Volume 3, Number 1                                                January 6, 2006

K.R.I.S.T. Newsletter


Freak or Great not Greek Athlete?

By Dr. Ridgely Abdul Muímin Muhammad

"Freak -1 a: a sudden turn of the mind: WHIM b: a seemingly capricious action or event 2: WHIMSICALITY 3: something markedly unusual or abnormal; esp. : one with a physical oddity who appears in a circus sideshow."

It was just another football game, the Rose Bowl, national championship, sport and play. Nothing really unusual happened: no one levitated and flew for 20 yards or dug a tunnel beneath his opponents line of scrimmage. So what prompted the loosing quarterback to refer to his winning opponent as a "freak"?

Freak, "a sudden turn of mind", could this be what USC quarterback, Matt Leinart, was referring to when speaking of Texas quarterback, Vince Young? Did Mr. Young act outside of his past history? Did he perform or make decisions so dissimilar to his history that one could call his performance "freaky"? At this, January 4th, 2006 Rose Bowl Game, Mr. Young ran for 200 yards and passed for 267 yards and was voted the MVP. Last year in the Rose Bowl Game, Mr. Young ran for 192 yards and passed for 180 yards and was voted the MVP. USC should have expected and planned for this "freaky" event. They did, but still could not stop Mr. Young.

Could Mr. Leinart be calling Mr. Young a "freak" because he is six feet five inches tall, runs fast and can throw a football. What is so "freaky" about that? Can you say Randal Cunningham? Or was a Black quarterback leading a major college team to victory a "freaky" occurrence? According to the latest polls, three of the top four college teams in America including No. 1 Texas, No. 3 Penn State and No. 4 Ohio State are led by Black quarterbacks. So Mr. Leinart it seems that you are surrounded by "freaks" and will have to live with that in the National Football League where there will be bigger and faster ones to beat you up (smile).

But on a more serious note, why is it that when a white athlete does something special he or she is called a "specimen", while the Black athlete is called a "monkey", "gorilla" or a "freak"? This reminds me of when Black Katrina victims looking for food were called "looters", while whites were called "survivors". The further we go back in history and try to get a glimpse of Black and white the more we get into name calling, innuendo, misrepresentation of the facts and outright lies.

For instance, when the white man shows you a statue of a deformed King of Kemet, Ancient Egypt, named Akhnaten, he says that this is one of the first times that a "Pharaoh" is depicted "realistically". On the other hand he describes the statues of hundreds of other "Pharaohs" as "stylistic representations". Of course these "stylistic representations" are very lifelike, yet distinctive, in the facial representation of the "Pharaoh", except when the noses have been knocked off. However, the physique of the vast majority of them look like Vince Young or some other "specimen" of Black athleticism. Of course for the sake of white supremacy, these must be "stylistic representations" and not actual depictions.

One of the most physically impressive specimen of Black athleticism was Ramesses II. Not only was he physically imposing but he is depicted on the walls of the temples in Kemet as killing 10,000 Hittite infantry by himself at the Battle of Kadesh, just as Vince Young virtually beat USC by himself. So how has the modern white man rewarded Ramesses for killing 10,000 of his ancestors? Well, not only was he called a tyrant, but white writers have tried to place Ramesses at the scene of a crime, the Biblical persecution of the Jews for which he was drowned in the Red Sea. You will have to read the book "I Will Not Apologize" by Dr. Ridgely Abdul Muímin Muhammad for the details of my defense of my brother, Ramesses, and get a clearer insight on just who fled and who was kicked out of Egypt 3,500 years ago. What did and did not happen 3,500 years ago has great significance in the geopolitical and spiritual question of who are the "Chosen People" and where is the "Promised Land", today.

But these lies and misinformation do not stop with the vilification of one or two Black men in Kemet, it goes to the proper understanding of the fiber and core of that civilization from its technology to its purpose. The white man would have you to believe that the only remaining wonder of the ancient world, the Great Pyramid of Giza, and the 72 or more other pyramids were built using slave labor for the purpose of burying dead "Pharaohs". Whew, where to start"?

Number one, the Kemetic people did not call their Kings "Pharaohs". Each King had five titles, "Pharaoh" was not one of those five. The only Kings called Pharaohs were outsiders who came in and conquered Kemet and called themselves by the name of the seat that they took, "Per-aah" or the "Great House". That would be like calling the president of the United States, "Mr. White House".

Second, the archaeologists admit that they have not found one dead "Pharaoh" or Kemetic king or queen in a pyramid. They found them 300 miles south of the pyramids in the Valley of the Kings and Queens. In my first book written in 1988, "Amen: The Secret Waters of the Great Pyramid" I put forth my hypothesis that the pyramids were built as wells, pumping and water purification units. In the more recent book,  "I Will Not Apologize", I present more evidence to not only prove my first hypothesis, but show how they were built using water. So why call the pyramids tombs?

Would you want to be under Black leadership if it can be proven that Black leadership would enslave its own citizenry to spend 30 years building a tomb for the king? However, would you want to follow Black leadership if it can be proven that they would have the foresight, love and technology to build a water irrigation and purification system that could supply drinking water to hundreds of thousands or irrigation water for 200,000 acres for 200 years per pyramid? The choice to have confidence in Black leadership or continued dependence on white leadership underlies the reason for the manipulation of the past by white writers of history.

I looked at the football game, yeah sport and play, on Wednesday night, but Tuesday night I happened to see the History Channel where they were describing technologies of the Ancient Roman Empire. One of the great "discoveries" described on this show was the remains of large underground aqueducts that were built to transport water uphill by using gravity and hydrostatic head technology. Water goes in at a higher elevation and kept under pressure in these closed underground aqueducts until it emerges at the same elevation but miles away. This is the same technology that I propose in my book as the methodology for building the Great Pyramid which was built at least 3,000 years before the founding twins of Rome stopped sucking from the she wolfís breasts that adopted them. Now thatís freaky (smile).

Then this same program talked about how an ancient vase was found outside of Bagdad that could produce an electric current. They said that this was the same technology that was used in the first known battery built by a Frenchmen in 1856. I wanted to throw up. The vase resembled one of the Canopic Jars of Kemet, not Mesopotamia. Furthermore, in my research I have discovered that Napoleon brought back to France a lot of technology from his grave robbing expedition in Egypt in 1799. Steal, retrofit then lie, this has been one of the white manís major methods of technological discovery. Freaky ainít it?


Books and lectures by Dr. Ridgely A. Mu'min