|My-Mu.com Blog||My-Mu.com Guest Blog||Podcast|
|Home||About My-Mu||Resources||Book Store||Interactive Media||Links|
Podcast #18 - James Churchward & the Muurish Empire Washita
The "Muuirsh Empire Washita" claims sovereignty over "every other individual, state, country or sovereign body, and to the world-at-large." Their assertion rests on their claim to be descendants of the earth's first humans - from the Motherland of Mu. Furthermore, to quote a posted history:
"Our Washitaw Nation is a sovereign body of freedom loving indigenous people who have existed all over the world and specifically on the "North American" continent for thousands of years. We were here long before Columbus "discovered the New World." We, Washitaw people, who have always been guided by a bloodline of Empresses, are known as the "Mound Builders." This is evidenced by hundreds of man-made mounds all across the continent, particularly in the Deep South. Our ancient territory covers much of the "North American" continent, and more recently evidenced in the area of the so-called "Louisiana Purchase."and contained in a subsequent passage:
"We believe ourselves to be the original people of The Creator, the "Mothers and Fathers" of all civilized peoples on Earth. As black, bushy haired homo sapiens, we can produce all other races; and no race can produce black individuals except black females and males."James Churchward's maps of his lost continent of Mu are used and his name is bandied about as the authority on the subject so one might expect to find mention of them in his books. These expectations would be sorely disappointed. I sent an email to the contact address on the website to request an interview, however I did not receive a reply. I offer an open invitation to the Empress of Mu or her representative to discuss the contents of this presentation.
So, what does James say about the black people of Mu and the colonization of the Americas? First, in the 1931 Children of Mu, page 98, James states:
"THE ANCIENT AMAZON ROUTE.- Two of the most puzzling questions I've had to solve to be the slightest bit satisfied with my work was to tell how Negroes got to Atlantis and how Negroes got to Africa. Two facts had to be faced: Fact One, all the earth was peopled from Mu, the Motherland. Fact Two, the home of the Negro in the Motherland was at the southwest corner of Mu which is now represented by various clusters of islands called Melanesia and here today are Negroes, descendants of those who were saved when Mu was engulfed. The Tibetian tablet map answers the questions, the inhabitants of the Melanesian Islands prove it..."and from page 101:
"As is shown by various documents, Atlantis had a colored population in the south. I have never come across any documents showing that any Negroes were known in Central and North America. Being in Atlantis and none being in Central and North America, the question was: how did they get into Atlantis? Subsequently the Tibetian map answered the question - they came through the Amazonian Sea, therefore, never touched Central or North America.With regards to the claims of sovereignty over the Americas as the original indigenous people and using James Churchward as a source, the Washita - as a black nation - never peopled North or Central America. Since James wrote that no 'Negroes' were in Central and North America, it is ridiculous for the Washita Nation to claim to be an indigenous people of America and to use him as a source to make this claim.
Another point arises from James' earlier quote:
"Fact One, all the earth was peopled from Mu, the Motherland."The Washita Nation's apparent claim to be the only people descended from Mu is not supported by James's writings.
In summary, the use of James Churchward's name and theories to support or lend credibility to the theory of a black indigenous people in North and Central America is academic and scholarly fraud. The evidence is clear and contained in James Churchward's writings. To state otherwise and further divide people tramples on James belief that all Earth's people are from Mu and are entitled to the same birthright.
If there is other supporting evidence for these theories I would caution persons to demand secondary sources and the scholarly detail necessary to unwrite a fully researched and sourced history that currently exists. If someone manufacturers such a major portion of their theory, what else could be lies?
For those who may view this presentation as an attack on your birthright or faith or history - the onus is on you to provide sources for your claims. When someone comes along and sells you a bill of goods and the inventory doesn't match - why go after the guy counting the inventory? Shouldn't the buyer talk with the seller?
I look forward to a civil discussion concerning this topic if one is necessary.
Thanks for listening and have a great day.