Its becoming increasingly clear that the US have a huge stake in the economic destiny of Nigeria, there are many classified documents detailing the role the US has played in the political arena of nigerian politics.

Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan expresses his views as to why many african countries find it almost impossible to progress:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBQZELCKB2s&feature=related

I knew what he was going to say before I watched the video and I guessed right. It is the same chant countless black people all around the world join voices and participate in when they refuse to look in the mirror and see their own worst enemy:

"Blame the white man"

See how he painted a false picture of Abacha as a hero who stood up to western influence instread of the tyrant that he was. A tyrant whose timely death was celebrated en masse by his own people. When will black people start looking in the mirror and holding ourselves responsible for our own shortcomings? instead of forever pointing to past real and present imagined oppression from 'white people'?

And if indeed the West was somehow involved in Abacha's death, then I say we owe them a long delayed letter of sincere gratitude.

Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan is a racist 'DOG'

JeSoul:

I knew what he was going to say before I watched the video and I guessed right. It is the same chant countless black people all around the world join voices and participate in when they refuse to look in the mirror and see their own worst enemy:

"Blame the white man"

See how he painted a false picture of Abacha as a hero who stood up to western influence instread of the tyrant that he was. A tyrant whose timely death was celebrated en masse by his own people. When will black people start looking in the mirror and holding ourselves responsible for our own shortcomings? instead of forever pointing to past real and present imagined oppression from 'white people'?

And if indeed the West was somehow involved in Abacha's death, then I say we owe them a long delayed letter of sincere gratitude.

Are you saying that nigerians are to blame for their own enslavement, colonialism and now neo colonialism implemented by way of international financial institutions like the IMF and the world bank? 

Okay so Farrakhan did not paint the whole picture of Abacha's tyrannical rule over nigeria, but let me ask you a question -was his replacement Obasanjo an improvement? For your information Obasanjo was chosen by the US as Abacha's replacement NOT because he was going to take nigeria forward but because Abacha refused to accept the IMF loans and structural adjustment programmes recommended by the american financial institutions.  Obasanjo was chosen by the americans as Abacha's successor because he agreed to plunge nigeria further into debt and destroy the living standards of the average nigerian so how you can think that the americans did nigeria a favour for removing Abacha is beyond me.

frosbel:

Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan is a racist 'DOG'

Is that so? How did you reach that conclusion? How about the entire US administration since independence up till today - do you think they love black people? Are you aware that forced sterilisation of black women was being practised in america until as recently as 1983?

I would advise you to read up on an organisation known as Planned Parenthood and their involvement with Eugenics otherwise known as race hygiene and their agenda towards black people in america.

Louis Farrakhan. Some things never change.

cap28:


Are you saying that nigerians are to blame for their own enslavement, colonialism and now neo colonialism implemented by way of international financial institutions like the IMF and the world bank? 

  No and yes. True we were kidnapped and removed forcibly into slavery, but also in many many instances it would never happened if we did not sell our own brothers and sisters to the white man for spices and mirrors. So we share plenty of blame there too.

Okay so Farrakhan did not paint the whole picture of Abacha's tyrannical rule over nigeria, but let me ask you a question -was his replacement Obasanjo an improvement? For your information Obasanjo was chosen by the US as Abacha's replacement NOT because he was going to take nigeria forward but because Abacha refused to accept the IMF loans and structural adjustment programmes recommended by the american financial institutions. Obasanjo was chosen by the americans as Abacha's successor because he agreed to plunge nigeria further into debt and destroy the living standards of the average nigerian so how you can think that the americans did nigeria a favour for removing Abacha is beyond me.

  I don't think I made any comment negative or positive on Obasanjo did I? That's irrelevant to the fact Abacha was a monster and Farrakhan's endorsement on Abacha is revealing on the kind of person Farrakhan is.

