I'm not a pan Africanist
I'm a pan West africanist
St Kitts & Nevis agrees to accept U.S. migrants….except Hatians
- Thread starter NYC Rebel
- Start date
I'm not a pan Africanist
I'm a pan West africanist
I'm not a pan Africanist
I'm a pan West africanist
You don't give a shyt about Caribbean people?
Not anymore than youYou don't give a shyt about Caribbean people?
The fukk...?
Why are you tagging me? I couldn’t even point out these islands on a map.
Ask me on geocities
You don’t employ COINTELPRO on things you find Non threatening.
The FBI's War on Black-Owned Bookstores
At the height of the Black Power movement, the Bureau focused on the unlikeliest of public enemies: black independent booksellers.www.theatlantic.com
You dont overthrow anAfrican government who believesd in pan africanism as did Kwame Nkrumah experienced.
You donr have businesses threaten to shut down Ebony magazine for promoting Pan Africanism
You dont try to murder pan africanist leaders to the point they have to leave the country like Stokely Carmichael.
You made shyt up.
Where is your backing of what you wrote because the actions arenr matching.
You are relying on a Fallacy of false equivalency.
First false equivalency occured at the beginning of your post,
The FBI != Cia. That's irrelevant to my post. Cointelpro is not a cia opperation. In fact J Edgar Hoover despised the CIA And often ran conflicting operations with them.
Second ,
The preeminent goal of us foreign policy from the 1950s to the early 1990s was countering the communist block. The secondary goal was stopping radical islam that ghadaffi seeded with bombings of US embassies and bombing comercial airlines like PanAmerican. The reason they went overboard in stopping the initial black governments was because
they were siding with the Soviet Union. They were not fighting them because of Pan-Africanism itself. You know why nkrumah , had to be removed?
This is why nkrumah had to be removed....
This would be the modern day equivalent of John Nahama having a summit with kim jong un or Ayatollahs Komeini. It would be grounds for immediate removal from his position by even the modern CIA. This is the same issue that Eldridge Cleaver had when he tried to reach out to Gaddafi. The issue was not black people working together for political, economic, sovereign and military military cooperation. it was the foolish idea of these individual leaders to align with the mortal enemies of America that made them enemies of the government. Your false equivalency is that you are equating the consequences of these relationships with pan-africism, instead of relating them to the inherent toxicity of these individual leaders embracing the arch enemies of America.
This is why nkrumah had to be removed....
This would be the modern day equivalent of John Nahama having a summit with kim jong un or Ayatollahs Komeini. It would be grounds for immediate removal from his position by even the modern CIA. This is the same issue that Eldridge Cleaver had when he tried to reach out to Gaddafi. The issue was not black people working together for political, economic, sovereign and military military cooperation. it was the foolish idea of these individual leaders to align with the mortal enemies of America that made them enemies of the government. Your false equivalency is that you are equating the consequences of these relationships with pan-africism, instead of relating them to the inherent toxicity of these individual leaders embracing the arch enemies of America.
But of course my speech would be meaningless unless I showed you counterexamples of pan-africanists who were allowed to exist, without interference by the US government.
Arguably these were more famous an African is so than stokely Carmichael himself. My first example to you is his Excellency Haley Selassie. Not only did Selassie host the initial pan-african Congress, but he served as a figurehead of the movement ever since garvey's day. But isn't it funny how the CIA never tried to depose him? In fact the CIA and the US military actively worked with him because he wisely chose not to align with the iron curtain. The crazy thing is Selassie was eventually deposed by a ussr proxy.
My second example is yet another powerful pan-africanist figure who was president both the initial pan-african congresses, the first president of Kenya Kenyatta. He was a staunchpin africanist, and was integral in the fight against the United Kingdom. But the minute he got into power, he wisely chose to distance himself from the enemies of the United States like Gaddafi and Leonid Brezhnev. The United States government didn't care that Kenyatta was a pan-africanist, in fact they funded his government. Entities like Barack Obama only exist because of outreach the US government did to Kenya flying intellectuals like Obama's father to America. My final example to you is Léopold Sédar Senghor who's pan-africanism was treated as a cultural quirk instead of an existential crisis. Now do you see what I mean?
The false equivalency you committed was attribute and persecution simply to being a pan-africanist. When in actuality the people who were being persecuted as pan-africanist were actually engaged in hostile activity with the mortal enemies of the us such as stokely Carmichael's trip to Ho chi Minh and even the USSR in 1967 while the America was actively in the Vietnam War. I posit to you that this is what the US government was targeting. It is the critical difference between a Kenyatta and an nkrumah who were both pan-africanist but were treated differently.
Even domestically speaking, there is a stark difference between a Eldridge Cleaver who actively reached out to Gaddafi or the Soviet Union, versus a pan-africanist like Roy Wilkins who vehemently rejected communism.
My second example is yet another powerful pan-africanist figure who was president both the initial pan-african congresses, the first president of Kenya Kenyatta. He was a staunchpin africanist, and was integral in the fight against the United Kingdom. But the minute he got into power, he wisely chose to distance himself from the enemies of the United States like Gaddafi and Leonid Brezhnev. The United States government didn't care that Kenyatta was a pan-africanist, in fact they funded his government. Entities like Barack Obama only exist because of outreach the US government did to Kenya flying intellectuals like Obama's father to America. My final example to you is Léopold Sédar Senghor who's pan-africanism was treated as a cultural quirk instead of an existential crisis. Now do you see what I mean?
The false equivalency you committed was attribute and persecution simply to being a pan-africanist. When in actuality the people who were being persecuted as pan-africanist were actually engaged in hostile activity with the mortal enemies of the us such as stokely Carmichael's trip to Ho chi Minh and even the USSR in 1967 while the America was actively in the Vietnam War. I posit to you that this is what the US government was targeting. It is the critical difference between a Kenyatta and an nkrumah who were both pan-africanist but were treated differently.
Even domestically speaking, there is a stark difference between a Eldridge Cleaver who actively reached out to Gaddafi or the Soviet Union, versus a pan-africanist like Roy Wilkins who vehemently rejected communism.
Finally, my proof of the cia dismissal of Pan-Africanism is their own internal documents criticizing all the faults in pan africanism and directly mocking it as a mystical concept.
There's a whole coli thread on it , where various talked about it for weeks. It was their own internal CIA documents .
Read this 1961 C.I.A. internal report on Pan Africanism
I'm sure that most are aware of CIA direct involvement, meddling, orchestrated coups in developing countries. Ive seen footnotes when these documents have been cited before, but this is my first time reading CIA document about how Pan Africanism was viewed in this time period. Based on the...
www.thecoli.com
the most fascinating thing is after you read their analysis of Pan-Africanism in 1961, you will notice that absolutely nothing changed. All the same tensions in this functions they mention previously still exist. Black people even managed to recreate a failed sahell alliance with the only change being gabon being replaced with burkino faso.
The fact that the parallels are still there nearly 70 years later is why i said in my post that black people are relying on mystical thinking to force a concept that was doomed to fail into working. The only new information I will add aftering pondering comments by @GrindtooFilthy is that pan-africanism is time wasting for us, because these silly mystical Pan-African conversations detract resources from us creating a black taiwan or a black korea. It would be far better for us to focus on creating individually competitive units, before trying to sew together multiple dysfunctional units that will fight each other.
Last edited:
K.O.N.Y
Superstar
wtf are you talking about. I walked you down to the point you fled the conversation. I never took a L in a debate on here
Anyone of yall would get destroyed in FBA debate
NYC Rebel
...on the otherside of the pond
At no point… Do you make points.wtf are you talking about. I walked you down to the point you fled the conversation. I never took a L in a debate on here
Anyone of yall would get destroyed in FBA debate
Last edited:
TELL ME YA CHEESIN FAM?
I walk around a little edgy already
Cotidamn you autistic FBA Jihadists belong in the Bushes
NYC Rebel
...on the otherside of the pond
You are relying on a Fallacy of false equivalency.
First false equivalency occured at the beginning of your post,
The FBI != Cia. That's irrelevant to my post. Cointelpro is not a cia opperation. In fact J Edgar Hoover despised the CIA And often ran conflicting operations with them.
Second ,
The preeminent goal of us foreign policy from the 1950s to the early 1990s was countering the communist block. The secondary goal was stopping radical islam that ghadaffi seeded with bombings of US embassies and bombing comercial airlines like PanAmerican. The reason they went overboard in stopping the initial black governments was becausethey were siding with the Soviet Union. They were not fighting them because of Pan-Africanism itself. You know why nkrumah , had to be removed?
This is why nkrumah had to be removed....
This would be the modern day equivalent of John Nahama having a summit with kim jong un or Ayatollahs Komeini. It would be grounds for immediate removal from his position by even the modern CIA. This is the same issue that Eldridge Cleaver had when he tried to reach out to Gaddafi. The issue was not black people working together for political, economic, sovereign and military military cooperation. it was the foolish idea of these individual leaders to align with the mortal enemies of America that made them enemies of the government. Your false equivalency is that you are equating the consequences of these relationships with pan-africism, instead of relating them to the inherent toxicity of these individual leaders embracing the arch enemies of America.
But of course my speech would be meaningless unless I showed you counterexamples of pan-africanists who were allowed to exist, without interference by the US government.Arguably these were more famous an African is so than stokely Carmichael himself. My first example to you is his Excellency Haley Selassie. Not only did Selassie host the initial pan-african Congress, but he served as a figurehead of the movement ever since garvey's day. But isn't it funny how the CIA never tried to depose him? In fact the CIA and the US military actively worked with him because he wisely chose not to align with the iron curtain. The crazy thing is Selassie was eventually deposed by a ussr proxy.
My second example is yet another powerful pan-africanist figure who was president both the initial pan-african congresses, the first president of Kenya Kenyatta. He was a staunchpin africanist, and was integral in the fight against the United Kingdom. But the minute he got into power, he wisely chose to distance himself from the enemies of the United States like Gaddafi and Leonid Brezhnev. The United States government didn't care that Kenyatta was a pan-africanist, in fact they funded his government. Entities like Barack Obama only exist because of outreach the US government did to Kenya flying intellectuals like Obama's father to America. My final example to you is Léopold Sédar Senghor who's pan-africanism was treated as a cultural quirk instead of an existential crisis. Now do you see what I mean?
The false equivalency you committed was attribute and persecution simply to being a pan-africanist. When in actuality the people who were being persecuted as pan-africanist were actually engaged in hostile activity with the mortal enemies of the us such as stokely Carmichael's trip to Ho chi Minh and even the USSR in 1967 while the America was actively in the Vietnam War. I posit to you that this is what the US government was targeting. It is the critical difference between a Kenyatta and an nkrumah who were both pan-africanist but were treated differently.
Even domestically speaking, there is a stark difference between a Eldridge Cleaver who actively reached out to Gaddafi or the Soviet Union, versus a pan-africanist like Roy Wilkins who vehemently rejected communism.
Finally, my proof of the cia dismissal of Pan-Africanism is their own internal documents criticizing all the faults in pan africanism and directly mocking it as a mystical concept.
There's a whole coli thread on it , where various talked about it for weeks. It was their own internal CIA documents .
Read this 1961 C.I.A. internal report on Pan Africanism
I'm sure that most are aware of CIA direct involvement, meddling, orchestrated coups in developing countries. Ive seen footnotes when these documents have been cited before, but this is my first time reading CIA document about how Pan Africanism was viewed in this time period. Based on the...
the most fascinating thing is after you read their analysis of Pan-Africanism in 1961, you will notice that absolutely nothing changed. All the same tensions in this functions they mention previously still exist. Black people even managed to recreate a failed sahell alliance with the only change being gabon being replaced with burkino faso.
The fact that the parallels are still there nearly 70 years later is why i said in my post that black people are telying on mystical thinking to force a concept that was doomed to fail into working. They only knew information I will add due to deeply thinking aabout comments by @GrindtooFilthy is that pan-africanism is tme wasting for us, because these silly mystical Pan-African conversations detract resources from us creating a black taiwan or a black korea. It would be far better for us to focus on creating individually competitive units, before trying to sew together multiple dysfunctional units that will fight each other.
You posted about Kwame and the Soviet Union . The same USSR who called Kwame’s embrace of Pan Africanism racist and didn’t want to work with him after he wanted an independent African free of their influence?
USSR and Nkrumah’s Project of the Union of African States, 1
Drawing on declassified documents housed in the Russian Federation Archives of Foreign Policy (Arkhiv vneshnei politiki Rosssiyiskoi Federatsii, AVP RF) and the Russian State Archive of Contemporary
The CIA later did their part in orchestrating the coup that toppled Africa’s true pan Africanist. So spare me the communism guff when communist stopped fukking with Kwame because he was a staunch pa Africanist.
Second….Are you under the belief that the FBI isn’t a part of the government because you brought up the CIA? The FBI is an arm government…….and pan Africanism scared them.
And let’s not talk about what pan Africanist schools experienced throughout the late 60s and 70s. The Intercommunal Youth Institute the panthers opened faced constant police harassment where teachers were arrested on dubious charges. Same shyt my boy’s uncle faced when opening his school in Brooklyn in the 70s. shyt….they made a movie about it
Afrocentric curricula and community control of schools triggered political backlash, state intervention, defunding and administrative takeovers
In this case, it was state government power used to dismantle African-centered educational autonomy.
So yeah….pan Africanism was ALWAYS attacked by the power structure. The fukk are you talking about?
Last edited:
Primarily lack of self interest as a group. We prioritize the issues of other groups over our own despite ours own being more urgent.
I remember some years back there was a report done in Alabama about how hookworm was becoming prevalent in the ADOS communities there due to a lack of sanitary sewer infastructure. During that time the representative of the county in question (lowndes) Terri Sewell was active on twitter tweeting about DACA which was the hot topic of the moment. She had never spoken about this issue in her own county until a bunch of us from the org started tweeting her the story and asking why she wasn't working on this. After getting all those messages she sent up a bill to get funding for that infastructure.
Yes that . exactly same USSR. Yes that exact same leadership. And no ,I believe your facts are incorrect.You posted about Kwame and the Soviet Union . The same USSR who called Kwame’s embrace of Pan Africanism racist and didn’t want to work with him after he wanted an independent African free of their influence?
USSR and Nkrumah’s Project of the Union of African States, 1
Drawing on declassified documents housed in the Russian Federation Archives of Foreign Policy (Arkhiv vneshnei politiki Rosssiyiskoi Federatsii, AVP RF) and the Russian State Archive of Contemporaryideas.repec.org
The CIA later did their part in orchestrating the coup that toppled Africa’s true pan Africanist. So spare me the communism guff when communist stopped fukking with Kwame because he was a staunch pa Africanist.
he was getting a lot of support from the Soviet Union and getting weapons shipment as early as 1965 from East Germany. This is documented. In fact when the coup leaders stormed the Flagstaff house, They were having literal gun fights with white Soviet security advisors . Would the USSR send its valuable military and intelligence assets to protect a man's regime that they "stopped fukking with"?
Neither party wanted nkrumah for his pan-africanism. America loathed him because he was close to the Soviet block. The Soviets like him because they sensed he would be sympathetic to them. Immediately after the trip to the USSR kwame nkrumah brought KGB agents and East German Stassi agents back home with him to form Ghana's national security service. Us intelligence obviously didn't like this.
We have new straight from the horse's mouth. The Soviet Union had lots of defectors like Vasili Mitrokhin , do testify that Ghana was integral to the Soviet Union's Africa strategy.
Neither party wanted nkrumah for his pan-africanism. America loathed him because he was close to the Soviet block. The Soviets like him because they sensed he would be sympathetic to them. Immediately after the trip to the USSR kwame nkrumah brought KGB agents and East German Stassi agents back home with him to form Ghana's national security service. Us intelligence obviously didn't like this.
We have new straight from the horse's mouth. The Soviet Union had lots of defectors like Vasili Mitrokhin , do testify that Ghana was integral to the Soviet Union's Africa strategy.
This is the primary issue America had. This is the entire point ive been making in this ddiscussion. America's issue with nkruma was
not the fact that he was a pan-Africanist it was the fact that he was trying to build a satellite state of the USSR in Africa. Your're falsely equating his pan-Africanist identity to to the CIA's aanimosity , when in fact Nkrumah was actively working with the arch enemies of America.
