Shaka Ndugu Kmt is still making those silly videos? Evidently, he has a new one:

http://youtu.be/e_KHittgeWc
Ok. I understand that he has a Jones for me, a symptom of the homosexualization/feminization of the current Afrocentric movement.
Little homie Wesley (by the way, you called me "silly" more than once and I'm not tripping so I'm sure you won't mind) I don't know what "Afrocentric movement" you are talking about but I take this opportunity to inform you that I deal with Afrikan Truth which is for brothers and sisters only (unlike to the Nation of Islam who have white members) who are strictly heterosexual.
You could be asked about a fellow Doctor, who is said to be part of your "crew", regarding allegations of homosexuality but you don't even know that there are Caucasian (i.e. white Americans) registered members in your former Black organization, even though your leader, teacher and guide has said it during an interview which was filmed and of course broadcasted. But so far you are the one describing another man as "hyper masculine", do you remember ?
"I have seen Bro. Seti in live, formal debate. I discovered that there are actually two "Seti's" the You Tube character Seti - the loud mouth who aims at 'shock value' through the things he says and the way he says them. This is the 'Hollywood' Seti that panders to his You Tube following. But there is actually a more reasonable Seti that shows up at debates. He still brings some of that loud mouth, hyper masculine Seti, but it is tamed a bit by his attempt to show himself a 'scholar' in the debate. Make no mistake about it: bro. Set is actually good. I am not validating him: he is already validated in a large segment of the community. We who love Islam cannot ignore him. There is no question in my mind that Bro. Seti is much more worthy of the engagement than the particular individuals those over here on this site that I said I would not waste my time on."
So you better check yourself...

It is unfortunate that he is in France. He is the one “Youtube banger” that I would actually debate. If anyone wants to collect a donation to bring Brother to the states, I am putting it out now that I would love to have a formal, public discussion with him on the African origin of Islam. In the meantime, this video (like the others) demonstrates how forced and dubious his arguments are and it demonstrates that the current Afrocentric Internet movement is dead before it ever got started. I will, simply to illustrate the point, actually outline his fallacies.

1.] Firstly, Shaka claims that my position is based only two statements from THEM. Actually, it is based on numerous literary and pictorial statements, all of which are compiled here:


“ THEM on Prophet Muhammad”

http://drwesleywilliams.com/yahoo_site_admin/assets/docs/THEM_on_Prophet_Muhammad.113154604.pdf

Now, I would advise that people here actually Knowledge before you Wisdom: read this before contributing your opinion to this discussion. For Shaka to try to pigeonhole 25 pages of documentation down to two statements shows his lack of integrity.
During your debate with Tahuti, you have put the "notorious" Elijah Muhammad quote on the screen "The Muhammad that was here 1400 years ago was a white man..." (The Theology of Time p.3) and you proceeded to read 3 quotes :
1) [...] "Muhammad was a member of the Black Nation [...]"
2) [...] "both the Arab Prophet Muhammad and Jesus were dark men, and brothers of the darker Nation [...]"
3) [...] "Muhammad, an Arab, was a member of the black nation."

Everybody will notice that the first and last quotes are quite similar, the only difference is that "an Arab" is not in the third quote. So in my video, that you also qualified as silly but still found necessary to address, I've put the 1st and 2nd quotes.
Afterwards you admitted "we don't know what the Honorable Elijah Muhammad meant" and did some speculative acrobatics that I won't dwell on for obvious reasons but if Elijah Muhammad spoke Arabic feel free to let us know, nevertheless it looks to me like some picking and choosing to argue that THEM might have meant "white" in the "classical Arabic" sense (way) because he used that same ENGLISH word as follow:
" The white man has made the black man lazy [...]" This is one of the 147 times that "white man" was used in Message to the Black Man (I did not count myself of course, that's the result of an electronic query) and unless you can demonstrate otherwise, it always referred to Caucasians. You carried on about Elijah Muhammad's quotes by saying "But we know that, his two statements [...]", so even yourself Dr. Wesley Muhammad seem to have been thinking the same way I did on this particular point, you did not mention "25 pages of documentation".
I went in chronological order but if you need further help I was referring to the part of the debate just before you threw the microphone on the floor...
No lack of integrity on my part, I understand that you are trying to catch up with me after I showed & prove that you willingly and publicly lied before.
Oh, by the way, I did not read your 25 pages of documentation, I could take you more seriously if you would acknowledge that video of you lying (who knows, you might call it a mistake, maybe you have trouble reading your own slides) or more importantly what I will outline underneath.

