical Afrikan achievement such as sport and music – however your negative deeds or failures can be; and are, attributed to being part of a group that is designated as inferior.

I will illustrate the above with a real life story. I have changed some of the details to protect people’s identities.
Once upon a time there was an intelligent young Afrikan woman named Adeola who wanted to be a solicitor. She grew up in humble financial circumstances and went to a very poor school, however she overcame these barriers as well as the ubiquitous racism and graduated well from University. She then had the task of securing a contract with a firm of solicitors to undertake her articles and after a relatively short period she was successful in this task. As was her wont she worked hard and qualified as a solicitor. She had been made aware by her boss that she was the first Afrikan trainee solicitor that the firm had ever recruited and thus felt a bit of added pressure in the sense that she did not want to ‘let the side down’. Anyway her boss was very pleased with her performance and two years after she was recruited, and just as she was qualifying, the firm recruited Femi, another hard working young Afrikan. Adeola gave Femi the ‘don’t let the side down’ pep talk and sure enough Femi prospered and qualified without any hiccups. Adeola’s line manager was pleased with both her and Femi and the following year recruited Tunde, who was not quite so focused and methodical as his predecessors. Tunde was not terrible but he was definitely not good and one day, after he had made a bit of a cock up, Adeola’s line manager turned to her in exasperation and said “If I had recruited Tunde first I would never have recruited another black trainee solicitor”. She thought it was a compliment to Adeola, however Adeola had an epiphany; and started to understand the subtleties of how racism works. She saw that whilst the halo is not transferable the horns definitely are!

The above story took place some years ago and of course in 2017 no white manager would be as honest as the manager in the above scenario. However just because someone does not say something does not mean they are not thinking it or acting upon it.

The moral of this story; and this article, is that our achievements should be motivated by the desire to help ourselves, our families and our community. Trying to get Europeans, as  a collective, to respect our humanity, intelligence etc. is a waste of time and psychological energy. The first respect is self-respect as an Afrikan and the ironic thing is that even those people who don’t like you will respect you if you have commitment and integrity. Remember, people can like you without respecting you whilst they can respect you without liking you and the latter is always preferable to the former, although in an ideal world most of us would choose to be both liked and respected. These are the things we need to teach our young people to prepare them for an anti-Afrikan world.

Article by Paul Ifayomi Grant