  Even if Abacha really resisted western influence, how does that make him a hero as farrakhan is trying to insinuate? I'll say it again, if the west was really responsible for Abacha's death, then we owe them a huge thank-you letter for ridding us of that tyrant. They did for us what we should've done for ourselves as far as I'm concerned.

JeSoul:

  No and yes. True we were kidnapped and removed forcibly into slavery, but also in many many instances it would never happened if we did not sell our own brothers and sisters to the white man for spices and mirrors. So we share plenty of blame there too.

I think you have completely exaggerated the level of collusion between our people and the european slave traders, the fact that there were a few corrupt collaborators in our midst does not mean that there was overwhelming support on the part of all africans to collaborate with the europeans to enslave their own people.  There is factual evidence which actually proves that the europeans fomented wars and pitted various tribes against each other, threatening each side with enslavement if they refused to cooperate.  YOu must remember that the europeans had the added advantage of the gun - this is why we were defeated - we could not defend ourselves.

The argument  you are trying to use is commonly used by whites who refuse to accept responsiblity for the heinous crimes that they have carried out against most of the non white races of the world.  YOu might as well say that the native americans and the aborigines of australia and new zealand are to blame for being decimated  by the europeans who invaded their land.

I don't think I made any comment negative or positive on Obasanjo did I? That's irrelevant to the fact Abacha was a monster and Farrakhan's endorsement on Abacha is revealing on the kind of person Farrakhan is. e]

No its not irrelevant - you were commending the americans for removing Abacha without understanding the real reason behind them doing so, there is no point praising an action when you have no real understanding as to why that action was undertaken in the first place.

Abacha was a thorn in the side of the americans NOT because he stole billions of dollars from the nigerian treasury , brutalised the nigerian people or mismanaged the nigerian economy - NO, the americans couldnt care less about what Abacha did or did not do for his people - their only interest was in him opening up the nigerian economy  to the whole sale plunder and pillage that they had been enjoying under Babangida, they wanted nigeria to continue on the downward spiral of borrowing more and more money from the IMF so that we would be in so much debt to them they would more or less own our natural resources, this is the level of sophisticated exploitation that the west now operates in africa and thats why Nkrumah referred to it as "neo colonialism" - a new form of exploitation whereby the exploiter does not physically occupy your land but still controls the economic and political destiny of your country by imposing punitive economic policies on the targeted nation which are designed to enrich the predator nation whilst simultaneously impoverishing the targeted nation.

Even if Abacha really resisted western influence, how does that make him a hero as farrakhan is trying to insinuate? I'll say it again, if the west was really responsible for Abacha's death, then we owe them a huge thank-you letter for ridding us of that tyrant. They did for us what we should've done for ourselves as far as I'm concerned.

Abacha's refusal to accept IMF and world bank loans does not make him a hero because he failed to do anything for his own people - instead he salted away billions of stolen money in foreign accounts, however in refusing to be kicked around by western financial institutions he showed that he was no coward and had balls.

the same louis farrakhan who refuses to admit the NOI killed malcolm x? oh wait, the white man did that also

cap28:

I think you have completely exaggerated the level of collusion between our people and the european slave traders, the fact that there were a few corrupt collaborators in our midst does not mean that there was overwhelming support on the part of all africans to collaborate with the europeans to enslave their own people.  There is factual evidence which actually proves that the europeans fomented wars and pitted various tribes against each other, threatening each side with enslavement if they refused to cooperate.  YOu must remember that the europeans had the added advantage of the gun - this is why we were defeated - we could not defend ourselves.

The argument  you are trying to use is commonly used by whites who refuse to accept responsiblity for the heinous crimes that they have carried out against most of the non white races of the world.  YOu might as well say that the native americans and the aborigines of australia and new zealand are to blame for being decimated  by the europeans who invaded their land.

My dear Cap, while I appreciate your knowledge on the history of slavery, you misappropriated my last response. Here is what I said again:

JeSoul:

  No and yes. True we were kidnapped and removed forcibly into slavery, but also in many many instances it would never happened if we did not sell our own brothers and sisters to the white man for spices and mirrors. So we share plenty of blame there too.

