posted
Okay, theDoctor has sat back long enough and witnessed the various arguments going on in this forum, and have encountered some VERY serious problems from those of you blacks whom follow him.
Instead of going off into a LONG lengthy discourse over the complex problem I have with a FEW of the concepts that many here subscribe to, I think copying a pasting two quotes from two reknowned members on this board should suffice for summing up exactly what my problem with them is:
quote:Originally posted by anguish_of_being:
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Here is my challenge to you all, what is the correct definition of black??
Does anyone have a problem with the following pics..
^^^^ 1)Based on all the art work displayed here on e.S would that be a decent representation of Egypt, if so why or why not..
2) Is the following Black, Med, Multiracial??
PS: I tried not to Cherry Pick, and I tried to mix up the Light and Darker Skinned Egyptians...so PLS. Don't Accuse me of Cherry Picking)
THESE ARE ALL BLACK PEOPLE.
SOME "BLACK" PEOPLE MIGHT BEG TO DIFFER. BUT WE SHOULD NOT CARE WHAT THEY THINK. THEY'RE IDIOTS. JUST LIKE THEIR WHITE COUNTERPARTS.
Just look at the exchange between these two...
On the plantation, we could identify a POTENTIAL traitor based on the COLOR of their skin, or on the texture of their hair before we even had to have a CONVERSATION with them. And this is what saved many of us as a people. Now you want us to believe that many of "our people" should now include those of us whom resemble our enemies rape products? and if so, whats to stop us from differentiating between us and the indians? Indians wield all of the same facial characteristics-- are we supposed to look upon THEM as our "black brothers and sisters" too now? Despite the fact that we now KNOW how they REALLY feel about black people?
Posts: 51 | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
why am i bringing this up? Not to support some silly Eurocentric theory about black people NOT being a WIDE variant people, but because our ancestors have already traced back the history of the ancients and found out that our DOWNFALL came from that of ALLOWING OTHER PPL outside of us INTO our society. ("Destruction of Black Civilization" by Dr. Chancellor Williams)
Is THIS NOT a RECIPE for DISASTER, concerning black people's LONG history of seeing EVERYONE in the world as the brothers and sisters and being CONSTANTLY infiltrated?
Or were the likes of Dr. John Henrik Clarke, Dr. Yosef Ben Jochanon, and Dr. Chancellor Williams just blowing hot "afrocentric smoke" up our behinds about the impending dangers we face by allowing just anyone who looks like ANYONE into our communities.
It's easy to see that Jari and the other syncophant up under him who replied to him are effectively hinting at the very fact that "blackness", (coincidentally the very thing that defines US and would be used as a safe-guard against other races entering in) is now defunct.
And while scientifically (as for now) that might be correct, my question to you is-- how in the hell are we going to advance as a BLACK NATION if we now keep trying to blur the lines between WHO is considered ONE of our people and who aint?
Aint none of you YET learned of the interactions between BLACKs and the other races, whom soon became their denigration?
Any black person from this forum CLEARLY knows that if any of us were to waltz across about 80% of those of us of what we see here in those pictures, no one in their right minds would consider these people a BLACK people. No silly DNA test needing to be done and no STOOPID second-thinking about "redefining the concepts of Blackness".
Posts: 51 | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Because Dr. Keita's scientific claims are the claims that lead to what Jari is insinuating here.
"Blackness" = defunct.
which opens us up to attack from those whom would come in to the continent wanting to embrace us as "brothers and sisters" by have agendas directly contrare to it.
Posts: 51 | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
On the plantation, we could identify a POTENTIAL traitor based on the COLOR of their skin, or on the texture of their hair before we even had to have a CONVERSATION with them.
Oh really, what are you basing that on a paper bag?
quote:Originally posted by theDoctor: And this is what saved many of us as a people. Now you want us to believe that many of "our people" should now include those of us whom resemble our enemies rape products? and if so, whats to stop us from differentiating between us and the indians? Indians wield all of the same facial characteristics-- are we supposed to look upon THEM as our "black brothers and sisters" too now? Despite the fact that we now KNOW how they REALLY feel about black people? [/QB]
If you live in America you pay sales and other taxes to a white government and live in a system of laws enforced by white people. So if you have decided to live in America instead of Ghana stop kidding yourself that we have any control of a neighborhood in America or Western Europe. Black people are now a minority in Harlem. You think we had the power not to let them in? That's a fantasy.
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Blackness is Subjective, silly little arguments on Hair Texture and Skin shade originated with Arab and European invaders and developed in Plantions of America, you preach about blackness but preach te same White Suprimist B.S...
Example one.. On the plantation, Our history predates the Plantation you abject slave.
we could identify a POTENTIAL traitor based on the COLOR of their skin,
Enemies of Black people, Doc's world..
And this is what saved many of us as a people. Now you want us to believe that many of "our people" should now include those of us whom resemble our enemies rape products?
African Variation goes back before "Rape" on plantations.
and if so, whats to stop us from differentiating between us and the indians? Indians wield all of the same facial characteristics-- are we supposed to look upon THEM as our "black brothers and sisters" too now? Despite the fact that we now KNOW how they REALLY feel about black people? or on the texture of their hair before we even had to have a CONVERSATION with them.
Strawman argument Indians live in Indian the people I posted live in Africa and in Egypt.
Not to support some silly Eurocentric theory about black people NOT being a WIDE variant people
No, you just want all Africans to look like this..
Because Dr. Keita's scientific claims are the claims that lead to what Jari is insinuating here.
"Blackness" = defunct.
Keita nor I claim this, Blackness is subjective for simple minded people. What I consider black differs from what Keita considers black and so on.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^The problem is you are implying Blacks have variations and that is not true. While Africa has variations in phoenotype, that does not mean black does. Black is just one variation in Africa. So, Blackness is not subjective. BTW... Sara Suten Seti is a poor choice of evidence. That nigga got white blood all up in his veins.
