The Lone Penman (rayne_vandunem) wrote in back_to_africa,
The Lone Penman
rayne_vandunem
back_to_africa

ok, first post.

hi, this is rayne_vandunem, and i just started this community for all African-Americans who are considering moving to, are moving to, are living in, or have returned from sub-Saharan Africa.

I've come to the conclusion that, in order to bring the legacy of the slave trade to an end, we who are desecndants of the Transatlantic Slave Trade should reconnect ourselves and our families to Africa, and they to us, and the best way to pursue such is by immigrating en masse to the Guinea Coast, or the Coast that stretches from Senegal to Cameroon, and, by extension of the TAST, all the way to Angola.

Now...if there is to be ANY immigration to Africa, I think that those who may want to settle themselves there should set up their primary residencies alongside a body of water. No matter if it be the coast (like the Bight of Benin), no matter a river (like the Congo), no matter a lake or reservoir (like Lake Volta), settlement should always take place primarily along a body of water. In this way, communication and transportation will be made as easy as possible, particularly when it would involve any national or provincial capital or major city, or, more importantly, across the Atlantic. Port cities are good places to start.

Plus, violent conflicts and rivalries, as well as diseases like malaria, seem to be alot more rampant within the less accessible areas, like the woods and forests. Any travel guide would tell you that, including http://lonelyplanet.com.

I take the "body of water" idea from what I read about the Maroons of Suriname in South America, who are descended from the escaped slaves who rebelled against the Dutch back in the 1600's and 1700's. Basically, they have always shared the wooded areas with the Aboriginal Surinamers, particularly since the woods acted as a major deterrents against Dutch colonial incursions. However, even in the jungle areas, the Maroons and Aboriginals have tended to live separate lives, with the Maroons living primarily along rivers and lakes, and the Aboriginals living in the least-accesible parts of Suriname.

So that's my idea. What do you guys think?
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic
  • 30 comments
good idea.. how would you minimize the conflict between new settlers and people already living in those areas.... if not planned wisely itcould have the same reprecussions of American colonialization. The native Americans were already settled on the eastern coasts and here come these new people... it is a recipe for conflict
Well, considering that sub-Saharan Africa isn't a necessarily urban-oriented region, but Amerafricans are, it actually makes more sense to settle the repatriatees in concentrated enclaves along bodies of water, since most sub-Saharan Africans still reside in rural, spread-out areas.

In that way, the two peoples can co-exist in a way that will benefit the nations involved: settling the Amerafricans in concentrated, water-based enclaves will give off the impression that Africa is urbanizing on a serious level, in a way that won't necessarily be based upon post-colonial legacies or tendencies.

(based upon example set up by the Maroons and Amerindians of backwoods Suriname).

Anonymous

April 18 2005, 01:54:17 UTC 12 years ago

This is awful. Such an idea will only increase the seperation between the races. The only solution is massive hybridization, the mixing of all the races to eliminate all the races. Not only will this result in a more peaceful and culturally understanding (CULTURALLY, not ETHNICALLY, they are not the same and many people forget this) world, but it will result in a superior race of genetically diversified beings.
First off, let me just say that this is just overtly utopian, entirely idealistic, and purely based upon fantasy.

I mean, look at the fact that the Caucasoids dominate the vast majority of the Old World, i.e., Europe, India, Northern Africa (including Ethiopia), the Middle East, and Central Asia (why do you think that Israel is so important?). A pattern that has been noticed in human history is the constant need for expansion, conquering, conversion, and assimilation by the Caucasoid ethnicity, which is why, by the time that the first Egyptian empire rose up, all of the Black Africans who had originally occupied the entire Nile Valley had vanished from modern-day Egypt, pushed southward into present-day Sudan by invading Asiatics, from the Arabian peninsula and Fertile Crescent, who then usurped an increasing authority in the region. In fact, such continued into modern times when the Arabs of northern Sudan tried to force southern Sudan (a predominately Negroid, non-Arabianized region) into an age-old assimilation process through murder, rampage, enslavement, rape, and other such horrors.

Therefore, I wholeheartedly disagree with your belief that mass hybridization will rectify the world's cultural misunderstandings. They tried that in Brazil by importing millions of European immigrants in an effort to "blank out (blanqueamento, as they call it)" the African slave descendants who, with their ancestors, had sustained that country's agriculturally-based economy for so long (and with no pay).

Mass hybridization is only an idea that will benefit the Caucasoid race, not the Negroids, not the Mongoloids, not the Guyanoids. It will fit into the common ideal of empire and expansion, something that the Negroids and Guyanoids, traditionally, are against, but something that the Mongoloids will look upon favorably for reasons different from the collective Caucasoid rationale.

So no, hybridization won't even work, no matter how much we may pray, uselessly, for peace, harmony, and understanding in the world.

Anonymous

April 19 2005, 03:25:46 UTC 12 years ago

You're still looking at this in the point of view that the loss of a race is a bad thing. I don't want you to misinterpret me, I'm not saying that Blacks should be wiped off the face of the planet (for the record I'm a mulatto). What I mean is, if true hybridization was to occur, there would be no race-based expansion, as all races would have mixed into one.

This is already happening and is progressing at an increasing rate. It is therefore inevitable, but acts such as what you're advocating will only slow down this process, which is not desirable.

Please tell me why you believe that mass hybridization will only benefit the caucasoid race and not the negroids, and why the mongoloids also look upon the idea favorably. I don't see how this fits into the ideals of empire and expansion when traditionalists in this field would want to keep such "impurities" out.
No, I said that the Mongoloids, traditionally, have looked upon the empire idea favorably, but in a far more different manner and rationale than the Caucasoids. I mean, make a comparison between imperial-day China and the old Roman Empire in how the two were run, and you'll see what I'm talking about.

But ok, I see your point: if we we're to find an ultimate common ground upon which all humanity can walk, then the notion of race being a prerequisite determinant for the composition of our humanity and how we define ourselves within the different categorizations of humanity can be made less relevant to us and how we live as human beings.

However, one would have a hard time trying to tell much of any difference between hybridization and amalgamation/assimilation, since the former is supposed to mean "the result of a union of two or more different things or people" and the latter is supposed to mean "the subjection of different, distinct things into one, single, cohesive unit". Now, if you're saying the former, then sure, I'd see the point, but the latter? Heck no, lol.

PS: but acts such as what you're advocating will only slow down this process, which is not desirable. What exactly was I advocating?
DIFFERENCE is not what causes the problem, It is the determination of some to DOMINATE others that causes the problems. If you fail to rectify White Dominance(Supremacy) hybridization only means that the hybrids who are the whitest will dominate those who are the least whitest. As stated before this is the present situation in Venezuala, Brazil and most recently Sudan.
but race is an invention of culture. It has changed so much in our recent history, how can you define it? most people are not desecended from only germans, or only phillipinos. Most of us are a big ol' mix and don't fit any race. In the United States, race was invented for immigration purposes. Everyone was white, except for people of sub-saharan descent. I looked at the census from my town from 1900, and everyone (except for 4 people listed as "black" or "Japanese") was listed as "white", even though more than half of them had Spanish names or had been born in Mexico, and, one can assume, were what we today would call "Latino". So race is socially constructed. It doesn't exist. Cultures exist as a result of supposed races, and by saying that race isn't real I am not denying that these cultures exist. But see what happens when we let race dictate our lives? have you been followong on the news what's happening with the minutemen in southern arizona? That is what happens when people think that race matters. they hate. and that is ridiculous.
There are many things about race (in its current conception) that I often question. For one, there are more than just three races: Caucasoid, Mongoloid, Australoid, Negroid, Guyanoid.

My conception of race is based upon the ethnic classification of the majority of aboriginal inhabitants within a given landmass or continent. Thus, I think it would be relevant to say that the majority of inhabitants within the sub-Saharan demographic are actually Negroid; that the majority of inhabitants who live in Europe, North Africa, the Middle East, and the Indian subcontinent are Caucasoid; that the majority of those who live in East and Southeast Asia are of Mongoloid ancestry; that the majority of original inhabitants (and their descendants) who live in modern-day Australasia (Australia, Melanesia, New Guinea, and *maybe* Polynesia) are of Australoid ancestry; and that the majority of the original inhabitants and their descendants who live in the Americas today are of Guyanoid (I invented that, btw) ancestry.

Why? Because of the common, historically-based ancestry which these people share.

Now, as far as color and to-the-T classification is concerned, I agree that the majority of us who live in the United States and Canada are a mosaic of these aforementioned ancestries, and that someone can show offense of somekind toward someone else simply because of that ancestry would show the person as an idiot and little else. However, race, in its most basic form, is a way by which one may know his own ancestry, not/never a means by which one can conduct his politics.
I don't really consider this an option for the masses. However there are African American expatriate communities in Tanzania and Ghana. It would be interesting to find out about there experiences.
Now Tanzania, I can't see the point, since our ancestors didn't actually come from that area.

However, I have heard a bit about the African-American community in Ghana. There was this one article from Wall Street about it, too, if you've ever come across it.
I'm not quite sure that repatriation is a great idea. While I don't deny that Black Americans are of African descent, I do not think that Africa is our home. People are misguided in thinking that upon returning to Africa one would be at ease because he/she is among his/her people. This could not be further from the truth. There is such a great difference that separates Black Americans and Black Africans. Culture, customs, language, world view, self-perceptions etc... Aside from fitting in physically (skin color), we are worlds apart.
Well, of course 500 years of something of a disconnection between the two geographic areas has created such a wide gap of difference between "us" and "them". So my question, then, would be this: Knowing that my ancestral roots tie me inexplicably to sub-Saharan Africa, while, simultaneously, being aware of the fact that there has been little-to-no dialogue whatsoever between me in Fort Benning (my sister just PCSed here on the 2nd, so we're helping her get settled here at the moment), and the guy in Accra who may/may not be related me somewhere WAAAAAY down the line, what do I do to bridge this canyon?

I mean, have you ever heard of the old adage "Don't burn the bridges which brought you over" (If you haven't, now you have)? If such is applicable to the Anglophones in Canada (why do you think that Elizabeth II is queen up there as well), as well as to the various Chinese communities (even third- and fourth-generation) throughout the known world, then what makes one think that such isn't applicable to us in the Americas (especially, if no one else, this particular community in the U.S.)?

This is what the whole repatriation idea is about: a two-way dialogue between "us" and "them". And no, not just in the form of meaningless international conferences for political leaders. If there's any way through which this two-way can be achieved besides repatriation, I'd be all up for it.

Got any ideas?
I suppose I need to know why exactly you feel you need to 'bridge this canyon'? I can tell you honestly that bridging the gap and having a 'dialouge' does not meet the immediate need of many Sub-Saharan African's nor does it interest them in the least.

From my experience, Sub-Saharan Africans are more concerned about white people to the extent that they diefy them and their culture while simultaneously neutralizing theirs. As a result I feel no need or desire to dialogue with 'them'.

If you offer dialouge as a way of showing Africans the value and beauty in being black, as a way of instilling a sense of pride and nationalism then it's a great idea. But to think that Black Americans should move back to Africa to get in touch with our roots, you are misleading yourself. Black Africans are as far removed from these 'roots' as Black Americans.
If you offer dialouge as a way of showing Africans the value and beauty in being black, as a way of instilling a sense of pride and nationalism then it's a great idea.

Well, while it is more relevant to history and culture than color, "race", in its generally ambiguous form, is a thing that I try to avoid except for when it comes to the topic of ancestry. However, I do agree with you that Africa, in its world outlook at present, is still inexplicably tied to Europe (on ALL facets). It, or at least the sub-Saharan geographic, is still stuck in the neo-colonial stage; to sever such ties, however, even 40 or 50 years from now, would still be economically disastrous for this area.

However, I'm trying to offer an alternative to the African people: the Diaspora which it happily sent across the Atlantic over 5 centuries ago. As both the homeland and the Diaspora share very similar experiences with European colonialism (and its accompanying features), I think that, if Africa is ever going to remove itself from its dependency on Europe (and Mugabe is leading the most bull-headed attempt to do such, the second most notable one since Nyerere's "ujamaa" program), it would probably behoove them to 1) move toward a greater relationship with the potential big-boys of the Third World, namely the PRC (Beijing) and Brazil, and 2) reconcile with the "Middle Passage" Diaspora.

So I know that there are those who continue to "deify" the Europeans, as you say. However, with Brazil's growing base in sub-Saharan Africa, Benin's apology to the Diaspora for slave-trading, the growing unhappiness of the Euro-South African minority with general conditions (not just racial or political) in their country, and Mugabe's pogroms above the Limpopo, I think that the days of the post-colonial period of Africa's history are clearly numbered.
Why not do all the things that are needed to make it possible for inner city youths do their junior high school year abroad living, live with hospitable Ghanaian families while attending local schools? That's where I am now. I've done some research on this (please see http://home.pcmagic.net/gpope ) All this will take a lot of doing. However I've re-tallied up my current list of tasks and find that even a pilot project group to come down here is more than I can handle. The responsibility is too great. Danger? think malaria! I'd like to talk about this with people who really understand the life here and who also knows about inner city youths which I do not.

Except for natural resource extractors nobody from the US has done what I think needs to be done in W.Africa to whit capital investment in manufacturing, construction, services and etc. You need private capital to make jobs. It takes jobs income for people to buy the things they want and for new markets to emerge.

Much of this is due to an adverse investment climate. Where there is corruption new investors and people will lack confidence..that they can control there business destiny. So even Ghanaians and I suppose many African decline to bring their money home even though sometimes after many years they may be quite homesick.

These things are changing, slowly. I believe that it might be good for these you to have a change of seen and that the project could be justified because having Americans become better steeped in the culture here would be good for the US economy.
I agree.

In fact, investment plays a key role in this idea about forming connections between the Diaspora in the Americas and sub-Saharan Africa. Basically, the formation of a vast social net, which will consist of mainly economic and infrastructural investment and development, will bring together the people in both communities as business partners/dealers/brokers and welfare workers ("welfare" as in the formation of agricultural, aquacultural, mineral, manufacturing/processing, food, clothes, medicine, boarding/construction, and water aid and distribution societies and partnerships).

Of course, such would seem like the "same old same old", but the difference between this approach and the approach by most First-World aid agencies is that this approach will be coming from the Diaspora (both Middle Passage and Modern versions), and would provide a somewhat better basis of/for relations between the providers, shippers, distributors, and recipients (what I like to call "The Four Estates").

All that this approach, even repatriation, should do is serve as a means by which both parties will gain multiple benefits through (better-improved) trans-Atlantic partnerships and bonds in all possible fields and facets.
have you ever been there?

it's dirty, diseased, and impoverished.

here, even poor people have cable tv and satellite dishes.

not so there.

go back and you won't have any hip-hop cds to listen to or mcdonalds to work at. there's not much education, they are about 200 years behind us. Have at it! Good luck finding a fast internet connection to post on your livejournal about how much fun you're having.
have you ever been there?

No. Have you?

it's dirty, diseased, and impoverished.

So goes the stereotype; plus, you have that in several parts of the Americas as well (including the nastiest boonies and ghettoes of Georgia).

here, even poor people have cable tv and satellite dishes.

not so there.


Question: do they *need* it? I don't even want one myself...

Plus, there are some parts of Japan (a G-8 country, mind you) which only in recent years received cable/satellite services; some areas in the United States proper still don't have them.

go back and you won't have any hip-hop cds to listen to or mcdonalds to work at. there's not much education, they are about 200 years behind us. Have at it! Good luck finding a fast internet connection to post on your livejournal about how much fun you're having.

1) I have mp3s, and my musical tastes are moody, at best. By the way, while I do like the music to an extent, I simply *despise* the subculture for all its worth.

2) Never worked there. I worked for a time at a local assisted living facility owned by my mother's church, at which point I received CPR training.

3) In the least-urbanized areas, of course there isn't that much education, if any at all; and metro Africa, where the (mostly bare minimum) education is concentrated, doesn't feature all that highly on the demographic anyway (except in Yorubaland, of course). By the way, I'm not all that inclined to the country, anyway.

4) Given the chance and resources, I most definately will, thank you very much.

5) Oh...so an internet connection is a hindrance to the 419 folk in Festac Town, Nigeria?