I said - "in many many instances it would not have happened". That does not equate in ALL instances we sold ourselves. My simple point was that we also share in the blame in many cases, and cannot simply "blame the white man" for all of slavery.

No its not irrelevant - you were commending the americans for removing Abacha without understanding the real reason behind them doing so, there is no point praising an action when you have no real understanding as to why that action was undertaken in the first place.

No brotha, I maintain that it is completely irrelevant.

Abacha = a tyrant.

That statement is completely unrelated to -

Obasanjo = a terrible president.

And don't forget that it is just an allegation (that can probably never be substantiated) that the West had a hand in Abacha's removal and Obasanjo's installation. So forgive me if I stop short of giving full credence to the conspiracy theory. But let us continue . . .

Abacha was a thorn in the side of the americans NOT because he stole billions of dollars from the nigerian treasury , brutalised the nigerian people or mismanaged the nigerian economy - NO, the americans couldnt care less about what Abacha did or did not do for his people - their only interest was in him opening up the nigerian economy  to the whole sale plunder and pillage that they had been enjoying under Babangida, they wanted nigeria to continue on the downward spiral of borrowing more and more money from the IMF so that we would be in so much debt to them they would more or less own our natural resources, this is the level of sophisticated exploitation that the west now operates in africa and thats why Nkrumah referred to it as "neo colonialism" - a new form of exploitation whereby the exploiter does not physically occupy your land but still controls the economic and political destiny of your country by imposing punitive economic policies on the targeted nation which are designed to enrich the predator nation whilst simultaneously impoverishing the targeted nation.

  Okay lets just stipulate everything you have said is indeed true. I'd like to solicit your opinion on this - was Nigeria better off under Abacha or under Obasanjo? Who committed greater crimes against the nation and people of the nation?

Abacha's refusal to accept IMF and world bank loans does not make him a hero because he failed to do anything for his own people - instead he salted away billions of stolen money in foreign accounts, however in refusing to be kicked around by western financial institutions he showed that he was no coward and had balls. 

Hmmm. Perhaps the one point in all this I will readily concur with you. And perhaps he indeed had some big stones, but of what profitable use is it to "commend" that? As far as Nigeria is concerned, his testicular fortitude did us no good.

  This can be equated to commenting on a 100 ton massive trainwreck of twisted metal that crushed scores and scores of people in cars on a train track, but yet pointing to a small window in the bathroom of the last storage car, and saying, look, at least that window didn't break, it withstood the accident.

JeSoul:

My dear Cap, while I appreciate your knowledge on the history of slavery, you misappropriated my last response. Here is what I said again: I said - "in many many instances it would not have happened". That does not equate in ALL instances we sold ourselves. My simple point was that we also share in the blame in many cases, and cannot simply "blame the white man" for all of slavery.

A fair assessment of the slave trade.

JeSoul:
  This can be equated to commenting on a 100 ton massive trainwreck of twisted metal that crushed scores and scores of people in cars on a train track, but yet pointing to a small window in the bathroom of the last storage car, and saying, look, at least that window didn't break, it withstood the accident.

A fair assessment of Abacha.

I am begining to suspect that white people and haters of blacks have invested this forum. The brother in question was saying some truth.
He was saying the reason why he alleged that enemies killed abacha. He was not saying abacha was a nice guy. Who is even nice now? He was saying that so far we have people that dance to the tunes of the enemies, we will never progress as a people but instead spiral downwards as the enemies intended.
On issues of Abacha's supposed billions:
if he had played ball with them and
if he had misappropriated our funds,
will they not have covered him when he died?
Did Abacha stole more than IBB? Why then did some enemies of our future from the evil land send emmisaries to the chief evil genius to contest and win so as to secure again the total destruction?
Is it not possible that most of the so called loots of Abacha were actually fabricated to demonise the guy? Is it not also possible that most of the killings in the country during his tenure were masterminded from outside?

I am not a supporter of Abacha at all, but I think.

[flash=300,300]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBQZELCKB2s&feature=related[/flash]

The only reason abacha was killed is because he refused the western powers.

Bishopking:

I am begining to suspect that white people and haters of blacks have invested this forum.

Many people have alternative agendas, people in the media study African web sites to see what they can get away with within mainstream media. Many Europeans are on Nairaland and other African web sites in disguise just to try and control the wave of information reaching our people.

. . . all these Conspiracy theories. When you have some solid facts come back to the market place of information and I'm more than certain more people (whether blacks or "whites in disguise") will be willing to buy from you. Until then, all this speculation or "could have been" is just fodder.

Louis Farrakhan is a hate-filled demagogue.

@ frosbel,

For every hate-filled black, there are ten thousand hate filled pink ( so called white) people.
Proof:
Visit: www.stormfront.org

frosbel:

Louis Farrakhan is a hate-filled demagogue.

You're definitely a white guy on this site trying to destroy African empowerment. How is Louis Farrakhan hate-filled?

JeSoul:

. . . all these Conspiracy theories. When you have some solid facts come back to the market place of information and I'm more than certain more people (whether blacks or "whites in disguise" will be willing to buy from you. Until then, all this speculation or "could have been" is just fodder.

Explain to me what exactly that conspiracy is? since of course you have all of the solid facts in the world.

chyz:

Explain to me what exactly that conspiracy is? since of course you have all of the solid facts in the world.

Chyz, lets look at this for a minute shall we;

-The only real fact we have in all this is that Abacha was a foul, foul person of a human being who left terrible, undisputable footprints of human and economic abuse on this great country.

-Now, Farrakhan himself does not have a good track record. He is known for his extreme aversion to all things "white" or pink as Bishop likes to put it.

    Now, in light of those two points, should we now take both their word - in absense of any kind of evidence - as the absolute truth?  If it were MLK making these accusations I can bet you the rest of us would take a lot more seriously. The source matters. We must not let our sometimes irrational dislike for "white people" to cloud our judgement and begin to entertain these kinds of unverifable speculations (that acheive nothing by the way) that we would otherwise not.

and oh, I certainly do not have a pinch of all the facts in the world. Just wanted to clear that up. Cheers.

JeSoul:

Chyz, lets look at this for a minute shall we;

-The only real fact we have in all this is that Abacha was a foul, foul person of a human being who left terrible, undisputable footprints of human and economic abuse on this great country.

-Now, Farrakhan himself does not have a good track record. He is known for his extreme aversion to all things "white" or pink as Bishop likes to put it.

    Now, in light of those two points, should we now take both their word - in absense of any kind of evidence - as the absolute truth?  If it were MLK making these accusations I can bet you the rest of us would take a lot more seriously. The source matters. We must not let our sometimes irrational dislike for "white people" to cloud our judgement and begin to entertain these kinds of unverifable speculations (that acheive nothing by the way) that we would otherwise not.

and oh, I certainly do not have a pinch of all the facts in the world. Just wanted to clear that up. Cheers.

Against what "facts" are you basing his argument against? The video was not in discussion about abacha sentiment by his countrymen or white or pork. I'm not going for the whole "our irrational dislike for white people" thing what i want to know what "facts" to you have to prove what he is saying is wrong? I dont care about his character,everyone has their own opinion.

bawomolo:

the same louis farrakhan who refuses to admit the NOI killed malcolm x? oh wait, the white man did that also

You obviously are completely unaware of the fact that malcolm x was under surveillance by the FBI right up until his death.
The FBI infiltrated the NOI and fomented antagonism towards Malcolm, many NOI members were extremely jealous of Malcolm and therefore it was easy for them to be used to get at him and this is what happened.

 A govt sponsored programme was set up by FBI head  - J Edgar Hoover, Hoover was a rabid racist and wanted all militant black men in america either dead or in prison for life, the programme which was funded and supported by the US govt was known as COINTELPRO.

If you look at the way in which Malcolm was assasinated you will know that it was a govt sponsored hit, the Audubon ballroom where Malcolm was giving a speech on that fateful day was crawling with FBI informants and plain clothes policemen, isnt it funny how the plain clothes policemen could not prevent the shooting.

You better wake up and understand what is going on the world okay, the US govt eliminates militant blacks who get in the way and Malcolm was regarded as one of the most charismatic and electric speakers ever to come out of the african american community.  He was seen as a major threat to the white establishment because he was waking up black people to their plight at the hands of a white supremacist enemy this is why he was eliminated.

Its so easy to blame Farrakhan for this but I can tell you that Farrakhan himself was being manipulated by the white establishment and did not realise that certain negative statements that he had made about Malcolm prior to his death would come back to haunt him and even raise suspicions about whether he was actually involved in Malcolm's murder.

I beleive that there were disgruntled elements within the NOI who were jealous of Malcolm and wanted him dead but it was the FBI who gave the order for him to be killed and in order to cover their tracks they used disgruntled NOI members to do the job.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h38PITTYVAY&feature=related

I continue to marvel at the way our people reason, frosbel and je soul please tell me why Farrakhan is a racist?

Have you ever listened to any of his speeches?  Does he spread lies and falsehoods in a bid to incite racial hatred or does he tell black people the truth about what is  happening to them in a world where they are powerless?

Je soul your way of thinking is really dangerous because it causes you to live in a state of false consciousness, Farrakhan as far as I know provides black people in the world with information about what is really going on around them and because the white establishment is terrified of the oppressed peoples of the world rising up to dislodge them from their position they try to discredit him by calling him a racist and a race baiter, these are tactics that have been used time and time again by the enemy when he wants to keep us ignorant and backward and yet we still havent understood the game.

JeSoul:

    Now, in light of those two points, should we now take both their word - in absense of any kind of evidence - as the absolute truth?  If it were MLK making these accusations I can bet you the rest of us would take a lot more seriously. The source matters. We must not let our sometimes irrational dislike for "white people" to cloud our judgement and begin to entertain these kinds of unverifable speculations (that acheive nothing by the way) that we would otherwise not.

"The source matters" - that's why some people shouldn't be posting fox news extracts on the internet as facts 

Sorry JeSoul, couldn't help one last dig at that my friend - you're doing a great job refuting cap by the way 

^^ . Touche. Omo, we go discuss Foxnews gist at some point soon I'm sure. Lemme answer these fellas . . .

---

chyz:

Against what "facts" are you basing his argument against? The video was not in discussion about abacha sentiment by his countrymen or white or pork. I'm not going for the whole "our irrational dislike for white people" thing what i want to know what "facts" to you have to prove what he is saying is wrong? I dont care about his character,everyone has their own opinion.

If I'm understanding you right (please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) this is the sequence of the conversation so far:

  Cap opens thread and says "Farrakhan Confirms West's Involvement In Abacha's assassination"

  JS says "where is proof for these allegations?" "why should we trust Farrakhan and Abacha? giving their sordid histories?"

  Chyz says "JS, where is your proof that what Farrakhan is saying is not true?"

So you are in essence asking me to provide evidence to the contrary, to a purely speculative claim? I'm not the one making definitive declarations, is onus is squarely on you and Cap's shoulders to provide evidence for that which you assert.

Suppose I open a thread and declare "I am the long lost heir to the throne of England". You and Cap dismiss my claims as unverifiable. Then I return and demand you show your proof that I am indeed not the long lost heir to the throne. Surely, you see the problem sir?

cap28:

Have you ever listened to any of his speeches?  Does he spread lies and falsehoods in a bid to incite racial hatred or does he tell black people the truth about what is  happening to them in a world where they are powerless?

  You call it "truth", I would use a very different noun to describe it.

Je soul your way of thinking is really dangerous because it causes you to live in a state of false consciousness, Farrakhan as far as I know provides black people in the world with information about what is really going on around them and because the white establishment is terrified of the oppressed peoples of the world rising up to dislodge them from their position they try to discredit him by calling him a racist and a race baiter, these are tactics that have been used time and time again by the enemy when he wants to keep us ignorant and backward and yet we still havent understood the game.

  Cap, are there still white-supremacist-establishment powers-that-be working tirelessly against blacks? I have no doubt that is true. Does this group constitute the vast, or even less-than-vast majority of white (or other races) around the world? No. Imho. I do not think that there is some massive, surreptitious conspiracy being constantly concocted and executed to "keep blacks down" around the world from progressing. I think the "oppression" we blacks cry today (while a certain small percentage is indeed real) is for the most part either imagined or self-inflicted.

  Look at Nigeria for Christ's sake. Does the white-establishment cause the religious rioting? the corruption in Aso rock? the theiving policmen at checkpoints? the murdering of "child witches"? the mechanic sabotaging your car so you'll keep coming back? the pastors and mogs fleecing the flock? the politicians lining their pockets with finances meant for education and hospitals? which of these oppressive actions did the white man cause? (perhaps only the massive mess in the Niger-delta can be cited).

and if the opinions I have expressed above makes me a "pink in disguise" or is causing me to "live in a state of false consciousness" then so be it.

cap28:


I beleive that there were disgruntled elements within the NOI who were jealous of Malcolm and wanted him dead but it was the FBI who gave the order for him to be killed and in order to cover their tracks they used disgruntled NOI members to do the job.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h38PITTYVAY&feature=related

All ur theories are nice and dandy, but point is still NOI members, FELLOW BLACKS, killed Malcolm X!!! Nobody can force or deceive me to kill my own brother, the NOI killed its own: HOW THE HELL IS THAT THE FAULT OF THE WHITE MAN?

bk.babe97y:

All your theories are nice and dandy, but point is still NOI members, FELLOW BLACKS, killed Malcolm X!!! Nobody can force or deceive me to kill my own brother, the NOI killed its own: HOW THE HELL IS THAT THE FAULT OF THE WHITE MAN?

bkbabe they are not MY THEORIES they are facts based on concrete evidence- some of this information is now declassified and can be  obtained under the freedom of information act from your national archives.     

Yes fellow blacks killed Malcolm and there is no justification for that but consider the fact that at that time Malcolm was widely regarded as a traitor by fellow NOI members for exposing Elijah Muhammed's immoral activities with teenage girls within the organisation.  Elijah Muhammed was desperate to have Malcolm silenced because Malcolm had exposed him for the fraud that he was.  Since Malcolm was a major thorn in the side of the white establishment as well, the FBI decided that this would be a great opportunity to have Malcolm silenced once and for all.
All they (the FBI) needed to do was to sow the seeds of discord then stand back and watch the destruction  and this is what happened.  Infact this was so easy for the FBI because they didnt even have to do the work themselves, because the infighting and hatred towards Malcolm was already underway.

You say that this is not the fault of the white man - well it depends on how you look at it, most human beings are out to satisfy their own selfish personal interests, Malcolm was a rarity in that he was not a selfish leader - he wanted justice for blacks and he didnt care who he had to expose in order to acheive it, he was uncompromising when it came to the truth, Elijah Muhammed on the other hand was a fraud and a charlatan who preached one thing but practiced the opposite.  In a bid to save his reputation and credibility amongst his followers he decided to collude with the white establishment in order to get rid of one of the most honourable black leaders that has ever come out of the african american community and possibly the world.