The US government itself, said this after the ghana coup
And a direct quoute from Nixon's national security advisor was ...
"The coup in Ghana is another example of a fortuitous windfall. Nkrumah was doing more to undermine our interests than any other black African. In reaction to his strongly pro-Communist leanings, the new military regime is almost pathetically pro-Western"
Notice nothing here immediately after the coup mentions pan-africanism. The highest level of the US government is concerned about communism. And this is why I say nkruma was targeted. They did not like his socialism/communism. It was not because of his pan-africanism.
Furthermore this is why I offered the examples of jomo Kenyatta and Léopold Senghor.
Why would the CIA and State Department give $310 million (in today's money) to a kenyatta who co-organized the 1945 Pan-African Congresss along with nkrumah, if their concern was pan-africanism? It's no coincidence that Kenyatta denied Soviet defense assistance. We don't even have to go into East Africa right next door to Ghana in Senegal Léopold Senghor who was also a prominent figure in pan-africanism and was being propped up and praised.
The US government itself, said this after the ghana coup
And a direct quoute from Nixon's national security advisor was ...
"The coup in Ghana is another example of a fortuitous windfall. Nkrumah was doing more to undermine our interests than any other black African. In reaction to his strongly pro-Communist leanings, the new military regime is almost pathetically pro-Western"
Notice nothing here immediately after the coup mentions pan-africanism. The highest level of the US government is concerned about communism. And this is why I say nkruma was targeted. They did not like his socialism/communism. It was not because of his pan-africanism.
Furthermore this is why I offered the examples of jomo Kenyatta and Léopold Senghor.
Why would the CIA and State Department give $310 million (in today's money) to a kenyatta who co-organized the 1945 Pan-African Congresss along with nkrumah, if their concern was pan-africanism? It's no coincidence that Kenyatta denied Soviet defense assistance. We don't even have to go into East Africa right next door to Ghana in Senegal Léopold Senghor who was also a prominent figure in pan-africanism and was being propped up and praised.
I find it strange how I brought to you four of the most prominent pan africanists in human history being completely untouched by the US government, but you're rebuttal is school children? I think we're speaking past each other breh.
To prevent the goal post from being shifted let me reiterate my point. The CIA did not see Pan-Africanism as a threat. They use the phrase mystical because it was not based in reality. That school has nothing to do with the cia. My original comment was based on a CIA assessment.
If you wish to have a discussion about the FBI we can do that in a separate thread. Similarly if you'd like to talk about the various dysfunctions of the government agencies we can do that too. For example
there was a very long time where the DEA was fighting CIA operatives in both South America or Thailand, but the DEA was completely unaware they were interrupting another government operation. Even as late as the 2010s , the DEA and ATF were actually stopping a bunch of FBI operations such as operation fast and furious because the two parts of the government don't talk to each other. Again I can go deeper into this interagency dysfunction but it's totally outside the topic of this conversation.
You are shifting goal posts. My original comment , which you replied to was about the CIA. I'm not coming here to talk about the FBI or whatever other government agency . If you wish to have an FBI discussion please do so in a different thread. I would gladly humor you in an intellectual conversation about the FBI if you started that thread.
My point in that statement you are referring to was to keep the conversation on point. Fbi != CIA. And I also added that entities within the government are oftentimes not working together. Much like Hoover despised the CIA and ran counteracting opperations.
The prime example of what I mean as well the FBI was doing that nonsense was the schools in Brooklyn , the CIA was simultaneously funding its own an African is programs. For example, AMSAC or the American society for African culture . It directly received millions in funding from CIA front organizations like the far field foundation doing constantious things like sending Langston Hughes and Nina Simone to Lagos on the taxpayers dime.
No shyt, c00ns exist all over the diaspora.
The people in charge of the government over there are probably your distant kinfolk, they disgust me just as much as you do.
Mosiah Supreme
....
Haitians need to fixed their country and stop acting like the world owe them something.
The world does owe them something from France to US maybe if ppl would stop fukkin with their central govt they will still have one by now
. Go look up the nonsense the Clinton’s were doing over there, I bet you won’t