2.] Now, Shaka cites 4 quotes from THEM, including one outrageous misquote, as evidence that I, Wesley Muhammad, contradict THEM. Before I demonstrate the futility of this endeavor, I want to make a broader point.

I have documented empirically that Muhammad, the Arab prophet of 7th century Mecca, was a black-skinned Arab, as were his tribal clan, the Banu Hashim, and the larger tribe the Banu Quraysh. I have documented this in several books and papers. The most easily accessible is the following:

“ Anyone who says that the Prophet is black should be killed”: The De-Arabization of Islam and the Transfiguration of Muhammad in Islamic Tradition

http://drwesleywilliams.com/yahoo_site_admin/assets/docs/Muhammad_Article.170121832.pdf

Again, Knowledge before you Wisdom. I will respond only to questions related to this material that derive from a reading of the material.

Now, the general consensus of the true Afrocentrist scholars – J A Rodgers, George Parker Wells, Cheik Anta Diop, Dr Ben, Mamadou Chinyelu, Runoko Rashidi, Wayne Chandler, and Dana Marniche – is that Muhammad was a Black Arab, in agreement with my researchers. The irony is, however, my enemies from among the new generation of ‘Afrocentrists’ reject the learned opinion of those scholars and cling to what they ‘think’ THEM taught on the matter, YET THEY DON’T BELIEVE IN HIM! Even if THEM did teach what they claim, why would they privilege the claims of a religious leader whose Teachings they otherwise find to be false, over the consensus of their own learned scholars? Ask Shaka why he privileges Elijah Muhammad’s alleged position on the matter – Muhammad was a Caucasian white man – over the position of his own respected Afrocentric scholars J A Rodgers, George Parker Wells, Cheik Anta Diop, Dr Ben, Mamadou Chinyelu, Runoko Rashidi, Wayne Chandler, and Dana Marniche that Muhammad was an Afrabian, a Black (African) Arab? This demonstrates that his whole polemic against me is not about scholarship. It is about his ideological hate for Islam on behalf of which he would even reject the learned judgment of his own scholars in favor of the religious claim of the paramount Muslim, THEM.
How could J A Rodgers, George Parker Wells, Mamadou Chinyelu, Runoko Rashidi, Wayne Chandler, and Dana Marniche be my "own respected Afrocentric scholars" when I have yet to read one of their books? It appears that you consider me to be an "Afrocentrist scholar" and therefore I'm supposed to be in agreement with "Afrocentric scholars" but let me remind you that scholars do not necessarily behave as a monolithic group when it comes to History and ideologies, we are all aware that you are part of a religious organization where all the "believers" have the same belief but you need to make the distinction.

I mentioned your vocabulary several times in the past, but I am now surprised that it seems to be the one of an extremist:
"This demonstrates that his whole polemic against me is not about scholarship.
It is about his ideological hate for Islam [...]"
Nothing against you, nothing personal, it's about scholarship (your claims & statements).
Have you forgotten that you said "Throw Kemet in the garbage can" "throw Maat in the trash can, throw Amen-Ra the slave making god away!" ? That's the main reason why I checked you in the first place. You did not say that you "hate" Kemet and Maat, as a matter of fact not only you said "I'm a Kemetologist" you stated “I love Kemet” “I love Maat”.
So how could you say "Throw Kemet in the garbage can" "throw Maat in the trash can" and you "love" yet I address you, your claims and "contradiction" with Elijah Muhammad's statement and I "hate" Islam ? I do scholarship, if you do crusades I will leave you to it (do you need back up?). When you said "Islam for over a thousand years has been an enemy to Black people in Africa" was that "hate" or "love" ?
When you said "today in 2010, Islam remains a tool of white supremacy" was that "hate" or "love" ? This is one of the greatest example of double standard I have ever witnessed, you should apologies to me for making such an irresponsible statement that (allegedly) have an
"ideological hate for Islam". You might be too proud to apologize, maybe you will have the "integrity" to at least say that you were wrong for writing that.