-------------------- Will destroy all Black Lies Posts: 2025 | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
On the plantation, we could identify a POTENTIAL traitor based on the COLOR of their skin, or on the texture of their hair before we even had to have a CONVERSATION with them.
Oh really, what are you basing that on a paper bag?
quote:Originally posted by theDoctor: And this is what saved many of us as a people. Now you want us to believe that many of "our people" should now include those of us whom resemble our enemies rape products? and if so, whats to stop us from differentiating between us and the indians? Indians wield all of the same facial characteristics-- are we supposed to look upon THEM as our "black brothers and sisters" too now? Despite the fact that we now KNOW how they REALLY feel about black people?
If you live in America you pay sales and other taxes to a white government and live in a system of laws enforced by white people. So if you have decided to live in America instead of Ghana stop kidding yourself that we have any control of a neighborhood in America or Western Europe. Black people are now a minority in Harlem. You think we had the power not to let them in? That's a fantasy. [/QB]
1.) Lady, you mean to tell me you cant tell the difference between Malcolm X and that half-arab you got in that picture?
and no-- a picture of a person with the shadow of their own face slightly darkening his pic, in comparison to a professionally taken, studio-illuminated lights highlighting of Malcolm X's photo doesnt make him any less closer to the definition of what one would consider black vs. that other goat-herding clown you've got alongside him.
Malcolm's facial features is what saved him.
2.) LADY, WTH are you talking about?
Me living in America vs. ghana has no correlation with anything I have brought up within the context of this conversation.
We are a minority because we have degenerated into a hopeless nation of people, fattened and "lazied" out by the integrationist, yet black-self-destructive ideals that white society hung out for us like a CARROT on a string while they assasinated all of our leaders, replaced them with media buffon pundits, and silenced the taking care of our black businesses, economics, and industries that would serve as a safe-guard in protecting us against the impending Arab and Korean parasites that now suck the LIFe out of our communities.
We are a minority because we did not play by the rules of Group Economic engagement. and it's number one fundamental rule that we REFUSED to acknowledge was "BLACK FIRST". Not hold hands with whites and sing and dance around campfires happy because we can drink water and do #1's and #2's in the same bathrooms that whites could.
Government warfare at it's finest that doesnt stray too far along from what EVERY black nation on this Earth has FAILED in doing (i.e. learning NOT to accept just any and everyone into their community)
Posts: 51 | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gigantic: ^The problem is you are implying Blacks have variations and that is not true. While Africa has variations in phoenotype, that does not mean black does. Black is just one variation in Africa. So, Blackness is not subjective. BTW... Sara Suten Seti is a poor choice of evidence. That nigga got white blood all up in his veins.
Like I said I don't claim "Blackness" nor does Keita, blackness is subjective which is why clyde claims Indians and Dravidians are are black, why Dana Marniche claims Arabs are black and so on.
Africa does have variation and genetically, culturally, and linguistically these people and linked together.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Throughout all the literature, videos and personal communication I've had with Keita it seems very clear to me that he is focused on one thing:
- Being an objective scientist who is committed to promoting accurate scholarship about African biological variation, relationships and cultures
This field has obviously been seriously corrupted by biased scholarship and the racist motivations of many scholars who have created a lot of misconceptions about Africa. I'm interesting in setting the record straight on African historiography not promoting more ideological agendas that lead to further false information.
Posts: 647 | From: Atlanta | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^Okay, I can agree with that. Black is their trojan horse they use to claim non black, people of color.
Posts: 2025 | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gigantic: ^^Okay, I can agree with that. Black is their trojan horse they use to claim non black, people of color.
Dude you are 100% right, the Afrocentrics will use black to lay claim to Indians, Asians, Chinese Rome, etc when it suits them then will fight Blackness when the white man uses it to claim Negro=black. Just look at Mike's Website in one breath he claims there is no true negro and that the white man's B.S then in the same breath say "Equitorial Africans" are pure Blacks and the Pics he uese has "True Negros" in it..LOL.
Dude don't you see now how dysfunctional now Afrocentrism is. Its not about Africa, Egypt or Black people setting up an all black nation(LOOOL These afrocentrics DONT WANT THAT SH#T..LOL..They Loove Living off the White man and Blaming him)... its about an inferiority complex brought on by the fact that the White man Colonized, defeated and set up shop in Africa, enslaved Africans, and literally and figuratively owned Africans, now its just a gut reaction.
Their whole purpose s to lay claim to all of Whitey's culture and Empires, what better way than to get revenge on the white man than to claim he Enslaved, Raped, and Destroyed Africa in one breath and claim in the same breath the Driving force behind European Culture and Architecture, and Weaponery that allowed him to defeat, Rape, and destroy Africans was given to him by Africans.
It cover's their inforority complex 100%...
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: [QB] Blackness is Subjective, silly little arguments on Hair Texture and Skin shade originated with Arab and European invaders and developed in Plantions of America, you preach about blackness but preach te same White Suprimist B.S...
That's interesting, considering the fact that our greatest African historical grandmaster Dr. John Henrk clarke STILL used the term "them high-yellow nxggas" when referring to mulattos and their half-arab cousin strain.
Was HE indoctrinated with "white Supremacist B.S." too? Many Africans to this day dont consider light-skinned Africans really as "one of their own". not even our ANCESTORS whom came across on the boats KNOWING that it was the light-bright ones to watch out for. And this was WAY before any 19th century European media fabrication.
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: [QB] Enemies of Black people, Doc's world..
funny how you took the quote OUT of its origi9nal sentence.
I mentioned skin shade as well as HAIR.
Sara Suten Seti clearly has the latter.
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: [QB] Strawman argument Indians live in Indian the people I posted live in Africa and in Egypt.
considering the pictures of the people you consider to be black (lighter skinned, straight to wavy hair, aquiline or even hooked noses, how would YOU know any difference if you met one, besides asking him where he's from or performing a genetic test?
And all it takes to accomplish the former is to LIE about it.Africa has LONG had outsiders in it, in case you didnt know that.
And as far as the latter, it could be best summed up in the words of Dr. Khallid Muhammad: "You dont get put into a pit of vipers, only to try and find out which one bites and which one doesnt... You get OUT of the PIT".
sir, under your jurisidiction, there almost wouldnt be single group on this Earth whom would qualify as "non-black" thus leaving us open for outsiders.
So the end answer is... you simply couldnt... and therein lies the flaw of what you are propogating.
Through re-defining of blackness, there simply IS no criterion for determining whose black and who aint aside from elaborate genetic tests.
Hell, through your method of science we wont be able to tell who's who at the end of the day.
anybody could just come in and infiltrate us.
Posts: 51 | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gigantic: ^^Okay, I can agree with that. Black is their trojan horse they use to claim non black, people of color.
I can agree with that also.
but if you look at this thread, you will CLEARLY see that the direction I am coming from is the DIRECT opposite.
While the Afrocentrics ENJOY claiming EVERYONE-- I dont. I cant stand non-black people of color due to how over the years they have constantly BENT over backwarsds to appease white people even at the denigration of both THEMSELVES and BLACKS. Matter of fact, I cant even stomach the degenerate people of my own race, nevertheless from OTHERS knowing how they feel about us.
Matter of fact-- the direction of this thread is more towards in actually scrutinizing those claims.
Posts: 51 | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think true African scholars need to avoid the label "Afrocentrist" like it's the plague. They must be proactive at distancing themselves from it. African centrism has been hijacked by radical, black nationalist zealots.
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: Dude you are 100% right, the Afrocentrics will use black to lay claim to Indians, Asians, Chinese Rome, etc when it suits them then will fight Blackness when the white man uses it to claim Negro=black. Just look at Mike's Website in one breath he claims there is no true negro and that the white man's B.S then in the same breath say "Equitorial Africans" are pure Blacks and the Pics he uese has "True Negros" in it..LOL.
Dude don't you see now how dysfunctional now Afrocentrism is. Its not about Africa, Egypt or Black people setting up an all black nation(LOOOL These afrocentrics DONT WANT THAT SH#T..LOL..They Loove Living off the White man and Blaming him)... its about an inferiority complex brought on by the fact that the White man Colonized, defeated and set up shop in Africa, enslaved Africans, and literally and figuratively owned Africans, now its just a gut reaction.
Their whole purpose s to lay claim to all of Whitey's culture and Empires, what better way than to get revenge on the white man than to claim he Enslaved, Raped, and Destroyed Africa in one breath and claim in the same breath the Driving force behind European Culture and Architecture, and Weaponery that allowed him to defeat, Rape, and destroy Africans was given to him by Africans.
posted
Keita is a scientist he doesn't want to get into direct politics of race arguments. As far as the question did light skinned people, like some Berbers (not all I said some) originate in Africa he says he doesn't know but it's possible. It is possible because of sexual selection. Even in Egypt walls the women ideal is significantly lighter in many cases. I'm not saying this is wrong or right but Keita does not make definite conclusions in this area and that is just being smart.
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gigantic: ^The problem is you are implying Blacks have variations and that is not true. While Africa has variations in phoenotype, that does not mean black does. Black is just one variation in Africa. So, Blackness is not subjective.
I agree with this quote, but not at the extent that blackness doesnt have variations.
I believe there are lots of variations with us as a black people. Hell, we see it all the time around us in america. however, the ppl in JARI'S photo? Nuh-UH... they've got to go.
Native Africans? Yes
The original Africans (blacks)? No way in hell.
the AE's whom called themselves a black ppl definitely saw WHO was WHO back then, and none of these circus freak side-show islamic turban-wearing half strains were considered.
Posts: 51 | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: Keita is a scientist he doesn't want to get into direct politics of race arguments. As far as the question did light skinned people, like some Berbers (not all I said some) originate in Africa he says he doesn't know but it's possible. It is possible because of sexual selection. Even in Egypt walls the women ideal is significantly lighter in many cases. I'm not saying this is wrong or right but Keita does not make definite conclusions in this area and that is just being smart.
That was symbolism.
Yellow was a sign a submission.
Later on they were colored their natural brown skin tone though.
Just like red was a sign that they painted on themselves to otherwise show them as not to be confused with the Nubians.
And I can respect Keita for that. but we need someone to take it further than he is.
whenever clowns like Salsassin can use his work and start quoting him magnanimously instead of trying to hide the info like the grandfathers and grandmothers have been doing for ALL of these years--- then something signals to me that dr. Keita hasnt yet HIT the mark yet that will make the WHITE WORLD quiver in its boots.
Posts: 51 | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: Keita is a scientist he doesn't want to get into direct politics of race arguments. As far as the question did light skinned people, like some Berbers (not all I said some) originate in Africa he says he doesn't know but it's possible
Evergreen Writes:
Most of the variation in skin color can be explained through genetic markers such as SLC45A2 and OCA2. Is there any evidence of Berber specific variants of these genes? If not wouldn't the most parsimous explaination be recent admixture with Eurasians?
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: It is possible because of sexual selection. Even in Egypt walls the women ideal is significantly lighter in many cases.
Evergreen Writes: Mesolithic to predynastic Egyptian limb ratios are tropically adapted. Biological anthropologist C. Loring Brace equates tropical limbs with greater melanin. Are these literal or symbolic representations? Why or why not?
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
On the tomb walls many people look black but many others look like what you describe as half-arab How do you deal with this?
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's interesting, considering the fact that our greatest African historical grandmaster Dr. John Henrk clarke STILL used the term "them high-yellow nxggas" when referring to mulattos and their half-arab cousin strain.
Would J.H Clark claim the followin Ancient Egyptians as High Yellow Niggers??
Light Yellow skin was not considered non African until the European had us on the slave ship unless you can post the Pre-Colonial African word for "High Yellow Niggers"..
considering the pictures of the people you consider to be black (lighter skinned, straight to wavy hair, aquiline or even hooked noses, how would YOU know any difference if you met one, besides asking him where he's from or performing a genetic test?
and what do you know how do you know or not if those people I posted are MORE related to A. Egyptians and Africans THAN YOU..??
According to your eyeball logic Indians and aboriginals are pure Africans despite their feelings toward Africans.
So the end answer is... you simply couldnt... and therein lies the flaw of what you are propogating.
Neither can you..
Through re-defining of blackness, there simply IS no criterion for determining whose black and who aint aside from elaborate genetic tests.
and sccording to genetic Test the people I posted represent A. Egyptians and African people.
Hell, through your method of science we wont be able to tell who's who at the end of the day.
...sad day for you, cry me a river. Get over it, the Earth aint flat, the universe is Heliocentric and Race is a social construct.
anybody could just come in and infiltrate us. ^^^^ One of the most stupid statements if have read.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
On the tomb walls many people look black but many others look like what you describe as half-arab How do you deal with this?
Evergreen Writes: Given AE history would you expect the elite to be more hetergenous than typical common Egyptians? Why or why not?
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by theDoctor: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Just call me Jari: [QB]
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Just call me Jari: [QB] Enemies of Black people, Doc's world..
funny how you took the quote OUT of its origi9nal sentence.
I mentioned skin shade as well as HAIR.
Sara Suten Seti clearly has the latter.
LOL, I did NOT take your quote out of context, the boy has Curly hair like Seti, I can bet if that boy grew his hair out it would be Afro-like texture...Ive seen Red Bone Mulattos who look more White than him with afrotexture and when cut their hair looks just like his... and Light Skin like Seti but I doubt you will tell Seti to his face he is an infiltration on blacks and a Enemy our forefathers would have spotted eaisily...I mean what wrong is seti no "High Yellow"..lol..
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by theDoctor: but not at the extent that blackness doesnt have variations.
I did not explain myself well. You are correct, "black" pheonotype has intra-variations. Those variations are but one set in Africa. Certainly one cannot include the N.African variation in the variations of black phenotype. This is what I meant.
Posts: 2025 | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
On the tomb walls many people look black but many others look like what you describe as half-arab How do you deal with this?
Hmmm... it seems like it's the case of a little something known as "paint fading" and "chipping, my Dear Lioness.
ya'know.. a little something, drawings, and paintings do after a little while, when they begin to "ERODE" when they get older and arent well-preserved.
not to mention the man's face-- like a lot of the AE paintings-- is from the SIDE, clearly NOT showing us the FULL profile of his FACE.
quote:Originally posted by Evergreen: Originally posted by lioness
On the tomb walls many people look black but many others look like what you describe as half-arab How do you deal with this? [/qb]
Evergreen Writes: Given AE history would you expect the elite to be more hetergenous than typical common Egyptians? Why or why not? [/QB][/QUOTE]
Thutmose III, for instance, is reported to have returned from a campaign in Canaan with almost 90,000 prisoners. Given the small size of armies usually numbering in the thousands rather than tens of thousands of soldiers, most of these prisoners must have been civilians.
Amenhotep III ordered forty girls from Milkilu, a Canaanite prince, paying 40 kit of silver for each:
"Behold, I have sent you Hanya, the commissioner of the archers, with merchandise in order to have beautiful concubines, i.e. weavers; silver, gold, garments, turquoises, all sorts of precious stones, chairs of ebony, as well as all good things, worth 160 deben. In total: forty concubines - the price of every concubine is forty of silver. Therefore, send very beautiful concubines without blemish."
The Hyksos were an Asiatic people who took over the eastern Nile Delta for about 100 years in the Twelfth dynasty of Egypt, initiating the Second Intermediate Period of Ancient Egypt.
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Would J.H Clark claim the followin Ancient Egyptians as High Yellow Niggers??
Light Yellow skin was not considered non African until the European had us on the slave ship unless you can post the Pre-Colonial African word for "High Yellow Niggers"..
The paint on those is fading away and or chipping.
and one or two pics of light-skin ppl dont equate to the whole populations of them back in the day. Like the modern ones we see today in those areas.
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari:
and what do you know how do you know or not if those people I posted are MORE related to A. Egyptians and Africans THAN YOU..??
Simply by looking at the earlier paintings AE's erected of themselves in comparisons to those whom reside there today.
do you not believe in "DOBC" by dr. Chancellor williams or do you dismiss it as mere psuedo-science?
the AE's look more like us than they do those collage of pics you've got at the top there.
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: According to your eyeball logic Indians and aboriginals are pure Africans despite their feelings toward Africans.
No. That is according to YOUR logic-- in which you dont have a criterion set on as to determine who is "black" and who aint.
I would know who is who on the assumption that Indians do vary somewhat in their looks from Blacks.
This has worked for years in us distinguishing between whom is obviously an indian and who isnt, despite genetic testing.
And it never has failed.
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: and sccording to genetic Test the people I posted represent A. Egyptians and African people.
Yes.. for now... until we can get someone better than Keita to emerge into the field.
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: ...sad day for you, cry me a river. Get over it, the Earth aint flat, the universe is Heliocentric and Race is a social construct.
Make sure you tell that to the whites and other various races whom are on the March against black society as they have been for the past 3000 years.
real easy to say tht to black folks-- but how do you manage in front of the enemy?
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: ^^^^ One of the most stupid statements if have read.
How?
Maybe if you stop chopping my sentences up into non-coherent pieces of verbage then it would make better sense to you.
You have accepted everything from STRAIGHT hair, to HOOKED noses, to excessively LIGHTER skin as all that should be re-considered as "BLACK"-- then the question is.. with that type of criteria then who the hell else is LEFT in the world that ISNT included in that group?
Indians fit the category all the way up to the darkest Swarthiest whites.
By accepting this ridiculous racial standard you are opening us up to an attack from those outside of us, by having us accept standards that are indicative of slmost the WHOLE HUMAN population, not us as a black people.
all the "human race" crap in the world wont prepare us for the destruction THIS will have on the community.
Posts: 51 | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by theDoctor: ell, we see it all the time around us in america.
While I agree Blacks do have variations but I would not use New World Blacks as an example of this. NWB are an admixture.
quote: the AE's whom called themselves a black ppl
The word "Khem" has nothing to do with skin color. It has to do with the silt deposit; soil. They called themselves after the land.
quote: definitely saw WHO was WHO back then, and none of these circus freak side-show islamic turban-wearing half strains were considered.
AEians depicted themselves tawny complected, on average. Do you dispute this?
1.) well according to Dr. Keita-- AA's have no more admixture in them population-wise than Somalis do.
Thus making them a population whose looks do not really come are are affected from admixture.
Dont shoot the messenger. this is just one of the many "claims" spouted in this forum.
2.) this is the argument, Eurocentrics have tried to use, until the EA budge came out with his hieroglyphic dictionary clearly debunking tht: KEMET
A comprehensive list of the structure and usages of perhaps the most significant word in the Ancient Egyptian language. All of these words can be found in "An Egyptian Hieroglyphic Dictionary" by E. A. Wallis Budge, Dover, NY
Used as an adjective
kem;kemem;kemom - black kemu - black (m) keme.t - black (f) hime.t keme.t - "black woman" (woman of Black) himu.t keme.t - "black women" (women of Black)
Used as a noun
keme.t - any black person, place, or thing
A determinative is then used to be more specific:
keme.t (woman)- "the Black woman"; ie,'divine woman' keme.t (cow)- "a Black cow" - ie, a 'sacred cow' Keme.t (nation)- "the Black nation"
kem - a black one (m) keme.t - a black one (f) kemu - black ones (m) kemu.t - black ones (f) kemeti - two black ones
Used for Nationality
Sa Kemet - a man of Black (an Egyptian male) Sa.t Kemet - a woman of Black (an Egyptian female) Rome.t Kemet - the people of Black (Egyptians) Kemetou - Blacks (ie,'citizens') Kememou - Black people (of the Black nation)
Other usages
Sa Kem - "Black man", a god, and son of Sa.t Kem.t - "Black woman", a goddess (page 589b) kem (papyrus)- to end, complete kem.t (papyrus)- the end, completion kemi - finished products kem khet (stick)- jet black ... kemwer - any Egyptian person, place or thing ('to be black'+'to be great')
Kemwer - "The Great Black" - a title of Osiris - the Ancestor of the race
Kemwer (body of water)- "the Great Black sea" - the Red sea Kemwer (body of water + river bank)- a lake in the Duat (the OtherWorld) Kemwer Nteri - "the sacred great Black bulls" kemwer (fortress)- a fort or town Kemwer (water)- the god of the great Black lake
Kem Amut - a black animal goddess Kemi.t-Weri.t - "the great Black woman", a goddess Kem-Neb-Mesen.t - a lion god Kem ho - "black face", a title of the crocodile Rerek kem; kemu (shield)- buckler, shield kem (wood)- black wood kem.t (stone)- black stone or powder kem.tt (plant)- a plant kemu (seed)- seeds or fruit of the kem plant kemti - "black image", sacred image or statue
Which of course the Europeans responded by making a Time magazine article dedicated to highlihgting some of the "few" black "Nubian kings" "here and there" that "once were in Egypt" for a "SHORT time period". lol
3.) Funny because in earlier depictions they showed themselves as darker and virtually no similar than their other African counterparts.
Thus the frequent use for the color red which was what they used as the only way it could be possible to distinguish between themselves and the Nubians when painting each other in close proximity.
such was the affinity between them and other black groups. the AE's KNEW who they were. the Arabs and whites didnt chop and disfigure the faces of the statues for no reason now.
Posts: 51 | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Doctor, if you see a painting that is not dark enough you say the paint is faded. How do you know it's faded?
look at this man he's quite dark:
but I didn't even post Ramesses show he's darker than Malcom and Malcom is lighter than the boy I posted. I posted Ramesses to show what you see in a lot of Egyptian art, people with so called "delicate" features, small noses and lips, people you would call non-African or mixed. Who's to say this wasn't the case in ancient times? Wasn't it you who said race mixing was our downfall?
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
The paint on those is fading away and or chipping.
Does'nt matter the Features speak for themselves, according to your logic they are less Africa or High yellow Niggers(slave mentality)...Also the Papyrus IS NOT, I repeat IS NOT Faded and I can post Variation in the Papryus are if you really want to go there.
and one or two pics of light-skin ppl dont equate to the whole populations of them back in the day. Like the modern ones we see today in those areas.
Trust me my dude I can post Hudreds of Egyptian Art with Straight Haired, Bearded, and Light skin if you really want to go there...LOL.
Simply by looking at the earlier paintings AE's erected of themselves in comparisons to those whom reside there today.
do you not believe in "DOBC" by dr. Chancellor williams or do you dismiss it as mere psuedo-science?
What is DOBC, explain.
the AE's look more like us than they do those collage of pics you've got at the top there.
Im not into Eyeball Antropology but in my opinion Egyptians look like Afro-Latino populations like Cubans, Puerto Ricans, Dominicans, etc, while African Americans resemble Norther Sudanese "Nubians"..
No. That is according to YOUR logic-- in which you dont have a criterion set on as to determine who is "black" and who aint.
I would know who is who on the assumption that Indians do vary somewhat in their looks from Blacks.
This has worked for years in us distinguishing between whom is obviously an indian and who isnt, despite genetic testing.
And it never has failed.
No I don't claim Indians, everyone I claim is African and those Egyptians probably have more Genetics to A. Egyptians and more African blood than many African Americans.
Yes.. for now... until we can get someone better than Keita to emerge into the field.
Genetics is destroying Racialists, and any genetic Racialists that will get in "The feild" will claim A. Egyptians are not black.
Make sure you tell that to the whites and other various races whom are on the March against black society as they have been for the past 3000 years.
real easy to say tht to black folks-- but how do you manage in front of the enemy?
LOL, I guess you are too new to see my conversations with Skeptic..lol. As I said Genetics is the Nail in the Coffin of race..Cry me a river.
How?
Maybe if you stop chopping my sentences up into non-coherent pieces of verbage then it would make better sense to you.
You sound confused..
You have accepted everything from STRAIGHT hair, to HOOKED noses, to excessively LIGHTER skin as all that should be re-considered as "BLACK"-- then the question is.. with that type of criteria then who the hell else is LEFT in the world that ISNT included in that group?
So has Dana Marnich-Arabs
Mike-Arabs, Indians, Dravidians, Greeks, Persians etc.
Et. al.
as a matter of fact the Afrocentrics here will claim the East Africans who display straight hair and "Hooked" and Straight Noses respresent African Variety..LOL..
Difference is I don't claim Indians or Swathy Whites. who are culturally and linguistically different from Africans.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
everyone of those pictures EXCEPT the second one can closely resemble thee straightness of Malcolm's nose. some of the bridges arent anywhere near as flat as his.
but then again-- it isnt like Malcolm is the quintessential prototypical nose type (as weird and rather strange as his is) for defining black people across the world either.
I just used Malcolm x as an example because that was who TheLioness was trying to draw comparisons between.
Posts: 51 | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
everyone of those pictures EXCEPT the second one can closely resemble thee straightness of Malcolm's nose. some of the bridges arent anywhere near as flat as his.
but then again-- it isnt like Malcolm is the quintessential prototypical nose type (as weird and rather strange as his is) for defining black people across the world either.
I just used Malcolm x as an example because that was who TheLioness was trying to draw comparisons between.
^^^ The Lioness is spinning Webs around you and you don't even realize it, You want to claim what you want to claim when it suits you. The A. Egypt Pics show "Delicate Noses" as opposed to Malcolm's large Nose and their lips are not as thick.
The Lioness is playing you at your own game except its not the results you want.
besides Malcolm was a Light Skinned High Yello Nigger to your logic..no wonder he fits the A. Egyptians so well.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: Doctor, if you see a painting that is not dark enough you say the paint is faded. How do you know it's faded?
How do I KNOw whether or not the PAINT is faded?
Ma'am... look at the vegetation in the background, and the piece of green pottery up under it.
DOES this mean that the plants and pottery of back then were LITERALLY a PASTEL almost even dirty brown color that the AE's so eagerly wanted to authenticate?
No... the paint is fading thus the reason why you can see the background color of the wall showing THROUGH it.
What the painting of THOSe items is going through we can almost clearly be certain that the skin color of the man would be going through the same after thousands of years.
Lets get real now...
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: look at this man he's quite dark:
but I didn't even post Ramesses show he's darker than Malcom and Malcom is lighter than the boy I posted. I posted Ramesses to show what you see in a lot of Egyptian art, people with so called "delicate" features, small noses and lips, people you would call non-African or mixed. Who's to say this wasn't the case in ancient times? Wasn't it you who said race mixing was our downfall?
1.)I never said black people COULDNT have "small noses or lips".
and it still doesnt nullify my argument that that painting of the pharoah with his NOSE to the side does nothing in contradicting my point nor bolstering yours.
anyone with a side profile can be made out to have a STRAIGHT nose.
2.) If you look throughout this thread, you will see that I never had a problem with identifying those in Jari's pics as mixed-race. Matter of fact-- OVER and OVER again throughout this thread I referred to the as "half-arab strains" and "mulattoes". Bi-racials? Yes. Original Blacks? No.
that's ALL my proclamation has been about in this thread.
My dear, Lioness-- you are getting confused here.
Posts: 51 | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by theDoctor: If you look throughout this thread, you will see that I never had a problem with identifying those in Jari's pics as mixed-race. Matter of fact-- OVER and OVER again throughout this thread I referred to the as "half-arab strains" and "mulattoes". Bi-racials? Yes. Original Blacks? No.
that's ALL my proclamation has been about in this thread.
My dear, Lioness-- you are getting confused here. [/QB]
the thing is there is no way of knowing that the ancient Egyptians did not have mulattoes or people that are a natural half black or less transition in addition to fully African types. Many pre-Isamic Arabs represent this type and ancient Egyptians may have looked exactly like them as much of the art represents. But when similar types are shown in modern day people you have a problem.
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: No I don't claim Indians, everyone I claim is African and those Egyptians probably have more Genetics to A. Egyptians and more African blood than many African Americans.
1.) Never said you speicifically "claimed Indians" but the criterion you have set up is ripe and ready for those whom resemble them and call themselves "African".
2.) AA's dont have that much admixture according to Keita. Not much more en-masse-wise than say, the somalis. whom are known to have not mixed anywhere near the number in comparison to their other North-east African counterparts.
so what you are saying about them in those pictures possibly being more pure than we are isnt adding up.
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: LOL, I guess you are too new to see my conversations with Skeptic..lol. As I said Genetics is the Nail in the Coffin of race..Cry me a river.
We thought the same about MLK's I have a Dream Speech and his no-violence, peace marches too...
well.. we all know where THAT ended up. LOL
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: You have accepted everything from STRAIGHT hair, to HOOKED noses, to excessively LIGHTER skin as all that should be re-considered as "BLACK"-- then the question is.. with that type of criteria then who the hell else is LEFT in the world that ISNT included in that group?
So has Dana Marnich-Arabs
Mike-Arabs, Indians, Dravidians, Greeks, Persians etc.
Et. al.
as a matter of fact the Afrocentrics here will claim the East Africans who display straight hair and "Hooked" and Straight Noses respresent African Variety..LOL..
Difference is I don't claim Indians or Swathy Whites. who are culturally and linguistically different from Africans.
1.) Yeah-- you seem to have a hard time separating MY specific statements away from the type-cast idiocty that has come to define "Afrocentric" of today running around on this forum.
Afrocentrics claim and embrace all. I scrutinize all.
2.) Isnt the latest hypothesis that Indians share a lot of the same identical culture customs and foods of somalis and Northern Ethiopians more so than they do with any other group in Africa?
This is exactly where all this "human race" crap leads us. Right outside of Africa RIGHT into holding hands and trying to find the "cultural similarities" with our enemies, making us view each other as "friends". *yuck*
Posts: 51 | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
everyone of those pictures EXCEPT the second one can closely resemble thee straightness of Malcolm's nose. some of the bridges arent anywhere near as flat as his.
but then again-- it isnt like Malcolm is the quintessential prototypical nose type (as weird and rather strange as his is) for defining black people across the world either.
I just used Malcolm x as an example because that was who TheLioness was trying to draw comparisons between.
^^^ The Lioness is spinning Webs around you and you don't even realize it, You want to claim what you want to claim when it suits you. The A. Egypt Pics show "Delicate Noses" as opposed to Malcolm's large Nose and their lips are not as thick.
The Lioness is playing you at your own game except its not the results you want.
besides Malcolm was a Light Skinned High Yello Nigger to your logic..no wonder he fits the A. Egyptians so well.
1.) Are you serious dude?
Malcolm's nose is no different than that of the third pic posted, and his lips (or the LITTLE that we can see of them) no BIGGER than almost every photo in the series!
2.) The term brought up about "high yellow nxgga" in use by Dr. clarke was to nullify the claim of yours being that such a mentality of associating "mulatto-ness" with yellow or light skin as nothing but a slave plantation myth.
Yet-- I asked you that if this were true. Then why did the ancestors regularly use this term when describing their would-be mulatto traitors in all of history?
JHC said told us about how the treachery of the mulatto was so destructive that in his last days he would try to dedicate a WHOLE BOOK just on this subject, but would have to FEAR for his life when published.
But I guess this was just "afrocentric" fairy dust he tried to wave in front of us due to his slave-like mindsets, despite the fact that he was one of the gretest and most accomplished teachers of Africa in the Disapora even up to this day.
quote:Originally posted by theDoctor: If you look throughout this thread, you will see that I never had a problem with identifying those in Jari's pics as mixed-race. Matter of fact-- OVER and OVER again throughout this thread I referred to the as "half-arab strains" and "mulattoes". Bi-racials? Yes. Original Blacks? No.
that's ALL my proclamation has been about in this thread.
My dear, Lioness-- you are getting confused here.
the thing is there is no way of knowing that the ancient Egyptians did not have mulattoes or people that are a natural half black or less transition in addition to fully African types. Many pre-Isamic Arabs represent this type and ancient Egyptians may have looked exactly like them as much of the art represents. But when similar types are shown in modern day people you have a problem. [/QB]
So you believe the modern day people who inherit the land of Egypt today are the same people whom originally found and built this place?
A bit off-track question and I mean this in no offense but...
Someone told me that you are a quadroon, lioness...
is that true?
is that your picture up above in your avi?
Posts: 51 | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Morpheus: What does any of this have to do with Keita?
Thank you.Lol!
I don't think people that are trying to be academic are also trying to be nationalists. Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gigantic: ^^Okay, I can agree with that. Black is their trojan horse they use to claim non black, people of color.
Dude you are 100% right, the Afrocentrics will use black to lay claim to Indians, Asians, Chinese Rome, etc when it suits them then will fight Blackness when the white man uses it to claim Negro=black. Just look at Mike's Website in one breath he claims there is no true negro and that the white man's B.S then in the same breath say "Equitorial Africans" are pure Blacks and the Pics he uese has "True Negros" in it..LOL.
Dude don't you see now how dysfunctional now Afrocentrism is. Its not about Africa, Egypt or Black people setting up an all black nation(LOOOL These afrocentrics DONT WANT THAT SH#T..LOL..They Loove Living off the White man and Blaming him)... its about an inferiority complex brought on by the fact that the White man Colonized, defeated and set up shop in Africa, enslaved Africans, and literally and figuratively owned Africans, now its just a gut reaction.
Their whole purpose s to lay claim to all of Whitey's culture and Empires, what better way than to get revenge on the white man than to claim he Enslaved, Raped, and Destroyed Africa in one breath and claim in the same breath the Driving force behind European Culture and Architecture, and Weaponery that allowed him to defeat, Rape, and destroy Africans was given to him by Africans.
It cover's their inforority complex 100%...
Don't blame "Afrocentrism" for Afronuttisms.LOL! Its people on this forum and the Neo Nazisms that have started confusing Afrocentric people - which can be a person of any color interested in African things and history with - nationalist NUTS! Nationalism should never be confused with learning history and appreciating culture. Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
The point has never been has heir been fair skin people in Egypt. That goes with out saying. Particularly in the North where they had been trickling in since the Old Kingdom and oOf course waves came in later from teh Middle East.
The point is where did this culture and the bulk of its people come from where did the bulk of neolithic civilization, the pyramid builders the builders of megaliths around the world originate. There is a black African culture that permeated all early civilization. Any civilized person that has studied the ancient world culture and forensics of the ancient world knows this. It has nothing to do with nationalism or Africanity in the Afronut sense.
The best scholars to learn about the black African culture that led to the early civilizations of complex culture in Africa are European scholars and its influence around the world Christopher Ehret, Dr. Van Sertima, Martin Bernal, Diop, Leo Hansberry, Dorothy Dunjee etc., not Mikey and Ironlion and not people that think African people and culture stopped dead at the edge of the Atlantic ocean adn Eritrean Sea.
Both are two extremes of nonsense.
-------------------- D. Reynolds-Marniche Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: the thing is there is no way of knowing that the ancient Egyptians did not have mulattoes or people that are a natural half black or less transition in addition to fully African types. Many pre-Isamic Arabs represent this type and ancient Egyptians may have looked exactly like them as much of the art represents. But when similar types are shown in modern day people you have a problem.
Ya Lioness, I see EXACTLY what you mean.
Arab Bronze 715 B.C.
Damn girl, you're just pulling this sh1t out of your ass, aren't you?
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Just call me Jari: The paint on those is fading away and or chipping.
Does'nt matter the Features speak for themselves, according to your logic they are less Africa or High yellow Niggers(slave mentality)...Also the Papyrus IS NOT, I repeat IS NOT Faded and I can post Variation in the Papryus are if you really want to go there.
and one or two pics of light-skin ppl dont equate to the whole populations of them back in the day. Like the modern ones we see today in those areas.
Trust me my dude I can post Hudreds of Egyptian Art with Straight Haired, Bearded, and Light skin if you really want to go there...LOL.
Simply by looking at the earlier paintings AE's erected of themselves in comparisons to those whom reside there today.
do you not believe in "DOBC" by dr. Chancellor williams or do you dismiss it as mere psuedo-science?
What is DOBC, explain.
the AE's look more like us than they do those collage of pics you've got at the top there.
Im not into Eyeball Antropology but in my opinion Egyptians look like Afro-Latino populations like Cubans, Puerto Ricans, Dominicans, etc, while African Americans resemble Norther Sudanese "Nubians"..
No. That is according to YOUR logic-- in which you dont have a criterion set on as to determine who is "black" and who aint.
I would know who is who on the assumption that Indians do vary somewhat in their looks from Blacks.
This has worked for years in us distinguishing between whom is obviously an indian and who isnt, despite genetic testing.
And it never has failed.
No I don't claim Indians, everyone I claim is African and those Egyptians probably have more Genetics to A. Egyptians and more African blood than many African Americans.
Yes.. for now... until we can get someone better than Keita to emerge into the field.
Genetics is destroying Racialists, and any genetic Racialists that will get in "The feild" will claim A. Egyptians are not black.
Make sure you tell that to the whites and other various races whom are on the March against black society as they have been for the past 3000 years.
real easy to say tht to black folks-- but how do you manage in front of the enemy?
LOL, I guess you are too new to see my conversations with Skeptic..lol. As I said Genetics is the Nail in the Coffin of race..Cry me a river.
How?
Maybe if you stop chopping my sentences up into non-coherent pieces of verbage then it would make better sense to you.
You sound confused..
You have accepted everything from STRAIGHT hair, to HOOKED noses, to excessively LIGHTER skin as all that should be re-considered as "BLACK"-- then the question is.. with that type of criteria then who the hell else is LEFT in the world that ISNT included in that group?
So has Dana Marnich-Arabs
Mike-Arabs, Indians, Dravidians, Greeks, Persians etc.
Et. al.
as a matter of fact the Afrocentrics here will claim the East Africans who display straight hair and "Hooked" and Straight Noses respresent African Variety..LOL..
Difference is I don't claim Indians or Swathy Whites. who are culturally and linguistically different from Africans.
Why did you mention me as claiming people with straight hair as Arabs were black. I am not lioness, the Africans that were in Arabia are black - period - an extension of African peoples from the continent!
I never said modern Arabs and ancient Africans in Arabia were the same people. That is some kind of psychological block that people have to not believe that ancient Arabs of Mohammed's time were indistinguishable from people of the Horn and Nubia. That is your problem. Don't distort history because you can't conceive of the world the way it was.
I only said it is the Africans in the Arabian peninsula who were the people first called Arabs, who called themselves the blacks nd the only people there for thousand of years since their movement in the Bronze and neolithic ages - and that the dark skinned Arabs there today are their least modified descendants.
All of what I have said is not based on nationalism, nor Afrocentric or black centric just indisputable fact which u black and white nationalists and mixophobes have distorted. Politics and history do not mix!
The fact also is that the original populations of many of the regions u mentioned were occupied by black people of African affiliation until certain groups replaced them in the historical period. Mike and Lioness might have confused matters and made this harder to understand by claiming modern peoples there are black or were no different then previous ones. But don't confuse THEM with ME!
Lastly modern Egyptians DO LOOK LIKE AFRO LATINOS AND CUBANS ETC. But don't confuse them with ancient ones who looked for the most part looked like the Eritraeans, Beja, Ethiopians, Djiboutans and Puntlanders peoples whose skeletons theirs are INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM!
I'm sorry but the above people in the Arabian peninsula are black whether you like it or not Jari, and have had their African ways since the Neolithic.
posted
Why did you mention me as claiming people with straight hair as Arabs were black. I am not lioness, the Africans that were in Arabia are black - period - an extension of African peoples from the continent!
I never said modern Arabs and ancient Africans in Arabia were the same people. That is some kind of psychological block that people have to not believe that ancient Arabs of Mohammed's time were indistinguishable from people of the Horn and Nubia. That is your problem. Don't distort history because you can't conceive of the world the way it was.
I only said it is the Africans in the Arabian peninsula who were the people first called Arabs, who called themselves the blacks nd the only people there for thousand of years since their movement in the Bronze and neolithic ages - and that the dark skinned Arabs there today are their least modified descendants.
All of what I have said is not based on nationalism, nor Afrocentric or black centric just indisputable fact which u black and white nationalists and mixophobes have distorted. Politics and history do not mix!
The fact also is that the original populations of many of the regions u mentioned were occupied by black people of African affiliation until certain groups replaced them in the historical period. Mike and Lioness might have confused matters and made this harder to understand by claiming modern peoples there are black or were no different then previous ones. But don't confuse THEM with ME!
Lastly modern Egyptians DO LOOK LIKE AFRO LATINOS AND CUBANS ETC. But don't confuse them with ancient ones who looked for the most part looked like the Eritraeans, Beja, Ethiopians, Djiboutans and Puntlanders peoples whose skeletons theirs are INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM!
I'm sorry but the above people in the Arabian peninsula are black whether you like it or not Jari, and have had their African ways since the Neolithic.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
________________________ 
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic