ok first off you should admit you were wrong... the law I mentioned and you just quoted.. MENTIONED MOORS... can you admit that?
Secondly.. if you would really dig into our moorish history you would discover, exactly WHERE the Moors went during the SPANISH INQUISITION......
thats right few stayed and converted to cracker jesus christianity.... and guess where many others went...
you got into Africa, who do you think the africans were rounding up and selling as captives...??
they say what about half a million captives( slaves )survived the horrors of the trans atlantic crossing. and these were the so called "first" to arrive to the americas...
Well guess how many moors were expelled from Europe to the Americas around the same time the atlantic slave trade was supposed to have taken place..
take a guess.. a wild guess.. then go look it up....
If you cant put two and two together that aint my problem bruh...
if you dont know who you are... again.. that aint my problem bruh...
Yes, it mentions Moors, BUT NOT IN THE SAME CONTEXT AS WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT! It makes a clear distinction between “slave Negroes (the ancient Berbers) and their descendants)” and “Moors”, who, amongst others. are called the “free inhabitants of Africa”. So the very law you’re referencing doesn’t even support the argument you’re making!!
This is par for the course with you - referencing something (the rare times you can reference something) that doesn’t even support what you’re saying. And, since you ridicule higher education, what makes that law any more legitimate than anything else that I may use as a source?
And since you’re a Moor, not ADOS, why are you discussing our history? You identify as something else.