Here is definitely an opportunity to manifest your integrity; regarding your statement "throw Amen-Ra the slave making god away" you have claimed publicly (radio show) :
“but I said, I concluded that with “Amen-Ra is not a slave god” (click here to hear it)
"I said that Amen-Ra should not be held accountable for Tutankhamun's mischievious activities in Nubia". It's just that I missed that when I watched the DVD "Black Arabia (Kusha Dwipa) and the African Origins of Islam". I heard you say "I make no apologies" afterwards but not the aforementioned so can you show & prove what you said ? Can you substantiate your claim ?
Can you back up your statement so that it can no longer be an allegation but a fact ?
It is on that same DVD "Black Arabia (Kusha Dwipa)" that you said "throw Amen-Ra the slave making god away!" so why don't you tell us when (where in the lecture) you said that “Amen-Ra is not a slave god” and that "Amen-Ra should not be held accountable for Tutankhamun's mischievous activities in Nubia" ? What minute was it ? Once again, I wrote that I missed that part, I'm not saying you didn't say it, I'm just waiting...

Now, in terms of the three statements which Shaka correctly quotes from THEM, they are all true and consistent with the empirical data I have documented. However, I will address his gross misquotation first.

Misquote – Here, Shaka shows why he should absolutely not be taken serious. He claims THEM made the following statement:

“ That is the white race, they are Arabic people.”

He thinks he is proving with this alleged quote that THEM taught that Arab people are really white (Caucasian) people, and thus Prophet Muhammad and the original Ummah were Caucasian. But when you go to the link and listen to THEM’s word’s, he clearly DID NOT say that. He says the following:
“For two-thousand years the white race was in the caves and hillsides of what is now called Europe. And he made no history in those days. While he was there he was punished for starting trouble among the people of Islam in the Holy land. He’s the one that is referred to as Adam that was driven from the Garden of Paradise. That is the white race. They are the ADAMIC PEOPLE.”

“ Adamic people,” Shaka, not “Arabic people.” THEM makes the same point in MTTBM:

“ According to the Bible (Gen. 3:20-24), Adam and his wife were the first parents of all people (white race only) and the first sinners. According to the Word of Allah, he was driven from the Garden of Paradise into the hills and caves of West Asia, or as they now call it, "Europe," to live his evil life in the West and not in the Holy Land of the East. "Therefore, the Lord God sent him (Adam) forth from the Garden of Eden, to till the ground from when he was taken. So He drove out the man; and He placed at the east of the Garden of Eden cherubims (Muslim guards) and a flaming sword which turned every way to keep the devils out of the way of the tree of life (the nation of Islam)." The sword of Islam prevented the ADAMIC RACE from crossing the border of Europe and Asia to make trouble among the Muslims for 2,000 years after they were driven out of the Holy Land and away from the people, for their mischief-making, lying and disturbing the peace of the righteous nation of Islam.”

Again, THEM is calling the Caucasian race “Adamic,” not “Arabic”. Shaka twisted THEM’s words in a desperate attempt to put me against THEM. Shame on him and on all of you who defer to his ‘scholarship’. This is only the latest example of his twisting words in order to force his dubious claims upon his viewers: he has blatantly twisted mine on numerous occasions.
I addressed your claim against mine here.
Out of 5 comments as of today (August 14, 2011) 4 of them say that Elijah Muhammad said "Arabic" (not "Adamic"), it's up to people to listen for themselves and tell us what they hear.

