Archive for April, 2009


April 21, 2009






Monday, April 20, 2009
Stephen Harper Hails Obama For New Era In The Americas
Stephen Harper credited Barack Obama with opening a “new era of dialogue” in the Americas as a hemispheric summit that the Prime Minister had feared would collapse in confrontation ended with surprising chords of harmony.

Instead of the barrage of attacks that former U.S. president George W. Bush faced at the last Summit of the Americas four years ago in Argentina, Mr. Obama engineered a warming of relations with offers of a new “equal partnership” that seemed to turn famously anti-American firebrands like Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez into pussycats asking to be his friends.

It was a weekend in which Mr. Obama proposed a “new beginning” with Cuba – still suspended from such summits.

He also promised to combat poverty and inequality in Latin America and pledged to not only emphasize international law-enforcement in fighting drug crime, but also to aim for reducing U.S. demand for drugs and trafficking of guns.

On Cuba, Mr. Obama said Raul Castro should release political prisoners, embrace democratic freedoms and cut fees on the money that Cuban-Americans send back to their families. Mr. Obama has lifted some restrictions on Cuba and Mr. Castro responded with a broad, conciliatory overture.

“The fact that you had Raul Castro say he’s willing to have his government discuss with ours – not just issues of lifting the embargo, but issues of human rights, political prisoners – that’s a sign of progress,” Mr. Obama said at a news conference yesterday.

Venezuela’s Mr. Chavez, who once called Mr. Bush “the devil,” said he wanted to exchange ambassadors with Washington again – both countries had expelled each other’s last year – and the summit was set abuzz by the repeated handshakes and smiles the limelight-loving leader exchanged with Mr. Obama.

Some of Mr. Chavez’s allies in the leftist Bolivarian Alternative international organization, like Bolivia’s President Evo Morales, said they were still waiting for concrete signs of change. However, Mr. Obama insisted he had held warm talks with many other Latin American leaders.

“I think it’s just that President Chavez is better at positioning the cameras,” he joked.

“The subject of many of these meetings and conversations has been launching a new era of partnership between our nations. Over the past few days, we’ve seen potential positive signs in the nature of our relationship between the United States, Cuba and Venezuela,” Mr. Obama said at a press conference yesterday.

“But as I’ve said before, the test for all of us is not simply words, but also deeds.”

Mr. Harper said he wasn’t sure before the summit began if he’d want to see another one take place, because they tended to get bogged down in ideological diatribes. Now, he said, there is a new opportunity for dialogue that can make progress on economic and social issues.

“I was very worried about the atmosphere of confrontation that exists in our region. But we saw a remarkable change during this summit. And that means that the era of confrontation was replaced by the era of dialogue,” Mr. Harper said at the close of this summit.

“In the difficult economic times in which we’re living, I think this is a tremendously promising development.”

Mr. Harper also met with several Caribbean and Latin American leaders – the latter mostly his closest allies, like the presidents of Chile, Colombia and Mexico – and continued to curry warm ties with Mr. Obama during two 15-minute private chats.

On Saturday, after a 15-minute talk in a hotel kitchen’s service corridor, they strolled past waiting cameras, and when Mr. Obama was asked if he would take Canada’s tips on Cuba, Mr. Obama said: “I take tips from Canada on a lot of things.”

Although the forum’s future had been in doubt, Brazilian President Ignacio Lula da Silva, the leader of the hemisphere’s second-largest country, said he believes there’s a reason to have another Summit of the Americas in three years time, with Cuba attending.


April 20, 2009


Agriculture Secretary Vilsack and First Lady Michelle Obama Highlight Healthy Eating
By Sandy Miller Hays

April 9, 2009
WASHINGTON, April 9, 2009—Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack joined First Lady Michelle Obama and a group of 5th graders on the South Lawn of the White House today to talk about healthy eating, the availability of locally grown fruits and vegetables, and bees.

“Growing your own fruits and vegetables is one of the best ways to have healthy food,” Vilsack said. “Working in a garden is a great way to stay physically active and maintain a healthy body. And the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is helping schools make sure that every student in America has a healthy and nutritious lunch to eat at school.”

This July, USDA will be providing two types of parasite-resistant honey bees developed by USDA scientists to pollinate the plants in the new White House garden this summer. Both of these bees are rapidly gaining in popularity with bee keepers.

Honey bees enhance any garden because they increase the yields of plants that require pollination, they produce honey, and they are one of Nature’s most fascinating creatures to observe. Unfortunately, parasitic mites cause serious health problems for most varieties of honey bees, and many beekeepers must use pesticides to combat the mites in the hives. But the USDA-developed bees are mite-resistant, offering a more natural, organic alternative for the White House garden.

Honey bees are crucial to American agriculture, adding some $15 billion in value in the nation’s crops, particularly specialty crops such as almonds and other nuts, berries, fruits, and vegetables. In California, the almond crop alone uses 1.3 million colonies of bees, approximately one half of all honey bees in the United States, and this need is projected to grow to 1.5 million colonies by 2010.

Scientists with the Agricultural Research Service (ARS), USDA’s principal intramural scientific research agency, developed the two types of mite-resistant honey bees. One type is highly resistant to the parasitic mite Varroa destructor, commonly known as the varroa mite. The bees have a trait called “varroa-sensitive hygiene” which prompts the worker bees to detect and remove infested bees from the nest, eliminating the need for chemical help to control the mites.

The second type of mite-resistant honey bees is based on a strain of honey bees from Russia which are naturally resistant not only to varroa mites, but also to tracheal mites, which infest the breathing tubes of the bees. These bees are also highly tolerant of cold weather and require less artificial feeding than typical honey bees.

The Russian bees were brought to the United States by Thomas Rinderer, research leader at ARS’ Honey Bee Breeding, Genetics and Physiology Research Unit at Baton Rouge, La., where studies have been under way on the bees since the mid-1990s. Rinderer and other ARS scientists will collaborate with White House staff on installation of the USDA bees in the White House garden.

For the past eight years, breeder queens of the Russian-derived and varroa-sensitive hygienic bees have been released to the beekeeping industry. In 2008, a breeders’ group called the Russian Honeybee Breeders Association, Inc., was formed to supply the Russian-derived queens throughout the U.S. beekeeping industry, and demand is outstripping supply.

Both types of mite-resistant USDA bees are good pollinators and easy to keep alive because of their hardiness, thus helping ensure the success of the new White House garden.


April 20, 2009


The trademarks “Narco News,” “The Narco News Bulletin,” and “School of Authentic Journalism” © 2000-2009 Al Giordano

You and What Movement?
A Response to Naomi Klein

By Al Giordano
An Opinion Column
April 18, 2009

Naomi Klein is suffering, along with some other sectors of the academic North American left, an existential crisis.

In a recent column she published in The Nation and in The Huffington Post, she complained about “the awkward in-between space in which many US progressive movements find themselves” now that Barack Obama is president of the United States.

Revealing a bizarre contempt and college-educated condescension toward a vast multi-racial swathe of progressive supporters and sympathizers of Obama and his movement, Klein seeks to explain us away as dupes. We (I use the first person plural proudly and without hesitation) are, according to Klein, part of a “superfan culture,” that, she says, believes we can “save the world if we all just hope really hard,” and that suffers from the following psychological ailments: “Hopeover… hoper coaster… hope fiend… hopebreak… and hopelash.”

Her theory, that progressive Obama supporters are now inflicted by buyer’s remorse, flies contrary to all objective measurement. The aggregate of all recent public opinion surveys finds that 61.8 percent of Americans view Obama (less than 100 days into his presidency) favorably, compared to 32.9 percent that view him unfavorably. As Gallup notes, President Obama’s first-quarter average favorability of 63 percent exceeds that of the first three months of his eight immediate predecessors: Presidents Bush II, Clinton, Bush 1, Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon or Johnson.

Ah, but Klein is talking about “progressives,” so let’s take a look at the hard data that is available. Separate out the crosstabs, and those numbers are even sky higher among progressive demographic groups. Among Democrats, according to an early April Pew survey, 88 percent view the young president favorably, so it’s not really clear who Klein is talking about, imagining or inventing out of thin air when she devotes an entire column to claim a non-existent demographic trend.

Among African-Americans (without which there can be no successful “progressive movement” in the United States), a towering 94 percent approve of how the president is doing his job, according to the Quinnipiac survey. Among Hispanic Americans (just as important to any progressive future in the US), 73 percent feel the same way. Among Americans that earn less than $50,000 a year (the working class and the poor), a solid 60 percent approve. The question must be asked: What “movement” does Klein thus imagine? An exclusively white and college educated one? I fear that the truth may not be far from it if she is so quick to insult and dismiss such a large bloc of people who skew non-white, poor and working class.

There is currently no quicker way for white progressives to further divide themselves from African-American, Hispanic-American, working class and poor Americans – all sectors without which serious and successful progressive movements in the US would be impossible – than to invent derogatory psychobabble terms for us because we do not share Klein’s tendencies to feel somehow demoralized by the country’s first African-American head of state, and demonstrably its most progressive since Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

That such complaint comes after less than 100 days, when the President has just eased the Cuba embargo that was foolishly embraced by Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush I, Clinton and Bush II, is nothing less than pathetic. In the same week, Obama made the classified torture memos public (and as any working journalist or investigator knows, every department of his administration now responds quickly – usually overnight – to our Freedom of Information Act requests for information; a sea change from all previous administrations). The passage of Obama’s economic Stimulus bill marked the single largest expenditure ever on jobs and social programs like unemployment insurance, Medicaid and public education in the history of any country. He has already made the orderly withdrawal of US combat troops from Iraq official policy with a timeline that has most of it done before the 2010 midterm elections. And in three short months, Obama has restored the principle of progressive taxation to the United States.

Yesterday, at the Summit of the Americas in Trinidad, the US president extended a long overdue hand of friendship to his Venezuelan counterpart, a democratically elected leader that suffered an attempted military coup d’etat that was cheered, if not planned, by Washington. The President, in short time, has already defused an entire string of similar policy time bombs left by previous administrations (Republican and Democratic alike). Will there be more tensions between Chávez and the US? Very likely the answer is yes, but the gravity and context of them has shifted positively. This hemisphere is already a safer place for dissident journalists, community organizers, governments of the left and other grassroots change agents. That, alone, makes it more possible for us to organize and make bigger and better changes – of the kind for which we do not need any government’s permission – in the days and years ahead.

I quite agree with Klein’s belief that “demanding” is better than “hoping” when it comes to changing public policy. But where I get off her bus is upon her inference that we who are supportive of – and more happy than not about – Obama’s presidency somehow believe differently. Her claim only demonstrates her gross ignorance toward the important sector of the left (including parts of the Obama movement) that are community organizers. “Demanding” is necessary but without “organizing” to back it up it is merely an act of intellectual masturbation. It accomplishes nothing. It never has won a single battle. And that’s why, until 2008, the US left in particular – so busy demanding without doing the hard work of organizing – went through at least three “lost decades.”

The problem with too much of the “activist left” in North America is that so many of its adherents don’t really want to do the hard work of community organizing. I wonder: when was the last time that Klein went door-to-door, or staffed a phone bank, or otherwise reached out directly to real people demographically different from her? Any journalist or writer that hasn’t, at minimum, accompanied organizers doing that real work of change should shut the fuck up when it comes to opining about “the people.” They don’t have a clue as to who “the people” are. Activism that doesn’t involve one or more of those tasks does not rise to the level or effectiveness of organizing. And those that don’t do it really have no idea where the public is at: the masses (or “the multitude” in current jargon) are imaginary cartoon characters to these people. Their view of us is as elitist as it is condescending.

They can complain about, for example, US policy toward Israel and Palestine, seemingly oblivious to how US public opinion on the matter keeps those very bad policies in place. If they got off their duffs and knocked on doors to ask real people about it, they’d get a lesson in civics, and perhaps learn better ways to move public opinion in a better direction. They can bemoan the “bailouts” (essentially government loans to financial services industries) ignorant of the fact that when big corporations fall they land hardest on the workers and the poor, as would a 1929-level crash of the kind that nearly occurred last October. They can demand “nationalization” of the banks, without offering any detail as to what that would look like. I live in Mexico where the 1982 bank nationalization proved disastrous for the country’s workers, and helped destroy its middle class. The devil is always in the details.

I am not a member of the Democratic Party, and I did not vote for twelve years prior to 2008 until Obama’s candidacy gave me a reason to do so. While the academic North American left went jet-hopping from summit protest to social forum across the globe, I went to Latin America, lived, worked and reported alongside the authentic social movements that many of them came to visit for a weekend or maybe a month. I’m more comfortable with an anarcho-syndicalist view of the kind of society that I daily work toward than I am with electoral politics. Socialist, although it’s a moniker that seems a bit statist and conservative for me, is still a term that I’m more comfortable with than “Democrat.” And yet every day I see the President moving the United States closer to my own version of utopia, after a lifetime of watching each of his predecessors pull it farther away. More importantly, for me, as a journalist and an organizer, the Obama presidency has created much more space for people like us to get out there and do this hard work without the repression and marginalization that we have struggled under for decades.

Here’s what the academic left – hopping mad, frustrated and now, like Klein, lashing out at those of us in the working left – doesn’t get: It was Obama – not Klein’s post-Seattle ’99 milieu of “anti-globalization activists” – who opened the doors of the American left for the first time since the Civil Rights movement of the ‘50s and ‘60s to the building of an authentically multi-racial movement. It was Obama – not Klein and her colleagues – that got working class whites struggling alongside working class blacks and Hispanics in the United States, and who turned a new generation onto the art of community organizing that the activist left had abandoned.

When colleagues like Klein so summarily insult Obama supporters and sympathizers, they are driving yet another stake between their white college-educated ghetto and the 94 percent of African-Americans, and the 73 percent of Hispanic Americans, and the 60 percent of the entire American working class, that is pleased, as I am, that this unique historic figure is, for the next four years at least, the President of the United States.

I’m reminded of the scene from the Martin Scorcese motion picture, The Aviator, in which Kathryn Hepburn (Cate Blanchette) brings Howard Hughes (Leonardo DiCaprio) home to meet her family. “We’re socialists,” the mother tells Hughes. And then, when she thinks Hughes is speaking ill of President Franklin Roosevelt, she nearly runs him out of the house. FDR, like Obama, wasn’t a socialist (and unlike Obama, he was born into privilege). But a great many socialists, communists and even anarchists of the era understood that their work was made so much more possible by his presidency. And that cultivated an intense synergy, not to mention a renaissance of labor and community organizing during that epoch. In retrospect, that synergy between the working left and the FDR presidency brought with it many of the 20th century’s most progressive advances.

The same is happening now – although Klein and others haven’t done the investigative or organizing spadework to recognize it – and that (even without the many progressive policies enacted by the Obama administration already, and those important ones like immigration reform yet to come) makes me an unabashed, eyes wide open, Obama sympathizer, guilt-free, without any of the feelings of remorse Klein seeks to assign to me and millions like me. That enthusiasm hasn’t turned us into blind followers: these pages are already filled with hard-hitting critiques when the Obama administration has been wrong; on Plan Mexico, on the drug war, and other deadly serious matters. And yet even on those fronts, our ability to push back and serve as a check and a break on the extremities of those bad policies vastly outweighs what we were able to do for many previous decades.

But I’m not going to sit back silently while some white progressives – dripping with the nastiest forms of envy because, truth be told, the Obama movement succeeded at resurrecting community organizing and multi-racial struggle whereas their tired tactics and strategies had failed again and again to do so – try to claim to me or anyone else that they’re the ones doing the demanding while we’re somehow sitting back and thinking we can “save the world if we just hope really hard.”

Memo to Ms. Klein: Go back to the only school that ever got the left – in which I take no back seat to you in either mileage or scar tissue – anywhere: that of community organizing. We’re doing it. You’re not. And when you go to give your next speech at some university or activist hall, look around at the white, privileged faces that occupy more than half those seats. Study how many of them choose to self-marginalize from workers or racial minorities with their freak-show narcissistic – and yet humorless! – antics. You know what I’m talkin’ about. And you probably wince regularly as they ask you to sign your book for them.

Ask yourself, “are these the so-called masses that are going to make a progressive movement succeed?” You know damn well, in your heart, that they’re not. They do buy hardcover books though, a lot more than the workers and the poor ever will. With all due respect I must ask: Have you become an intellectual prisoner of what you think it takes to pander to your own college-educated consumers?

No thank you, Ms. Klein: When it comes to the United States, I’ll take my chances with the multi-racial community organizers of the Obama movement, and the tens of thousands of young organizers they’ve inspired and trained, at least until the non-electoral North American left gets its shit together, which, after reading a column like yours, seems still a long and far away struggle.


April 20, 2009


Wednesday, April 15, 2009

Glimmers Of Hope: 5 Reasons Obama Is Positive

Obama is highlighting an economy on the mend. Here are five reasons for Obama to make that rhetorical pivot now:

1. Real “Glimmers Of Hope”
The Dow notched five consecutive weeks of gains heading into Easter weekend, prompting Wall Street analysts to celebrate the fleeting return of a bull market. Wells Fargo reported billions of dollars in first quarter profits, a recent rarity for the beleaguered banking sector. Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke made the same point at a speech at Morehouse College Tuesday, citing new numbers on housing and consumer spending. “Recently we have seen tentative signs that the sharp decline in economic activity may be slowing,” he said.

2. The 100-Day Clock Is Ticking
Obama’s speech came on Day 85 of his presidency, and after the spate of media attention to come when he hits the 100-day mark, Obama will own the economy in a very real political sense. After that, voters are likely to hold Obama more responsible for their economic suffering, and patience for blaming the Bush Administration will wear thin. Still, White House officials believe Obama’s window of patience from voters could last as long as two years, if the public continues to see him as someone who is being straight with them about the problems and working to solve them.

A recent Public Strategies Inc./POLITICO poll suggests Obama does have some leeway. The survey of 1,000 registered voters found that two thirds of the respondents trust the president “to identify the right solutions to the problems we face as a nation.”

3. They’ve Done It All
There’s also a practical reality facing the Obama Administration, which is that they have largely done everything they set out to do to fix the economy. Obama ticked through a list of items in his speech — the $787 billion stimulus bill, the Wall Street and auto bailout programs, a housing recovery plan, a boost to non-bank credit markets and even his efforts to get the G-20 nations to do more. All, he said, have “been necessary pieces of the recovery puzzle.”

The White House knows that it doesn’t have another trillion-dollar program ready to go – though officials there surely would try to find one if the economic numbers grew worse — so now is the time to begin talking about the results of this intense period of activity.

4. Boosting His Credibility
The president has two key decisions coming up, so this week marks an opportune moment to bolster his credibility with the public before he needs to make politically difficult calls. At the end of this month, the Obama administration will have to decide what to do about the results of the bank “stress tests” – designed to see which financial institutions can withstand the economic downturn, and which need a government lifeline. Obama also must decide whether to ask Congress for more bank bailout funds.

At almost the same time, Obama will have to announce the fate of automakers Chrysler and General Motors, which could involve the politically agonizing decision of letting one of America’s most storied companies fail without a new lifeline from the government.

5. Boosting The Public’s Confidence
Consumer confidence hit its lowest reading since 1967 in February. Obama’s hoping he can translate his popularity and trust into getting consumers feeling good again. Altman cautioned that consumer confidence alone cannot drive a recovery, but said, “I think he’s doing the right thing and that he’s trying to instill confidence in the American people that we’re on our way to recovery.”

Obama explained his thinking in his remarks at Georgetown: “When this recession began, many families sat around the kitchen table and tried to figure out where they could cut back. And so have many businesses. And this is a completely reasonable and understandable reaction,” Obama said. “But if everybody — if everybody — if every family in America, if every business in America cuts back all at once, then no one is spending any money, which means there are no customers, which means there are more layoffs, which means the economy gets even worse.”

But Obama is clearly hoping some people who’ve been holding off on buying a car, or even going out to dinner, might crack open their wallets if they hear their president say things are getting better.

– Politico


April 18, 2009




Saturday, April 18, 2009
HALPERIN’S TAKE: Why Obama is Exceptionally Good at His Job

1. On major decisions, almost without exception, he does what he thinks is right, rather then what might appear to be the politically expedient thing to do; in the end, doing what he thinks is right actually turns out to be better politics.

2. He– and his vice president, chief of staff, deputy chiefs of staff, congressional relations office– are experts on Congress and know how to approach, manage, manipulate, finesse, and meld with the institution in virtually every respect. (Up to and as far as the considerable limits of three-branch government and multiple egos).

3. He is temperamentally suited to both the public and private aspects of the job.

4. His honeymoon with the media and the public continues unabated.

5. His political operation (and its closely coordinated allies) is modern, well-funded, and skilled at not leaving fingerprints.

6. He has vast reservoirs of charm.

7. He trusts his staff. Clear guidelines, no micro-managing, accountability, less back-stabbing than most governments.

8. He knows how to control his public image.

9. He is emotionally stable, and has a rock-solid support system of immediate family, close friends, and reliable advisers.

10. Criticism from his political opponents– no matter how personal, vile, or off base– bothers him no more than such things bothered Dick Cheney (which is to say, not at all).

11. He’s not afraid of losing– because he doesn’t expect to.

12. He talks to his constituents as if they are adults who are willing and able to deal with complexity– which is intellectually and practically satisfying to him, pleasing to elites, and gratifying to many citizens.

13. He has created a political organization that has unprecedented access to polling and focus groups, but he maintains a healthy distance from the up-down-in-out minutia, even as his advisers use the data to maximum effect.

14. The cyclical nature of economics, politics, and sociological trends seems to be on his side. For now.

15. He is rarely angry, intimidated, stressed, fearful, or joyless.

16. He likes the job– its challenges, its history, its resonance, its power, its perks.


April 15, 2009



April 15, 2009


Monday, April 13, 2009
Big Win: Obama First National Security Test

The U.S. economy is showing only glimmers of life and two costly wars remain in the balance, but President Barack Obama’s “no drama” handling of the Indian Ocean hostage crisis proved a big win for his administration in one of its first critical national security tests.

Obama’s two quiet backstage decisions to authorize the Defense Department to take necessary action if Capt. Richard Phillips’ life was in imminent danger gave a Navy commander the go-ahead to order snipers to fire on the pirates holding the cargo ship captain at gunpoint.

For Obama, the benefits were instantly clear: an American life saved and a major victory notched against an increasingly worrisome scourge of the seas off the Horn of Africa.

Obama’s handling of the crisis showed a president who was comfortable in relying on the U.S. military, much as his predecessor, George W. Bush, did.

But it also showed a new commander in chief who was willing to use all the tools at his disposal, bringing in federal law enforcement officials to handle the judicial elements of the crisis.

The rescue appeared to vindicate Obama’s muted but determined handling of the incident. What won’t be known for some time is whether Obama will benefit politically.

When Obama campaigns for re-election, he may take Bush’s approach of turning any such incident into evidence of his leadership acumen. On the other hand, Obama didn’t go before the cameras Sunday to trumpet the success, instead releasing a written statement that saluted the bravery of the military and Phillips but claimed no credit for himself.

Also, this crisis, while topping the news now, may fade into distant memory by the time voters get a chance to take any new measure of Obama and his party.

Still, it goes some way toward dispelling the notion that a liberal Democrat with a known distaste for war — Obama campaigned on his consistent opposition to the Iraq invasion — doesn’t have the chops to call on U.S. military power.

The sniper operation Sunday, with pirate guns aimed at Phillips, was a daring, high-stakes gambit, and it could have easily gone awry. If it had, the fallout would have probably landed hardest on Obama.

Indeed, the last Democratic president to unleash American military might against Somalis suffered miserably from the failure of that operation. Portrayed in the book and movie “Black Hawk Down,” a U.S. peacekeeping mission in Somalia ended with a deadly clash in the capital of Mogadishu and former President Bill Clinton’s humiliating withdrawal of troops.

The outcome this time was vastly different. This crisis proved a big win for Obama’s administration in one of its first critical national security tests.


April 9, 2009




About the Council of Independent Black Institutions (CIBI)
Founded in 1972, the Council of Independent Black Institutions (CIBI) is an umbrella organization for independent Afrikan-centered schools and individuals who are advocates for Afrikan-centered education. CIBI members are found primarily throughout the United States. Most of our institutional members are full-time Afrikan-centered independent schools. Our institutional membership also includes a number of part-time and supplementary schools. These schools enroll students at all levels from pre-kindergarten through secondary. The heaviest concentration, however, is at the elementary level.

CIBI activities include:

• Bi-annual conferences (in odd numbered years) designed to educate members of the Afrikan community about issues and prospects in Afrikan-centered education in general and specifically in CIBI. Unlike the convention, the conference is open to the public;

• Bi-annual conventions (in even numbered years) provide educators from CIBI schools and elsewhere opportunities to share information on curricula and other Afrikan centered education related matters. CIBI also installs its incoming Ndundu (leadership council) members during its convention;

• The Walimu Development Institute (WDI) attracts teachers in CIBI schools as well as CIBI home schools. CIBI also organizes intensive, on-site workshops for African-centered educators;

• Semi-annual publication of a newsletter, FUNDISHA! TEACH!, provides a forum for curriculum innovations, book reviews, news about member schools and other features pertaining to people of Afrikan ancestry.

• Annual Science Expositions held each year in April. During each Science Expo, children from the various member schools have an opportunity to display their science projects in a uniquely non-competitive environment in which they are evaluated according to criteria based upon the Nguzo Saba.

• A speakers’ bureau;

• An alumni association for graduates of CIBI institutions;

• Consultation and technical assistance to those operating or wishing to open independent Afrikan-centered schools. Services are also available to public and private schools or to any institution or group that serves children of Afrikan descent.

CIBI member contributions help make it possible to publish some of the outstanding Afrikan-centered curriculum materials that have been developed and used effectively over the years by teachers in institutions affiliated with CIBI as well as in other schools. CIBI’s social studies curriculum guide, Positive Afrikan Images for Children, published in 1990, is an example.

CIBI Mission Statement (Approved January 14, 1995)
Definition, Standards and Interpretations

• To define Afrikan-Centered Education
• To establish appropriate terminology, conditions, interpretations and standards consistent with the definition


• To vigorously promote the philosophy of Afrikan-centered education as defined by the organization
• To serve as the primary regional, national, and international spokesperson for the Afrikan- centered education movement and the institutions associated with that movement


• To establish Afrikan-centered standards and procedures for the certification of educational institutions, program, initiatives, organizations, etc.
• To establish Afrikan-centered standards and procedures for the certification of instructional and administrative personnel associated with educational institutions or programs

Curriculum Development and Standardization

• To develop and promote an Afrikan-centered curriculum philosophy
• To establish appropriate definitions and terminology associated with that philosophy
• To establish an Afrikan-centered curriculum design and methods for its implementation and evaluation
• To establish Afrikan-centered curricula for all ages (infancy through post-graduate levels) and in all subject areas
• To sponsor and/or facilitate the development of curriculum materials consistent with the design and content of Afrikan-centered curricula

Academic Performance Standards and Evaluation

• To establish academic performance standards consistent with the philosophy and design of the Afrikan-centered Curriculum
• To sponsor and/or facilitate the design of appropriate performance and diagnostic instruments, and procedures for the measurement of academic performance
• To establish standards and appropriate instruments for the evaluation of curriculum design and operations, instruction, and administration within Afrikan-centered educational institutions

National and International System Development and Coordination

• To facilitate the development and linkage of Afrikan-centered institutions world-wide through staff and student development programs, exchange programs, expositions, conventions, computer networking, bulk purchasing, joint investments and fundraising, etc.
• To establish designs, criteria, procedures, models, and necessary training\orientation programs that facilitate the development of viable institutions of Afrikan-centered education and culture.
• To serve as that administrative vehicle that coordinates the affairs of a national and international system of Afrikan-centered education.

CIBI’s Definition of Afrikan Centered Education: A Position Statement (Adopted November 11, 1994)
CIBI defines Afrikan-centered education as the means by which Afrikan culture — including the knowledge, attitudes, values and skills needed to maintain and perpetuate it throughout the nation building process — is developed and advanced through practice. Its aim, therefore, is to build commitment and competency within present and future generations to support the struggle for liberation and nationhood. We define nation building as the conscious and focused application of our people’s collective resources, energies, and knowledge to the task of liberating and developing the psychic and physical space that we identify as ours. Nation building encompasses both the reconstruction of Afrikan culture and the development of a progressive and sovereign state structure consistent with that culture.

We, in CIBI, further believe, that in practice, Afrikan-centered education:
1) acknowledges Afrikan spirituality as an essential aspect of our uniqueness as a people and makes it an instrument of our liberation (Richards, 1989; Clarke, 1991; Anwisye, 1993; Ani, 1994);
2) facilitates participation in the affairs of nations and defining (or redefining) reality on our own terms, in our own time and in our own interests (Karenga, 1980);
3) prepares Afrikans “for self-reliance, nation maintenance, and nation management in every regard” (Clarke, 1991, p. 62);
4) emphasizes the fundamental relationship between the strength of our families and the strength of our nation;
5) ensures that the historic role and function of the customs, traditions, rituals and ceremonies — that have protected and preserved our culture; facilitated our spiritual expression; ensured harmony in our social relations; prepared our people to meet their responsibilities as adult members of our culture; and sustained the continuity of Afrikan life over successive generations — are understood and made relevant to the challenges that confront us in our time;
6) emphasizes that Afrikan identity is embedded in the continuity of Afrikan cultural history and that Afrikan cultural history represents a distinct reality continually evolving from the experiences of all Afrikan people wherever they are and have been on the planet across time and generations;
7) focuses on the “knowledge and discovery of historical truths; through comparison; hypothesizing and testing through debate, trial, and application; through analysis and synthesis; through creative and critical thinking; through problem resolution processes; and through final evaluation and decision making”
(Akoto, 1992, p. 116);
8) can only be systematically facilitated by people who themselves are consciously engaged in the process of Afrikan-centered personal transformation;
9) is a process dependent upon human perception and interpretation [Thus, it follows that a curriculum can not be Afrikan-centered independent of our capacity to perceive and interpret it in an Afrikan-centered manner (Shujaa, 1992)];
10) embraces the traditional wisdom that “children are the reward of life” and it is, therefore, an expression of our unconditional love for them. In order to best serve Afrikan children our methods must reflect the best understandings that we have of how they develop and learn biologically, spiritually and culturally.


Akoto, K. A. (1992) Nation building: Theory and practice in Afrikan-centered education. Washington, DC: Pan- Afrikan World Institute.

Ani, M. (1994). Yurugu: An African-centered critique of European cultural thought and behavior. Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press.

Anwisye, S. (1993). Education is more than the three “R”s. Harvard Journal of African American Public Policy, 2, 97-101.

Clarke, J. H. (1991). African world revolution: Africans at the crossroads. Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press.

Karenga, M. (1980). Kawaida theory: An introductory outline. Inglewood, CA: Kawaida Publications.

Richards, D. M. (1989). Let the circle be unbroken: African spirituality in the diaspora. Trenton, NJ: The Red Sea Press. (originally published in 1980)

Shujaa, M. J. (1992). Afrocentric transformation and parental choice in African American independent schools. The Journal of Negro Education, (61)2, 148-159.

How CIBI Defines “Independent” As it Relates to the Fiscal Affairs of Independent Afrikan Centered Educational Institutions
An Afrikan-Centered educational institution is considered by CIBI to be “independent” in the context of its fiscal affairs, if:

a. The programmatic emphasis of the institution is directed toward nation building and the security of liberated space.

b. Pan-Afrikan nationalist interests determine institutional decisions about soliciting, accepting and investing funds.
c. The operational budget (i.e., that which includes the rent/lease/mortgage, payroll, utilities, kwk (etc.)) is funded primarily from sources within and controlled by the Pan-Afrikan community in order to ensure that the ability of the institution to maintain itself is contingent upon Afrikan people.


April 7, 2009



lamar perryman wrote:

Shalom El Hetep and Greetings,
To The Mambos, Queens and Princesses Of Traditional
Black Spirituality, To The Elders, Chiefs and Houngans Of Black Spirituality, To All Group
Members United Here in Our Struggle and Quest For A Common Identity and Union, and
To Bro Yao-Heru-Tehuti.

1. Semitic
2. The Anthropological and Ethnological Evidence
3. Akan
4. The Habiru/Apiru
5. The Avrahamic Peoples
6. Kana Yisrael As A Pharoanic State
7. Israel’s Ontology
8. The Archaeological Evidence
9. Overview
10. The Conclusion

( foreword : Bro. Yao-Heru-Tehuti, It is my suggestion that you read the evidentiary portions first and
then read Israel’s Ontology last. But Respecting your sagacity that is only a suggestion. The
materials gathered here in our discussions and elsewhere is to be the subject matter of a
larger volume entitled : The Egyptian And Aramaic Origins Of West Africans And Black
Americans. )

In order to faciliate the interests of scholastic aptitude for laypersons and academics alike I
shall set out what I believe to be The Philosophical Doctrine Of The Base in the discussion between You and I seek to help the understanding of all concerned.

I would like to start by addressing your present responses and also some of the ones from
your earlier posts and highlight some issues that are of important consideration even with
the present historical records and cast some light on the questions (s) posed by scholars
as to Who Were The Canaanite/Israelite/Hyksos People instead of just saying that it is not
known who they were. This, among some other things.
To get to the heart of your arguments again. In your first response you state again that
“there is no historical archaeological evidence of an “Israel” that matches up with the mythical writings found in religious text such as the Bible. There is evidence of a people
that the Kemetic peoples called “ysri ri”….though the peoples of Israel don’t have as many
interactions with any other people as they do with the Kemetic peoples.” [Note: To High-
light Something, that is precisely my point in my response And I might also add Sumer/
Chaldea as peoples that Ancient Canaan/Israel interacted with. End Note]……You state
“There is absolutely no historical connection that can be shown between any land or
people known as “Israel” and any people known as “Hebrew” or “Habiru”. [Note: The words
Habiru/Apiru is still in serious contention among scholars and at present simply means a
homeless person, a wanderer, a brigand, a street dweller or a criminal of some sort without
regards to race.!!! It Also Means They Who Have Crossed Over Meaning By Land Or The Rivers And They Who Have Come From A Certain Place To A Certain Place In The Lands And Countries Spoken Of, ( Egypt, Sumeria, Canaan ). It Is Also A ETHNIC DESIGNATION!!! End Note].
2. You hold to the view that all of the names given in the stele and defeated by the Kemetics are foreign city-states ( meaning foreign races to you, I suppose ) and that the
determinative for ‘Israel” is simply a foreign group of people ( also meaning a foreign race
or non-black peoples to you, I suppose ). You mention the punishment of Yanoam in
comparison to Israel being just as severe… [Note: Yanoam and Israel are Virtually Syn-
onomous as Canaanite People. End Note], and……The vast majority of the inscriptions on
the stele is actually about invaders from Libya [ I Note that this is True] ….They were the
most serious threat from the study of the inscriptions…[ Note: With that last statement I
most fully disagree. These campaigns were not conducted at the same time and Canaan’s
rebellion seems to have been put down first and still fresh/recent in the minds of the
Kemetic inscribers from a reading of the inscriptions. End Note].
3&5. I have combined your responses in three and five for relation. You disagree that the
Stele proves conclusively that “Israel” were native indigenous Canaanites and that Israel/
Canaan as shown in the Stele is actually one single group of people representing their
Country. You disagree that we can tell who they actually were or are, to state: ……. we
cannot tell that they are an ethnic group from that one line….we cannot tell if they are
Canaanites from that one line or a people who invaded and assimulated Canaanite culture.
…. we cannot tell if they were black from that one line…..there is not much at all in reality
that can be discerned from that one line as to who those peoples were…… [ Note: All of
Canaan’s Towns and Peoples received a one liner from the Egyptian inscribers of the
Stele. Also it has been noted and inferred by various scholars such as Drs. J.J. Bimson,
M.G. Hasel, Sigmuend Freud, C.G. Jung and Profs. C.A. Diop, Theophile Obenga, J.A.
Rogers, Frances Cress Welsing, Josef ben-Jochanan and others that it takes a long, long
time to assimulate the language, science, art, technology and customs of a foreign
superior culture and then make a appreciable contribution to it in terms of mechanical
usage. End Note].
4. And No. 4, in response to my position about there being no foreign racial groups that
were mentioned in regards to Canaan, period, You stated : “Actually all of the people
mentioned, not only in “Canaan” but also in Libya are mentioned as foreigners. Those
other city-states in Canaan that were mentioned all have the determinative symbol indicating
foreign city-states and “ysri ri” has a determinative indicating a foreign people…” [ Note:
WITH FOREIGN BY RACE!!! There were some White/Indo-Oriental Foreigners mentioned
as Allies of Libya But No White/Indo-Oriental Foreigners SHOWN or Mentioned in Canaan
on the Stele And That is Why The Kemetics REFERRED to Two Campaigns in One Stele!
As I have said before, They KNEW who they were looking at and Dealing With!!! More will
be said on this later, though.!!! End Note].

I have subsumed all of your responses and assertions into one so that I may answer them all in toto.
My entire position on this matter is that The Black Peoples of Canaan/Israel/Phoenicia were all One and the Same
and That it is These Black Peoples who were and are none other than The Mysterious Hyksos that
have been called Semitics and Asiatics by Indocentric, Eurocentric and some Afrocentric authors
and scholars.!!!
The first issue that I must address is the word Semitic. Understanding this word and its usages is one
of the KEYS to understanding our subject matter. The Akkaddian Inscriptions calls the Name of
Shem/Sem as Semu or Shu-Mu. it is the name of a Person, a Peoples and a Country, Sumer.
We Have To Be Very Careful When We Use The Word “Semitic” because it originally
applied to Black peoples in Mesopotamia, Sumeria and The Indus-Valley of Asia. See The
Akkaddian Inscriptions,;
and This is for your contention in an earlier
post that no historical person named “Shem” ever lived because of the lack of a historical
inscription to that effect outside of the Bible. As to Sumer and Shem, once again, from the
Mesopotamian view we look South. It is certain now that the peoples of Mesopotamia called
themselves Sumerian because they descended from and venerated the Orisha/Irumole/Imole
Person called SHU by the Egyptians. The very word means to derive from, to proceed from,
without regards to politics or religion but RACE. It also means an Act, An Event, A Social
Movement, such as the peopling of The Mesopotamia from Nile Valley and Indus-Valley
populations. Going further as to originality we are told by Prof. Amelineau and Prof. Cheikh
Anta Diop that the Orisha/Irunmole Ausar/Osiris was a True, Living Person as well as the
other Orisha/Imoles and Prof. Diop notes that the “God’s” head and other sacred parts were
found in four canopic jars at Abydos.!!! See The African Origin of Civilization, Myth or Reality.
Among these Nile Valley groups were the Akan/Kanaan peoples whose original home appears
to be Kenya as this Country still bears their ethnic name to this day. The origination of these peoples
must then have been Southern and Western, Nubian and Dravidian, which is to say South Africa
before many African/Asiatic Groups of Black Peoples assumed their own Ethnic/Tribal
Identities, Lands and Regions.
I submit that the first group of Nile Valley and Indus Valley peoples who settled the Mesopotamian
region ( Iraq, Canaan, Arabia ) were venerators of the Irumole, Imole, Neter SHU and so
named the land, its peoples, language and culture after their Patron Orisha. Even to this day
Black Hebrews refer to Black Jews as Shema Israel. The language of Canaan is called Semitic
( meaning Sumerian, Akkaddic, Ugaritic, Hebrew and ARAMAIC ). It is an Afro-Asiatic
language and is NOT Indo-Oriental or Nordic European. The language system of Black Asia
( The Dravidian Indus-Valley ) is conclusively shown to be Dravidian/Tamil/Kali/Dalit. The
Indo-Orientals/Indo-Aryans have no language system but that adopted from the Tamil system
is Vedic, Sanscrit and Hindu. The Dravidian is the Original Indigenous Asiatic Black Man and
Woman ( The South-East Asian Indian and Australian Aboriginal Type! ).
The original language system of Caucasians is the Nordic, Scandinavian, Teutonic, Celtic,
Germanic, Caucus and a corrupted bastardization of these tongues called Slavic! We also
note that Semitic referred to the Blacks of Asia First and Their Language and after that to
Japhetic Indo-Oriental and Caucasian peoples who adopted and spoke the language afterwards
and that is the SOLE origin of the word, land and peoples called Shumitic/Semitic!!!
See Semitic/Semitic Languages,
With this one single fact we can clearly begin to explain the times of Canaan, its provincial
state periods under Egypt and Sumer, its Nationalistic periods of Independence and Regional
Rule as Canaan, Israel, and Phoenicia, its rise and fall and the reasons therefor. Also with this
one single fact we can begin to set straight the Confusion of the Torah/Tanakh Records of
The Sumerian Hebrews and The Egyptian Yewes by the Western European and American
State/Church Academic Establishments!

The Anthropological And Ethnological Evidence

For purposes of clarifications throughout this treatise ( and for rebuttals, if any ) I will proceed
first to IDENTIFY the peoples now known to the World’s State and Religious Academia as the
HAMITICS and the SHEMITICS. See Gen. 10: 6-32 ( The Western Torah, miscalled The
Christian Holy Bible ). In the beginnings of Man’s Evolution on the earth as the Human Life Form
we all know that there was only ONE Homogenous race of peoples. A critical fact long over-
looked is that there was two (2) different groups of these peoples. One group was dark-skinned
with Woolly-Hair and called Nubian. The other group was dark-skinned with Straight-Hair and
called Dravidian! See An Authentic Anthropology, by Prof. Cheikh Anta Diop, ;and Dravidian India, by Prof. T.R. Sesha Iyengar, .
Both appear to have originated in Southern Africa. The Nubian is The Biblical
Hamitic and The Dravidian is The Biblical Shemitic as well as The Original Asiatic Black Man and
Woman. Eighty 80% percent of our Human History is the Story of These Two (2) Groups of Black
INTERMIXTURES.!!! And now for The Paleontology of Ancient Israel.!!!

The Anthropological and Ethnic evidence will best be considered by giving the four (4) Ethnic-Tribal
Groups and their societies which form the basis, origin, developement and actual peoples called the
Canaanites, Hebrew Israelites and The Black Jews. They are:
1. The Sumerian Hebrews, The Igbo (Ibo)
2. The Egyptian Yewe, The Ewe
3. The Akan of Canaan, and
4. The Colchin of India, The Indus-Valley
Outside of biblical text the evidence shows that the Patriarch Abraham and his Wife the Matriarch
Sarah were of Sumerian Dravidian descent. His Great-Great-Great Grandfather is Eber. Eber is
nothing more or less than an Igbo/Ibo man. Whether Eber was a Nubian Man or a Dravidian I
cannot tell but the record bears out the fact that there was much, much intermixing between these
two black groups in the Middle East, Iraq and Arabian Peninsula for long, long, long periods of
time before, during, and after Abraham’s migration. We ALL, laypersons and scholars alike, appear
to forget sometimes that all of the groups mentioned in Nubia-Egypt and Sumeria-India were ALL
Ethiopian Peoples. In other words and to be more specific, Nubians and Dravidians.!!!
( Early Dynastic period, Dynasties I and II; The “Ethiopians”
according to Diodorus Siculus); and a History of The Ancient Black Races Including The Black
Hebrews, by Prof. Rudolph R. Windsor , .
In all of my treatises in this Thesis I have presented the ONE VIEW that the Canaanite Hebrew
Israelites and Black Jews were the product of the Intermixing of The Nubian and Dravidian Black
Peoples, The Biblical Hamitics and Shemitics. As to the antiquity of the four (4) tribes of peoples
in Sumeria, Egypt, Canaan, India and Mesopotamia See Chayah bayith Elowahh,; and The Archaeology of The Bible Lands, by Magnus
Magnusson, B.C.; AND Ephramite
Forum-2, Other Peoples: Canaan, Ghana, Uganda. ; AND Igbo People,
The Egyptian Yewe, Ewe or IU are mentioned in Egyptian historical texts and it is from this tribe
of Peoples that we get the very word JEW. It is well known now by laypersons and scholars that
Hamitic and Shemitic language systems contain no letter “J”. The use of the letter “j” came about
as a translation of hamitic and shemitic tongues into Caucasian alphabet that uses the letter “J” such
as the English language. The word Iu, Iue, Yewe and EWE evolved into the word Jew as a matter
of the translation of languages and That Alone is the Whole Matter of the modern english word
Jew. It STILL MEANS the Yewe/Ewe peoples that the word describes and comes from as these
peoples were and are the Original Jews to start with.!!! I also submit that the very word HEBREW
is from the union of these peoples dialectical tongue from their biological intermixture as a socio-
ethnic group. The word Ibo or Igbo as Eber and the word Iu, Yewe or Ewe being conjoined to
form the Ethnic word : Hebrew as IBRI-EWE or IVRI-YEWE. I believe this very, very, very strongly.
The Ewe/Yewe peoples as a whole describes their Origins as being from the lands of EGYPT and
SAUDI ARABIA. I also Highly Note that Joseph I ( Yuyasof I of On ) was born in PADAN-ARAM
EWE.!!! He married ASENATH, the daughter of Potipherah, High Priest of the fabled City of On,
later celebrated as the Greek Heliopolis. ON is the Fabled Egyptian City of The Sun. The importance
of this will be seen later as we go on. He was buried in SHECHEM. I believe the word Shechem has
hamitic and shemitic implication and derivation from the reasons described herein. See The Ewe, ; The Africans Who Wrote The Bible, by Dr. Nana Banchie Darwah, ; Ancient Egyptians Wrote The
Holy Bible, by Dr. Kwame Nantambu, ; Gerald Massey, Ancient Egypt, The Light of The World, pgs. 474-498.
BUT SEE; in which Bro. Keita presents the opposing


Because of its importance to our discussion here, the Land and People of Canaan will be dealt with at
length. My point is that it is the Country that all four tribes mentioned came into one as a Socio-Ethnic
Group and Nationality. I begin this by identifying the Geographical Area of Ancient Canaaan from their
historical records and those of Egypt and Sumeria. To state: Modern Day Israel, Jordan, Lebanon,
Syria and Saudi Arabia. This region was called the Retennu, Sirion and later on the Levant by Egypt and
Sumeria. The importance of this description will become clearer as we move on. See Canaan, ; ; and ; and
Bro.Yao, to elaborate on what I will present in this treatise I submit that the Hurru, Mittani, Hatti etc.,
WERE ALL Black Peoples of The Societies of Nubia, Libya, Egypt, Sumeria and India, The Indus-
Valley. Going further on what Profs. Cheikh A. Diop, Ivan Van Sertima and Josef ben-Jochanan has
said, until we see the societies of Nubia, Egypt, Libya, Canaan, Sumeria, and India as RELATED
Nations and NOT Isolated Societies we will continue to be as CONFUSED abour OUR Origins and
Ancestors as Caucasian and Indo-Oriental scholars are about THEIRS and OURS. This, My Brother is
The Philosophical Doctrine Of The Base in our discussions and Debate. To further illustrate what I am
saying here let us view a map of the Ancient Near East during these times. See ; and Maps of The Ancient Near East, ;( Especially Asia, The Indus-Valley Civilization ).
Bro. Yao, in one of my prior treatises in this thesis I told you that the conflict between Canaan, Egypt
and Sumer was not just Political, Religious and Ethnic but also Scientific! I will state a list of Canaan’s
accomplishments and then I will proceed to show just who the Canaanites/Hyksos/Israelites truly were.
The Archaeological record from about 3000 B.C. shows that :
1. The Canaanites were the first mercantile nation in the world, the very first to use coins and paper money
(papyrus) as currency !!!
2. Their Political units were the very first Federated City-States in the world ( Ugarit, Aradus, Tripoli,
Ursalima (Jurusalem), Batrun, Byblos, Beirut, Sidon, Tyre, Raphia ( the first one ) and others ).
3. They recorded much (not all) of their history and system on papyrus (paper) which they also used in
the schools and business system.
4. Among the first to have a Merchant Marines and a Regional Navy with sophisticated warships.
5. Introduced the War Chariot into Egypt, Sumeria, Libya and surrounding Countries. The Canaanite
Chariots were made of Iron and equipped with Shields.
6. The Mortuary Science was sophisticated in both cremation, mummification and burial techniques.
7.Among the first to found a Agricultural based food, textile, chemical, clothing, industrial and medical
system from the land.
8. The first in the Art of Air Travel by way of the Gas Air Ballon which later gave way to our modern
Airships called Derrigables.
9. The first peoples to fuse Egyptian Hieroglyphics and Sumerian Cuneiform into one language to create
a Phonetic Alphabet (Aleph-Beth) and Mathematical system called ARAMAIC on which all other Modern languages have been based upon since then. This language system appears to be much, much
older than 5000 years.!!!

The name Amurru, Amorites, Amar, Aamu and Amu is synonomous with Canaanite. According to
biblical archaeology Genesis 10:16 indicates that the “Amorites were descended from Canaan but they
must have intermarried with Semitics at a very early age because they appear as a SEMITIC people in Near
Eastern references to them. Their origin is something of a mystery, but they probably arose not too far
from the Syro-Palestine region, perhaps in the northern euphrates area. We know that Amorite mercen-
aries were used in overthrowing the Akkaddian empire of Sargon I, about 2200 B.C. Thereafter they
invaded Mesopotamia and established themselves there; the Hammurabi Dynasty (1830-1550) was
Amoritic. From certain artistic representations we may conclude that they were entering Egypt as traders
by 1900 b.c. The Amorites occupied an area in Trans-jordan as well as in Canaan. Numbers 21:21
speaks of Sihon, King of the Amorites, and Joshua 10:5 lists the towns of the Amorite league: Jerusalem,
Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish and Eglon. Probably they occupied the hill country while the Canaanites lived
in the lowlands of Palestine. At one time the Amorites controlled an extensive area in Mesopotamia, Syria
and Palestine”. Genesis and Archaeology, pgs. 88-89, by Dr. Howard Frederic Vos.
Let us view some other matters that Dr. Vos comments on. On Abraham’s Identity, Dr. Vos states that
recently the idea has been advanced that Abraham was not merely a powerful Patriarch but a Merchant
Prince. In this Dr. Vos cites Cyrus Gordon who concludes ” the patriarchal narratives, far from reflecting
Bedouin life, are highly international in their milieu, in a setting where a world order enabled men to travel far and wide for business enterprise…. Abraham comes from beyond the Euphrates, plies his trade in Canaan, visits Egypt, deals with Hittites, makes treaties with Philistines, forms military alliances with Amorites, fights kinglets from as far off as Elam, marries the Egyptian Hagar, etc” and simply admits that
this shows the Patriarch Abraham to be much more than the Bedouin nomad that scholars a generation
ago thought him to be. pgs. 51-54. On the Garden of Eden, The Flood, and their many similarities Dr. Vos states: ” That there was such a place of perfection may be reflected in the Sumerian account of the
land of Dilmun. He cites both Pritchard, who believes Dilmun was the Island of Bahrein in the Persian
Gulf, and Dr. Samuel Noah Kramer who locates Dilmun in the Indus-Valley, p.19, as well as the view
that Sumeria’s Mesopotamia is the original home of the Hebrews”, p.43.
On Genesis 14 Dr. Vos writes : ” the assertion made formerly that travel was not so extensive in the
patriarchal period and that Mesopotamian ( Sumerian ) Kings did not control the area must now be
discarded. The expeditions of Kings of Elam and Babylonia appear in different light when we learn, for
instance, that as early as 2300 b.c. Sargon of Akkad ( near Babylon ) made raids on the Amorites of
Syria and Palestine. Hammurabi himself claimed that his empire extended to the Mediterranean. Of
particular significance for the present study is the fact that prior to Hammurabis’s rule in Babylon, Kudur-
Mabug, an Elamite King of Larsa ( north of Ur ), claimed to be “prince of the land of Amurru” ( Palestine
and Syria ). Furthermore, a wagon contract found at Mari in the Middle Euphrates region and dating to
the patriarchal period gives as one of its conditions of rental that the wagon shall not be driven to the
Mediterranean coastlands, hundreds of miles away. Dr. Vos also comments on the discovery by Albright
of a line of buried cities along the legendary Highway of Kings. These cities dated to the Early Bronze
(3000-2000 B.C.) and Middle Bronze (2000-1500 b.c.) Ages. Also identified was the town of eastern
Gilead, Ham, Ashteroth Karnaim in southern Syria, Kadesh-He ( along with many others ) with Ain el
Qudeirat in the Sinai Peninsula. pgs. 66-73.
On Joseph ( Zaphnath-Paaneah; Yuyasof I of On ) as Prime Minister or Pharoah Vizier of Egypt, Dr. Vos observes : ” First, it is clear that the Egyptians did not consider the Hebrews to be part of the Hyksos
movement. When the Egyptians drove out the foreign overlords in the 16th century b.c., the expulsion did
not involve the Hebrews”. Again : ” Critics used to doubt the possibility of a Palestinian slave’s rising to
such high position in Egypt as scripture says Joseph did but archaeological investigation has provided
several interesting parallels to this occurrence. A Canaanite, Meri-Ra, became armor-bearer to Pharoah;
another Canaanite, Ben-Mat-Ana, was appointed to the high position of interpreter; and a Semitic,
Yankhamu ( Jauhamu ), became deputy to Amonhotep III, with charge over the granaries of the delta,…
In commenting on the position of Jauhamu, who some believe officiated in the region of Goshen, Price
observes ” to him the Egyptian subjects in Canaan-Syria appealed in case of necessity, as he was the
high official of the Egyptian Government for that foreign state. He had all power to respond to the appeals
for grain in exchange for silver, wood, or even the sons and daughters of the buyers. The position of
Joseph as Commissioner of graneries in Goshen ( Gen.47:13 ff ) and his authority to retain the sons of
Jacob ( Yaa’kov ) as hostages remind one of the position of Jauhamu”. pgs. 101-108. Genesis and
Archaeology, by Dr. Howard Frederic Vos, 1963.
Bro. Yao. I have reprinted some of the conclusions in this book to Illustrate again the Truth and the
Modern Confusion on the subject here. Dr. Vos, a Caucasian scholar, was at least truthful to what the
evidence showed and did not show and was sensitive in his comments on race and religion in the book.
He also admitted the confusion of scholars on the Identity of The Canaanites, Hyksos, Semitics and
Habiru!!! Of course Anthropology, Archaeological research and Afrocentric Academia has shown and
proved much since then but to my knowledge has not said who the groups mentioned truly were in a
definitive sense.
The Canaanites are SIMPLY the Akan Peoples of Egypt’s Nile Valley and Sumeria’s Mesopotamia as
the many Tribal/Sub-Tribal groups throughout the region who descended from them along with the Igbo
Colchin and Ewe as a common ethnic group and CALLED THEMSELVES and their land KINAHHU.
The Hyksos and Semitics ( Amu, Aamu, Asiatics ) are SIMPLY The Black Dravidian Peoples of Sumeria, India and Canaan among them The Ibo ( Igbo), Ewe, Akan and Colchin.!!!


Because the meaning of the word Habiru is “still” in contention among Scholars I will present my own
view of the Ethnicity and Race of the peoples called Hapiru. This will digress from our earlier discussions
on the Hapiru. By all accounts it is certain now that the term hapiru/apiru referred to peoples who were
homeless, outcasts and downtrodden at that time. In other words street peoples. The same goes for
sag’gaz, a robber without regards to race.!!! The promblem is solved in Sumeria and Egypt when we look
at where this underclass dwelt at. They erected large homeless camps near the edges of forests, deserts,
lakes, streams and along the banks of The Rivers. It is certain now that these peoples worshipped the Life
Giving Spirit of The Land, the River God HAPI. They, the lower class of Hyksos, also dwelt at the Deltas and by the Red Sea, being peasants, servants, prisoners and street peoples. This River, The Nile
(Hapi) and its deltas also being the home of Apophys-Set-Typhon, the Crocodile Gods, and Ipi. In
Sumeria the same is Enbil-Ulu. These peoples in the areas were no Indo-Orientals or Caucasian foreigners
but the Egyptians and Sumerians OWN UNDERCLASS being mainly Canaanites with poor Egyptians,
Libyans, Sumerians and Nubians included. It is also a known fact and no secret that Egyptian/Sumerian
peoples and dynasties had many of these peoples as house servants and field slaves. For all of the talk
about “crossing over the Rivers and Red Sea” these are the Hapiru/Habiru so-called from their veneration
or worshipping at that time of the Spirit of The Nile, a favorite of the oppressed and downtrodden, The
River God HAPI.


These are the peoples, the descendants of ABRAHAM, who produced Isaac ( Yitzhak ), Jacob
( Yaa’Kov ), the 15th to 16th dynasties of Ancient Egypt, the Nation-State of Kana Yisra’el, and its
connections to the 18th dynasty of Ancient Egypt. I also note the fact that their native presence was
attested to in Ancient Egypt as early as the 13th Dynasty.!!! In order to explain the 18th Dynasty of Ancient Egypt it is helpful if we look at the 15th to 16th dynasties and the formation of Kana Yisra’el
as a socio-ethnic and political group. The names of the Hyksos Kings are unquestionably Canaanitish.
As the Akan, Igbo, Yewe and Colchin groups began to coalease in the region of Canaan, they all
originating from a common background and bond, along with the minor substrata of other various small
tribal groups ( the mixed multitude of the Torah and Biblical records ) we see the people of Canaan as
Israel finally take shape as a Nation. One of the reasons for this is that the 15th to 16th Dynasties were
THESE CANAANITES themselves. It is important to note that the timeline for Canaan/Egypt’s most
important events concerning Israel is from 1650 to 1150 b.c.e. It is especially important to anaylyze the
time period for the 15-16th dynasties for this is when the Patriarch Jacob ( Yaa’Kov, the Supplanter )
appears. Jacob is called Yaa’kov-Aru, Yaa’kov-Her and Yaa’kov-Baal. The founder of the 15th Dynasty
was Salitis ( also called Shalik, Saites and May-Ebre Sheshi, literally translated as MAH-IBRI-SHE-ISHI.!!!), and the last King of this dynasty was Auserre Apophis I ( Ausar-Re Apophys I ). In other
words these Canaanites were the Self-Styled Pharoahs of the Delta, Canaanite and Arabian Peninsular
regions. It is said that Yaa’kov-Her had 12 sons by the Matriarchs Rachel, Leah and the Matriarch
Mistresses Bilhah and Zilpah. It it also a fact that Canaan had 12 Tribes. The CONFUSION results from
modern scholars giving the family names of Each Son as the Tribal names itself of each group. And these
were the 12 Sons of Yaa’kov that settled in each of the lands and territories of the 12 Canaanite tribes.
The 12 Sons and their Wives were SIMPLY the heads of these 12 Canaanite families, clans, groups and
Tribes of peoples in Canaan. As time went on from the earliest periods, their names and the Canaanite
tribal names became synonomous and identical. That is what happened there. That is all.
On Joseph ( Zaphnath-Paaneah; Yuyasof I of On ) again, I believe that Joseph was a Pharoah Vizier
under his Father Yaa’kov-Baal of the 16th Dynasty. When comparing the historical records from the
ancient texts to modern theoretical interpretaions it is interesting to note the similarities and differences as
told by academia of all schools. They make it so confusing, perplexing and non-common sensical at times.
In my opinion it would seem to me that Joseph was not just “sold” into slavery but was bartered, ransomed, captured and/or taken as a political prisoner-of-war (after all, they were at war with the
southern dynasties and others in that day and time) and his release was effected by BOTH Official
Diplomatic and Spiritual means. I also note that in the Book Joseph And Asenath, Ase-Nath, his wife to
be, already a Queen Princess at this time looked MORE LIKE A DAUGHTER OF THE HEBREW
ISRAELITES ( Read : Canaanite/Hyksos/Israelite ) than any of the other women belonging to the various
socio-ethnic tribes making up the population of Egypt in that day and time. I submit that Joseph was a
Pharoah Vizier of the 16th Dynasty ( called Hyksos ) under his Father Yaa’kov-Her and simply
ascended the throne after the death of the Partriarchal Pharoah. Again, See Joseph and The Hyksos,, echoeing the same conclusions reached by Dr. Vos
and others that the “expulsion of the foreign overlords” by the Southern Theban Dynasty did not include
the Hebrews. However as Dr. Vos admits, western academic scholars were labouring under the
“assumption” ( Academic Theory ) that the Canaanites/Hyksos/Israelites were different ( non-black,
non-native ) groups of peoples or a foreign race of people altogether which is the view that you presently
hold also Bro. Yao. Again I propound the fact that there is not a shred of anthropological or archaeological evidence to support your theory.!!!
See Joseph In Egyptian Historical Records,; and Jacob-Baal, ; and also See Genesis, KJV : Chap. 44: 1-34 ; Chp. 45: 1-28 ; Chp. 47: 1-31 ; andChp. 48: 1-22 ( Where The Land of Egypt and Canaan are VIRTUALLY INDISTINGUISHABLE ) !!!
All of the anthropological, archaeological, ethnological and linguistic evidence supports the fact that the four tribes mentioned herein ARE the
peoples known as the Hebrew Israelites and Black Jews. After much intermixing in the Nile Valley and Mesopotamia ( Egypt, Sumer, Canaan )
Canaan is the land where these four groups, already ONE, merged into a Nation as a Socio-Ethnic Group with a NATIONAL, INDEPENDENT,
SOVEREIGN IDENTITY. And that is how a SOCIO-ETHNIC GROUP AND A NATION IS BORN!!! The evidence supports the fact that
these Indigenous Canaanites are indeed the peoples of the book. Using this as our primary ideology here, let us approach the finding and
identification of the Israelites from the Egyptians OWN words in describing them and what they called them in the Middle Kingdom and Early
New Kingdom period and see just how easily we can find Israel in Egypt again and again and at almost every single turn. They called them
SYRIANS and referred to Canaan-Arabia as The RETENNU and LEVANT. This as we can easily see was a RACIAL as well as a Geographical
Classification, Retennu meaning Blacks but not of Egypt but the Akinahhu of The Land of Canaan. To put it plainly the Hyksos peoples was
nothing but these peoples and the Rulers, Chieftains, Nobles and the powers that be of Canaan ( along with the other small groups of Libyan,
Sumerian, Nubian and Indus-Valley populations that were present among them ) as evidenced and described by the SUMERIANS AND EGYPTIANS THEMSELVES. !!! See Joseph, The Alignment of The Chronological Records, .
They were also referred to as the WEARERS OF THE LOCKS ( you know, as in plaits, braids, sidelocks, Dreadlocks ). The Merneptah
Stela clearly DEMYSTIFIES Ancient Israel rather than MYSTIFY them. ( I myself have always known that the Stele itself is the
Incontrovertible Proof of the Black Canaanites who were denoted as Israel by none other than themselves and their Sister Nations, Ancient
Egypt and Sumer every since laypersons and scholars alike have tried to use the Stele to Prove or Disprove the existence of Israel as a
Canaanite Ethnic Group for quite, quite, quite some time now !!! heh, heh, heh, heh, heh ). See The Merneptah Stela,
Once again, for what a Native Canaanite looked like in the fifteenth century b.c. to 70 A.D. to present, See Harpers Bible Dictionary, pgs. 151-153, First Edition, 1985 ( Description : Canaanite Dignitary
with arm raised in salute; Bronze Plaque from Hazor, Fifteenth Century B.C. : The Canaanite Official in
this Stele is a very black person, extremely dark-complexioned. He wears undergarments similar to our
modern day clothing over which there is a Robe. In the olden days these Officials often wore a circular
ribbon about their upper body with Aramaic language and Adrinka symbols inscribed thereon denoting the
rank, country, station and function of the dignitary. This clothing is identical to West African Clothing today
called KENTE CLOTH. ), And, to further Drive The Point Home > See Rabbi Mordecai Abi Serour,
History of The Jews of Bilad el-Sudan ( In Fact, Read The Whole Article and The References in it ), ; and this one too, The
Igbo People :; Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, pgs.
174-175, by Margaret Bunson. The Hyksos/Israelites were no “new race and/or new people”. Egypt
called them SIRIONS, Sumerians called them ARAMEANS and Manetho himself called them ARABS
and PHOENICIANS. These Canaanite peoples were indigenous to Canaan, Sumer and Egypt. See
Handbook to Life in Ancient Egypt, pgs. 87-89, by Rosalie David ; Ancient Syria, ; And Hyksos ; ;Hyksos, ; ; And Hyksos,

The 15th to 16th Israel dynasties were the basis, origin and developement of the Canaanite State of
Israel as a Independent, Sovereign Pharoanic State. After their expulsion from North Egypt in 1567 by
the Southern Pharoah Ahmose I ( Kamoses ) they withdrew again to Canaan. Still Canaanites continued
to play a large role in the Egyptian dynasties and society. In continuing the socio-political drama this leads
us up to the famous 18th dynasty of Pharoah Akenaton and his Vizier, The Priest-King Osarseph ( The
Tetmoses Osarseph or Tetmosi Osar-Yuyasof II of On ) better known as the biblical King Moses.
Yes, Bro. Yao. What I am saying is that the Chief Dynasties of The Canaanites were the Amurru and
the 15th to 16th Dynasties of Egypt were the Proto-Israelite and Israelite Dynasties who sat on the Thrones of Ancient Egypt as they sat on the Thrones of Mesopotamia also.!!! To understand this better
See The Prophecy To The Avrahamic ( Abrahamic ) Peoples. Western Torah, Gen. Chap. 17: 1-27 ;
Chaps. 16-17 ; and Chap. 25: 1-23.
However we are concerned now with the Administration of Akenaton ( Amonhotep IV ). It seems that
after the Theban southerners drove the Canaanites back into Canaan they oppressed the Hebrews still in
Egypt and made frequent incursions into the Land of Kanaan. But again, a Canaanite family rose to power
in the 18th dynasty of Egypt in the person of Pharoah Tetmoses Osarseph. [ Note: To explain the Pharoah/Pharoah Vizier King Tetmoses Osarseph ( also known as Yuyasof II of On, Damoses and
Tamoses ) the name SEPH or SOF MEANS descendant of Joseph, ( Yuyasof I of On, Zaphnath-Paaneah ), Ephraim, Manesseh, Benjamin and Judah whom the Levites lived among and intermarried with in Goshen, North Egypt. A practice which Pharoah Tetmoses discontinued as he assigned the Levite-Zadoks a special status when he withdrew ALL Hebrew Canaanites back into their own native land within their own national borders, named it Kana Yisrael, and established himself as the First and Founding Pharoah of Kana Yisra’el’s First Dynasty with Joshua as the Pharoah Vizier or Prime Minister. This was The Second Exodus. A voluntary one. The first dynasties were A COLONIZATION OF NORTHERNKEMET/EGYPT BY THE HEBREWS. Now, the first exodus or expulsion of the last Kings of the Israelite 16th Dynasty in North Egypt and the attempt by southern Kemetics to REMOVE ALL TRACES of the CANAANITE presence WAS because that was the first and only time in its native history that KEMET had been COLONIZED, albeit an INTERNAL ONE.!!! Phr. Tetmoses, in founding a Independent Canaanite State, had to deal with native elements loyal to the southern dynasties, Sumeria, and selfish ones out for their own power, resettle the 12 Canaanite Tribes, and write The First Democratic Constitution.The Constitution of Man and Woman, The Torah.!
This is the BASE of the stories about Phr. Tetmoses and Joshua’s wars with the Egyptians and hostile
elements in native Canaan. He and Joshua oversaw all of this along with the High Priest Aaron and Matriarch Queen Miriam. Pharoah Tetmoses also lived for 120 years beginning his work at the age of
40 !!! End Note ]. He made the final break with the southern Theban dynasties after Akenaten’s death,
re-established Canaan as a Independent State as Kana Yisrael and begin Judaism according to the
Patriarchal Command as the Native Culture.This is the Whole Story of the Exodus and The Mosaic-Joshua Dynasty of Ancient Kana Yisra’el in Canaan, more or less. This is ALSO for the unleavened,
half-leavened, half-mixed, half-baked Hebrew Israelites in CERTAIN GROUPS and Individuals with
street level, race-based so-called “Knowledge” who are teaching the Lie that Judaism ( YAHUDAISM )
is a Japheth Russian/Caucasian Ashkenazi “invention”. There are Hebrew Israelites, that just like other
Black peoples, are not prepared to accept and face the Facts of Israel and its True History. Having been
De-Culturized for so long they do not understand the real and true meaning of what it means to be the Hebrew Israelites. That will be addressed in Israel’s Ontology. See The Moses Mystery, The African
Origins Of The Jewish People, by Gary Greenberg , ( Go To: Look Inside Another Edition Of This Book for an Academic Introduction ); Ahmed Osman, ; Moses In History,
Hyksos, ; ; Osarseph ; Breaking News: Man Named Moses Declares “Set My People Free!” Leads Gang Of Hoodlums Into Wilderness, ; The Origin of the Jewish People and the Land of Canaan, by David Storobin, ; And, ; AND Genetic Evidence : West African/SubSaharan Peoples Are The Original Canaanites, Israelites And Arabs,; And The Israelites Were Pharoahs of Egypt, page 1, by Ralph Ellis, ; And, .

Also See
The Original And Only Amorites Were Black Canaanites, The Mount Zion Assembly Of Yah, ; And,

To begin with I will give the definition of Ontology : The branch of metaphysics that deals with the nature
of being ; a particular theory about the nature of beings or the kinds of existents. I have heard it said by modern Caucasian Greek scholars, Indo-Arabs and Black Egyptologists the Hebrew Israelites/Black Jews worship a Demiurge. Scholastic conjecture COULD NOT be better than this. Let a layman person
enter the FRAY here. I will give you the old magical Hebrew formula for determining “a God” and THE
GOD. Let us apply this formula Right Here! The first one is Linguistics with its ETYMOLOGY ( Etymology MUST be applied because languages can be corrupted, badly Translated and falsely Transliterated ! ). The other two (2) are FUNCTION and PLACE. YAH/YAA, the Sole and Supreme
Creator God has descended down to us as OM-YAH, AMYN-YAH, and EL YAH from Nubia-Kush
( Nubi-Yah, Nabi-Yah ), Indus-Kish ( Indi-Yah, Indu-Yah ) and Sumeria ( Semeri-Yah, Shemi-Yah )
from Time immemorial. YAH was known in Egypt ( Kemet, Kemi-Yah ) as YHUH, HUHI ( NOT AS
LAH ), in India as OYM/OM, YAA/YOM/YAM, Sumeria as ELYON ELYON EL, meaning The God,
The God, The Great God, in Nubia as AMYN, AYM, AMN and AM, The AMEN, and in Canaan as
EL YAH, The God who is Known but Unknown. This is why YAH was and still is taught by word and
thought only, The Sacred Three/Four Letter Word of The Ancestors!!! YAH is not Interchangeable and
Transliterable with Lah.!!! ( The “Y” is only transliterable as O,A,U,I BUT is equivalent to the First Three
Only as “O”, the SYMBOL of the Cosmos, All in All, The ALL ONE ). The LAH of Egypt directly
descends to us today as identically Lah, meaning the MOON and el-El or al-Al, meaning “a God”,
literally translated as AL-LAH, The Moon God. Also See ALLAH, The Moon God in the form of a
person as DUMUZI, The Sumerian Messiah, Shepherd King and Shepherd of Men equal to the Egyptian
Tehuti ( All the Kings and Priests were called Shepherds of Men by The Ancestral Nations, NOT just
Egyptians and Hebrews ! These Are Facts Without Emotion, Hate or Sacrilege Also. Just THE FACTS ). .
No such translation exists for YAH and IAH is a corruption of LAH, NOT YAH !!! If IAH is proposed
or theorized as a corruption of YAH it is a badly disconfigured one.Now, even PTAH is a form of YAH
as PTYH, PTHY, and PTYAH.!!! YAH is the Hebrew Israelite word for Supreme Being and Creator
God. That is All ! ( Compare Meroitic-Egyptian Hieroglyph, Tamil-Sumerian Cuneiform and Aramaic
Ugaritic Hebrew !!! ) .
2. Place : YAH could not be a form of Tehuti or he a form of YAH because YAH is First and Tehuti was
merely a messenger, teacher, guide and initiator into the various Religio-Spiritual systems of that day and
time. Second of all, YAH is the Aramaic Hebrew word for Ideal, Divine, Cosmic, Transcendental, The
Universal One. The same meaning as YAH has Today for YAH changes not. Third of all, YAH can not
be a “Moon God” or “a Tehuti” for YAH has no Images or Representations. It is said and taught that YAH
dwells in the Thick, Thick, Thick Darkness. A Ontological term for The Melanated Essence of the Cosmos
and ALL. Even today Israelites have no artistic representations and images of YAH and no else does either !!!
Fourth of All, YAH was known and worshipped in the Secret Societies by the High Initiates Only and Only
By The 3 Letter and 4 Letter Sacred Secret Word of The Ancient World.!!!
3. Function : The Supremacy of YAH as EL YAH in the Canaanite Pantheon is well illustrated in several,
numerous instances where the Orishas, Neters, Anunaki, the BAALIM of Israel , the “lesser Gods, Lords
Deities or SPIRITS” Have to go to YAH to get permission for to do just about almost anything, whether it
be good, evil, or to bestow a favor, curse, or impreesion upon someone especially if that person ( Man,
Woman, Child ) be loyal and beholden to YAH or be given a destiny by YAH or Not bothered at all.!
I will give 3 instances from the Torah/Tanakh and bring this part to a close about YAH’S Supremacy in
Hebrew and World Ontology !!! See Holy Tanakh/Bible, Book of Job ( Iyyob ), Chap. 1: 1-22 ; Numbers,
Chapters 22, 23 and 24 ; and I Kings, Chap. 22: 1-53.

And Now for the HARD Part. Hard because Indigenous Black Spiritualists and those of Organized
Religions Do Not Want to Accept WHAT IS AND IS A FACT !!! Now, to explain The ROOT AND
BASE of ANCESTRAL JUDAISM. In Israel, the word for Yoruba-Dogon-Kemet and Dravidian Tamil
Indian Orishas, Anunakis, and Loas IS BAALIM AND ELOAS. The basis of Judaism in its origins and
and developements is nothing but Traditional Black Spirituality of Africa and Asia known as VODUN.!!!
And Black Evolutionary Science known as ANIMISM. Our Ancestors Have Always Taught us that
this World Of Nature is Just AS Important, Alive and Diverse as is The World of Spirit. This System of
The Teaching of Judaism comes from The School of MELCHIZEDEK, THE ANCESTRAL SPIRIT
OF KANAAN BENE YISRAEL, Just as Osiris is The Ancestral Spirit of Egypt/Kemet and Enlil The
MOST HIGH GOD ( El Yah ; YHVH The El; Elyon Elyon El ) whom Our Patriarchal Father Abraham Met and gave Tithes, Supplication and Ancestral Veneration to. This was before The Patriarchal Father
married his Matriarchal Mistress, Mother Hagar, Our Mother Also. Matriarch Hagar is Agar, A Agaritic or Ugaritic Woman, A CANAANITE! And that is Also why Patriarchal Father Abraham ( ABBA’ HAM ) is ALSO called The Father Of Ham.!!! There also goes out the Door and Window
of Truth “The Lie of The Mythical Curse On Canaan” INSERTED into Our Torah/Tanakh
Records by Roman, English, Indo-Arab and Russian Ashkenazi “White Jews” Academia!!!
To Illustrate on BAALIM again : The Neter SHU in Egypt, The Anunaki SHU in Sumeria, is
to the Canaanite Hebrew Israelites : The BAAL SHEM or BAAL SHU-MU. A word that HEBREWS still use today to refer To Our Origins. He is the Brother of Ham ( Who is OSIRIS ), Anu,
Enki, Enlil and others. The word Baal in Hebrew means a Lord of The Land .
Because This Treatise is to Promote Unity, Love, Peace and Harmony I will set out how Black Hebrewism and its Culture Judaism is to be viewed and defined by. Judaism has No Law of Coercion
whether by Force or Guile!!! The Most Critical Fact, LONG OVERLOKED, is That ALL Black
Spiritual Systems SHARE a Creator-God Concept surrounded by a host of lesser Spirits. Judasim should be seen as ALL African Religions and Spiritualities such as Egyptian Amenism, Sumerian Anuism, Indian
Brahmanism and Buddhism, Orisha-Ifa, Santeria, Candomble, Sectarian Christianity and Sectarian
Theocratic Islam PURIFIED and STRIPPED of The Multiplicities. The multiplicities that causes conflicts
and DIVISIONS. We believe that YAH, through Pharoah Tetmoses, preserved YAH’S name through all
Hebrew Spirituality and Mystical Judaism should be viewed as a UNITY system. In commenting above on the relation that we all SHARE of a Creator-God and lesser Orishas, Loas, Deities and Spirits Hebraic Spirituality and Mystical Judaism teaches that the SPIRITS, if they be True and Real, are all a part of and function of God (YAH) and not SEPARATE from YAH. Just as one Cannot separate a Ray
of Sunlight from its Source, The Sun. For this reason these functions of God (YAH) are called ELOHEEM. This is the context that Hebrew Spirituality and Mystical Judaism should be viewed in by
Traditional Spirituality and Orthodox Religions.
For Messianic Hebrew Israelites who look to a Messiah, the belief, veneration and practice of a Divine
Virgin Mother who gives Birth to a Son who IS THE MESSIAH coming to SAVE His People for Their
GOD IS JUST AS OLD AS THE CREATOR-GOD CONCEPT among ALL the Afro-Asiatic Peoples in the World to this day. I am a practicing Mosaic Messianic Hebrew Israelite because I KNOW that there is No DIVISION in Our Scriptures and that BOTH Moses and Yashua lead to the same ONE : YAH ! And That Is ISRAEL’S ONTOLOGY !!!
For Hebrew Israelites in this Age of Increased Knowledge, The Scientific Technological Age, when
beset on all sides by psychological and material coercions, made to feel that Hebrewism and its Culture
is borrowed, or made to think that Judaism is a Inferior Spirituality, YOU NEED NOT BE DISMAYED.
Hebrewism and its Judaism is quite the contrary and its Effectiveness has been Time-Tested through our
ANCESTORS and US! In The Darkest And Finest Hour That Is When YAH is There.
And that, My Bro.Yao-Heru-Tehuti, and all others concerned is The Ontology of Israel!
See Biblical Beginnings In Ancient Egypt, ( A Very, Very Good and Interesting Site When One Knows How To Read It, Whether Black Egyptologist, Sumerianist or Hebrew ; Scroll To Jehovah and
Read The Portion About HUHI=IHVH=YAH and then Go To RE HPRW NEB translated as the GOD
HUHI=IHVH=:YAH No Matter how Many Persons, Moon Images and Human Beings That YAH is
Associated With !!! In Fact Hebrews and All Others Should Read This. As For Languages ALL of The
TAMIL SCRIPTS ….. !!!!!!!! . See : ; And The Names Of God In Judaism,

See ; ; ; ; ; Then See : Afrocentrism, 4. African as a race, ; I Rest My Case on The Universality of Hebrew Israelites and

(Message over 64k, truncated.) Mon Jan 7, 2008 3:05 pm


lamar perryman

FORWARD TO DRAFT BOX AND RE-EDIT. lamar perryman wrote: Shalom El Hetep and Greetings, To The Mambos, Queens and Princesses Of… lamar perryman
Jan 7, 2008
3:05 pm


April 7, 2009






%d bloggers like this: