Genome Mapping of Ancient Egyptian mummies shows SUB-SAHARAN AFRICAN LINEAGE!!!

[Marvel]

I agree and wasn't disputing that, just wanted to show that the non-violent strategies MLK used was the best way to go about things, the letter he wrote while in that birmingham alabama jail is pure poetry to me. The KKK was a terrorist group in my opinion if we were to call them something.

True, but non-violence is the toughest option. But it took MLK to become a victim of violence to bring about change. Why? Was it because blacks around the US rioted in every city in the Spring of 1968 after his death and whites were The answer is? yes. Violence and the continual threat of violence by the blacks in South Africa along with sanctions ended apartheid in South Africa.

I would like to see if the white man is willing to adapt the non-violence approach while being under attack...I think not. When they want to retaliate with violence, its ok....if we were to do it...we get the "you are no better than they are" talk

When they beat Rodney King half to death, they had no problem or outrage. When Reginald Denny got it, it was "Look at those those savage n******"

 

[KingDanz]

True, but non-violence is the toughest option. But it took MLK to become a victim of violence to bring about change. Why? Was it because blacks around the US rioted in every city in the Spring of 1968 after his death and whites were The answer is? yes. Violence and the continual threat of violence by the blacks in South Africa along with sanctions ended apartheid in South Africa.

I would like to see if the white man is willing to adapt the non-violence approach while being under attack...I think not. When they want to retaliate with violence, its ok....if we were to do it...we get the "you are no better than they are" talk

When they beat Rodney King half to death, they had no problem or outrage. When Reginald Denny got it, it was "Look at those those savage n******"

it's the same everywhere...

white people fighting - "this is awesome" ,
black people fighting - "savages, monkeys"
(NBA, NHL)

white people looting - "they're gathering supplies for their families"
black people looting - "savages, monkeys"

white person kills everybody - "mentally ill, troubled teen"
black person kills everybody - "savages, monkeys"

i'm sure i could keep going..

 

[Sensitive Blake Griffin]

True, but non-violence is the toughest option. But it took MLK to become a victim of violence to bring about change. Why? Was it because blacks around the US rioted in every city in the Spring of 1968 after his death and whites were The answer is? yes. Violence and the continual threat of violence by the blacks in South Africa along with sanctions ended apartheid in South Africa.

I would like to see if the white man is willing to adapt the non-violence approach while being under attack...I think not. When they want to retaliate with violence, its ok....if we were to do it...we get the "you are no better than they are" talk

When they beat Rodney King half to death, they had no problem or outrage. When Reginald Denny got it, it was "Look at those those savage n******"

The non-violent approach worked best with the circumstances faced in America. Not saying it's the best in every situation and I could certainly sympathize and understand a violent response. That's what makes MLK even more amazing in my opinion.

Violence was a contributing factor to ending apartheid but there were much bigger influences than that.

You're painting very broad brush strokes with your words. Not every single white person was some extreme murderous racist, you can't just say "they had no problem or outrage". Reginald Denny was an innocent bystander, beating him was a "savage" thing to do.

"At the same intersection, just minutes after Denny was rescued, another beating was captured on video tape. Fidel Lopez, a self-employed construction worker and Guatemalan immigrant, was pulled from his truck and robbed of nearly $2,000. Damian Williams smashed his forehead open with a car stereo as another rioter attempted to slice his ear off. After Lopez lost consciousness, the crowd spray painted his chest, torso and genitals black"

This is why violence in response to violence doesn't work. People ignore your "cause" and focus on the "savagery".

 

[I Lord Justice]

Film is a powerful tool for brainwashing. Its the reason that whites and other non-blacks have a hard time letting go of the images of what they think is a white Egypt with movies like Cleopatra . Birth of Nation influenced the masses to increase the level of hate of the black man.

Nobody will truly know why the white man has hated the black man without a cause. I am beginning to be convinced that it must be either a genetic predisposition to hate us, much like a full-blooded pitbull can hate another dog without a cause...or it is demonic force that pushes them to this hate us. There is no other explanation.

Simple economics.

The western powers couldn't become (nor can they stay) the western powers without the help of black slave labor or control of african resources. Everything else, from racism to the white superiority complex etc, is just the by-product.

 

[Marvel]

The non-violent approach worked best with the circumstances faced in America. Not saying it's the best in every situation and I could certainly sympathize and understand a violent response. That's what makes MLK even more amazing in my opinion.

Violence was a contributing factor to ending apartheid but there were much bigger influences than that.

You're painting very broad brush strokes with your words. Not every single white person was some extreme murderous racist, you can't just say "they had no problem or outrage". Reginald Denny was an innocent bystander, beating him was a "savage" thing to do.

"At the same intersection, just minutes after Denny was rescued, another beating was captured on video tape. Fidel Lopez, a self-employed construction worker and Guatemalan immigrant, was pulled from his truck and robbed of nearly $2,000. Damian Williams smashed his forehead open with a car stereo as another rioter attempted to slice his ear off. After Lopez lost consciousness, the crowd spray painted his chest, torso and genitals black"

This is why violence in response to violence doesn't work. People ignore your "cause" and focus on the "savagery".

But the vast majority of white didn't condone it. Black people saw what happened to Mr. Denny and went florence and normandie to save him. These are isolated incidents when compared to the collective of what whites have done as a NATIONAL PASTIME such as lynching. Something that even little kids were spectators of smiling, even sending post cards to friends and families of these lynchings. So, you can bring isolated incidents all you want of such aggression. While you are at it bring Nat Turner.

Non-violence doesn't always work, people don't ignore violence when its at your doorstep. They listen LOUD and CLEAR. Again, the white man is not down with the non-violence as an approach for themselves. History shows that they use violence and intimidation to solve their issues.

We have only seen Asian (East and South) and people of African decent use non-violent methods as a means to change in the midst of being victims of violence. Imagine white people being victims to full scale violence and them not responding back violently...not happening

 

[Sensitive Blake Griffin]

But the vast majority of white didn't condone it. Black people saw what happened to Mr. Denny and went florence and normandie to save him. These are isolated incidents when compared to the collective of what whites have done as a NATIONAL PASTIME such as lynching. Something that even little kids were spectators of smiling, even sending post cards to friends and families of these lynchings. So, you can bring isolated incidents all you want of such aggression. While you are at it bring Nat Turner.

Non-violence doesn't always work, people don't ignore violence when its at your doorstep. They listen LOUD and CLEAR. Again, the white man is not down with the non-violence as an approach for themselves. History shows that they use violence and intimidation to solve their issues.

We have only seen Asian (East and South) and people of African decent use non-violent methods as a means to change in the midst of being victims of violence. Imagine a white people being victims to full scale violence and them not responding back violently...not happening

Certainly not trying to equate some isolated incidents of violence with the entirety of what America has done, I was merely using it as an example of why it may not win peoples sympathies because it distracts them from the real issue of oppression. As for violence, it depends where your morals stand, not the color of your skin. There were many white folks who marched with the marchers and were beaten or killed by their own people. History shows that HUMANS use violence and intimidation to solve their issues and they also use diplomacy too. We could blow North Korea right off the fukking map, but what do we do? Hit them with sanctions. About 1/4th of the marchers who marched on Washington were white. Again, you need to be careful about applying characteristics to an entire group of varied individuals based on their skin color dude. Violence only works if you can win the war, if you're a minority group within a nation being oppressed and you're greatly out gunned and out numbered, violence isn't going to work, you're just going to be murdered.

 

[D.C Young]

Honestly this question is what started me on my journey to learn of self. I just don't understand it. I always asked what did we ever do to them to make them want us destroyed so bad throughout history? So I started digging up history & running into things about our people...sadly I still haven't come up with anything other than the bible's explanation of it. So maybe you are right.



What's crazy is I still don't hate them even after everything that's been done And I don't understand that either. I almost wish I was mad or angry with them but I'm not. Why is that? That makes no sense to me as well. Logically, I should be upset right? Instead I just my head to all of the nonsense that I read upon or even experience in some form or fashion today.

Its CRAZY...

this might answer your question

 

[YoungMasterGold]

but what have sub saharan africans done for us lately?

Provided living human specimen for the testing of exotic drugs; garnering enough resources to control the world, but continiously selling many of it off for a quick buck, because we're a caring, generous people that think others should get rich at the expense of our lands and people; etc. . . . and Dr Philip Emeagwali?

 

[MooseMouthMthafuga]

here is King Tuts father

and grandfather

and grandmother

why would white people ever deny King Tut was black? his father/grandfather/grandmother were all obviously black

How can people see this kind of stuff and still deny the blackness?


That looks like Tupac's family album

 

[HummerCrusher]

Simple economics.

The western powers couldn't become (nor can they stay) the western powers without the help of black slave labor or control of african resources. Everything else, from racism to the white superiority complex etc, is just the by-product.

I'll add another layer to this truth. But you have to go way back to when Whites and Blacks first rediscovered each other.

When blacks and semites were ruling the world, that is, from Mesopotamia, to Ancient Egypt, to Assyria, to Babylon, to Persia, Europeans observed, respected, and conducted business with them. And these predominantly Semitic and Black empires, though acknowledging the differences of the underdeverloped European civilisations, accepted them.

When Ancient Greece arose out of Persian influence to become a major world player, they looked at Ethiopians (remember, Ethiopia then described a larger region of Africa, including more peoples) with so much respect it baffles you. They loved each other. And the Greeks have all these stories about them.

Africans in Ancient Greek Art | Thematic Essay | Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History | The Metropolitan Museum of Art

So how does this White, newly-dominant empire have little or no racism toward these Blacks? Well, one, they shared similar religions at the time. The most popular of all religions back then was the Sun/Moon/Star cult. There was no Islam, no Christianity, and Judaism was a small racially-exclusive sect. Essentially, the Sun/Moon/Star cult was the first religion of man. It started somewhere and spread to all corners when man migrated.

List of lunar deities - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
List of solar deities - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

White Grecians shared the same basic tenets of worship as Persia, Assyria, and Egypt. And by this culture, though they fought for military supremacy, they were more unified.

A secondary reason behind the unity is that the concept of an ethnicity not being evolved or being like an animal didn't even exist yet. When a Greek looked at an Arab, or a Black looked at a European, all they saw was a man of different living and culture. They judged, but on a military and wealth level. The only pocket in which a racial that doctrine existed was in the oral tradition of the Talmud, and it was against blacks. It was the only religious sect that spoke lesser of other ethnicities based not on merit, but birth alone.

Talmud, Sanhedrin 108b
Three copulated in the ark, and they were all punished — the dog, the raven, and Ham. . . . Ham was smitten in his skin

How does this relate to Whites? Well, the fall of Rome (which accepted all ethnicities as citizens based on merit), gave rise the Holy Roman Empire in which a Romanized version of Christianity was born. Holy Rome spread their version of Christianity across Europe into the most powerful Empires. And every young European empire that wanted to be the New Rome, followed this religion. They had total power and influence.

After this era, came the rise of Islam out of Arabia. Up until Islam, Arabia still worshipped the Sun/Moon/Star like Ancient Rome, Greece, Persia. And it sparked the Crusades, where the entire battle became about who should or shouldn't be entitled by God to control the Holy Land.

By this point, obsession with the Holy Land and the lineage/ethnicity of Jesus comes to the fore. One on side you have the original Arab Muslims saying that the Biblical covenant of Abraham went to his son Ishmael (ie: the Arabs), and on the other you have some armies of Europe saying it went to his other son Jacob (the tribe of Israel). This is where the Arab-Israel conflict comes from on a racial level.

Where it concerns Blacks? With the Crusades as a backdrop, the oral rabbical teachings of Judaic mysticism became more and more popular on a cultic level. And by the time the wars were over, the Talmudic teaching of the Curse of Ham had become a blended explanation of the Bible's story of Noah and his three sons Japtheth (Europe), Shem (Semites), and Ham (Africa).

Even though the Bible says nothing about a Hamitic Curse, supposed non-Jewish White Christians used a Talmudic teaching - the source of which they never publically mentioned - to justify African slavery. They could not have even known about this teaching if they weren't studying the Talmud or being influenced by it on the down low. In the Talmud, it teaches that God did something to Ham's skin. It was interepreted as being made black and turning his hair curly as a punishment.

Nowhere else in the ancient world did that view of Blacks stem except from that one source, before spreading into Western Christianity on the low. It spread into early Islam, too. Which is why there was so much racism against Blacks as soon as that region became Islamic. That entire region of Arabia, just prior to Islam, was accustomed to scholars from Judaism and Christianity, and it became mixed in to the teachings.

Eventually the stigma evoled. And as Western civilisation moved away from religion, into science, they tried to scientifically justify Blacks as being ideal slaves/non-human/unintelligent in order to keep their slaves. That scientific half-reasoning stuck like glue. And couple that with the Chosen Race attitude Whites stole from a racist minority of Talmudic and Zohar studying Jews, and you have a continual racist complex.

Funny thing is on places like st0rmfr0nt they don't even though that their entire philosophy on Blacks and being the Chosen Ones comes from old racist Judaism. It's like Talmudic Judaism for Whites, where America and Europe is their version of the Israel.

And those are the cliffs.

 

[I Lord Justice]

I'll add another layer to this truth. But you have to go way back to when Whites and Blacks first rediscovered each other.

When blacks and semites were ruling the world, that is, from Mesopotamia, to Ancient Egypt, to Assyria, to Babylon, to Persia, Europeans observed, respected, and conducted business with them. And these predominantly Semitic and Black empires, though acknowledging the differences of the underdeverloped European civilisations, accepted them.

When Ancient Greece arose out of Persian influence to become a major world player, they looked at Ethiopians (remember, Ethiopia then described a larger region of Africa, including more peoples) with so much respect it baffles you. They loved each other. And the Greeks have all these stories about them.

Africans in Ancient Greek Art | Thematic Essay | Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History | The Metropolitan Museum of Art

So how does this White, newly-dominant empire have little or no racism toward these Blacks? Well, one, they shared similar religions at the time. The most popular of all religions back then was the Sun/Moon/Star cult. There was no Islam, no Christianity, and Judaism was a small racially-exclusive sect. Essentially, the Sun/Moon/Star cult was the first religion of man. It started somewhere and spread to all corners when man migrated.

List of lunar deities - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
List of solar deities - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

White Grecians shared the same basic tenets of worship as Persia, Assyria, and Egypt. And by this culture, though they fought for military supremacy, they were more unified.

A secondary reason behind the unity is that the concept of an ethnicity not being evolved or being like an animal didn't even exist yet. When a Greek looked at an Arab, or a Black looked at a European, all they saw was a man of different living and culture. They judged, but on a military and wealth level. The only pocket in which a racial that doctrine existed was in the oral tradition of the Talmud, and it was against blacks. It was the only religious sect that spoke lesser of other ethnicities based not on merit, but birth alone.

Talmud, Sanhedrin 108b
Three copulated in the ark, and they were all punished — the dog, the raven, and Ham. . . . Ham was smitten in his skin

How does this relate to Whites? Well, the fall of Rome (which accepted all ethnicities as citizens based on merit), gave rise the Holy Roman Empire in which a Romanized version of Christianity was born. Holy Rome spread their version of Christianity across Europe into the most powerful Empires. And every young European empire that wanted to be the New Rome, followed this religion. They had total power and influence.

After this era, came the rise of Islam out of Arabia. Up until Islam, Arabia still worshipped the Sun/Moon/Star like Ancient Rome, Greece, Persia. And it sparked the Crusades, where the entire battle became about who should or shouldn't be entitled by God to control the Holy Land.

By this point, obsession with the Holy Land and the lineage/ethnicity of Jesus comes to the fore. One on side you have the original Arab Muslims saying that the Biblical covenant of Abraham went to his son Ishmael (ie: the Arabs), and on the other you have some armies of Europe saying it went to his other son Jacob (the tribe of Israel). This is where the Arab-Israel conflict comes from on a racial level.

Where it concerns Blacks? With the Crusades as a backdrop, the oral rabbical teachings of Judaic mysticism became more and more popular on a cultic level. And by the time the wars were over, the Talmudic teaching of the Curse of Ham had become a blended explanation of the Bible's story of Noah and his three sons Japtheth (Europe), Shem (Semites), and Ham (Africa).

Even though the Bible says nothing about a Hamitic Curse, supposed non-Jewish White Christians used a Talmudic teaching - the source of which they never publically mentioned - to justify African slavery. They could not have even known about this teaching if they weren't studying the Talmud or being influenced by it on the down low. In the Talmud, it teaches that God did something to Ham's skin. It was interepreted as being made black and turning his hair curly as a punishment.

Nowhere else in the ancient world did that view of Blacks stem except from that one source, before spreading into Western Christianity on the low. It spread into early Islam, too. Which is why there was so much racism against Blacks as soon as that region became Islamic. That entire region of Arabia, just prior to Islam, was accustomed to scholars from Judaism and Christianity, and it became mixed in to the teachings.

Eventually the stigma evoled. And as Western civilisation moved away from religion, into science, they tried to scientifically justify Blacks as being ideal slaves/non-human/unintelligent in order to keep their slaves. That scientific half-reasoning stuck like glue. And couple that with the Chosen Race attitude Whites stole from a racist minority of Talmudic and Zohar studying Jews, and you have a continual racist complex.

Funny thing is on places like st0rmfr0nt they don't even though that their entire philosophy on Blacks and being the Chosen Ones comes from old racist Judaism. It's like Talmudic Judaism for Whites, where America and Europe is their version of the Israel.

And those are the cliffs.

repped. Exelent Breakdown.

 

[GMOGMediaTV]

undeniable truth

 

[B-Rock Odrama]

so will North Africans stop being racist against their darker skinned brothers now??

Brothers? Racist North Africans are the Eurasian invaders are whom genocided and chased Ancient Egyptians and other idigenous black North Africans South in the 1st place..

 

[B-Rock Odrama]

they are portrayed as they looked, mostly brownish people with a lot of african people mixed in.

It's obvious this topic is more of a personal pride thing than a fact finding mission, obviously lots of black people feel insecure about their position in the world and want to believe that they once were on top of the world but some evil creature came and took it all from them.

If it helps you get up in the morning im all for it

So there are no brown skin African people?

They were a black/brown skin people from the continent of Africa whom had African genes..Obviously you are a whitewashed c00n whom refuses to believe logic or your own eyes cause your inherant inferiority complex and massa hasn't given enough valdation for it to be true to you

 

[B-Rock Odrama]

so you don't believe the DNA evidence that King Tut and Ramses III were most similar to CENTRAL AFRICANS?

FYI.....nikkas in central africa are not brownish......they are among the blackest people on earth

this is how the Ancient Egyptians looked

those are black people any which way you slice it.....and the DNA analysis tells us this is who they were most like


accept reality cac

I'm sure there were Ancient Egyptians whom looked like those people but Northern Sudanese/Upper Egyptian blacks represent most whom the mainstream core of Ancient Egptians were as a people and looked..

edit...Why am I not allowd to post pics? Could a mod fix this?