Quote 1 -Shaka quotes the following statement from the Muhammad Speaks (2-4-1972):

“ The Old Islam was led by white people, white Muslims, but this one will not be. This Islam (The New Islam) will be established and led by Black Muslims only.”

Presumably, poor Shaka thinks that THEM is here claiming that Prophet Muhammad and the original Ummah were “white people, white Muslims,” i.e. Caucasians. This is yet another example of why his ‘scholarship’ is so pathetic: his cant read, or read carefully. Please note that THEM said that the New Islam will be “established AND led by Black Muslims only,” while he only says of the Old Islam that it “was led by white people, white Muslims.” I have demonstrated that while Caucasian/white-skinned Muslims – Persians, Turks, and Byzantine converts - have indeed led Islam for 1271 of its 1401 years (of the ‘Prophet Muhammad era’), this Old Islam was not ESTABLISHED by these whites, nor did THEM say that here. Old Islam was established by Black Arabs who led the Ummah only for approximately 130 years of its 1401 year existence. THEM’s statement is completely consistent with the historical record.

Quote 2 – Shaka again quotes THEM’s famous Theology of Time statement that Prophet Muhammad was “a white man”. I dealt with that quote in detail in the above referenced article, “THEM on Prophet Muhammad,” so there is no need to repeat that argument here, except to say that this statement is, on the surface, isolated and in contradiction to several statements made by THEM in:
Great acrobatics about Islam being "led" by white people but not "established" by them.
Just like you say that Elijah Muhammad didn't say "there" that Islam was ESTABLISHED by white people, Elijah Muhammad did not say "there" that Islam was established by Black people. And yes I reminded that Elijah Muhammad said (in ENGLISH, not Arabic) "The Muhammad that was here 1400 years ago was a white man..." and for those who only read it, they can hear it from Elijah Muhammad himself here.

1.] The Genesis Years, 1959-1962, 188: the original Arabs were Black
2.] Pittsburgh Courier, Feb 2, 1957: Muhammad was A BLACK MAN and a member of the Black Nation (which he specifically says consists of Black, Brown, Red, and Yellow, not white)
3.] “Truth is Confirmed,” 434: Muhammad was dark-skinned (tanned? Really, Shaka?) and a BLACK PROPHET.
4.] MTTBM, 92-93: Allah and Prophet Muhammad are Black God and Black prophet rejected by white race
I believe "MTTBM" stands for "Message To The Black Man", and that "92-93" are the page numbers. I have an electronic copy (PDF) so the page numbers are probably not the same but searches did not lead me to anywhere that says that Muhammad is a "Black prophet", the closest I found to Wesley's quotation (or is it paraphrasing?) is:
"The white race does not like to worship a black god and his prophets."
Unless the quote is to be found elsewhere, so far it mentions "a black god" but it says "and his prophets" it doesn't say that the prophets are black and doesn't mention Muhammad.
I even asked people to locate this statement but they have yet to point it out...

5.] “The History of Jesus,” Pittsburgh Courier August 3, 1957, p. A6: Muhammad of 1400 years ago rekindled the light of Islam among the original Black Arabs (not white).
I might as well state for the record that the way that Dr. Wesley Muhammad's text is transcribed here is the same way it was sent to me. I only added some URL's (links) and of course my replies (Shaka-Ndugu-KMT) are in green. I was told that Wesley Muhammad's text was published as a "note" on Facebook only available for viewing to his "friends" (contacts).
I have not logged in to Facebook for about a year, the text was sent to me by some brothers on Afrikan Truth. I believe that "p. A6" is in fact a typo, that what is meant is page 6.
However I do not see the above statement (No. 5) on page 6 and on the following page (The "History of Jesus" Article No. 3 August 3, 1957 - THE BLACK STONE) it says:
"Muhammad turned on the light (Islam) in the ancient house (Arab Nation) that had burned low since the time of Ibrahim (Abraham) and cleaned it up for the reception of a much brighter light of the Mahdi (Allah in the Person) and His people, which will come from the West out of the house of the infidels."
My version is published by Messenger Elijah Muhammad Propagation Society (M.E.M.P.S.)
The ISBN is # 1-884855-07-5
I did not see "original Black Arabs" written in this August 3, 1957 No. 3 (Black Stone) article which starts on page 6 and ends on page 7.

6.] Muhammad Speaks, Nov 19, 1965: A pictorial depiction of Umar and the early Muslims as Alack Arabs
7.] Muhammad Speaks, Nov 26, 1965: A pictorial depiction of Umar and the Early Muslims INCLUDING PROPHET MUHAMMAD, as Black Arabs.
8.] Muhammad Speaks, Dec 24, 1965: pictorial depiction of the early Islamic heroine Khawla bint al-Azwar, from the Arab tribe Banu Assad, and other Arabs as Black Arabs.
9.] Muhammad Speaks, August 3, 1973: 14 months after THEM’s June 1972 Theology of Time lecture, there was republished the depiction of a Black Prophet Muhammad surrounded by his Black Arab followers.

You all need to STOP acting like THEM only said one thing – the ‘white man’ statement - and that this represents his ‘position’. How does that singular statement relate to all of the above? I don’t know, nor does anyone else. I have offered my informed opinion in the above article, “THEM On Prophet Muhammad.” I believe it can all be harmonized, but only when read in the context of the Classical Arabic tradition and the empirical data. Those who reject the evidence of the data and the Classical Arabic tradition as a proper context to understand this apparent blatant contradiction, are left only with the contradiction. Good luck with that. I’m an historian, so I will always privilege demonstrable facts over religious ambiguity and contradiction.

Quote 3 – In “The History of Jesus” THEM says:

“ The Aboriginal Egyptians are people of the black nation, and even the modern people of Egypt – in fact, all original Asiatic people are of the black nation.”

Poor Shaka thinks that this means that THEM has admitted some whites (Caucasians) into the Black Nation. But this is not so. The modern Egyptians are most definitely members of the Black Nation. They are not Caucasians. MAny are the result of the invading whites mixing with the local Black population and are thus Mulatto. However, most Egyptians today are still dark-skinned, like the following:
http://rickcollierphotography.com/Living/Work/08-09-22KarnakDSC8356/422903527_vHSSY-L.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2552/3890230779_9a7d3f5f47.jpg
They are thus clearly members of the Black Nation, being even darker than the Japanese, whop are members of the Black Nation. While Mubarak is the most popular ‘face’ of the modern Egyptian, he does not represent the masses of the modern indigenous Egyptians (fellahin, Copts).
Dr. Wesley Muhammad says that the modern Egyptians and the Japanese are members of the Black Nation, it is duly noted.

Shaka Ndugu Kemet is an Internet Scholar and Youtube Banger who has put in no work in the real word. His ‘scholarship’ is pathetically shabby and deceptive, just like that of virtually all Internet Scholars.
Dr. Wesley Muhammad, I (Shaka-Ndugu-KMT) do teach just like John Henrik Clarke for example, you labelling me a "Youtube Banger" is only an attempt to diminish my impact like you tried to do when you addressed me back in 2010. If my scholarship is deceptive, how bad is yours when you willingly lie to a live audience ?
Isn't it ironic that you find it "unfortunate" that the "Youtube Banger" is in France ?
Not only you, Dr. Wesley Muhammad (PhD), "would actually debate" me but you would
"love to have a formal, public discussion" with Shaka-Ndugu-KMT the "Internet Scholar"...
Shaka-Ndugu-KMT has been running Afrostyly ( http://www.afrostyly.com/english ) since April 2004 (before Facebook, MySpace, Twitter & Youtube).

Wesley Muhammad refuted by Shaka-Ndugu-KMT