posted
^ Not according to Pat! The good 'professor' won't be satisfied until we provide actual full-color photographs of the Moors! To him, not even full detailed descriptions and accounts or even painted portraits of the Moorish conquerors by the native (white) Europeans are good enough for historical data! Until then, he will just keep clinging to his whiskey induced dream of Arab Moors and Almoravids! LOLPosts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually, The Patriot is simply regurgitating and defending certain segments of majority scholarship on the subject. Most books on the Moorish period of Spain go to great lengths to create a fake distinction between Berbers as a "race" or ethnic group separate from other Africans, especially black Africans. In this scheme of histrionics, Berbers can be an ethnic group, culture and identity that has nothing to do with most Africans, who are black, almost as if it is a prerequisite for being Berber. With such a foundation of pseudo historical distinctions between Berbers as Africans solely North of the Sahara, then they can present all sorts of other distinctions between the Africans in the Sahara and those to the South, with "negroes" or African blacks always broken out as a separate group and lumped together as one. So it only makes sense that he would defend such histrionics because in the Eurocentric mind they are the only ones qualified to tell history and of course they never lie or distort the truth.
So for someone to go outside the frame of distortion and dig for the truth on their own of course represents a threat to the establishment and the distortions it is built on.
One good example of this is the Sufi musical brotherhoods of Morocco. Almost all of them are based on a strong black African influence from instruments to styles of playing and most importantly a spiritual or trance element. Such elements are most definitely not part of the Islamic orthodoxy and more often resembles the Creole Gumbo of New Orleans in terms of African Vodun traditions mixed with more classical elements from the U.S. If you look up Moroccan brotherhoods they are all based around the same thing: music and trance as a form of therapy. I don't know what distinguishes them but they are all quite African in my book, especially given that you find such traditions from the tip of Tunisia all the way to South Africa among black African groups.
But of the three groups, it is the Gnawa that seems to be most associated with black Africans, even though the rest are as much influenced by Black Africa as the Ghawa, but they all also have Persian and other influences as well.
These traditions seem to be more along the lines of the 'hidden' animist tendencies that have gone underground and are considered black magic or witchcraft by some.
In some of these you can here the echoes of the horn marches of New Orleans.
Posts: 8890 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Doug wrote: ---------------------------------- So it only makes sense that he would defend such histrionics because in the Eurocentric mind they are the only ones qualified to tell history and of course they never lie or distort the truth. ----------------------------------
Doug, I hate to tell you, but this Djehuti psycho believes the same eurocentric historians. Djehuti has made more virulent racist commentary about Africans than anyone who has been here. Most of it based on those same eurocentric historians you have angst with.
Folks reading this have seen me call him out on his evil, wretched racialistic dogma on several occasions.
How Djehuti's life has devolved to this point is a mystery.
Posts: 3085 | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote: Point blank, many Moroccans and other Northern Africans are simply light skinned Africans, most likely due to interaction with European, Levantine and Arabian populations.
Doug why would they have to be mixed to have so called "light" skin?
Are you saying that Africans only have so called "dark" skin?
Is that why you are always using the Eurocentric phrase "black" African?
What is "light" skin? What is "dark" skin?
By your own words if a Nigerian, Congolese, Ethiopian, Kenyan, Tanzanian, Chadian, Eritrean, Burkino Fasian, Malawain, etc is so called "light" skin they are mixed.
Isn't this the same pseudoscience used by Eurocentrics for the purpose of culture theft?
Why are you repeating their lunacy?
Posts: 3085 | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
i am sure that this fourm went covered this already. but bere with me,the Fulani and the Berbers are they related?
Posts: 6546 | From: japan | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Doug explain to us all what exactly do you mean by "mixture".
How many people does it take for mixture to take place? How many people took part in this "mixture"?
Aren't you doing what the race loon site idiots do, which is to use "mixture" to explain away people whose look threatens your junk science racial beliefs?
Are the Japanese and Koreans mixed because American soldiers have gotten some of their women pregnant?
Posts: 3085 | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ackee: i am sure that this fourm went covered this already. but bere with me,the Fulani and the Berbers are they related?
I am not sure what you mean by related. Berber is a language and the Fulani are an ethnic group. Some Tuaregs are very close to the Fulani in many ways.
Posts: 8890 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
i ment both. ok you said some Tuaregs;i was just wondering, because in the pic above they are hanging out together. btw you touch upon the moorish non-Islamic side of their religion, i know you are buesy with this thread,but you might want to check out my thread moors,magic and witchcraft,you may find usefull,also we can broach the question of the goat of Mendes cult of lower kemet. Posts: 6546 | From: japan | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Doug, its interesting to see how once again you run like a transvestite to the hair salon on a Friday when someone calls you out for your Eurocentric beliefs.
Posts: 3085 | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ackee: i ment both. ok you said some Tuaregs;i was just wondering, because in the pic above they are hanging out together. btw you touch upon the moorish non-Islamic side of their religion, i know you are buesy with this thread,but you might want to check out my thread moors,magic and witchcraft,you may find usefull,also we can broach the question of the goat of Mendes cult of lower kemet.
You mean both of what? In some parts of Niger and Mali the Tuareg are physically very close to the Fulani. They are also close culturally as being pastoral nomads. There are other ways of identifying relationships, but I am sure they are both genetically E3 carrying Africans.
Goat (animal) cults, fire cults and other sorts of "magical" traditions are all over Africa. That is one reason African traditional religion is called Animist. Such traditions are found among all human groups, but in more modern societies and cultures, especially those of the more modern religions, these practices are looked down on and therefore go underground. And then there are the groups in Europe who take bits and pieces of such traditions from all over the world and use it for their own traditions.
Posts: 8890 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Correct. What alot of people don't realize is even though many of these African groups are Muslim, they still maintain pre-Islamic traditions and the same is true for many Christian and Jewish Africans.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ok another reason i ask is because i half remember a passage from the book the Golden Age Of The Moors somehting about the Fulani resembling the ancient Libyans on Kemetian wall paintings,interms of dress body art and mode of life. example women being transported by an ox.
Posts: 6546 | From: japan | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
The original point that seems to have gotten lost is that people in and around the Netherlands still depict "Moors" as black Africans to this very day! Hence the black paint and curly wooly wigs. They don't depict them as "asian" or "eurasians".
No matter how ignorant and racist this customary thing is....it reveals some facts about the past.
Posts: 100 | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: what does thst hsve to do with history?
Hmm... What do centuries old traditional depictions by Europeans have to do with history, indeed?... Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanx Altakruri,Doug.you guys have the Golden Age Of The Moors, What do you think of the passage,i-am talking about?
Posts: 6546 | From: japan | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes the Fulani who wear the feathers and the long decorated tunics are said to be strongly remniscent of some of the ancient Libyans from Ancient Egyptian art. If I remember correctly some of these darker Libyans were found in various Egyptian dynasties and possibly even tuts tomb. However, most often the white Libyans often get most of the focus. There were 131 or so canes found in Tut's tomb and many had depictions of various foreigners. I think I remember seeing some darker Libyans on some of these. If not that then maybe it was from another tomb/time period.
Posts: 8890 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh so now the Libyans were black. How about the chinese Doug. Maybe if we land on Mars and find some little green men we will end up finding out they were really black africans. There is no end to silly stuff here. It is like a visit to a flat earth society meeting.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ You obviously weren't paying attention to what Doug just wrote, let alone the many past threads in which ancient Libyans were discussed!
Again, the few pictures of white Libyans such as the Meshwesh which tend to get the most focus by white-washed scholarship which is all YOU know, underscore the simple fact that the earliest Libyans were as indigenous Africans (just like the Egyptians) black people! All Egyptian paintings from the beginning of the dynastic period all the way to the Middle kingdom depict them as not much different in appearance from the Egyptians themselves-- dark brown in color i.e. 'black'. Even in later times during the Roman period, Libyan peoples such as the Garamantes were also called Negritai by the Romans!
So yes 'professor', scoff all you want at the idea of native blacks of Africa-- Libya is in Africa, remember? Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
When you start talking about white washed scholarship you leave the reservation of reality. This is simply an afrocentric ploy to justify making up myths and presenting them as history. Libya is in Africa Djehuti, but North Africa is not black and has never been in the historical period, including today.
This idea of evil European historians may play well on ES but it is a joke everywhere else.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
^ You obviously weren't paying attention to what Doug just wrote, let alone the many past threads in which ancient Libyans were discussed!
Again, the few pictures of white Libyans such as the Meshwesh which tend to get the most focus by white-washed scholarship which is all YOU know, underscore the simple fact that the earliest Libyans were as indigenous Africans (just like the Egyptians) black people! All Egyptian paintings from the beginning of the dynastic period all the way to the Middle kingdom depict them as not much different in appearance from the Egyptians themselves-- dark brown in color i.e. 'black'. Even in later times during the Roman period, Libyan peoples such as the Garamantes were also called Negritai by the Romans!
So yes 'professor', scoff all you want at the idea of native blacks of Africa-- Libya is in Africa, remember?
Do you have colored wall renderings of the Meshwesh?
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Have we checked with art historiands to find out what various colors designated in particular art or are we just coming up with answers we like? My guess is that we have no read an ounce of art history when dealing with ancient paintings.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: Oh so now the Libyans were black. How about the chinese Doug. Maybe if we land on Mars and find some little green men we will end up finding out they were really black africans. There is no end to silly stuff here. It is like a visit to a flat earth society meeting.
We are talking about ancient Libyans Mr. Patriot. Libyans in central and Southern Libya to this day are still black. Blacks have always been in Libya.
But we all know that for you the space ships landed a long time ago, especially if you believe black Africans are not the aboriginal people of North Africa. Black Africans are the aboriginal people of the earth period. You simply need to stop pretending otherwise.
posted
again you post modern pictures to back up an ancient point. Secondly the pictures you post do not look black african at all. You again DODGE the question with a meaningless insult. The question is Doug, do you do research through art historians before you come up with these wild ideas of ancient art? The answer is no. Doug, I am going to be right 99% of the time. You and I know you are not a reader, at least not a reader of anyone's history. Mostly what you do is repeat what you pick up on ES.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr Patriot, don't pretend to actually know what you are talking about. Blacks have always been in Libya. And you cannot disprove it via art historians. It requires genetic and skeletal data and analysis by anthropologists. The fact is that there are numerous anthropological studies that show that black Africans have always been in Libya. The modern portraits show that they are still there. And being that Libya is in Africa it only goes to show that the only people desperate to keep blacks out of North African history is the whites who know how important North Africa is to their history. There are black Africans in those photos Mr. Patriot. The fact that you don't like it and lie about it is not my problem.
Again, you are whining because you have nothing to support your claims that blacks are foreign to Libya or any other part of North Africa. Stop whining and actually cite some scholars for a change.
Posts: 8890 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
You guys are the ones who try to use art to prove your bizarre ideas Doug, not me. I simply said, when you use art do you vet your ideas through art historians or, as I think, you just make things up.
When your entire case is based on calling people who disagree with you frauds you have a weak case. You guys here on ES can cuddle up to each other on these wild ideas if you wish but it is going nowhere.
I did not see any blacks in those pictures. Having a dark complexion does not make one a negroid.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
There are three races in the world, nigrids are one of them. Every human being belongs to one of those groups.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: There are three races in the world, nigrids are one of them. Every human being belongs to one of those groups.
Perhaps you did not comprehend this well. I repeat...explain IN FULL DETAIL WHAT IS A NEGROID!?
Posts: 100 | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am not going into detail nomoreiles because that information is all over the web.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: I am not going into detail nomoreiles because that information is all over the web.
You get all your information from the web? You are either 12 or 65. There is no one definition to be found on the web or anywhere else. Some say there is no factual definition and no longer even use these archaic "oid" terms to describe groups of people.
Since you still want to use this term, I suggest you stay out of this thread until you can provide a definition of "negroid" you believe to be true, then be prepared to defend it with factual evidence...not whining. Next!
Posts: 100 | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Scientists often say the term is outdated and that may be true from the standpoint of their discpline. Practically, however, for most purposes it is still true. If you moved into my neighborhood doubtless the residents would understand the definition. I always found it interesting that people on this board claim there is no such thing as race and then spend their time talking about nothing but race.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: Scients often say the term is outdated and that may be true from the standpoint of their discpline. Practically, however, for most purposes it is still true. If you moved into my neighborhood doubtless the residents would understand the definition. I always found it interesting that people on this board claim there is no such thing as race and then spend their time talking about nothing but race.
To compare your neighborhood to different regions of the world, mainly on a VERY large continent that existed millions of years before your neighborhood is assanine at best. Even "practically", it still is NOT true.
As far as my own stance, I do not discredit the idea of race. It's just that people like you have a VERY shallow and elementary idea of it, especially when it comes to African people.
I really don't think you are a professor of any kind.
Posts: 100 | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Of course he isn't. He is simply a mouthpiece for white supremacy. White supremacy is based on a racialist paradigm which breaks the world up into "races" which are purely a construct of white pseudo science and serves to put the white "race" on top of all others. White supremacy does not care about the facts of biology and the fact that whites did not exist 40,000 years ago to begin with. They only care about control of institutions and being able to force their lies and world view into the brains of others. It isn't about facts or evidence it is about whites being the supreme authority over history and anthropology and everyone else having to follow what they say. It isn't about what is right it is about being in control and the authority figure. Therefore, Mr Patriot the so called professor simply keeps producing nothing but substance other than trying to be the gate keeper and authority figure over what is right and what is accepted. And in almost all cases what is right and accepted comes solely from whites who of course are supposedly the only people who know anything about history and populations around the world, even though they only learned about the rest of the world 500 years ago.
Whites have no part in the ancient history of human development which goes back 200,000 years in Africa. They know this. That is why they try and focus on the extremely recent frame of history and try to put Europe as the center of all human development when it isn't. Humans do not originate in Europe, did not learn to think in Europe, did not learn to write in Europe, did not learn to plant seeds in Europe, did not first raise livestock in Europe, did not first build cities, fire, bows and arrows, spears nor anything else in Europe. It is all simply Europeans being desperate to give themselves a history and place in it that reinforces their view that they should be the owners of everyone else's history and understanding there of.
This deck of cards is flimsy to begin with and of course introducing solid facts will demolish it. But again, these people do not care about facts, they only care about being in control and being able to disseminate their point of view no matter how absurd or ludicrous it may be. And this is obvious because even after being presented with undeniable facts and evidence, they simply ignore it. Because that is their purpose, to lie and distort anything that does not suit their agenda. No more and no less. So in this context being a professor only means being an authority figure and not having to prove anything, other than to support and reinforce the goals and aims of white supremacy.
Bottom line Mr Patriot is nothing but a whiner who depends on the fantasies of racialist dogma to support his views and not facts.
Posts: 8890 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Typical dodge, if you cannot handle the argument simply insult your opponet. We have already established that Doug knows nothing of historical method and does not read history. Nomorelles comes on acting like he knows something about genetics and yet does nothing but parrot the ES afrocentric standard line.
Doug, If you were correct about whites in Europe, and I do not think you are, they sure caught up during the historical era. I suppose what you are trying to tell us is that blacks were effective up to a point and then petered out. Looking around the world over the last several thousand years you would be correct. the totally lacked the ability to defend themseves at the beginning of the colonial period and could not today. In the list of nations of the world they bring up the rear in almost every negative catagory. We have poured billions into their communities both here and in africa and yet the IQ's remain low, cultural problems deepen and many fear that the problems cannot be solved. So, while they may have been good at chasing a goat in 10,000 BC they cannot compete in modern western civilization.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
LOL, talk about dodging. Ya'll shouldn't let him off the hook so easily about defining the descriptor, Negro. It should be hilarious, especially with his last fall back on the racially charged, IQ and it's relationship to Africans, or in his mind, Negro Africans.
Posts: 3595 | From: Moved To Mars. Waiting with shotgun | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: Typical dodge, if you cannot handle the argument simply insult your opponet. We have already established that Doug knows nothing of historical method and does not read history. Nomorelles comes on acting like he knows something about genetics and yet does nothing but parrot the ES afrocentric standard line.
Doug, If you were correct about whites in Europe, and I do not think you are, they sure caught up during the historical era. I suppose what you are trying to tell us is that blacks were effective up to a point and then petered out. Looking around the world over the last several thousand years you would be correct. the totally lacked the ability to defend themseves at the beginning of the colonial period and could not today. In the list of nations of the world they bring up the rear in almost every negative catagory. We have poured billions into their communities both here and in africa and yet the IQ's remain low, cultural problems deepen and many fear that the problems cannot be solved. So, while they may have been good at chasing a goat in 10,000 BC they cannot compete in modern western civilization.
Americanparrot
The only person parroting is you. I have asked you time and time again for YOUR definition of negroid. You cannot even type a few words describing this "oid"? All you can spew is a few ignorant charges about an entire grouping of people you know very little about?
Dont inform us of your political knowledge since you dont know what kind of aid has been flowing into Africa and who it was meant to ultimately benefit. You are ignorant in this arena also.
Please try and leave something of substance and present your negroid definition. Otherwise go back to Stormfront where you are safe from human intellect.
Posts: 100 | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: Typical dodge, if you cannot handle the argument simply insult your opponet. We have already established that Doug knows nothing of historical method and does not read history. Nomorelles comes on acting like he knows something about genetics and yet does nothing but parrot the ES afrocentric standard line.
Doug, If you were correct about whites in Europe, and I do not think you are, they sure caught up during the historical era. I suppose what you are trying to tell us is that blacks were effective up to a point and then petered out. Looking around the world over the last several thousand years you would be correct. the totally lacked the ability to defend themseves at the beginning of the colonial period and could not today. In the list of nations of the world they bring up the rear in almost every negative catagory. We have poured billions into their communities both here and in africa and yet the IQ's remain low, cultural problems deepen and many fear that the problems cannot be solved. So, while they may have been good at chasing a goat in 10,000 BC they cannot compete in modern western civilization.
The only one dodging is you. You have not provided one shred of anything to support your claims about black Africans not being indigenous to North Africa including to say that the following are not black Africans from Libya:
Saharan nomadic blacks who have always been crossing the Sahara from Niger to Libya and the Mediterranean and are the first settlers of North Africa:
And then you proceed to continue as if you have something to say. But you don't. You have no credibility. Nothing you say has anything to back it up and every time someone provides evidence you present nothing of any value. Therefore, again, stop whining like a child, because your nonsense is exposed for what it is. And you actually want to lecture as if you know what you are talking about after being shown to be a fraud.
Posts: 8890 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Why is it called 'orientalism' if all these pictures depict Africans??
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Orientalism refers to a 19th century phenomena of Europeans obsessed with mainly Islamic societies. In that era Albania, Greece, "Slavia," and Turkey were considered the Near East and, like all the Mediterranean lands and Arabia, were included in Orientalist paintings.
The focus of this forum is Africa and is why you are seeing Orientalist selections fixed on Africans.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by T. Rex: To be honest, I have to express some doubt that the Moors were all black. If that was true, why'd they depict themselves like this?
It's from "Qissat Bayad wa Riyad".
I don't consider Moors and Turks to be the same people.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ The Moors were used to refer to various distinct peoples. That included the North-West African peoples (led by Yemeni migrants) and later, the Turks. The latter is pale skinned while the former isn't.
Posts: 1080 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic