Moorish ancestry of America

[Jerseee]

Folks,



Kgod has only touched the surface of this issue. I can tell all of you this much....this is going to be a long thread because the Moors (from my research) have done so much--that they even established the government for this nation--prior to its corruption. It was not to be this corrupt. And keep in mind to ask yourself why does the US have a treaty with Morrocco that will never end?



Kgod, you opened the topic up---you got to see it through now. Good luck and happy learning to all.

ok,ok, let me start with the Moors. The Moors that came over here to establish this government came from Morroco. They modeled Washington D.C. after the white house in Casablanca. What you have to learn is the fact that the European Manarchy in every European country knows that their bloodline started with the Moors who inhabited Europe first, left, with to Genewa (africa) and came back. If you look at the German and British coat of arms, you will see the Moors (africans) on the coat of arms. Now, getting back on point, Morroco was the first country to recognize America as a country and established a treaty with the united states government called the treaty of friendship and peace. Under this treaty, no Moor was to be kidnapped into slavery, so , to get around this, like the devils they were, the government got the plantation owners and the ship kidnappers to mix the native americans with the moors they brought from africa. This treaty is in existence to the very day and is the supreme law of the land. there was a moor in virginia a couple of years ago who brought this into court and the judge excused the court from the case by saying they didtnt have jurisdiction. this was a child support case at that. ill try to find this case. here is a link to the treaty , a copy from yale university http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/di...y/bar1786t.htm

NOw, let me get to Paul, i wish i had the time and patience right at this very moment to look up verse by verse, but just browse anywhere thru Romans and see where Paul says its alright to not be circumcised, its all right to eat pork, he tells a story 3 times about how he and his boys were trotting down the road and met jesus and the story changes every time (when he is being questioned by the authorities). after telling people its basically alright to not follow the laws of The Most High, Paul tops it off by saying "it the truth of his glory has abounded by my lie, why im i yet judged a sinner". Paul is clear as day saying that he is lying but his lies are making the glory of The Most High better. Pleease. sounds like a lawyer, im mean lyer to me. ill bust my bible out when weasel comes in here again, and ill show you the quote where they called simeon a nigger in the bible, yes a nigger and you got black folks running around with bibles and worshipping that crap. and to make sure they knew they were really using the word nigger, i had a version of the bible with the footnote at the botton and the word niger which they used (nigger) was explained in the footnote as the word black man.

Here is a link to a lawsuit agains the united states for kidnapping us and the constant abuse and violations of treaties against moors

http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:E...in+court&hl=en

[weishaupt1776]

[color=black][b]Mrs. Just Starting Out, is it O.K. if you re-titled this thread Moorish Ancestry of the U.S.? I think we could stay more on point. Then maybe Kgod could create in the religion section a thread called Paul. I see this thread about to get pretty hairy. I bet Jersee knows what I'm talking about.

where you at weasel? im just getting started

[weasel]

I'm here. I've been at a seminar all morning, so I haven't had time to post anything. so tell me what you know. I'd never heard of the whole Moor thing until this week, throw me some more links so I can research this concept. As in source material.



And as far as Paul, I'm going to go read Romans again before I respond. Feel free to post the quotes that you refer to, that'l make it easer/faster.

i already posted the links. go there and follow THEIR resource links, im not gonna give a full class on this stuff.

[juststartingout]

trying to rename it

[weasel]

Well, until you rename the discussion, here goes.....



kgod,

I reread Acts and Romans, to start, and I still don't see evidence of Paul perverting the message of Jesus, though you use a different name I'm assuming you mean the same person.

What I read into Paul's teachings, in these 2 books, is that we are saved IN SPITE of the law, not INSTEAD of the law; that the law still applies, but that Jesus' sacrifice freed mankind from having to follow the law perfectly to be saved.

You said, "Paul says it alright to not be circumcised, its all right to eat pork."

Context: Jewish Christians were going around saying "you HAVE to be circumcised to be saved," and Paul said that was wrong. Jesus paid the ultimate sacrifice - no more killing lambs and wearing sackcloth. If I go to hell for not being circumcised, then why did Jesus die?

And the whole "pork" thing wasn't Paul, it was in relation to Peter - he saw a vision where he was told to eat of many unclean things, and then God told him that nothing was unclean that HE had declared clean. In reference to Peter being sent to preach to a Gentile. The law told the Jews not to associate with Gentiles.



I read Paul's conversion story 2wice in Acts, yes he changed certain parts. I skimmed parts of Romans, but didn't see one there, so I might have missed it. I feel that the crucial details stayed the same, so what's your point? Jesus never used the same story twice.



"it the truth of his glory has abounded by my lie, why im i yet judged a sinner"

Again, because I skimmed parts of Romans, I didn't see this quote. Please respond with the reference, so I can get back to you on it.



Ok, in Acts 13:1 I found your post about Simeon. In a list of Christians, it says "...Simeon, also called Niger..." where Niger is pronounced Nee-ger. The only definition I found was "black." I read it the translation as "Simeon the black", but you could read it as "Simeon, also called 'black'." Why couldn't it be referring to Nigeria? Makes a lot more sense to me. And since Luke wrote Acts, that clears Paul of your accusation anyway.



I'm open to many different ideas, even if they profess to contradict my own theology. So I'd still like to hear your specific thoughts on this subject, with the actual references you said you had. (no malice intended, just sincerely interested)

[weasel]

Althought I do admit that the modern "Christian" is converted with little or no appreciation for the Law and repentance, I blame the current trend of happy-go-lucky evangelism, not Paul.

[weasel]

"We have a history of savagely plundering other cultures and subjegating the native people to slavery... to suit our own ends.."

Not my ancestors, I'm Swedish



And what's all this about the order of Melchizedek? Are you saying there's other writings about him then the 3-4 sentences in the Bible?