Addressing the misconceptions with the Moorish Movement

Tired of bold claims that crumble on contact? We take on the most persistent Moorish movement misconceptions and put them under the bright light of evidence, walking through what counts as proof, where to find it, and how to argue it in rooms that demand rigor. From the idea that Moors founded the U.S. government to the dollar‑bill “merger” myth, we break down what treaty law actually requires and why symbolic imagery is not a legal instrument. We also unpack why private individuals can’t invoke the 1787 and 1836 Treaties of Peace and Friendship, how consular jurisdiction really works, and what it means to be appointed within a legitimate government structure.

We go straight to primary sources: constitutional convention minutes, ratification debates, and recognized legal principles. The “U.S. became a corporation in 1871” narrative meets the Constitution’s architecture head‑on—Articles I, II, and III—and the basic fact that Congress is a creature of the Constitution, not its master. We clarify the origins of “U.S. non‑citizen nationals” in the aftermath of the Spanish‑American War and explain why that status applies to unincorporated territories—not as a self‑declared workaround. We examine the preamble’s “We the People” as a political phrase rather than a hidden identity code, and we draw a clean line between cultural identity and legal nationality.

Most importantly, we explore nationality in its real legal‑political sense: a bond to a sovereign state that carries rights, duties, and protection. If sovereignty is lost, paperwork can’t substitute for restored statehood. That’s not a dismissal of Moorish heritage; it’s a blueprint for building the legitimacy needed to sit across from jurists, consuls, and ministers with confidence. If you’re ready to trade conjecture for citations and rhetoric for results, this conversation will sharpen your tools and your strategy.

If this resonated, follow the show, share it with someone who needs better sources, and leave a review telling us which claim you want tested next. Your questions drive the next deep dive.

Chapters

• 0:00 Greetings, Shoutouts, And Setup
• 0:53 Defining Misconceptions And Evidence
• 5:44 Critical Thinking Sources And Standards
• 9:44 Claim: Moors Founded The U.S. Government
• 13:26 Claim: U.S.–Moroccan Merger Via Dollar Seal
• 17:32 Treaties And Private Rights Of Action
• 21:48 Is The United States A Corporation?
• 26:00 Non‑Citizen Nationals And Territorial Law
• 30:20 “We The People” And Identity Claims
• 35:20 Nationals Vs Citizens: International Usage
• 39:10 “35 Moors Wrote The Constitution” Claim
• 44:20 Individual Status Correction Vs Statehood
• 50:10 Political Legitimacy And Building Government
• 56:00 Wrap‑Up, Resistance, And Part Two Plan

Transcript

SPEAKER_01: 0:10

What's going on, everybody? What's going on, everybody? Out there is Ron Brown LMGs professional, aka soul brother number one reporting for duty. I have to salute every time I say that. Peace to Mikey Fever in the building. Israel in the building. Abdullah Bay in the building. Thank y'all for joining the NYP family. You've been with us for a while now. I really appreciate you, Kenneth L Bay. I know you only come on this show or watch this show when those brothers are on. However, there are other shows that are popping, though. There are other shows that you're missing out on that are popping. This show is popping. Every other show is popping. Y'all gotta tune in. Um, let's go straight into it. Addressing the misconceptions at large within the Moorish movement.

SPEAKER_00: 1:00

Okay, let's go before before anybody else gets started. I want to give a shout out and wonderful love and appreciation to all conscious Moors who, and I'm saying that because they they they put out the effort. However, the effort is is is what it is what's appreciated of teaching our people that we're Moors and not Nickel color black. I want to give the shout out. I greatly appreciate all of you for extending the love that you have for our people and in addressing the the centuries of our Moors cultural racial and the the the our Moors cultural racial and Moors identity theft hijacked by European shriners and European mystics, who claim our fans, our Moors names, our Moore's turbines, our Moors architecture, our Moors uh of uh scimitar, the the the compass and the square, the uh uh the um five-pointed star, the crescent moon. I want to thank all of you for reaching out to unconscious Moors the best way you know how. The best way you know how. I salute you. I unwrap my turban and tip my fans to all conscious Moors out there. I appreciate you. I salute you.

