The title of the following report shouldnot shock you. The Americans and other white governments have been planning the death and the RE-enslavement of the whole of Africa for many years. The New York Times, 18 April 1993, put fourth an article promoting the idea of the recolonization of Africa. The deployment of spies and other persons to Africa to see how much the Africans are paying attention to the white man’s evil plans, and to see if there are any strong freedom movements or strong leaders should not shock you. Again, this is nothing new, this same type of plan was used 400 years ago by the English Queen Elizabeth and her chief of the Navy, Sir John Hawkins in 1555. According to the history we have, the Queen of England and Sir John Hawkins had taken control of the slave trade from Spain. Sir John Hawkins was sent to Africa, and lived among the Aboriginal people for some 29 1/2 years studying the culture, religion, speech, and everything he could learn about our Black Nation. He went so far as to go to the “GOD TRIBE”, to get England’s first slaves, this GOD TRIBE known as SHABAZZ was PICKED, because no one had lied to them, all they knew was the way of peace(PURE ISLAM). So they believed Mr. Hawkins lies about a ” land to the West filled with milk and honey”. Now, America today, under the leadership of a so-called “Black man” is carrying on the evil plan to re-enslave not only Africa, but he is also planning the same for the Black Nation WITHIN America herself!!. Remember, the early slaves that where brought to the Americas, who gave birth to their babies; the white man would take these new born Black babies from their mothers and had these babies brought up by white woman. These babies would then grow up knowing only the ways of the white world, and many of these Black children grew up hating their own Black People, and worked with the white man to help enslave and kill their own people. Did not the ruler of America today come from a very similar background? Does he not have the same mind of those Black babies that where brought up by the white women during the 64 years used in the making of the Negro? From 1555 to 1619 is the missing history the white man left out, this is the time he used to make a new kind of Black people, whom he called a “NEGRO”, which means “a Black person who is dead from the neck up.” So, history is TRYING to repeat itself, but this time it will not happen, as this is the TIME known as the DAYS OF ALLAH, and ALLAH HIMSELF demands Justice for the Ex-slaves, and TRUE FREEDOM for HIS people, THE ORIGINAL BLACK NATION. Please read the following report:
In Afghanistan and Iraq, the U.S. military has embraced social science as a tool of counterinsurgency, embedding anthropologists and sociologists within brigades as part of an effort to understand local cultural and tribal dynamics. It’s a controversial approach, but in theory, it’s supposed to make military operations less lethal by helping commanders identify who their friends are.
In Africa, the military wants to try the same experiment, with a twist: The idea is to help top military planners better understand Africa and its peoples, and perhaps provide some “early warning” to prevent conflicts before they start.
As part of this plan, U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) is planning to send researchers into the field to conduct academic-style research in remote areas of the continent, according to a copy of an unclassified information paper for the command’s Social Science Research Center, based at its headquarters in Stuttgart, Germany,
The teams, called Socio-Cultural Research and Advisory Teams, or SCRATs, will be skilled ethnographic or social science researchers with language skills and field experience. Before a bilateral military exercise, for instance, the paper states, “a SCRAT may conduct a socio-cultural assessment to better focus U.S. efforts and develop beneficial objectives. They may then accompany U.S. forces during the exercise in a cultural advisory capacity and conduct a post-exercise assessment of the impact on the local population.”
It’s part of a quiet, but steady, increase of U.S. military attention to the continent. Back in 2008, the Pentagon united military activity on the continent under a new geographic headquarters, AFRICOM. This week, the Army is hosting nearly 100 senior military leaders from around the continent at its African Land Forces Summit. In parallel, the U.S. military has been taking part in regular exercises like Flintlock, a multi-national exercise that is supposed to help Trans-Saharan states develop professional militaries.
Ideally, SCRATs will work with with local researchers, and keep a light footprint: According to the information paper, “While the support and approval of U.S. Embassy Country Teams is critical, SCRAT logistical requirements from Country Teams will be minimal. Team members will most often speak the local language and have extensive experience conducting academic research independently in remote locations.”
Still, anthropologists have raised ethical and professional concerns about this kind of collaboration with the military. They worry that research conducted by the military’s social scientists may violate principles of informed consent — and may potentially be used in lethal targeting.
The information paper on the Africa socio-cultural teams is careful to stress professional responsibility. “Research will be carried out in full compliance with the local norms, customs, and laws as well as the ethical guidelines laid out in the SSRC Code of Ethics,” the paper says. “Researchers will make their research objectives clear and will remain aware of the concerns and welfare of the individuals or communities studied.”
What’s more, the research teams “do not engage in concealed, clandestine, or covert activities and we will not be involved in activities that will harm our credibility as social scientists or compromise our relationship with local communities. Freely given, informed consent will be obtained from all participants. Researchers should use courtesy and discretion in their initial approach to potential participants, understanding that the individuals might not agree with the U.S. Military, nor wish to be publicly identified with it.”