In as much as we are all responsible for our own actions you must remember that the white man is constantly watching us and looking for any weakness that he can use to bring us down, in that respect the white man is totally at fault because he does not see us as his brother but an enemy who is to be crushed and destroyed at every opportunity.

JeSoul:

  You call it "truth", I would use a very different noun to describe it.

Farrakhan is a very knowledgeable and learned man, he is not an illiterate rabblerouser but a man who has travelled widely and who has access to vast amounts of information.

Cap, are there still white-supremacist-establishment powers-that-be working tirelessly against blacks? I have no doubt that is true. Does this group constitute the vast, or even less-than-vast majority of white (or other races) around the world? No. Imho. I do not think that there is some massive, surreptitious conspiracy being constantly concocted and executed to "keep blacks down" around the world from progressing. I think the "oppression" we blacks cry today (while a certain small percentage is indeed real) is for the most part either imagined or self-inflicted.

The mistake you continue to make is that you think that racists are those guys who walk around in white sheets and who openly exhibit racist behaviour, to be honest you are missing the point, the real racism that hurts blacks is institutionalised racism which is where you have a whole system set up with the objective of subjugating, oppressing and disadvantaging one group of people while simultatenously assisting, benefiting and advancing the progress of another group - that is the type of racism that hurts, destroys and damages blacks and that is the type of racism that I am talking about.  The reason that it hurts blacks disproportionately is because most blacks cannot influence govt policy, do not own enough businesses in which to employ other blacks and on the whole have virtually no economic or political power or influence within the white supremacist system.

Lets use america as an example: In 1940's america various pieces of legislation were enacted to enable white americans easy access to cheap housing, but blacks were specifically excluded from benefitting from this  despite being law abidign tax payers, banks refused to grant loans to blacks to enable them obtain mortgages with low interest rates in suburbs and the few who managed to raise a large enough deposit as a down payment met with screaming white lynch mobs  who ran them out of their neighbourhoods.  This practice undertaken by the banks was known as redlining, it was based on the fact that mortgage loan officials drew red lines on maps around neighbourhoods which were inhabited predominantly by blacks indicating that those areas were to be excluded from the cheap loans that were on offer at the time.
Now this is just one example amongst many, i might add of govt organisations that act in conjunction with other organisations to keep blacks in a position of poverty and servitutude whilst assisting whites to progress and move up the socio economic ladder.

Here is what redlining means:


Redlining is the practice of denying, or increasing the cost of, services such as banking, insurance, access to jobs,[2] access to health care,[3] or even supermarkets[4] to residents in certain, often racially determined,[5] areas. The term "redlining" was coined in the late 1960s by John McKnight, a Northwestern University sociologist and community activist.[6] It describes the practice of marking a red line on a map to delineate the area where banks would not invest; later the term was applied to discrimination against a particular group of people (usually by race or sex) no matter the geography. During the heyday of redlining, the areas most frequently discriminated against were black inner city neighborhoods. Through at least the 1990s this practice meant that banks would often lend to lower income whites but not to middle or upper income blacks.[7]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redlining

In order to understand racism you must understand the bigger picture which is WHITE ELITIST CAPITALISM - america was founded by white slave owners, merchants, pirates and fortune hunters whose main aim was to amass as much wealth as possible and retain their position of power whilst ensuring that the poorer whites would never overthrow them and take away their wealth, the only way the white elite could continue to retain their position was to divide society (divide and rule) by creating a scapegoat or an underclass who would be regarded with contempt by other groups who were "fortunate" enough not to have been born with the "wrong" skin colour.  This group would be demonised and blamed for their unfortunate position in order to justify the abuse that would be meted out to them, they would also be  denied the same rights as the whites.  The white population upon seeing this would sever all links with this alien people and close ranks with their own and secretly be thankful that they had not also been condemned to such maltreatment.

In creating the racial caste system the rich whites would never have to worry about being overthrown because, they would have succeeded in dividing society along racial lines to such an extent that it would now be impossible for poor whites and blacks to ever unite and form any meaningful opposition that would threaten the status quo.

This system is very much in place today, poor or middle class whites collude with white elites in order to benefit from a system which rewards you not on the basis of ability but based on your race.

Look at Nigeria for Christ's sake. Does the white-establishment cause the religious rioting? the corruption in Aso rock? the theiving policmen at checkpoints? the murdering of "child witches"? the mechanic sabotaging your car so you'll keep coming back? the pastors and mogs fleecing the flock? the politicians lining their pockets with finances meant for education and hospitals? which of these oppressive actions did the white man cause? (perhaps only the massive mess in the Niger-delta can be cited).

All of the above situations that you have mentioned are SYMPTOMS of an oppressive system that has its roots in a much greater problem which was created by white oppression.  Nigeria first of all was created by a white racist colonial system in which white british colonisers forced together groups of people who had nothing in common with each other  so that the british colonisers could have easier control over the natural resources and manpower within that artificial construct.  When certain groups within this construct decided to agitate for independence, the british cleverly handed over power to a group of stooges on the condition that those stooges would allow the whites to continue to control the economic and political destiny of the country, in exchange for selling out their own people the stooges would be rewarded handsomely with massive kick backs, bribes, looted money from the national treasury and military aid to ensure that they would never be dislodged from their position by the masses.  The trickle down effect of this is the basket case that we call nigeria today, a country where people are driven to do just about anything because of poverty and when people are desperate there is nothing they won't do to keep their heads above water.  America is supposedly one of the richest countries in the world but look at the crime rate, look at the rate at which people take drugs and alchol and engage in p.o.rn.ography, prostitution and paedophilia despite being  one of the most affluent countries in the world.  If america with all its wealth could still be plagued by such social ills why would nigeria - a country where 70% of the population live in abject poverty be a paradise?

At least colonialism had its good parts.

The most oppressive , racist , hateful and aggressive people on earth are Islamic Arabs.

They perpetrated the worst sort of black slavery world wide which lasted for a thousand years or more and is still going on in Sudan, Mauritania and other parts of the world.

At least the white man in many ways has atoned for his sins while the Islamic Arab goes on killing, maiming and  blighting our  humanity with the supremacist ideologies.

frosbel:

At least colonialism had its good parts.

The most oppressive , racist , hateful and aggressive people on earth are Islamic Arabs.

They perpetrated the worst sort of black slavery world wide which lasted for a thousand years or more and is still going on in Sudan, Mauritania and other parts of the world.

At least the white man in many ways has atoned for his sins while the Islamic Arab goes on killing, maiming and  blighting our  humanity with the supremacist ideologies.

Although islamic extremity exist amongst Africans by African, at least they arabs spread islam then left.However, the Europeans spread christianity, as a way of killing African-hood and today continue to manipulate African countries and suppress their development.



Read the book: "How Europe Underdeveloped Africa" by Walter Rodney

JeSoul:

 Cap, are there still white-supremacist-establishment powers-that-be working tirelessly against blacks? I have no doubt that is true. Does this group constitute the vast, or even less-than-vast majority of white (or other races) around the world? No. Imho. I do not think that there is some massive, surreptitious conspiracy being constantly concocted and executed to "keep blacks down" around the world from progressing. I think the "oppression" we blacks cry today (while a certain small percentage is indeed real) is for the most part either imagined or self-inflicted.

Today the groups that actually represent the greatest threat to African Americans are highly educated and very articulated. They are graduates of the most prestige’s universities in the country. And instead of wearing white hooded kkk robes, they adorn themselves in very expensive custom tailored suits and silk ties. They represent the countries most prestige and affluent Anglo-Saxons elites. They are always working unrelenting secretly behind the scene to ensure that white dominance and control is maintained in the U.S. And unfortunately, to the detriment of African Americans these white elites maintain their positions of power and prestige regardless of who is actually president.