posted 25 October 2004 05:59 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orionix:
Arabs as an ethnic group had nothing to do with ancient Egypt but i believe that phenotypically they were similar.

---

What are Arabs? You do realize Arabs aren't a homogeneous race, and are actually mixture of Asians and Black folks of Africa.

The biggest point you are missing, isn't whether Egypt was a heterogenous society, but what the nation was identified with and who laid down the foundations...phenotypically these people were black folks from the Upper Nile valley or do you question that!

posted 25 October 2004 06:42 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orionix:
Arabs as an ethnic group had nothing to do with ancient Egypt but i believe that phenotypically they were similar.

---

posted 25 October 2004 06:50 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by supercar:
[B] What are Arabs? You do realize Arabs aren't a homogeneous race, and are actually mixture of Asians and Black folks of Africa.

The biggest point you are missing, isn't whether Egypt was a heterogenous society, but what the nation was identified with and who laid down the foundations...phenotypically these people were black folks from the Upper Nile valley or do you question that!

---

Arabs merely represent an Ethnic group with similar phenotypes but there is a great regional variation.

What i meant is that there in no concrete evidence that the ancient Egyptians were different of what they are today.

posted 25 October 2004 06:52 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
Phenotypically there are differences between Asiatic Arabs and native Upper Egyptians even today. Even though this is obscured by the fact that Arab, esp. today and as Supercar rightly noted refers more to a language group and not a phenotype.

---

Better said an ethnic group or a social group of people who speak Arabic.

posted 25 October 2004 06:59 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by supercar:
As I pointed out earlier, Orionix's real intentions will become clear over time...we are getting there. If he is really where he claims to stand on the concept of race, his comments will show it.

---

Friend understood the word leucoderm as meaning whites, (even 'explained' it to us in his 1st post....in case we didn't know) but now pretends to not understand kememu as meaning blacks. It's not objective you see.

posted 25 October 2004 07:14 PM            

quote:

---

Better said an ethnic group or a social group of people who speak Arabic.

---

What you are saying is exactly like saying that the Ancient Aztec look like the modern Hispanics. It's a non-sequitor. Hispanics include direct descendants of the Aztecs, direct descendants of the Spanish, combinations of both; niether of the above.

And it attempts to obscure the facts:
The Aztec were indiginous Mexicans. The Spanish were conquerors from a different land and, almost polar opposite culture who destroyed Aztec civilisation. So too, with the Arabs and AE.

To attempt to make the Arabs into Ancient Egyptians is to practice revisionist history of the worst sort.

posted 25 October 2004 07:34 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orionix:
Arabs merely represent an Ethnic group with similar phenotypes but there is a great regional variation.

---

Yep,
Here we go again. Ancient Egytians are the same as Arabs.

posted 25 October 2004 07:45 PM            

The human catastrophe of early modern slavery juxtaposed west and central Africans with northwest Europeans in the Americas.

Out of this genocidal experience, race has become a dominant category for uniting and dividing people in modernity. Within the race debate, ancient Egypt has become a terrain contested by three mutually exclusive views:

1. Modern Egyptian: the ancient Egyptians are the same group of people as the modern Egyptians

2. Afrocentric: the ancient Egyptians were black Africans, displaced by later movements of peoples, for example the Macedonian, Roman and Arab conquests

3. Eurocentric: the ancient Egyptians are ancestral to modern Europe

I take the first choice.

According to the distribution of blood groups in present-day Egypt a large number of people are very homogeneous with no significant differences.

[This message has been edited by Orionix (edited 25 October 2004).]

posted 25 October 2004 07:52 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
What you are saying is exactly like saying that the Ancient Aztec look like the modern Hispanics. It's a non-sequitor. Hispanics include direct descendants of the Aztecs, direct descendants of the Spanish, combinations of both; niether of the above.

And it attempts to obscure the facts:
The Aztec were indiginous Mexicans. The Spanish were conquerors from a different land and, almost polar opposite culture who destroyed Aztec civilisation. So too, with the Arabs and AE.

To attempt to make the Arabs into Ancient Egyptians is to practice revisionist history of the worst sort.

---

Maybe i wasn't certain enough.