SPEAKER_04: 2:47

So let's get into it. So addressing the misconceptions at large within the Moors movement using evidentiary standards, misconceptions equal lack of knowledge. Misconception. The word misconception is a noun, a false opinion, prefix miss dash, meaning bad, wrong, plus prefix con together with plus root, capir to take, from pi root, cap dash to grasp. False opinion, false, the word false is an adjective, meaning deceptive, deceitful, pretend, mistaken. See the word fail. The word fail is a verb meaning be unsuccessful in accomplishing a purpose, from Latin, falir to trip, cause to fall. From Sanskrit, scalate to stumble. The word opinion is a noun from Latin opinion, opinionum, meaning opinion, conjecture, fancy, judge, suppose, opine from pi from pi op dash to choose. See the word option. So we're dealing with misconceptions and falsely choosing or uh choosing to stumble. Misconceptions is when one chooses to stumble. What is evidence and what are evidentiary standards? Evidence. Evidence is explicit information shared by the communicator that is used to back up or to justify the dependability of a factual claim. In prescriptive arguments, evidence will be needed to support reasons that are factual claims. In descriptive arguments, evidence will be needed to directly support a descriptive conclusion. Legal application of evidentiary standards. Evidentiary standards are the legal principle that determine how much convincing evidence is required to prove a fact or a claim in court. Professional debate application of evidentiary standards. Evidentiary standards is the principle and criteria for evaluating the quality, relevance, and credibility of evidence presented to support a claim in an argument. So this is the 11th edition, Asking the Right Questions: A Guide to Critical Thinking by M. Neil Brown and Stuart M. Keeley. Those are Europeans? I'm not sure, brother. Yeah, yeah, yes, yes. So this is chapter 8, How Good Is the Evidence. So chapter 8 in this book, How Good Is the Evidence, intuition, personal experience, case examples, testimonials, and exact and appeals to authority. The need for evidence. So these are the page numbers as well. So this is just from the table of contents. So you uh everyone can check this out and look into it. The need for evidence, locating factual claims, sources of evidence, intuition as evidence, personal experience as evidence, case examples as evidence, testimonials as evidence, appeals to authority as evidence, using this critical question, your academic writing and evidence, practice exercises, and sample responses. In chapter 9, how good is the evidence? Personal observation, research studies, and analogies, personal observation as evidence, research studies as evidence, general problems with research findings, generalizing, uh generalizing from the research, generalizing from the research measures, bias surveys and questionnaires, analogies as evidence, identifying and comprehending analogies, evaluating analogies, when you can most trust expert opinion, research the internet, practice exercises, sample responses, and this is from chapter eight of what we just read. Sources of evidence. Number one, when the claim appears to be undisputed, common knowledge, such as the claim weight lifting increases muscular body mass.

SPEAKER_01: 7:30

Okay, I want to I want to I want to go I want to interject. So right now you're setting the stage to address. Okay, I just want to let the audience know what's going on.

SPEAKER_04: 7:40

Gotcha. Yeah, perfect. Yep. Uh number two, when the claim, when the claim is the conclusion from a well-reasoned argument, and number three, when the claim is adequately supported by solid evidence. Our connection in this chapter is the third instance. Determining the adequacy of evidence requires us to ask, how good is the evidence? To answer this question, we must first ask, what do we mean by evidence? So, again, attention. Evidence is explicit information shared by the communicator that is used to back up or to justify the dependability of a factual claim. See chapter 3. In prospective arguments, evidence will be needed to support reasons that are factual claims and descriptive arguments. Evidence will be needed to directly support a descriptive conclusion. So the quality of evidence depends on one kind of evidence it is, on the kind of evidence it is. Thus, to evaluate evidence, we first need to ask what kind of evidence is it? Knowing the kind of evidence tells us what questions we should ask. When used appropriately, each kind of evidence can be good evidence. It can help support an author's claim, like a gold prospector closely examining the gravel in her pan for potentially high quality ore. We must closely examine the evidence to determine its quality. We want to know major kinds of evidence, these are the major kinds of evidence: intuition, personal experiences, case examples, testimonials, appeals to authorities or experts, personal observe observations, research studies, and analogies. So does an author's evidence provide dependable support for her claim? Thus, we began to evaluate evidence by asking how good is the evidence? Always keep in the back of your mind that no evidence will be a slam dunk that gets the job done conclusively. Misconception at large. The Moors established the United States federal government for themselves and the state governments for the Europeans.

SPEAKER_00: 10:03

I thought you had a slide after that. All right, so I got you. Go ahead. Yeah, that the Moors established the United States. So the evidence, so that's examining the evidence. What evidence will support this claim that the Moors established the United States government? What evidence would one would examine? We have the minutes, the United States, the constitutional minutes. All right, so from from March, from May, from March 1787 to September 1787, they convened in Philadelphia. So we have the minutes, we have the uh the what they call the uh Federist Papers. The Federalist Papers written by John J. Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton, a collection of 88 articles that that uh that was that was wanted that pushed for the ratification of the the constitution. Then we have the constitutional debate. So after the so the constitution was signed by the delegates. So at the signatory, the signature section at the bottom, at the end of the constitution, the signatures of the delegates of the 13 states that signed the constitution. That in the signing of it did not put into force. There were debates. And then you had the the the um the 8-8 articles known as the fellas papers. Then you had 12 of the 13 states, Rhode Island ratified it um in 18 1991. 12 of the 13 states had ratification conventions, so you have minutes of the ratification conventions. So though, you know, so you examine the evidence.

SPEAKER_02: 11:56

That's evidence right. I have a question, right? Uh-huh. A statement. They say they show evidence, being that they more is just based on Islam, right? They say some of the laws were built on Muhammadinian law, Islamic laws in America. Is that considered evidence? Would that be taken?

SPEAKER_00: 12:14

No, that's that's that's a statement, though. That's not what you're you know. What I'm saying is that's what you just said is a statement, it's not evidence. All right, gotcha. Let me let me say I got a you have a statement, and you say they say that some of the laws were built on Islamic laws. That statement is that statement does not constitute evidence. Right that's a that statement, that statement is a claim.

SPEAKER_02: 12:40

But are there any evidence of that taking place?

SPEAKER_00: 12:46

I don't, I haven't, I haven't seen any evidence of that.

SPEAKER_04: 12:50

Okay, gotcha.

SPEAKER_00: 12:52

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 12:53

So that yeah, so the evidence of who established the uh United States federal government or whatnot, you can find those within the constitutional minutes of 1787, the Federalist Papers, and the Constitutional Debates. Yeah, the signatory page on the Constitution in the Constitution. Yeah, next next misconception at large. United States and the Moroccan Empire merged as one nation, and the evidence is the dual seal on the reverse side of the federal reverse or federal reserve note, aka the one dollar bill. All right.

SPEAKER_00: 13:40

What the evidence that would be needed to support this claim would be what's called declaration of merger or unification treaty. You have the West Germany and East Germany, they reunited, no, under a reunification treaty. So where so the where would be where is the unification treaty?

SPEAKER_01: 14:07

Before we go into that, before we go into that, hold that thought. I just have to make an acknowledgement. All right, cat Kaba Sunk. Thank you for the$20. I really appreciate that super chat. We appreciate the super chats. Definitely trust me. We do. Thank you, thank you. All right, pardon me.

SPEAKER_00: 14:27

Right. So so the evidence, if if it, if the if the for this claim to support this claim that the Moroccan Empire and the United States merge as one, there would be a unification treaty or declaration of merger. Yeah, that that doesn't, they don't exist. The the federal the back of the one note is not evidence. That's not evidence. You pull out the one note all you want, you can pull out a million times. Keep in mind, let's let's let's examine this. You can pull it out a million times. How good is that is that evidence? Is the Federal Reserve note what they call the one dollar bill, the back, the image, is that evidence though? Because you where's the evidence to support that? Where's the evidence to support the claims that you know the word the one, and then you have the the the the like the great sale of the United States? Where is the hard documentary primary source unification treaty declaration of merger evidence?

SPEAKER_01: 15:42

Nice. I like that. I like that.

SPEAKER_02: 15:45

I'm glad he's clearing it out. He's clearing it out. That's why I say they said I'm I'm happy he said that was a claim because a lot of misconceptions were put out throughout the years. But for those who were doing the studying, we gotta be able to do that.

SPEAKER_00: 15:55

I was one of them 25, 26 years. I was one of them.

SPEAKER_02: 15:58

So yeah, I got people that remember those things run YouTube back then. Yeah, people telling you do this and do that, and you believe in it.

SPEAKER_01: 16:06

Hold on, brother, brother uh uh uh uh uh Abdullah. Didn't you make a book saying something like that in there?

SPEAKER_00: 16:12

I if I Moses Macy part one has it, has a has some of the misconceptions in there, yeah, yeah. I gotta be gotta have to revise it. Everything not in there, everything in there is not misconception because I have documentary evidence of other supporting points, but I do have those those points about the misconceptions, you know, that you know, uh we are the founders and all that. That's in more's major part one. I have to revise that.

SPEAKER_01: 16:39

Okay, because I I knew I read that you in your books, yeah, yeah.

SPEAKER_00: 16:45

Part one, just more's made you part one now. Okay, more's made part one, not part two. Because I already I was already cleared up by the time I finished part two.

SPEAKER_04: 16:58

All right, next misconception at large. Individual Moors can invoke the 1836 peace and friendship treaty between the United States and the Moroccan Empire. Let's go!

SPEAKER_00: 17:10

All right, so you have I I there are there are principles of treaties. It was called you have what's known as private private rights of action. Let's hit it out. Private, so does the 1836 peace and friendship treaty and the 1787 peace and friendship treaty have a private right of action? The answer is no. Why you say no, Abdullah? Because Articles 20 to 25 of the 1787 Treaty of Peace and Friendship, it says a council, a Moors Council, if there is a dispute between a United States citizen and a Moore, a Moors Council, if a Moore is a defendant, a Moors Council would have jurisdiction. So that based on the language, based on some substantive language, that that doesn't that doesn't give a private right to action. The Morse council has the right, has the power to bring the case. So no. So they don't understand with private rights of action and the it's with the with the type of language.

SPEAKER_01: 18:31

Uh uh.

SPEAKER_00: 18:31

So if it doesn't, if if if it doesn't say Morse Council or Council, then then it would have, then the more would have a private right answer. The United States citizen doesn't have a private rights of action.

SPEAKER_01: 18:43

Now, can you now can you just claim to be the Moorish council?

SPEAKER_00: 18:48

No, no, no, no, no, no, no. I once again, so no, no. There's no claim. That's not the thing. Good question. Throw them at me. Don't throw them at me. There's no such thing as one claiming to be a Moorish council. Because you have to have to have a head of state, a Moors Council and government structure worldwide. Well, this worldwide. I'm talking about this universal principle. No one claims to be a consul in the United States or French council. That is the French council, whatever they're appointed by head of state, or if if the head of state would be president, all right, would would delegate that authority to the to the um secretary of state or uh or minister of foreign affairs, where they appoint ambassadors, you know. So so so no, we're talking about government structure. We're talking about playing government structure. So we gotta show the world that we know government. We got to show the world. Yeah, what I said to Israel, yeah, we hear we got to prepare the people to be able to dance with ambassadors, council, council generals, uh uh international jurists. We gotta get them to that level. See, what it is, Ron and Mike, is that conscious more speak to other conscious mores and consumers who don't know. So they sound intelligent. They sound right, but when you get among those who know, Israel is going to sound Israel can speak to international jurists, Israel can speak to consuls, ambassadors, council generals, and he will sound intelligent to them. I'll make it, I'll make a keen eye making sure of that. All right, now we're making sure that.

SPEAKER_01: 20:54

I gotta go to a question because uh uh is there any truth to the 102s? Of course, I know about the 101s. I've never heard of the 102s, I think someone mentioned 102s a long time ago on this podcast, but I only heard of the 101s.

SPEAKER_00: 21:11

I'm not I can't, I don't know. I haven't heard of 102, so I can't speak to that. But I'm no 101. Any truth that that is too broad because then you have to look at each one, you know what I'm saying? We don't have time though. You know, saying the I can't I can't say I have to you have to examine each question and each inf yeah, that's not yeah, I just want to be you know logical.

SPEAKER_01: 21:36

So we can't think there's a 102.

SPEAKER_00: 21:38

I never I don't know, I haven't seen a 102. I'm gonna just say that. I don't, I'm not gonna say I don't, I'm just gonna say I haven't seen it. I'm just keep it at that.

SPEAKER_01: 21:45

Yeah, yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 21:46

All right. So the next misconception at large, the United States became a corporation in 1871 via act of Congress.

SPEAKER_02: 21:55

Yeah, I heard that.

SPEAKER_00: 21:57

All right, so Congress is a creature, Congress is a creature of the Constitution. So you have so what kind so you have United States and the preamble. We the people of the United States, all right? So so that United States and the preamble to the United States Constitution, we the people of the United States. You have United States Article One, Article I, Section One of the United States Constitution, United States, the uh the executive power, United States executive power shall be, uh legislative power should be vested in in one Congress. I um represent holding a um a Senate and uh House of Representative. You have Article Article 2, Section 1, the executive power of the United States shall be vested in the president of the United States of America. You have Article 3, Section 1, the judicial power of the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court. So you have those unit that so is that a corporation? So we say in 1871, an act of Congress. So an act of Congress, Congress is a creature of the Constitution. How can how can Congress create an entity that's greater than that which created it? So Congress is pardon me.

SPEAKER_01: 23:39

I think Brother Sharif Bey addressed this. I don't I'm talking about He didn't he didn't he didn't have like he didn't break it down like this, but he he he broke it down. I'm listening though, yeah.

SPEAKER_00: 24:00

Yeah, I don't know what broke down though, because this is how you break it down, because you have to go, uh you have to go to the constitution, yeah.

SPEAKER_03: 24:07

Right.

SPEAKER_00: 24:08

I mean you say break it down if you're not going to the if you're not gonna go to the constitution, I'm going to the constitution. I'm I'm I'm pointing out United States, I'm pointing out the term United States in the Constitution. I mean, I would say break it down. All right, anyone in the world, if they all right, I'm talking about anyone in the world. If they don't if they don't break it down this way, how are they breaking it down then? If the cut the constitution is the is the is the is it's the creature of of Congress, the Constitution is the creature of the presidency. If you don't use if that is not your foundation for breaking it down, are you breaking it down?

SPEAKER_02: 24:49

That's the creator, yeah. So he's going to he's going to the nucleus of it, the mechanics of it. So all right.

SPEAKER_00: 24:55

The nucleus. So that so that United States of 1787 is not greater than the United States that's in the Constitution. Wait, so this whole thing that United States is a corporation, no, it's not. You thought the United States in the Constitution, United States, and y'all, my brother and sisters, United States mentioned in the that preamble to United States Constitution. United States mentioned in Article drafted in Article 31, Section 1, United States Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, Article 3, Section 1. That United States is not a corporation. Got you. And that that's the only United States that matters. Hear me out. That is the only United States that has constitutional authority. Why would you concern yourself? Why would you, anyone in the world, anyone, anybody, anyone in the world concern themselves with a United States that does not have constitutional authority? Won't you won't what the intelligence is focused on the constant United States that has constitutional authority?

SPEAKER_04: 26:19

Yeah, not congressional authority.

SPEAKER_00: 26:22

Right, constitutional authority. Congress is the teacher of the constitution. We're putting so much energy, so much time, I mean, into a United States doesn't have constitutional authority.

SPEAKER_02: 26:38

Oh man, as you said earlier, that's what happened was misinform Moors and misinform other Moors. It's like junk piling upon junk misinformation. And it goes back when that's what I'm talking about. That's when they said, Oh, the you the U.S. is a is a is a corporation, it has an LLC. You heard that before, right? Right, Ron? There's an LLC for the U.S. Trust me. You got this are things that we were picking up along the years. So we used to be like, wow.

SPEAKER_00: 27:07

Yeah, but that that that those United States don't have constitutional authority, though. That's right. That fact those you don't fact. France did France didn't France did not deal in 180 in 1803. France did not France dealt with the United States. That's drafted in the United States Constitution. Great Britain dealt with the United States in 1783, the 1783 Defendative Peace Treaty between Great Britain and the United States. Article one of that treaty, that is that United States. Dealt with the United States. All right. So you had the Treaty of Peace and Friendship between his Pure Majesty and the United States. Dealt with the United States that's what that was drafted in the Articles of Confederation. I'm just saying, though. We spinning wheels, so we gotta go to the foundation. All right, we can go to the next one.

SPEAKER_04: 28:15

Misconception at large. Moors are U.S. non-citizen nationals.

SPEAKER_00: 28:20

All right. So the source of law. All right, so let's let's let's look at this. Um, in in 1898, they do this called the Spanish and a Spanish-American War, known in the textbooks. You Spain lost the war. Spain's Spain ceded her possessions through a treaty. Puerto Rico, Cuba, Philippines, Guam, Virgin Island, Samoa. Those those were Spanish possessions. They were ceded to the United States through the 1898 treaty. In the treaty, that they so you Spain ceded territory. Spain ceded Spanish territoriality, that is a that is a main, a primary principle in international law, territoriality. Spain ceded Spanish territoriality to the United States through that treaty. In the treaty, it states that United States can determine the status of those inhabiting in Portugal and I mean in the Philippines and Virgin Islands and Cuba and Puerto Rico and some more. So United States Congress did do that. United States Congress legislated a new status known as this United States non citizen nationals, only for those, because those were those are territories that were. not incorporated have not since been incorporated into the United States Constitution, meaning that Article 4, Article 4, Section of Section 4, that's the mission of new states. That's the mission of new states, Article 4, Section 4. So you had so if those those states have not been have not um was not given became they would not they those territories did not become states. So they're they're called they're called unincorporated territories. They're unincorporated territories that were not incorporated through Article 4 section 4 the mission of new states. So that's a that's an aspect that's a that's an aspect of territoriality that now the United States having acquired territoriality treaty they can now draft they can determine the the status meaning if uh well if the status is not determining the treaty about the inhabitants and then I and clearly state that the United States can determine right and the Congress did do that. So so no but I want I don't I want to give you the reasonings you know the principles yeah and declare it up it was article four section three yeah oh it's article four section three the mission clause yeah oh but thank you article four section three the mission the mission clause is there there's clause there's several clauses but article four section three is uh and since the article three is one is and that's um yeah the mission clause is article four section three yes thank you indeed man this is beautiful i appreciate this a lot of misconception are being cleaned up because you get people out here jammed up man trying to play with paperwork and do all this filing to be non U.S. citizen to be national man thank you for this so then we have uh misconception at large we the people of the United States in the preamble of the United States Constitution consists of the Moors and means the people of the land all right you look at other constitutions it it clearly defines the national identity of the people in the constitution we the the people of synagogue the people of Spain the people's republic of China the people of Nigeria that the the the people is a political phrase you ain't gonna all but the purpose of the phrase and then identifies what the national identity the national identity the state identity real quick real quick we gotta we gotta address uh uh this brother right here uh can we get brother abdullah and yash israel on here for two hours we need to do that man yeah it's important for five six months yo man listen this this this thing is moving fast for me you know I mean this whole thing that's what we're saying to you got you got you you know you know what let's do that next time then two hours yeah two hours yeah yeah because we could we can have more time to explain because I can have to I gotta shorten it you know I mean I gotta get a short version because because of the time right you know what Ron we should we should done a Jay-Z Rockefeller play hold up no commercial breaks we're going straight through two hours you know no more guests we we on live forever definitely this is dope man all right so then i did i all right so so we the people united states it doesn't read we the people morocco i'm after i'm not just look at the findings with the the evidence because i because if other than that you're conjecturing though keep in mind understand that understand that the that it's just a conjecture it's not facts because they're pushing it as fact oh yeah we're the people and i i did too we the people of the United States that's the Moors that's not a fact where's the support it doesn't read Moors doesn't read Morocco nowhere in that constitution nor does it read in the an auto in the preamble that's can that's pure conjecturing we cannot push conjectures to our children we cannot hand down conjectures suppositions to our children you're not gonna move the hundreds of millions of our people with conjectures and suppositions it's not gonna happen we gotta move away from that hard evidence hard thank you hard evidence show and prove as the gods say show and prove yeah and and this abdullah said it's not based on what abdullah said it's not it's not based on what abdullah said it's not based on what is my says so no don't have to say abdullah said anything is say anything because I'm giving we giving you the sources as we speaking or we go or we're like giving you the also the the analytical tools to examine you need analytical tool tools that's why that's why y'all set the stage definitely presentations are important man it's laid out very detailed so a lot of misconceptions are out there man I'm glad you're clearing it up the brother says uh the Moorish treaty says uh all right so what the what does the Moore treaty what to for what the Moore treaties read what it reads what I don't know where he I don't know where he was going with that yeah okay all right continue let's build let's build it built yeah all right so yeah so the next misconception at large is the Moorish Americans are nationals of the United States federal government and not state citizens of the several states all right all right once again we've Israel set the stage where's the evidence Moorish Americans are nationals of the United States federal government we the people of the United States doesn't read we the people of Morocco right where is where is the evidence that Moors are nationals of the United States so all right what would be the evidence a naturalization you have you nationals of United if you can you if someone is a naturalized a Russian who becomes a naturalized city of the United States they would be what a national of the United States if there were if they were in the Olympics but how did how did Moors be how how did we how did the Moors how were the Moors brought into the United States jurisdiction by force we were brought by force into the United States uh oh so prisoner of war you you know you know what some are gonna say behind that right not all of us are brought here by force no no even those who no I'm saying with uh I'm saying into the United States jurisdiction those our our people those who claim to not been brought they're being being subject into the United States that's by force though by force united states forced us into their legal system how did we how did our people become part of the legal system through subjugation that's all our people we're not talking about Nigerians you know Senegalisa over here all right we're not talking about them we don't you know we so we're talking about those who been classified as black niggas colored all of them by by force dude they will feel forced into the United States legal system that's a fact with the evidence that because there no United States through legislation through the 14th amendment legislation that is known in international law as the acquisition of national due subjugation united states subjugated us and forced us into their legal systemed states continued to maintain the eraser of our cultural identity they were caught up maintaining the collapse and dismantling of our of our empire or more government and even those who make it a claim that they were bought or falsely bought they still by force I mean the the claim the force doesn't still doesn't can't be challenged because they would be supporting me they still would be supporting me because how did you become part of the United States legal system you still would be supporting me because the claim is by force this brother says uh uh uh brother Abdullah are you saying the entire Civics lesson book number six no part one more no not more no because I no not the entire book not the entire more part one absolutely not because you I have I have references of treaties I have the treaties uh excerpts of various treaties I have listing of treaties I have listing of letters I have references of books of several of several books so no absolutely not that's why we set the stage so that people would know how to look at evidence so they can know how to check the uh sources themselves wow another misconception at large citizens means corporation and national means flesh and blood being of the land yeah I like that one all right yes while citizen is used domestically we so we're looking at worldwide worldwide citizen is used domestically national is used national has a broader meaning mean mean that for example a a French a French living in Germany they would not be they would be known considered a French national in Germany they wouldn't be called a French citizen and they if they're in france they're a French citizen the French if they're a French in France would be you'd be known called a French citizen but a France a French who is a citizen of France but but living in Germany will be called a French national so French and national and international and as an international meaning has a much broader meaning. So we're speaking because that this is you this is you worldwide citizen and national is used worldwide so we want to we want the we want the artisans to understand the distinction of citizen and national at the the Olympics the Olympics they'll say they'll use nationals French nationals United States nationals German nationals Chinese nationals Russian nationals yes so it has a broad has a broader meaning and that's the way it's used in the international arena citizen would be used they wouldn't say French citizens in at the Olympics French citizens Chinese citizens uh Russian citizens would they will use nationals and you you'll people they hear that people hear that but you know they're not because they're stuck in the misconception so they they that you know they can't get beyond that.

SPEAKER_04: 43:43

So hopefully this will make it stand out to them next time they watch the Olympics they can absolutely yes because this coup definitely hear it yeah so that that makes sense okay all right we want like you say we want y'all to be able to speak to jurists and ambassadors and consuls and consul generals we want you you know but y'all with the misconceptions they're gonna just laugh at y'all they're gonna just laugh at y'all or they're not even going they won't laugh at in your face but they they won't even address you they won't probably won't even they they're they will ignore you they're ignored you said it can't stand on misconceptions like you said you choose to stumble what's the choice to stumble yeah they they're gonna ignore you just yeah so another misconception at large 35 Moors along with 20 European sons establish the United States constitution as a beacon light to stop the hundred years of wars between Moors and European colonists.

SPEAKER_02: 44:50

Give the evidence that would be needed to support this what evidence would they have to look to to support this Israel they would need the constitutional minutes uh for the United States constitution uh basically the same as this number one really the uh federalists yeah uh yeah double ratification minutes of the of the 12 states that held ratification conventions yeah yeah but to play devil's advocate right I mean devil's advocate they will say how can you trust the the um the the recorded information the constitution you know the European wrote that to write us out to do paper genocide and you're gonna believe what they say all right so but remember they make they're making a claim though Mike all right remember this is the claim yeah so all right so all right so no no problem throw it at me throw it at us throw it at us yeah so they're making a claim so no no no that's good that's good they can say they can say anything they can say anything so what would do what would they use to support the claim right that that's why you back them in the corner because because you said constitution hold on you saying oh you said establish the United States constitution remember this this the claim so what so is establish the United States constitution so that I would have to to support the claim I would have to go to the United States constitutional minutes I would the ratification conventions minutes right based look at the claim like so we if based if the look you have to look at the claim first and then look what evidence will be needed to substantiate the claim of who wrote it and then that who wrote then you're looking at examining how good is evidence.

SPEAKER_00: 46:31

In this case the only evidence that one you would have to go to would be the United States constitutional minutes it would be the the the the the um the the the the um the federal papers the uh you're not the the um ratification conventions of the 12 states because 12 of the 13 held ratification convention that's let's say vote on and ratified it in in 1991 then you have to examine the claim i mean to just to to dismiss without examination to throw off without examination to say something's not good without examination that's not based in the that's not evidentiary standards you're not you haven't examined the evidence how good is it how bad whatever you haven't examined it though you just you're you're throwing it off without examining it you're dismissing without examining so but then you make a they make a bunch of claims unwarranted claims the unfounded claims we want the audience to grow the audience will never grow when people just make unfounded claims upon unfounded claims upon unfounded claims upon unfounded claims they're not going to grow it could be one year two years three years five years ten years twenty years thirty years 40 years 50 doesn't matter because if you're not using the principles they're never gonna grow i've seen it i i i'm telling you I've seen it I've been 33 years in now this is my 33rd year and yeah anniversary of meeting Taj October night third October 1993 got you all right next misconception at large individual Moors can correct their own status as well as the status of others individually all right all right that see once again nationality nationality is a nationality is a legal is a legal framework legal and political framework and the legal political framework of nationality that can't that cannot hold that doesn't hold true because it's done in government structure so this shows that they don't understand national now we are Moors but you're talking about a correction or bringing them back into government structure because they understanding nationality as a legal and political framework that cannot be that's not true at all I mean I'm saying that understanding what nationality is in a legal in the legal framework we like we have nationality in the social cultural aspect because we are more there's no process there's no process that makes us more but when you're talking about protection and recognition and legal bond to a state you're talking about legal bond rights and duties diplomatic protection state's jurisdiction whereby the state exercises jurisdiction over the nationals to protect for protection so that's nationality in a legal and political framework you're talking about the people synagogue the people synagogue the political phrase the people of synagogue now you that's nationality in a political framework sovereignty sovereignty is the political and legal framework that recognizes institutionalizes and formalizes the nationality of the people and the national name of the nation state in the creation of state so nationality and sovereignty are are deeply interwoven we're talking about the political and legal framework of nationality and then in the social political aspect the legal political framework of nationality protects and the the sovereignty protects the social cultural aspect of nationality festivals customs cultural language ceremonies holidays dress that is the social cultural aspect of nationality what we're talking about is protected and in the body into the legal and political framework of nationality as nationality and sovereignty are deeply interwoven we have to speak of it on this level we got to rise to this level so that individual Moore is correcting their stats or correcting others is it's it's a farce it's not it's a farce in the in the context of the legal and political framework of nationality you know what you understand the context put in the context though in the political and legal framework and nationality it is it is a farce I mean can I one thing for that for those selling that package out there take one of these with you get out of here with that and can keep in mind also I'm gonna say this too that we cannot this the the the nationality card on whatever process we've gone we go through nationalization process it is not a true nationalization process give me out I'm explaining you know you know me all right nationality in the put in the political and legal framework is one's legal bond for a state you cannot have one cannot have a legal bond to a state whose sovereignty has been lost or whose and whose sovereignty has yet to be restored. So so that so the nationality process is not a true nationality process and in the in the in the in the in the framework in the legal and political framework of nationality because we cannot have our legal bond restored with our nation when our mother has yet to be restored. We have to recover our lost more sovereignty you cannot restore a legal bond to a state whose sovereignty is still lost once again I can speak to anyone I can speak to international jurors I can say this to international jurors and I would be dancing with them. So that would mean religious organizations such as the Moorish Science Temple of America can't nationalize its members all right meaning that it what I mean what you mean is that that the legal bond can't be restored until the the Moore statehood is revived. So therefore it only serves in in the framework in the legal international legal process of reversion of sovereignty because it's important it would be it would only represent identify dealing with the dealing with a national registry but it but it cannot mean it cannot mean in the framework and political framework of nationality that our legal bond to our more state has been restored doesn't mean that because you have to restore the state first that makes sense hit them with the boom bro I got I gotta come like this because we gotta prepare we gotta elevate we have to elevate the people because we we we want to get the attentions of international jurists we want to get attentions of ambassadors presidents prime ministers we want to get their attention you're not I trust me my brothers and sisters trust me you will not get the attentions of international jurists prime ministers ambassadors council generals Charlotte affairs we will not get their attentions with these misconceptions you're not we need this knowledge in numbers yes you must speak the language that they know you got to speak the language and principles that they know that they identify with deep deep we got time for more yeah well yeah 755 y'all yeah let's so the next exception at large individual Moors can create a government first and then bring other Moors into the government second that that's being a violation of political legitimacy doesn't respect the principle of political legitimacy the the consent and will and free will in the will of the people so that that principle doesn't embody does that doesn't embody that you get based based on you gotta you gotta look at the principles so is there political legitimacy the will of the people was the will of the people involved was the consent of the people involved was there political legitimacy see they're just doing because they don't know the principles you do by principles not by emotions not by feelings all right so 756 and then we'll do uh we'll do a part two uh Israel we got enough for part two you know if y'all want to do us give us two hours you know because we can you know like I said I had to you know keep things short because of the time right but uh you got it you got it two hours the the uh the audience once two hours we've been saying we was we're gonna do two hours two hours it is two hours it is all right yeah because we can do part two and you we could probably review some of the ones we've done today go more in depth because I like I said it's only much I can we can say based on the time you know we can pull up the evidence and show it as well yeah we could do that right because we can't do but so much you know with the the time we limited time we have all right so let's let's say let's uh let's come back uh the following week and do two hours and you know have everything ready to go yes they're gonna be a lot of resistance because you know you you you you cleared up a lot of misconceptions and a lot of people out there have been duped by other individuals claiming to be Moorish and saying that we could do such and such for you and they they're not you know properly educated about what the movement stands for. It's just fed a lot of no they're not uh they're not yes now can can uh Ron can the can the thumbnail that the beginning that uh the with the Moorsh flag at the title can that be the thumbnail for this one too because I could you have for the thumbnail our pictures that way because we can get more we can get more people looking at it when you if you could change the thumbnail okay let we we could uh text around about that and um and and yeah all right I'll make it happen yeah we'll just say all right no problem all right on that note thank you guys for coming out this evening I really appreciate it learned a lot definitely uh you guys in the chat learned a lot we're gonna build with the guard in about two minutes and we are out of here