With the money that they bring in, they can make their *own* ISP, lol.
I have been there and you, Mr. SubSaharan, are insane. Tell me, please, your ethnic origin. Which countries were your enslaved ancestors taken from? What years? Give me your lineage.
I'm black but by NO means am I African-American. And I know where my roots lie thank you. I have ONE African relative. My great grandmother on my father's side came from Maun, Botswana. Everyone else on my father's side is Austrailian Aborigianal.
You are American. Get over it. None of the Africans want any of the black Americans over there. Not only do you not know the culture, or the languages, or the customs, Black Americans don't even look like native Africans anymore. I've been all over Southern Africa, for very long periods of time. I have plans to move there to begin ministry with LBOM next fall.
You have no connections whatsoever to anyone 'back home'. And to think you do is sheer ignorance.
"reconnect ourselves and our families to Africa, and they to us" What bloody idea comes into your cotton-pickin' head to think that 1)you'd be able to find anyone you're related to, 2)that they will even consider you "family", and 3)that anyone in Africa wants a 'family reunion'?! And what is this bloody "legacy of the slave trade"?! If you haven't cared to notice you live in a privilaged country where you are fed, covered, and housed you arrogant activist ungrateful bigot! What LEGACY are you concocting in your narrow empty head?
The unity of our country is hindered by people like you. People who are so self concerned with things that don't even affect the world today (except when you're making a deal about it), if you would stop being so bloody racist and suspicious, you would be able to stop and look around at a world that is trying to be fully united, country to country and color to color. Less than half the world is pure in any nationality. And I know you aren't. Even if you had all black people in your entire lineage, you still aren't one nationality.
And you know another thing? Immigrating En Masse would get you further from nowhere. Africa wouldn't take you, fool. It takes one four person family over three years to get all four visas, and then the process of becoming a citizen takes, on average, 12.4 years. And that's throughout Africa. You can't own property of any sort with out being a citizen, and they don't have the whole 'let's rent a cute little bungalow with a picket fence'. Unless you're gonna rent a room in the Kingdom Hotel, you're staying in the bush baby. Get ready for 105 degree days and -25 degree nights.
Bottom line; you couldn't handle it. Compared to Africans (real ones not American posers like yourself) your're just another urban yuppie.
I said it once, I'll say it again. You are American. Get over it.
~K_M.
I have been there and you, Mr. SubSaharan, are insane. Tell me, please, your ethnic origin. Which countries were your enslaved ancestors taken from? What years? Give me your lineage.

1. Ethnic origin: Both my mother and my father are of African ancestry, be it partial at best. My mother's father's father was full-blooded Blackfoot Native American, and my mother's mother's mother was of partial Irish-American ancestry. My father's mother is of partial Dutch-American ancestry. However, what is recognized by almost all of my extended family is that we all are, eventually, descendants of slaves who came here from countries which, for the most part, only exist in historical annals and recollections (Asante kingdom, now part of Ghana; Matamba, now part of modern-day Angola; the list goes on). Thus, I couldn't possibly tell you the exact nations from which those particular ancestors hailed, except for the fact that the extent of this particular slave trade reached along the entire Atlantic coast from Senegambia to the Angola-Congo region.

I'm black but by NO means am I African-American. And I know where my roots lie thank you. I have ONE African relative. My great grandmother on my father's side came from Maun, Botswana. Everyone else on my father's side is Austrailian Aborigianal.
You are American. Get over it. None of the Africans want any of the black Americans over there. Not only do you not know the culture, or the languages, or the customs, Black Americans don't even look like native Africans anymore. I've been all over Southern Africa, for very long periods of time. I have plans to move there to begin ministry with LBOM next fall.
You have no connections whatsoever to anyone 'back home'. And to think you do is sheer ignorance.


"Black".....personally, I wouldn't describe myself as, or by, some mere color or shade, as my skin color is light brown, to resort to bare technicality.

"You are American. Get over it." By nationality and citizenship, of course I am a U.S. citizen ("American"...that would basically mean, in the historic sense, one who resides in the *Americas*, as in North America or South America, so of course I am such as well). However, just because I am such doesn't mean that I have to relegate my ethnic description or identity to the simple "American" term. I describe myself as being of "African slave ancestry", since, of course, that is taking into account that particular facet of my ancestry. I can also describe myself as being of Native ancestry, as that is taking into account the above mentioning of *that* particular facet as well. I don't hold myself to any particular rigidity of description because such would not take into account the other facets of my genealogy.

Did I, madam, *ever* say that I was in any possible way familiar on a *first-hand* basis with the multiple cultures of sub-Saharan Africa? Please re-read the original post (or, if you desire, the adjoining commentary) before you lay such an absurdly-marginalistic claim like the aforementioned against me.

You say that you're involved in ministry? Then I suppose that you'd be quite understanding of Proverbs 17:28.

Now, back to your further commentary....
"reconnect ourselves and our families to Africa, and they to us" What bloody idea comes into your cotton-pickin' head to think that 1)you'd be able to find anyone you're related to, 2)that they will even consider you "family", and 3)that anyone in Africa wants a 'family reunion'?! And what is this bloody "legacy of the slave trade"?! If you haven't cared to notice you live in a privilaged country where you are fed, covered, and housed you arrogant activist ungrateful bigot! What LEGACY are you concocting in your narrow empty head?
"reconnect ourselves and our families to Africa, and they to us" What bloody idea comes into your cotton-pickin' head to think that 1)you'd be able to find anyone you're related to, 2)that they will even consider you "family", and 3)that anyone in Africa wants a 'family reunion'?! And what is this bloody "legacy of the slave trade"?! If you haven't cared to notice you live in a privilaged country where you are fed, covered, and housed you arrogant activist ungrateful bigot! What LEGACY are you concocting in your narrow empty head?
The unity of our country is hindered by people like you. People who are so self concerned with things that don't even affect the world today (except when you're making a deal about it), if you would stop being so bloody racist and suspicious, you would be able to stop and look around at a world that is trying to be fully united, country to country and color to color. Less than half the world is pure in any nationality. And I know you aren't. Even if you had all black people in your entire lineage, you still aren't one nationality.
And you know another thing? Immigrating En Masse would get you further from nowhere. Africa wouldn't take you, fool. It takes one four person family over three years to get all four visas, and then the process of becoming a citizen takes, on average, 12.4 years. And that's throughout Africa. You can't own property of any sort with out being a citizen, and they don't have the whole 'let's rent a cute little bungalow with a picket fence'. Unless you're gonna rent a room in the Kingdom Hotel, you're staying in the bush baby. Get ready for 105 degree days and -25 degree nights.
Bottom line; you couldn't handle it. Compared to Africans (real ones not American posers like yourself) your're just another urban yuppie.
I said it once, I'll say it again. You are American. Get over it.


................


While I do respect the right to state your opinion, no matter how virulent and inflammatory it may be (and exceedingly so in this example, might I add), I would like to note a few things before I simply dismiss your diatribe as rude, uncouth, and resounding with those descriptions with which you have so nastily sprayed me.

1. A "family reunion" was not what I had in mind with that tiny tidbit which you quoted (one of only two which you quoted, thus adding to the possibilty that you are simply writing in this God-awfully impertinent manner for reasons of accusatory subjugation, alot like how Democrats demonize Bush in some of the most shameful of ways). Frankly, it was an allusion toward the creation of economic and social bondings between the Diaspora and the Continent proper, not unlike the bondings which typify relations between other immigrant or immigrant-descendant groups and their ancestral nations (which, unlike we who are descendants of the Transatlantic Slave Trade, can trace their own ancestry back to the day of departure, or even further back on the timeline).

Do I even think that whole TAST-descended families could trace their ancestry back toward a particular place and/or time on the African continent? In the rarest of cases, yes, as in the case of the Gullah/Geechee culture on the Sea Islands of my own resident state (Georgia) and neighbouring South Carolina, which has traced its ancestry by way of cultural alliterations and similarities all the way to Sierra Leone (in fact, a former minister in the pre-civil-War government of that country, who now works as a lunchroom janitor here at Oglethorpe Unievrsity, along with several other African-immigrant workers from West Africa, has noted such quite clearly, and on more than one occasion, to me personally).

The Finale

rayne_vandunem

11 years ago

Re: The Finale

rayne_vandunem

11 years ago

Re: The Finale

Anonymous

10 years ago

Re: The Finale

Anonymous

8 years ago

as someone who is 1/2 congolese, i feel african americans finding thier roots should be the number one priority, just so we can ground ourselves to an earth that gives us a place belongs to us. However, i feel as though there is such a limited amount of knowlege concerning Afican Americans origins in africa, considering africa is huge, that it would be wise to first find out all you can about where your ancestors origionated from and try to incorporate this into your daily life before you decide to leave for africa. and who knows, we should probably bring african culture to the US. since this is no ones land besides the native americans and its turned into a melting pot anyway.
but these are just my thoughts, thanks for reading!
-Anna

oh and i embrace anyone of african heritage so add me as a friend!
I am happy to know that someone takes the notion of repatriation as serious as I do. We should make a greater effort to get the message across the globe. We want to go home. "Africa is our home."
real locals looking for hookups. Go Here dld.bz/chwZM