My point is that the AEs were probably the same people as the present-day ones. There is no concrete evidence which could suggest otherwise.

posted 25 October 2004 08:14 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by blackman:
Yep,
Here we go again. Ancient Egytians are the same as Arabs.

"In Orionix mind"
We will just keep skirting around the fact that Ancient Egytians were black africans until we can come to a term you guys will accept that is not black.
Okay, No race didn't work so now I'll try arab. Will you buy that?

---

We've been to this road with Ayazid about the Kemetians and Arabs. As Rasol appropriately pointed out earlier, it is yet another blatant distortion of facts. First of all, "Arabs" as an ethnic group didn't exist during that era, until thousands of years later, when Kemetian civilization was a declining. Orionix contradicts himself yet again about not projecting modern racial terms to Kemet. By "Arabs", if he is referring to Asians who came to North Africa during the pre-dynastic era, this doesn't change the fact that the Upper Nile Valley populations were essentially black populations of the same stock as Sub-Saharan Africa, who advanced their more developed culture to the North. Even then, the northern populations was heterogenous, with mixed Afro-Asian population, a contrast to the more homogeneous Upper Nile valley settlements of indigenous Africans. In contemporary times, these relatively conservative black populations of Upper Egypt remain phenotypically black. Believe me, anyone with good vision can't possibly mistake them for anything else. I dare Orionix to say that this isn't the case!

posted 25 October 2004 08:35 PM            

quote:

---

My point is that the AEs were probably the same people as the present-day ones. There is no concrete evidence which could suggest otherwise.

---

posted 25 October 2004 08:41 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orionix:
1. Modern Egyptian: the ancient Egyptians are the same group of people as the modern Egyptians

---

It is obvious that the original Egyptians didn't become extinct. But you are lying to yourself, by convincing yourself that the content of contemporary Egyptian population is virtually the same as its Kemet days. You are intentionally disregarding reality, by disregarding the fact that Romans, Greeks, Persians, Turks and others only came into the nation during declining phases of the dynastic era. It's your choice; you can live in a wonderland where you can dance around the question of what is real or not, or you accept reality!

posted 25 October 2004 08:42 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orionix:
Maybe i wasn't certain enough.

My point is that the AEs were probably the same people as the present-day ones. There is no concrete evidence which could suggest otherwise.

[This message has been edited by Orionix (edited 25 October 2004).]

---

Orionix you must be kidding...It is fact that the first of the AE resembled the Upper egyptians..

Fact.....Most of the population in AE was in upper Egypt and they resembled/clustered/looked like/genetically related to the Nubians/negroes,black/african in the sarah.

If the Anceint egyptians refered to themself as Black people and you have no problem calling african american and afro-caribbeans black (toni braxton, angela basset, vanessa williams, vivica fox, alicia keys, densel washington, eddie murphy, koybe bryant, snoop dog, ice tea, sinbad) then why are you playing inconclusive and guessing about the race that the AE said they belonged to?? They told us and some of us don't like the answer so we blame the "Afrocentrics" for saying, "hey they look very similar to us and we are black so..."

I guess Iman from Somalia is not black either right.

About the arabs, some look like african americans too. I have been told this and asked if I was arab from saudi arabia. It kinda took me by suprise cause I think I am undoubtly "black". Some even look "white".

The facts are all over this board and you can cross reference them and research them if you don't trust it. But the reality is They are who they are whether you don't like the term black or not....THEY SAID WHO THEY WERE!

posted 25 October 2004 08:42 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orionix:
1. Modern Egyptian: the ancient Egyptians are the same group of people as the modern Egyptians

---

It is obvious that the original Egyptians didn't become extinct. But you are lying to yourself, by convincing yourself that the content of contemporary Egyptian population is virtually the same as its Kemet days. You are intentionally disregarding reality, by disregarding the fact that Romans, Greeks, Persians, Turks and others only came into the nation during declining phases of the dynastic era. It's your choice; you can live in a wonderland where you can dance around the question of what is real or not, or you accept reality!

posted 25 October 2004 08:45 PM            

quote:

---

Orionix contradicts himself yet again about not projecting modern racial terms to Kemet. By "Arabs", if he is referring to Asians who came to North Africa during the pre-dynastic era, this doesn't change the fact that the Upper Nile Valley populations were essentially black populations of the same stock as Sub-Saharan Africa, who advanced their more developed culture to the North. Even then, the northern populations was heterogenous, with mixed Afro-Asian population, a contrast to the more homogeneous Upper Nile valley settlements of indigenous Africans. In contemporary times, these relatively conservative black populations of Upper Egypt remain phenotypically black. Believe me, anyone with good vision can't possibly mistake them for anything else. I dare Orionix to say that this isn't the case! [/B]

---

You sound like a racist who believes in race as a biological concept.

If so you are not that different from those on Stormfront. They also believe in race as a biological entity.

You cannot project the American racial classifications like "white" and "black" on people who didn't share them.

The AEs were people of many colors from light in the north to dark in the south while the majority being brown.

The origin of the ancient Egyptian culture was the Upper Nile Valley but you guys had to add more...

posted 25 October 2004 08:59 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by supercar:
It is obvious that the original Egyptians didn't become extinct. But you are lying to yourself, by convincing yourself that the content of contemporary Egyptian population is virtually the same as its Kemet days. You are intentionally disregarding reality, by disregarding the fact that Romans, Greeks, Persians, Turks and others only came into the nation during declining phases of the dynastic era. It's your choice; you can live in a wonderland where you can dance around the question of what is real or not, or you accept reality!

It will certainly be interesting to see your evidence on where all these aformentioned foreign groups were in Kemet, during its pre-dynastic to early and middle dynastic era. That essentially what you are implying, when you compare the modern population with the ancient!

---

No you are trying to claim the AEs as black Africans while you have no objective evidence of what black is. I agreed with you that AEs were dark-skinned people in the majority. There is a significant number of dark-skinned people living in Egypt nowadays.

posted 25 October 2004 09:09 PM            

quote:

---

Ok let me get something straight. I'm not an Afrocentric or an Eurocentric and i do not have any intentions. [quote]It seems you do have an agenda expressed later in your post....
[quote]Out of this genocidal experience, race has become a dominant category for uniting and dividing people in modernity.

---

quote:

---

Within the race debate, ancient Egypt has become a terrain contested by three mutually exclusive views:
1. Modern Egyptian: the ancient Egyptians are the same group of people as the modern Egyptians

---

* careful, you are claiming here to speak for Modern Egyptians. you don't. in fact you have been debating a modern Egyptian in this thread; the one who asked you the question "what is an arab phenotype" which you ducked , so number 1 is false.

quote:

---

2. Afrocentric: the ancient Egyptians were black Africans, displaced by later movements of peoples, for example the Macedonian, Roman and Arab conquests

---

quote:

---

3. Eurocentric: the ancient Egyptians are ancestral to modern Europe

---

quote:

---

I take the first choice.

---

quote:

---

According to the distribution of blood groups in present-day Egypt a large number of people are very homogeneous with no significant differences.

---

That isn't saying much either. You can say that about Mexico today and it would be correct. What would not be correct is to imply from this that the Spanish are the descendants of the Aztecs. The Spaniards had nothing to do with Ancient Mexico. The Arabs had nothing to do with Ancient Egypt. Perhaps you should consider choosing to deal with the facts.

posted 25 October 2004 09:16 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orionix:
You sound like a racist who believes in race as a biological concept.

If so you are not that different from those on Stormfront. They also believe in race as a biological entity.

---

I am not the clown who said that we are projecting our modern concepts of race on Ancient Egyptians, just so I can later on say that the Kemetians are "phenotypically the same" as Arabs. I am not the ignorant person, who said that the modern Egyptian population is virtually the same as the ancient nation, ignoring the specific timelines that reflect the influx of specific foreigners. Above all, I am not the hypocrite who posted the stormfront agenda on this thread, only to introduce my crackpot affiliation with the "no race" concept and then describe Kemetians with bogus phenotypical classifications. The crown of all these achievements, solely belongs to you!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orionix:
You cannot project the American racial classifications like "white" and "black" on people who didn't share them.

---

So you are suggesting Africans are black, because the Americans say so!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orionix:
The AEs were people of many colors from light in the north to dark in the south while the majority being brown.

---

Why not include yellow and blue, in your list of colors. After all, they did use those colors to paint some Egyptian Kings or rulers.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orionix:
The origin of the ancient Egyptian culture was the Upper Nile Valley but you guys had to add more...

---

Many of us here have tried reason with you, correcting your ridiculous logic of the color convention of AE paintings. Yet you disregard even that generous offer. At this point, the only thing that will do justice, is to allow you to make further fool of yourself.

posted 25 October 2004 09:44 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orionix:
No you are trying to claim the AEs as black Africans while you have no objective evidence of what black is. I agreed with you that AEs were dark-skinned people in the majority. There is a significant number of dark-skinned people living in Egypt nowadays.

---

Advice for you: don't take all racial labels to mean literally the colors used to describe them. Many white folks aren't really "white", and many black folks who are actually brown in color, aren't really "black". The sooner you understand this, the better of you will be!

BTW, what is your objective evidence of what "dark" is?

posted 25 October 2004 09:46 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by supercar:
[B] Why not go through past threads to get that information. Many of us here have tried reason with you, correcting your ridiculous logic of the color convention of AE paintings. Yet you disregard even that generous offer. At this point, the only thing that will do justice, is to allow you to make further fool of yourself.

---

Are you trying to force your Afrocentric ideas into me??

posted 25 October 2004 09:50 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by supercar:
Advice for you: don't take all racial labels to mean literally the colors used to describe them. Many white folks aren't really "white", and many black folks who are actually brown in color, aren't really "black". The sooner you understand this, the better of you will be!

---

posted 25 October 2004 10:01 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Supercar:
I am not the clown who said that we are projecting our modern concepts of race on Ancient Egyptians, just so I can later on say that the Kemetians are "phenotypically the same" as Arabs. I am not the ignorant person, who said that the modern Egyptian population is virtually the same as the ancient nation, ignoring the specific timelines that reflect the influx of specific foreigners. Above all, I am not the hypocrite who posted the stormfront agenda on this thread, only to introduce my crackpot affiliation with the "no race" concept and then describe Kemetians with bogus phenotypical classifications. The crown of all these achievements, solely belongs to you!

---

This is exactly what you're doing. Sorry but i'm not the clown who's trying to project modern racial classifications of blackness or whiteness (doesn't matter which) on people who didn't share it. You have NO evidence which indicates that ancient Egypt was inhabited by a so-called black "race". AE was a "melting pot" with many types of people with many skin tones

The diversity of the people remained the same till this time. Most present-day Egyptians just reffer to themselves as Arab-Africans.

posted 25 October 2004 10:06 PM            

quote:

---

No you are trying to claim the AEs as black Africans while you have no objective evidence of what black is.

---

Of course what was stated for a fact was that the AE referred to themselves as black people; the evidence for which you are evading and really not refuting at all.

quote:

---

I agreed with you that AEs were dark-skinned people in the majority.

---

We find there Egyptians and Africans represented in the same way, which could not be otherwise; but the Namou (the Asians) and the Tamhou (Europeans) present significant and curious variants; The first tribes that inhabited Egypt, that is, the Nile Valley between the Syene cataract and the sea, came from Abyssinia to Sennar. The ancient Egyptians belonged to a race quite similar to the Kennous or Barabras, present inhabitants of Nubia. In the Copts of Egypt, we do not find any of the characteristic features of the ancient Egyptian population. The Copts are the result of crossbreeding with all the nations that have successively dominated Egypt. It is wrong to seek in them the principal features of the old race.

The mdw ntr makes sense. Champollian the Younger's decipherment makes sense as well. You invest too much energy in rationalizing away truths that you do not want to understand.

posted 25 October 2004 10:14 PM            

quote:

---

This is why i said race is an historical and cultural reality, not a biological one. Most Anthropologists today study race as a social fact, not a natural one.

---

* Anthropologists cannot study race as a social phenomenon, that is sociology.

* You might want to familiarize yourself with the work of Shomarka Keita, he has a very sophisticated concept of biological variation which he understands is not necessarily congruent with racial classification.

posted 25 October 2004 10:30 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orionix:
Are you trying to force your Afrocentric ideas into me??

---

Well it depends on what Afrocentric ideas we are talking about. If you mean this by Upper Egyptians being black, you certainly need to be educated on that reality!

quote:

---

Posted by Orionix:
It is clear that the origin of ancient Egyptian culture is the Nille Valley and not Nubia.

---

You don't even have your demographics right, why should even bother to go any further!

quote:

---

Orionix writes:
The AEs were people of many colors and many times the differences between them were even exaggerated.

---

For a "color blind" individual, I guess it is difficult to distinguish light-skin color foreigners from black folks of Africa.

quote:

---

Orionix writes:
The Egyptians did not make racial distinctions themselves, but rather ethnic distinctions based on nationality and according to their OWN artwork most Egyptians were painted RED and BROWN. Don't make a fool of yourself by ignoring their artwork.

---

Which confers that it is okay to refer to Egyptians as red people:You aren't merely a fool, you are definitely twisted!

posted 25 October 2004 10:41 PM            

quote:

---

Orionix write:
This is why i said race is an historical and cultural reality, not a biological one. Most Anthropologists today study race as a social fact, not a natural one.

---

You might want to re-read that comment. It is not exactly endorsing your contradictory, not to mention twisted gibberish.

quote:

---

Orionix writes:
This is exactly what you're doing. Sorry but i'm not the clown who's trying to project modern racial classifications of blackness or whiteness (doesn't matter which) on people who didn't share it. You have NO evidence which indicates that ancient Egypt was inhabited by a so-called black "race". AE was a "melting pot" with many types of people with many skin tones.

---

Disorderly thinking is a hard thing to come by without proper medical attention, which is clearly what you need. I am not in a position to provide evidence that dark-skin people called black folks exist. You were supposedly given eyes to help you do that! Can you give me evidence that you are a colorless creature?

posted 25 October 2004 11:51 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by blackman:
Orionix,
Why is it so hard for some white folks to admit and accept the fact that Ancient Egyptians (People of Kemet) were black Africans?

---

I am not white and i don't think the ancient Egyptians were black in the sense of black-skinned people. I mean look at the present-day people who inhabit Egypt. The majority of them are not black and not white and SURELY won't be confused for Europeans.

posted 25 October 2004 11:52 PM            

Actually, Greece and Rome were more of "melting pots" than ancient Egypt. Do you think they were inhabited by a so-called white "race"?

posted 26 October 2004 12:06 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orionix:
I am not white and i don't think the ancient Egyptians were black in the sense of black-skinned people. I mean look at the present-day people who inhabit Egypt. The majority of them are not black and not white and SURELY won't be confused for Europeans.

---

Orionix,
I never said you were white. You can still answer the question if you want to.

The present day inhabitants are not the same has the ancient inhabitants. People keep trying the tell you that is like comparing the present day inhabitants of the Americas to the ancient inhabitants of the Americas.

Egypt (Kemet) has been conquered by Persians, Syrians, Romans, and Arabs.
Are you saying these people had no change on Eygpt's people?

posted 26 October 2004 12:24 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by blackman:

Orionix,

I never said you were white. You can still answer the question if you want to.

The present day inhabitants are not the same has the ancient inhabitants. People keep trying the tell you that is like comparing the present day inhabitants of the Americas to the ancient inhabitants of the Americas.

Egypt (Kemet) has been conquered by Persians, Syrians, Romans, and Arabs.
Are you saying these people had no change on Eygpt's people?

[This message has been edited by blackman (edited 26 October 2004).]

---

They're not completely the same as before but the diversity of the people hasn't changed.

It's very hard for me to believe that Egypt was once inhabited by black-skinned people.

The Nubians might had some contact with the Nuer (black-skinned people) of southern Sudan.

However it's more reasonable to presume that the Upper Egyptians were dark or black while the Lower Egyptians were somewhere between brown to light. You also have to remember that the Sahara disiccated almost completely by the end of the 4th millenia BC, seperating the two lands.

The earliest inhabitants of what is now The Sudan can be traced to black African peoples who lived in the vicinity of Khartoum, the Sudan, in Mesolithic (Middle Stone Age) times (30,000–20,000 BC). They were hunters and gatherers who made pottery and (later) objects of ground sandstone. Toward the end of the Neolithic Period (New Stone Age; 10,000–3,000 BC) they had domesticated animals. These Africans were clearly in contact with predynastic civilizations (before c. 2925 BC) to the north in Egypt, but the arid uplands separating Egypt from Nubia appear to have discouraged the predynastic Egyptians from settling there.

posted 26 October 2004 12:40 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
Ok, I'm here to help.

* Anthropologists cannot study race as a social phenomenon, that is sociology.

* You might want to familiarize yourself with the work of Shomarka Keita, he has a very sophisticated concept of biological variation which he understands is not necessarily congruent with racial classification.

---

Actually it's called cultural Anthropology. A respected field nowadays.

Anthropology has a dark history. In 19th century physical anthropology was heaviliy based on the concept of race. Physical Anthros used to determine race as a natural/biological reality. Their work was based on the biometry of skulls shapes, body measurements and what not. Maybe most of the work from anthropologists was based on racism.

The vast majority of today's anthropologists consider race to be a SOCIAL, not a natural reality. This is the reason why there are very few physical anthros alive yet today outside the field of forensics: their notions of what is important in human difference have simply been overtaken by events and rendered obsolete.

Race has no natural physical base to it. There are millions of inheritable human genetic traits, and while one COULD make neat racial divisions based on any ONE trait, when the others are taken into consideration, human race divisions are revealed to be as arbitrary and anti-scientific as astrological signs.

However, humans BELIEVE in race, just like they believe in astrology and thus race is, obviously, a component of our reality - a social fact rather than a natural fact. The vast majority of today's anthropologists study race as a social fact.

In the departments, they have all the old biometric equipment on display in a glass case in the main hall to remind all the students of the bad old days and how prejudice, cloaked in scientific rhetoric, must not be allowed to dominate the science of man. Most departments have a display like this. in fact, of all the scientific disciplines, anthropology has been the one that has most conducted a thorough-going critique of its racist roots.

posted 26 October 2004 12:50 AM            

The Nubians/Ethiopians and the ancient Egyptians have the same ancestors.
1) The Ethiopians told Herodotus Egypt is an Ethiopian colony.
2) The Egyptians considered the land south of them as the land of their ancestors.
3) The bible historically has Egypt and Ethiopia as brothers. (They are related)

People have provided you with Egyptology scholars quotes who are not afrocentric, to state the egyptians are of black african stock.

I didn't know Africa was inhabited by other than black african people prior to invasion.
Please provide data showing that Africa was inhabited by this no race (brown, but not black african) people that created ancient egypt.

If you don't believe the posted data and quotes from scholars find data to prove otherwise so we cand discuss other than what you feel or think.

posted 26 October 2004 02:23 AM            

I've said this early on, and it appears to be turning out that way: His use on the "no color" racial code, is to avoid commentary on Upper Kemetians viewed as black folks. Notice how he avoids answering questions on whether or not to view Greeks as "White" folks. Another figment of his imagination is the racial demarcation among populations in the Egypto-Nubian region. No Egyptologist has even attempted to go that far, although they had once tried to call Nubians black white-men. He is also refuting (actually disregarding) Keita's findings, which have yet to be successfully refuted by any other bio-anthropologist. Keita puts the Upper Egyptians within the same group as Nubians. Yet Orionix has the nerve to constantly refer to bio-anthropologists to define his color conventions. Let's just tell this guy, that from his own color standards, Upper Egyptians share their "brown" heritage with other Sub-Sahara Africans!

Oops I almost forgot this:
Look at this statement,

quote:

---

Orionix:
It's very hard for me to believe that Egypt was once inhabited by black-skinned people.

---

and now, the following with highlighted words,

quote:

---

Orionix:
However it's more reasonable to presume that the Upper Egyptians were dark or black while the Lower Egyptians were somewhere between brown to light.

---

Does this reflect coherent thinking?

posted 26 October 2004 04:14 AM            

quote:

---

Oops I almost forgot this:
Look at this statement,

[QUOTE]Orionix:
It's very hard for me to believe that Egypt was once inhabited by black-skinned people.

---

and now, the following with highlighted words,

quote:

---

Orionix:
However it's more reasonable to presume that the Upper Egyptians were dark or black while the Lower Egyptians were somewhere between brown to light.

---

quote:

---

Does this reflect coherent thinking?

---

It reflects a very specific condition common among 'liberal' bigots.

cognitive dissonance: psychological conflict resulting from incongruous beliefs and attitudes held simultaneously

...fellow is a textbook example.

posted 26 October 2004 04:49 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ayazid:
Ausar, why do u not delete this thread? Its not getting tiresome???
Again and again ...

---

posted 26 October 2004 07:13 AM            

1. On the issue of whether the ancient Egyptians were predominantly black(based on Western definitions of black African) there is no way to know for sure. Of course there were Pharoahs who were black Africans but can we really make conclusions about the common people of ancient Egypt considering we know so little about them?

2. Black Americans are quite obsessive over this issue. Race is a very divisive issue. Just because a person doesn't agree that the ancient Egyptians were predominantly black Africans doesn't mean he or she has some Eurocentric agenda or the person doesn't agree that they were African.

posted 26 October 2004 08:35 AM            

2.) Attempting to rewrite history so as to replace the identity concepts of other peoples with modern Western concepts is, by definition, a Eurocentric and fundamentally fraudulent agenda in action.

bonus point....
3.) If you want to make Western definitions relevant define:

* Western.
* European.
* white.
* caucasian.

...because those are the terms the 'westerners' use to define themselves.

posted 26 October 2004 08:53 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
1.) Western definitions of the identity concepts of ancient Africans are irrelevant.

---

They are quite relevant here where people use WESTERN terms like "black" quite freely. People from different cultures have different definitions of race. This goes for people from all continents not just Africans.

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

2.) Attempting to rewrite history so as to replace the identity concepts of other peoples with Western concepts is a Eurocentric and fundamentally fraudulent agenda in action.

---

I agree. I'm not sure if anyone here disagrees that the ancient Egyptians were just as African as ancient Ethiopians.

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

bonus point....
3.) If you want to make Western definitions relevant define:

* Western.

---

Any cultures or civiliazations that originate from Western European influence...

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

* European.

---

Anyone who is born on the continent of Europe

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

...because those are the terms the 'westerners' use to define themselves.

---

posted 26 October 2004 09:23 AM            

quote:

---

They are quite relevant here where people use WESTERN terms like "black" quite freely.

---

The term of relevance, the NATIVE term... is Kem.

In English it means black. To deny that fact because you cannot abide the notion of the kememu as black people is intellectual bankruptcy in the service of bigotry.

quote:

---

I agree. I'm not sure if anyone here disagrees that the ancient Egyptians were just as African as ancient Ethiopians.

---

posted 26 October 2004 09:31 AM            

quote:

---

bonus point....
3.) If you want to make Western definitions relevant define:
* Western.

---

quote:

---

Any cultures or civilizations that originate from Western European influence

---

Which would exclude Mesopotamia and Greece. Please let us know when this becomes the basis for discourse in the "west".

posted 26 October 2004 09:43 AM            

quote:

---

We wear Western clothes, speak a Western language, and participate in Western religions.

---

quote:

---

And if you consider anyone with one trace of negro ancestry

---

posted 26 October 2004 12:38 PM            

What race were the ancient Egyptians is the most ignorant question people could ever ask. Race has no physical, objective meaning. It's time for Americans to except that.

The proper question would be what color were the ancient Egyptians? The Egyptian artwork clearly represents a people who were in the majority neither black nor white.

posted 26 October 2004 12:42 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
It reflects a very specific condition common among 'liberal' bigots.

cognitive dissonance: psychological conflict resulting from incongruous beliefs and attitudes held simultaneously

...fellow is a textbook example.

---

posted 26 October 2004 01:07 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
I am sorry, but this is not Storm Front, where you can silence the views of others with foul language and loutish behavior. The quality of your posts sinks to a new low with each reply. Seems the others had you pegged correctly from the start. Too bad.

---

posted 26 October 2004 01:27 PM            

quote:

---

The proper question would be what color were the ancient Egyptians? The Egyptian artwork clearly represents a people who were in the majority neither black nor white.

---

By that illogical and irrelevant standard there are few if any white people in Europe or Ameria, except for albinos.... and certainly no white people in AE whatsoever except perhaps for diseased Lepers.

But of course, you're not being serious. We know that, because you do not apply your twisted two faced semantics to white people. You apply it exclusively to Kememu to avoid the reality of their being Black peoples.