Besides Japan, what non-White country would you think a suitable home for you and your family? What percentage of the non-White world do you think is good enough to not laugh at? Compare that to the percentage of White nations.
Also, can you tell me a country that went from predominantly White to brown and didnt die? I dont know of any. Yet they claim there is "Strength in diversity"...
What justifies turning this country brown?

Well, I guess I could live in Nepal. And I think I would have enjoyed Tibet before China invaded. Do you consider Italians white? Because they are pretty dark. I know of a few people that live in Mexico that are very happy, they come back for holidays, but that is it. Saudi Arabia has a government that takes care of thier citizens.

One reason why many white countries have a better standard of living is because we steal their resources. The next time you buy Nike or Gap remeber you are buying stuff made by 12 year old chinese girls. The reason why we can do this is not because we are smarter or more deserving, but because we have weapons. One reason whites have been more fervent about killing browns is becasue of penis envy. Whites saw that blacks had larger flacid penises. They figured this would turn out to be larger erect penises. They could not take this as their women might just be overcome with lust and let a brown man ravage her.

Oh, don't be ignorant about Japan. It has one of the worst police brutality countries in the world. They have a 98% conviction rate, this is even better than Stalinist Russia. It only seems like a good place to live because they are important economic partners with us.

Another thing, you have gotten so used to being a wasteful American that to use less energy is akin to death and poverty to you. Why do you think we have so much access to energy? Do you think it might have anything to do with our military? We deal in death, that does not make us a better country. Eventually it will come back to us, much worse that sept. 11.

no syndalicist,

the reason we can do this is not weapons.

we don't hold weapons at the chinese throats to get sneakers.

it is because of their oppressive regimes that hold power, and hoard the money for themselves.

south korea

the way we do this is, you said it, not with weapons directly, but with economic might.

racism was an excuse for slavery, but i like your explanation better (says the black man)

I would have said South Korea but I suppose Taiwan. Seems like Japan, S. Korea, and Taiwan have realized that industrialization, urbanization, education, and an lively associational life fosters consolidated democracies to Western standards.

I held a study group for my comparative government class at a Southern California Denny's and I have never been more bitter about the future in my entire life. White Witch was right..he who breeds succeeds



[This message has been edited by Lokil (edited 12-08-2001).]

possesions are fleeting. go somewhere where the people are civil to each other, and people are nicest when they have little, and have no desire for much more. i read this http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=12012 and afganistan seems like a good place to vist (obviously not now, but when things settle down and they get thier act together), also india has really nice people.

I have been to many non-white countries and seen living standards far below anything we would tolerate here in Europe.

Saudi Arabia does have, however, a very good standard of living for the main part, though the golf between rich and poor is vast to say the least. (Much the same world over) But would I wish to live there? The answer is no. There is an almost totalitarian religious system that is so deeply rooted in the society that government and religion is practically the same thing. I am not saying this is a bad thing, but I could not live with it.

I have seen no non-white country that I would like to live in. I have seen no black majority place within my own county that is not run down and abused by its non-white populace. The government spends millions of pounds in to development of these areas and still there are bleak and in most areas, almost derelict.

Having lived in an Asian area for many years, I can honestly say that I am glad to be away from them. And living in a white area again. Where the streets are cleaner and the houses still show that there owners are proud of them.

One place I would still like to see though is Tibet. The place seemed (before the Chinese invasion) to be wonderful for the traveller, though I do not think I would wish to live there, it does seem a very spiritual place, that could possibly invoke a religious feeling, even in me!

quote:

---

Originally posted by RAOVQ:
possesions are fleeting.

---

Who were you referring to and what does that have to do with anything?

quote:

---

Originally posted by skinn:
[B]One place I would still like to see though is Tibet. The place seemed (before the Chinese invasion) to be wonderful for the travellerB]

---

Did you know that the Tibetan race is actually part European? Thousands of years ago, tribes from the west migrated there and interbred with the native population.

That is the common denominator in all societies that arent complete shitholes like Sub-Saharan Africa.
Syndacilist, penis envy is when a woman envies a man's phallus and what it implies...

Also, can you tell me a country that went from predominantly White to brown and didnt die? I dont know of any. Yet they claim there is "Strength in diversity"...
What justifies turning this country brown?

I lived in London for seven years; I do not know what it was like before the Windrush years. But the area I lived in was terrible. Mostly black and mostly rundown.

I moved back to the now infamous Bradford, to find my parents living in the house that I was brought up in, now surrounded by Asians. The area was once a respectable place, where people moved to, to raise families and to give their children a good start in life. Moving back there, I found nothing but destitution and abuse, rubbish littered streets and vandalism.

Both Undercliffe and Manningham are now cesspools, where once they where shining examples of community. They are now predominately Asians areas.

Where as Holmwood was once classed as a very poor area, and an unsafe place to live, it is now known as a haven in Bradford. Why? Because Asians are kept out and it has stayed a white area.

My parents move out of Bradford, and lived there last years happy and content. I moved away from there, to a much better place after years Of violent abuse and black Racist attacks against me and my own.

Since the 1919 anti black riots, and then the 1977-78 skinhead riots there has been very little done, in the way of white outcry. The "I'm not raciest butt�" mentality that is so typical of the white race as a whole has all but killed the chances of a strong and healthy Britain.

It is only now that the people are joining in to a political movement dedicated to stemming the flow of immigration and giving back the strength that was once the British people.


People are now seeing that a black country is a weak and violance filled hell.

[This message has been edited by skinn (edited 12-09-2001).]

Also add in the fact that the asians ruined quite a substantial part of Bradford and other nothern towns during their racist orgy this year.

Can't even respect their own neighbourhood let alone our fuckin country.

The Asians where so angered by the fact that a small number of skinheads National Front supports got off the train at Bradford Interchange that they got into there cars and drove to white areas and rained terror on them. The skinheads just got up and walked away, with out conflict. No Asians attacked the skinheads, they in turn where not violent in any way.

Police have made a number of arrests against the skinheads for ensitment to riot. There have been so many conflicting stories of how the skinheads coursed the Asians to riot that police have confirmed that there is very little to go on. Only that the skinheads did not leave the city centre and that they did not physically attack any one.

It has been proved though that the Asian rioters burned down a number of white shops, stole a car and drove it in to a full social club doors and then set it alight, whilst at the same time setting alight the fire exits.

Beating a number of priests and vicars, even burning a church (I DO NOT KNOW HOW BADLY)

I my self have a lot of friend in Bradford, each time I go to see them I get turned away by rail police, and I get stopped from entering the city and surrounding areas. I am not allowed in to the city where I was brought up.

Israel, Jordan, India, Brazil, Greece, Singapor, Kenya.

A contry that wen't from predominantly white to brown and didn't die: The United States.

Israel is a marxist despotic theocratic nightmare where only Ashkenazi jews have any clout. Even Sephardic Jews are shit on.
Greece is White. Jordin is predominantly Mediteranean and Dinaric racial stock, its not very far removed from Indo-European heritage. Brazil is factionalized along racial lines, and segregationist policies keep the blacks, mulattos, and amerindians out of the policy that the celtiberian Portugese run. Kenya...ah-ha. And India?!?! I guess youre fond of not eating, poor medicine, and storms wiping away your third world stone age dwelling.
America is not predominantly non-White. Give it 30 years. I doubt in that time you will consider it a desirable place to live.

Vene, I love how anything good had to have some european influence. It could not possibly happen that some asians got enlightened all on their own.

Penis envy is just that you are jealous of someone's penis. If it is because you don't have one or because when flacid, a black man has a bigger penis, it is all the same. Whites bomb brown people all the time. We steal their resources and give them slave wages (or a little above nothing) to make clothes and american flags, and everything.

Israel is not marxist. Marxism and a theocracy are opposites, I would think you would know that. And the only people in America with any clout are white protestants. Even the catholics are shit on, the only one elected president was killed.

I would have liked to live in america prior to 1492. The indians lived in some form of harmony with each other. Plus, there were a lot more trees and a lot less noise back then.

I think I asked you before, are italians white or mediterranean? What about greeks? In the 15 and 16th centuries, Spain ruled the world. Gasp, how did brown people do this. Egyptians also had the most powerful civilization at one time. The main reason why Europe is doing so well is because of america.

So is anyone with a european background white? Are all countries of europe white, and if not, could you specify which ones?

>>>>Israel is not marxist. Marxism and a theocracy are opposites, I would think you would know that.<<<<

You can have a Marxist economy run by a Rabbinical clique, like in Israel.

>>>>And the only people in America with any clout are white protestants. Even the catholics are shit on, the only one elected president was killed.<<<

??? Ever hear of Steven Spielberg? The Weinstein brothers? Alan Greenspan? Clintons cabinet? Michael Eisner? Gerald Levine? Dianne Feinstein? Chuck Schumer? The Rotchschilds? Does Hollywood have clout? How about Wallstreet? Madison Avenue?

>>>I would have liked to live in america prior to 1492. The indians lived in some form of harmony with each other.<<<

If you consider incessant border squabbles and tribal warfare some kind of harmony.

>>>>Plus, there were a lot more trees and a lot less noise back then.<<<<

Good. Then the Indians who rip the entrails from your children for being an enemy tribe have a place to hide before they snipe you with arrows. And you can hear their screams better, since theres less noise. Do you really believe they were any better than any tribe of people anywhere else? How sad.

>>>>I think I asked you before, are italians white or mediterranean?<<<<

Mediterraneans are White...

>>>>What about greeks?<<<<

Mediteranean and Dinaric.

>>>>In the 15 and 16th centuries, Spain ruled the world. Gasp, how did brown people do this.<<<<

Because they were Celtic. The duskies are the lower classes and had no say or share in the greatness of Spain.

>>>>Egyptians also had the most powerful civilization at one time.<<<<

At that time, they were Nordic and Mediteranean (depigmented Nordic people). You think Ramses was a negro bro? How bout all those statues you see? Sure look like Germanic people to me. Thats probably why mummies have red and blonde hair. And why they named Sudan Sudan (Land of the Blacks) Id think a black people wouldnt see that distinction.

>>>>The main reason why Europe is doing so well is because of america.<<<<

I'll leave this one for my brethren across the pond, with thousands of years of greatness in history before my countries tiny existence to argue.

>>>>So is anyone with a european background white? Are all countries of europe white, and if not, could you specify which ones?<<<

Theyre white enough.

Many pictures painted on the walls of Pyramids show men fighting in chariots. The men fighting from chariots would generally be the aristocrats. I do not recall ever having seen germanics in these, but I have never seen Negroes in them either. Usually, they have Black Hair and tan skin. Its about the shade of an Italians skin.

Black neighborhoods in white countries are obviously rundown, because the black culture is oppresed in the western world. Damn, that sounds trite. I wish I could think of a better way to phraze it. It's because because the government is racist, it's because the government WAS racist, and blacks suffer reprocutions from slavery.

That statement sounded stuped, but it should be accepted as a fact about all culture's. If one race dominants a nation, the other race will be oppressed. It's the sociological definition of the balance of power. This is simply culture in general, and has nothing to do with one race being better then the other.

In answer to the question, yes, quite a few. Argentina wouldn't be so bad. Northern Spain would be acceptable too, their skin is on the dark side. Not Saudi Arabia because of the religious nuts, but South Africa would be okay if it counts. Of course Tibet, but it's been mentioned.

------------------
Brought to you by delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol

yeah, michael jordan, colin powell, eddie murphy, jamie foxx, chris rock, will smith, ice-t, marvin gaye, lionel richie, rod smith, marshall faulk, bill cosby, jerry rice, tim brown just to name a few that come to mind in a second.

these people have all suffered greatly from a government that wants to keep them down.

i wonder how many succesful minorities there are in america that don't even live in the publics eye.

your own racism fingers refers to inner city slums as "black neighborhoods".

there are white people, mexicans, cubans, there as well.

Egyptians were Nordic. Nordic people have dark hair often. Nordic peopel that live in the ancient Mediteranean are called Mediteraneans, and are generally darker. But they are Nordic. Jimmy Stewart is very Nordic, and he's dark.
Blacks dont build civilizations. Its a fact. Just get over it.


Heres another little logical tidbit overlooked by any Socialist vermin. Does culture really explain this? Just about every Non-White country has large amounts of immigrants residing in just about every White country. Are there large amounts of White immigrants in non-White countries? White people in Non-White countries are usually there as an aristocracy descended from ancient conquerors. That is not true of any Non-White countries.
South America is a dirty shithole, I dont know why anyone is saying they would like it there. Unless you have a lot of money (as the Spanish descendants tend to), which is true of any society.
Having a tan does not make you non-White. Northern Spain is predominantly Celtic.

quote:

---

Originally posted by syndicalist:
We steal their resources and give them slave wages (or a little above nothing) to make clothes and american flags, and everything.

---

Probably good for the economy having a high profile company starting up a factory in your squalid little backwater country. Also give these people a sense of duty.

quote:

---

The indians lived in some form of harmony with each other.

---

No they didn't (shit, i sound like defiant)

quote:

---

In the 15 and 16th centuries, Spain ruled the world.

---

Only because the British were having some internal problems. Once we'd sorted those out we then proceded to beat the shit out of the spanish again. Spanish Armada would be a choice word here.

quote:

---

The main reason why Europe is doing so well is because of america.

---

This is far too broad to argue against. What exactly does America do that makes europe do well. Seems to be that one can't exist without the other.

quote:

---

So is anyone with a european background white? Are all countries of europe white, and if not, could you specify which ones?

---

I'm white. Not all countries in europe are white, especially the south eastern ones.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spirit of '22:
Having a tan does not make you non-White. Northern Spain is predominantly Celtic.

---

There a lot of Spanish people in southern spain that are decended from the now called moroccons that once lived in spain.

Defiant:
I know the Egyptians were were white, and very simiilar to the nordic races, but they do not look much like any other Europeans. I think they should have there own classification.

I also find fault with the classification "Nordic." Many races we have been considering here did not originate in Northern Europe.

So what? They are called Nordic people. Indians didnt originate in India, and they didnt have a name for the american continent. It is understood as something. Get over it.

Lost, other than colin powell who is maybe 1/4 african, you named 13 other blacks that are all entertainers. How many heads of corporations or political offices are black? This sends the message that blacks are here to entertain us.

Defiant, of course the egyptians were nordic. So were Tibetans, Mayans, Aztec, and most likely the buddha. It seems to me that if any non-white culture or person does something great, it is attributed to Nordic people. No the Spaniards of the 15 and 16th centuries were not celtic. After the spanish armada was defeated the spaniards landed on Ireland and mixed with their blood.

What is this shit about nordic people often have dark hair? That is not true to their race. That is like saying a lot of asians have blond hair. You have no idea what you are talking about. It just pisses you off that non-white people can build civilizations. Egypt, Spain, China, Mongolia, Romans (who certainly are not Nordic, and I don't see as white). You see the problem with your definition of white is it can accompany almost any race. That detracts from the meaning of your statement. Germans are not Nordic, neither are french, english, irish, scottish, swiss, polish, czech, and so on. Nordic is Norway. Sweden is Swedish. Finland is Finnish. Please stop with this hitler mythology of a super-race.

I will revise my statement and say that Europe has been helped by America, more than we have been helped by them.

Preying, do you know anything about history? Spain ruled the world for about two hundred years because they had the strongest army (ie America today). Britain got lucky during the Spanish Armada battle. Our constitution could easily have been written in Spanish had that battle went differently.

quote:

---

Originally posted by UnclNastyFingerz:
Black neighborhoods in white countries are obviously rundown, because the black culture is oppresed in the western world.

---

I've neer heard of British black ghettos.

There wasn't slavery in England.

The British underclass is white, the most of those gutter punks were also stomped on by the big wigs. Some were just lazy, but lazyness isn't always symatric to poverty.

I feel a bit off for not countering Defiant's point, so here it is. Black countries have low standards of living becase the black culture sucks. Not the race, the culture. A white person raised in that culture will be just as much of a blood-thirsty savave as most of those medangos. A black person raised by British aristocrats will probably be more sophisticated then you. Culture's have flaws, but races don't.

------------------
Brought to you by delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol

Cultures dont create themselves overnight. White cultures are similar all over the planet, and have similar values and attitudes. The same goes for black. Haha, Blacks even tend to make the same mistakes in whatever language they are adopting.

Now for the uppity Syndicalist. I have the feeling a lot of people agree with my points, especially when I argue with him, but the bitterness of my style and my unwillingness to yield has forced you away from admitting that...Here it goes though.

>>>Defiant, of course the egyptians were nordic. So were Tibetans, Mayans, Aztec, and most likely the buddha. It seems to me that if any non-white culture or person does something great, it is attributed to Nordic people.<<<<<

Thats because it is. Scientists continually find evidence of a Nordic race attributed to a native peoples gods coming in and building a civilization. Who built the MesoAmerican empires? Nordic people. Radiocarbon dating shows the Olmecs, the progenitors of american civilization, appeared overnight sometime between 1200and 1150 BC. This range directly corresponds to the records of an Egyptian fleet going into the Atlantic on 1187BC under Rammses III. Olmec monuments have some Egyptian hyroglyphics, but also show why knowledge would be lost to the Americas of their other world origins. In that temple is a carving of a decapitated scribe. Obviously the landing crew mutinied and killed the aristocrats on board. They went about building their world the way they remembered it.
The Incas, when asked by the Spanish who built their cities, said they were "ancient already in the time of the Inca" and were the work of "white men with auburn hair." Carvings and pottery of ancient Meso-america support his idea.
The same goes for mummies in China and Egypt, but thats not very shocking considering the probable asiatic origins of Indo-European peoples.

>>>>No the Spaniards of the 15 and 16th centuries were not celtic. After the spanish armada was defeated the spaniards landed on Ireland and mixed with their blood.<<<<

In Ireland...

>>>>What is this shit about nordic people often have dark hair? That is not true to their race. That is like saying a lot of asians have blond hair.<<<<<

I did not say often. I said it is not atypical. It happens, in numbers large enough to consider it natural to Nordic peoples. Like Jimmy Stewart.

>>>>You have no idea what you are talking about. It just pisses you off that non-white people can build civilizations. Egypt, Spain, China, Mongolia, Romans (who certainly are not Nordic, and I don't see as white).<<<<

Hahahaha. Over half of the aristocrat's surnames were words for Blondes or red-heads. LoL Have you ever seen a roman statue? Those are nordic features. Egypt and spain are Nordic.
Mongolia had a civilization?

>>>>You see the problem with your definition of white is it can accompany almost any race. That detracts from the meaning of your statement. Germans are not Nordic, neither are french, english, irish, scottish, swiss, polish, czech, and so on. Nordic is Norway. Sweden is Swedish. Finland is Finnish. Please stop with this hitler mythology of a super-race.<<<,

Nordic is Indo-European. Dilocephalic people with retreating zygomatics, square orbitals, long gracile features, thinner skin, and more muscle.

>>>>I will revise my statement and say that Europe has been helped by America, more than we have been helped by them.<<<<

Europe can exist without America. America would not exist without Europe.

>>>>Preying, do you know anything about history? Spain ruled the world for about two hundred years because they had the strongest army (ie America today). Britain got lucky during the Spanish Armada battle. Our constitution could easily have been written in Spanish had that battle went differently.<<<<

I dont think Spanish Catholic monarchism would have led to the rise of an American protestant puritanical government of self-determination...

no syndalicist, it's a reference to people we will all be aquainted with.

or would you know dr. phillip cross here at the local hospital?

or how about jamal anderson who owns his own company here in town, building houses?

if i mentioned these types of people all of you would look at me funny.

quote:

---

Originally posted by syndicalist:

Preying, do you know anything about history?

---

Military history, yes. Other history, basic stuff like most people.

quote:

---

Spain ruled the world for about two hundred years because they had the strongest army (ie America today). Britain got lucky during the Spanish Armada battle. Our constitution could easily have been written in Spanish had that battle went differently.

---

If the spanish were so good, why were all their colonies in shit places. The French and the British had the pick of the best.

Spain never had a decent army, they did however rely on their fleet a lot more. Yes the English fleet did get lucky, but isn't that what most battles are based on.

America would never be spanish. It was closer to being French though.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lokil:
I've neer heard of British black ghettos.

---

They don't exist because there aren't enough blacks in britian to make one.

Plenty of Asian ones though.

quote:

---

Originally posted by UnclNastyFingerz:
There wasn't slavery in England.

---

Read more books because you are seriously wrong.

Lost, what I was trying to illustrate is that most famous black people in american culture are entertainers. To be sure there are many blacks that are doctors and head of corporations. All I am saying is try to list famous blacks in power.

Preying, it was unfair for me to doubt your knowledge of history. I happened to learn a great deal about the spanish from 1400-1600. And during this time they ruled the world. They had silver mines in Peru and that is a huge part of their budget. They did not have their colonies in shit places, it only turned out that america became the country it did. I was stretching a little when I said our constitution would be written in Spanish. I am saying they had enormous amounts of power. One reason for their downfall was inbreeding. I know you all may think I am joking, but it seriously happened. Philip Hapsburg the 4th had a huge jaw and drooled a lot. They inbreed because only royalty could marry royalty.

Defiant, I said the Spaniards during this period, 1400-1600 were not celtic. In 1588 after the defeat of the armada, they went to Ireland and spanish blood mixed with irish blood. All you said to that statement was in Ireland, that is exactly what I was saying.
I am glad you think everyone is on your side. In your own words, "the elite are usually a minority."
Now, in your next post you will have to define exactly what nordic is. If you are saying it is indo-european, then fine. But it would be less confusing if you just said The Olmec were started by indo-europeans. The indo-european part of our gene pool encompasses a huge vast mass of different people. I am under the assumption that nordic is blond hair blue eyed fair skinned.

Concerning the myth of the red haired irishman. No irish have red hair. That came from the vikings who raped irish women. Irish people like english or scottish have brown hair.

I am going to simply refuse to believe that the Egyptian empire, Spanish empire, Tibetans, Chinese empire was started by "nordics". Why I said romans is because they are meditteranean, not nordic. This changes of course if your definition of nordic encompasses all of indo-european land. Same with the Greeks, they certainly did not have typical nordic features. You said yourself it is atypical for nordics to have dark hair. What about Hitler? So we have an entire civilization that is the beginning of western life. The greeks who came up with philosophy, democracy, and all that other good stuff. They were not Nordic. People reading have to please realize that Greeks are not nordic. They had arguably the greatest civilization in history.
Defiant, say what you want, but not all good in the world is caused by whites. And not all bad is caused by brown. Try to see the world for what it is, and put down Mein Kampf.

>>>>Defiant, I said the Spaniards during this period, 1400-1600 were not celtic. In 1588 after the defeat of the armada, they went to Ireland and spanish blood mixed with irish blood. All you said to that statement was in Ireland, that is exactly what I was saying.<<<<

Yes. The spaniards were mixed in Ireland. In Spain, the aristocracy and much of the north was predominantly Celtic stock. Celts lived in Iberia befoer Ireland. Germanic tribes from Celtic lands moved to Ireland as Rome was decaying.


>>>>Now, in your next post you will have to define exactly what nordic is. If you are saying it is indo-european, then fine. But it would be less confusing if you just said The Olmec were started by indo-europeans. The indo-european part of our gene pool encompasses a huge vast mass of different people. I am under the assumption that nordic is blond hair blue eyed fair skinned.<<<<

Principally. And they were. Irrelevant though. Nordic people can be all kinds of pigments, that is the most common though.

>>>>Concerning the myth of the red haired irishman. No irish have red hair. That came from the vikings who raped irish women. Irish people like english or scottish have brown hair.<<<<

What myth of Irish red hair?

>>>>I am going to simply refuse to believe that the Egyptian empire, Spanish empire, Tibetans, Chinese empire was started by "nordics".<<<<

Because I am close-minded, right?

>>>>>Why I said romans is because they are meditteranean, not nordic. This changes of course if your definition of nordic encompasses all of indo-european land.<<<<

It has nothing to do with geography. Romans were very Nordic. I told you, half of the names of the aristocrats meant blond or red haired. Ever see a Roman bust? My bust of Augusts looks very Nordic.

>>>>Same with the Greeks, they certainly did not have typical nordic features.<<<<

Yes they did. Apollo and the Muses were blonde. So was Alexander the Great.

>>>>You said yourself it is atypical for nordics to have dark hair. What about Hitler?<<<<

He was very Nordic looking. Dark hair is not typical, that means in the majority. If you have four kids, one will have dark hair. dark hair does not = not Nordic. Like I said, look at Jimmy Stewart.

>>>>So we have an entire civilization that is the beginning of western life. The greeks who came up with philosophy, democracy, and all that other good stuff. They were not Nordic. People reading have to please realize that Greeks are not nordic. They had arguably the greatest civilization in history.<<<<

Yes they were. They even said all of their wisdom came from Apollo in ancient times, and Apollo was a Hypoborean from above the North who invented the wheel, music, and the finer things in life. He had blonde hair.
>>>>Defiant, say what you want, but not all good in the world is caused by whites. And not all bad is caused by brown. Try to see the world for what it is, and put down Mein Kampf.<<<<

Try to look at history without the a Kosher New York times editor helping you.
Try also to argue without using pitiful cliche attacks like, Stop reading hitler. Use facts. You have none.

Defiant, there is a very credible theory out there that states that the Egyptians actually weren't even Nordic, they were black. Supposedly they were descendants of people once living in the region of what is now the Sahara desert, when it was a lush and green region. When, after the Ice Age, it began to grow arid these people moved to two different places: some went further south to the West African coast whereas others migrated to the delta of the Nile River and settled, initiating thus the Egyptian civilization.

I also have to add that at the time of the Middle Ages in Europe, the Africans had great kingdoms in their continent which functioning just as efficiently as their European counterparts. How do you think the city of Great Zimbabwe was built? Or the bronze Benin masks? Or do you think that the Arab accounts of a rich kingdom in what is now Mali are false when we have found so much evidence to prove their existence?

>>>>Defiant, there is a very credible theory out there that states that the Egyptians actually weren't even Nordic, they were black.<<<<

No they werent. Mongoloid presence in ancient Europe is possible, not negroid.

>>>>Supposedly they were descendants of people once living in the region of what is now the Sahara desert, when it was a lush and green region. When, after the Ice Age, it began to grow arid these people moved to two different places: some went further south to the West African coast whereas others migrated to the delta of the Nile River and settled, initiating thus the Egyptian civilization.<<<<

No. What makes you think people who lived in North Africa, when the Mediterranean was a plain, were negroes?


>>>>I also have to add that at the time of the Middle Ages in Europe, the Africans had great kingdoms in their continent which functioning just as efficiently as their European counterparts. How do you think the city of Great Zimbabwe was built?<<<<

Arab slavers and merchants built those kingdoms. I thought Great Zimbabwe was from like, the Bronze Age. Stone cities in Zimbabwe have Chinese coins buried there. It was probably the Egyptians who conquered down that way. Or Carthagians who cirumnavigated Africa. That is more likely than Negroes inventing civilization.

>>>>Or the bronze Benin masks? Or do you think that the Arab accounts of a rich kingdom in what is now Mali are false when we have found so much evidence to prove their existence? <<<<

The Arab accounts say Arabs went there to establish a trading post, and the kingdom sprang up around it, a MUSLIM kingdom. That isnt black African.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spirit of '22:
>>>>Celts lived in Iberia befoer Ireland. Germanic tribes from Celtic lands moved to Ireland as Rome was decaying.

---

I'm not sure I am correct, because I read this in a very old book(40's or so)that Iberians and Celts were originally different. The Iberians supposedly wandered in during the Ice Age. Later(but before the Romans came), the Celts launched an invasion of the British Isles, and fighting form chariots, conquered the Iberians. They instituted themselves as an aristocracy, and sometimes interbred with the Iberians. This intensified when the Roman Legions defeated the Celts.

Defiant, you have to be the only person that would consider greeks as nordic. I have had discussions with historians and history professors about greek civilization and the celts. Greeks primarily have darker skin and black hair. If you know any greek person with fair skin post a picture because that would be interesting. You said it is not common for nordics to have dark skin or hair. So, why when an entire culture has dark hair and skin you still call them nordic. You have still refused to answer my question of exactly how you define nordic. Principally what region of the world did they start from. Maybe I am being closed minded by saying I don't think every civilization on this vast planet was started by a specific gene pool. But, I rather think it is you who are close minded to the ultimate superiority of the nordic race. Once again, I have studied extensively the spanish empire and they were not nordic or celtic. They were spanish like people you see in spain, mexico, and much of south america. I really do not understand how you can confuse someone with spanish blood with that of nordic blood. Unless again you are stating that nordic encompasses every single race on the planet.

The Nordic aristocracy had slaves of different racial make-ups, and the middle-class and free men were different still. That has all mixed to form one racial group now. Gone is the glory of Hellas.
Are you going to deny the Aryan roots of Indian civilization? See any Nordic people in India today? Nordics are Indo-Europeans, I said that already.

Defiant, if you seriously think that Great Zimbabwe was product of some civilization that was not African and black, then you are being ridiculously unscientific. As to the establishing of Kingdoms in Western Africa, it was Europeans and Arabs that first reported of their existence, they were basically already there when they stumbled upon them.

Defiant, let me get this straight one last time. There are asians, africans, and nordics. That is much different than my perception of blond hair blue eyed. So, nordics are anyone that originated from central asia (india) all the way to western europe and the british isles. Like I said before it is a little confusing when you call all french, germans, irish, english, greeks, italians, polish, russian, finnish, swiss, swedish, scottish, spanish, portuguese, etc. Nordic. To me this is stretching nordic to fit any race from europe. Yet again, the Chinese empire and empires in africa are not nordic, nor were they started by nordics. The chinese built all by themselves.

No, I will not deny the aryan roots of india. Nordics are indo-european like you said. Indo-european would include india obviously.

>>>>Defiant, if you seriously think that Great Zimbabwe was product of some civilization that was not African and black, then you are being ridiculously unscientific.<<<<

I dont know anything about it. I told you, I know of a very ancient civilization in Zimbabwe where Chinese coins were unearthed. Where, ever, in the history of man, has a negro population begun and advanced a civilization? There is a greater possibility of Mediterraneans coming down into Africa, or around it from the West. What scientific evidence have you that it is black? That it is in Africa?

>>>>As to the establishing of Kingdoms in Western Africa, it was Europeans and Arabs that first reported of their existence, they were basically already there when they stumbled upon them.<<<<

The African kingdoms were Muslim all by themselves without Arabs being there?


>>>>Defiant, let me get this straight one last time. There are asians, africans, and nordics. That is much different than my perception of blond hair blue eyed. So, nordics are anyone that originated from central asia (india) all the way to western europe and the british isles. Like I said before it is a little confusing when you call all french, germans, irish, english, greeks, italians, polish, russian, finnish, swiss, swedish, scottish, spanish, portuguese, etc. Nordic.<<<<<

I never said that. I said ancient Greeks were Nordic. The aristocracy that built and shaped Greece was Nordic. The Aristocracy that built and shaped Italy was Nordic. I did not call all people in those nations Nordic.

>>>>To me this is stretching nordic to fit any race from europe. Yet again, the Chinese empire and empires in africa are not nordic, nor were they started by nordics.<<<<

Based on what? The fact that now Chinese people live there?

>>>>The chinese built all by themselves.<<<<

Then what of the dozens of Celtic mummies across China dating into its ancient history? What of the Manchurians who today still have blonde hair and blue eyes?

>>>>No, I will not deny the aryan roots of india. Nordics are indo-european like you said. Indo-european would include india obviously.<<<<

There are no Nordic people in India, on a different continent than Europe. Why cant you believe than that China was Nordic, and there are likewise no more Nordic people there?

I have one. The Bahamas. I'd love to raise my kids in a tropical paradise.

------------------
Brought to you by delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol

Defiant, the proof that these civilizations were black was the fact that no record remains in any other civilizations' history books concerning them. As to the kingdoms on the West African coast, these areas were never Muslim. Only the Kingdom of Mali was later on converted to Islam, but after its splendor.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/africa/features/storyofafrica/

defiant, you have not a single shred of evidence to back up your right-wing conspiratorial white race mythology. You feel the way you do about whites because you are white and feel inferior for some reason. So, it is easier for you to say, "no blacks have ever built a civilization, and all asian civilizations were built by whites".

This whole thread has made you sound silly and ignorant. I hope someday you will realize that the color of your skin is no more than pigment. We all have brains which have near infinite potential. You can use it if you are black, white, asian, hispanic, etc. One difference is that the race (whites) that specialized in war (aka killing people) is afraid of the other races.

Blacks have different shaped heads. Their skulls dont allow for the same amount of development of the frontal lobe responsible for planning and communication.
African kingdoms were begun by Mediterranean people who lived in Africa. That doesnt make them negroes.

Are you kidding me? Now you are just being ridiculous. The human brain is a wondrous object that is unique throughout the universe. Most people use 10 percent of their brain if that. So, it really would not matter if a black man had 5cc's less of volume in his skull. If he used 15 percent he would be smarter than all the nordic people alive right now. Let me guess, are you going to say that einstein was nordic. Actually he was jewish. Yeah, I know you hate admitting that, but he was.

What does that have to do with the fact tht africans have a less developed brain?

I'm pretty sure that defiant doesn't think jews are inferior. Based on his comments elsewhere, he just thinks they're sneaky and detrimental. Not that matters.

Seriously, defiant, you are one of the most bigotted people I have ever witnessed. Vene, you are not fairing much better. "All Africans have less developed brains" "Jews are sneaky and detrimental" You guys should realize that a lot of white protestants are sneaky, detrimental, and idiots. Not all, of course, I would not say that, it would be prejudiced.

Prejudice means making judgments. Calling someone sneaky and dishonest is not a judgement, it is acknowledging aspects of thir personality. saying they are bad is a judgement. I say they are sneaky and dishonest. Thats not judgement.

Sneaky and dishonest are not objective terms they are terms with implied bias.

Prejudiced means to judge before. Like when you judge before you have even met any of these people. You may have met one or two jewish people, but in no way have you met all or even a hundreth of a percent of them. That is what I mean by prejudiced. What possible evidence could you come up with to prove that "all jews are sneaky and dishonest". I would like to see it.

Sneaky and dishonest are not judgements. Good and bad are. Destructive or creative is not a judgement, its a characteristic. I dont judge anyone before I understand them.

You are prejudging their characteristics Defiant, shame that you shouldn't have a better excuse to defend your bigotry.

Theres a guy who kills his family. I dont know him, but I know hes murderous. If his family was like my girlfriends family though, hes not a bad guy. Saying hes murderous is not judging him. It is acknowledging aspects of his character.
Jews are sneaky, deceitful, selfish, racially concious people. Where are the judgement calls there?

I never said that was what I thought! I said that was what Defiant Thought! Fools!

Judaism is a religion, not a race. Jewish people aren't born deceitful, nor sneaky nor devious. That's the most absurd thing in a long while.

How it happens is irrelevant. Ramble on all you want about raising a Jewish kid in an Asian household, Im not one to condone kidnapping. Since I like the idea of kids being raised by their parents, what would happen if savages are brought out of the jungle and raised by Senators is irrelevant. The only way to practice your theory is by stealing children from their parents.
I didnt say anything about Judaism, I said Jews, as in, the Eastern European Ashkenazi subrace descended from Eastern European caucasian and Kazarian Hunnic stock.

Which Happened to occupy Sumer at the time of the flood.

What about the Sephardim of Spain Defiant?

Huns probably lived in Mongolia at the end of the Ice Age. Sumeria is a Nordic civilization.
Sephardic Jews are ok. Ashkenazi Jews hate em, there must be some good to them.

I want to marry a nice Scandavnavian girl...

Defiant, why are the Sephardim not hated by your "august" person?

Why should they be?
My wife to be is Mayflower English

But you do realize that the Sephardim and the Ashkenazi have the same Semitic roots?

Kazarians are as Semitic as Slavs.

Could you provide me with a source that proves your claims.

No. I dont read much online. Kazarians are from Hunnic stock and lived near the Caspian Sea. Sephardim are Mediterranean Jews. Ashkenazi are converted Kazarians. The only semitic infusion they would have collectively recieved would be from a few passing merchants or raiding parties.

Provide me with a book, bibliography that confirms your theory. I'll do my best to find it. And make sure it isn't Mein Kampf, or some Nazi Racial study justifying the annihilation of millions of Jews and Gypsies.

Show me a book, a bibliography that isnt socialist vomit that justifies stealing my children and warping their thinking, on how Ashkenazi Jews are the same stock as Sephardic ones. They are not. Why do you ned a book to confirm what your eyes can? Ashkenazi Jews have mongoloid features, live in Eastern Europe, and showed up after Genghis Khan destroyed the converted Kazarian kingdom. Sephardic Jews have Mediterranean features, live in the Mediterranean, and are figures in history since ancient times.

A better question for defiant (or spirit) would be: Could you provide me with a source that proves your claims that "Africans have a less developed brain"?

Or proving that "Jews are sneaky, deceitful, selfish, racially concious people." Which, by the way, sounds more like you, defiant (with your shitty rhetoric, only caring about your family and no one else, and if I were to call anyone "racially concious", it would be you), than any Jew I've met.

Again, no books should be necessary to confirm what eyes can. Look at the archetypical negro head: low, squat, thick, and short. Other peoples' heads are higher with thinner skulls. There is more room for brain development, particularly in the sections responsible for communication and planning.
As for the Jewish question: The history of Jews across the world should be testament enough to their deceit.
Racial conciousness is not a bad thing. Its a healthy and positive attribute that is a fundamental contributor to a peoples success. I am racially concious, yes. I am concious of the uniqueness of my people and their history. So are Jews.

Defiant, since your eyes seem to be the only witnesses to Black inferiority, I cannot but laugh spitefully.

You never noticed that the archetypical negro skull is rounder and shorter than other races?

Why are my posts not showing up? I already said once, but its not here:

You never noticed the archetypical negro skull is lower and more squat than other races skulls?

I am 0 for 2 in seeing my replies. Where the hell are they going?

Sources for the inferiority of negro brains:

Race, by J.R.Baker

The Origin of Mankind, by Careltoon Coon

Will provide more names of books/studies for you to peruse if you like?

Nordic nobility in Greece - can post extensive info on this if anyone likes. Am holding back at the moment as noone other than spirit seems to be posting at the moment.

Anythign by Coon is gold. The Races of Man and the Races of Europe is a good source of information on aristocracies and their Nordic origins. McCulloch is good.

It would be odd for greek aristocracy to be nordic considering that the germanic people were barbarians living in mud huts. Or do you mean your odd explanation of nordic which lets dark skinned Italians be nordic.

Mediterraneans are a depigmented version of Nordic people. There are no real living specimens of pure Mediterranean peoples though.
But he is talking about your idea of Nordic people. Apollo was blonde and from the North, for example. His muses were likewise blonde. Apollo is credited with bringing the Greeks the wheel, agriculture, music, and all things civil.
There was no need to advance beyond woodsman tribal life for Germanic tribes because they were an entire tribe of aristocrats. Aristocrats do not need architectural splendor, flashy cities, and polished metal to be strong, free, and happy. Those things only arise when the aforementioned Nordic peoples live amongst lower tribes, as a means of distinction, and because its something to put the lower tribes to work on. Germanic tribes still had very advanced medicine, astronomy, writing, etc etc. Just no giant towers that are more the mark of the presence of slaves than of great people.

Considering that Rome, Greece and Carthage all grew from the Medditerranean and that the Barbaric North was indeed Barbaric, I wish to differ with your assertion Defiant.

Apollo and the muses were blonde because its just a more atractive color. like pale skin it doesn't hide disease and therefore is seen as more desireable.

Nordics in the Ancient World - Some Greek and Roman NordicsSubscribe
Alexander "the Great". The greatest military general of antiquity. According to Plutarch, he was fair haired and blue eyed.
Marcus Cato 'the Philosopher'. His eyes were grey and his hair was red.
Lucius Cornelius Sulla. A brilliant but ruthless Roman Dictator. From the Greek historian Plutarch; "his glaring blue eyes in a white face mixed with rough blotches of fiery red...Sulla affirms that he was the man, and his golden coloured hair made him extroadinary looking"
Octavian Augustus, the first and greatest Roman Emperor. From Suetonius; "his eyes were bright and clear...his complexion was between dark and fair...his hair, rather curly, inclined to blond"
Roman Emperor Nero. According to the Roman biographer Suetonius, he had fair hair, freckles and blue eyes.
Roman Emperor Galba. His eyes were blue.
Roman Emperor Diocletianus. His reign, which lasted for an amazing 20 years, brought stability and peace to Rome after 50 years of Civil War. He was said to have been blue eyed and very pale in complexion.
Roman Emperor Valentinian I. One of the greatest warrior emperors of Rome. His eyes were blue and his hair was fair.
Roman Emperor Theodosius I "the Great". He was said to have been light in complexion with short blond hair.
Emperor Jovian. He had grey blue eyes.
Byzantine Emperor Heruclius (sp?). His eyes were grey and his hair was reddish-blond.
Byzantine Emperor Basil "the Bulger Slayer". A man of Greek origins, Basil is regarded as one of the greatest warrior emperors of Byzantine. His eyes were light blue (Greek eyes).

Oh, by the way Germanics never lived in mud huts, they lived in wooden/stone halls. Which means even the northern nordics, let alone the hellenic nordics, were far more advanced 2,000 years ago than modern blacks are today.

Funny. I didn't think anyone 2,000 years ago had access to computers. I also didn't think ancient peoples could be modern doctors, or have any experience working with even older concepts, like cars, or electricity.

Or, in terms that you could understand, which is probably along the lines of who could kill who faster, I'll stand by my belief that a modern black man with a gun could kill anyone white man of 2,000 years ago, no matter what he was armed with.

Huzzah! My god, how could we be so ignorant? Youre right, because modern soldiers cold kill ancient ones with ease, we must then logically assume that aristocracies werent Nordic, and all peoples are equal...
Did anyone bother to ask why blonde is "just more attractive" and what that implies? Isnt more appealing, as in, produces more of a drive to mate with, the characteristic of a more advanced, more superior segment of a species?
Has anyone ever heard people saying, "Damn look at that girl. Her head is so round, and her skins so dark, I cant see her at night. Look at how shes almost as wide at the shoulders as she is short. And that yellow tint to the eyes, like a gorilla. I love how thats brought out by the brow ridge. Mmmmmmmm"? Didnt think so.

I already gave the answer to that question, it doesn't hide diseases, therefore a blonde person who looks healthy probably is, its a double edged sword though, your are sick and blonde you're extremly undesireable due to the off palor of your skin.

and in areas where sun exposure is not extremely harmful, that is to say the far north It will eventually become the dominate color of hair due to the greater success in mating. wheras in a climate where sun exposure is greater the blonde haired pale skined are more suseptible to detriment thus the trait is not passed on. when you have small isolated gene pools evolution makes these changes fairly quickly. the great advantage of the hotter climates tough is that they allow for higher surface area to volume ratios in terms of body proportion.

Originally posted by Jamopy

Nordics in the Ancient World - Some Greek and Roman NordicsSubscribe
Alexander "the Great". The greatest military general of antiquity. According to Plutarch, he was fair haired and blue eyed.>>>most depictions show brown hair<<<
Marcus Cato 'the Philosopher'. His eyes were grey and his hair was red. >>>he was the censor, and yess that is true"
Lucius Cornelius Sulla. A brilliant but ruthless Roman Dictator. From the Greek historian Plutarch; "his glaring blue eyes in a white face mixed with rough blotches of fiery red...Sulla affirms that he was the man, and his golden coloured hair made him extroadinary looking" >>>plutarch has a thing for blond men, perhaps a greek influence?<<<
Octavian Augustus, the first and greatest Roman Emperor. From Suetonius; "his eyes were bright and clear...his complexion was between dark and fair...his hair, rather curly, inclined to blond" >>>not to nordic looking from the statues, which are acurate depictions as that was the roman was of sculpture, if you doubt it see one of claudius<<<

end pseudo quote.

thats all for now Im tired.

Augustus is Nordic as hell looking. Im looking at his bust on my shelf now.
You just called blondeness a Greek influence....why are we arguing then?
A lot of family names of the Roman senate and nobility meant red-head, or fair-haired, or something to that effect.

Let me get something strait, as it is often confusing.

Defiant: When you say Nordic do you mean any of the races of Northern Europe?

Present day Northern Europe, correct. In ancient times they were other places too. It is ignorant to assume because someone is somewhere today, their ancestors didnt live elsewhere.

smithee, for what you mention about apollo and muses,

is that why anime characters have blatant european features.

the only oriental looking people in anime are the old men.

and babies.

"Funny. I didn't think anyone 2,000 years ago had access to computers"

Computers were invented by whites.

"I also didn't think ancient peoples could be modern doctors"

Wtf? Of course ancient people couldnt be modern drs. In just the same way modern people couldnt be ancient drs. Get a clue.

"or have any experience working with even older concepts, like cars, or electricity"

Cars were invented by whites. Electricty was discovered by whites.

So your point is what? Because modern blacks have acces to white technology the ancient Greeks werent Nordic? Because some modern blacks can drive a car and use guns to kill each other, that means that many E.Africans still dont live in huts made out of shit and drink blood? I really dunno why i bothered even responding to this post.

My point, has nothing to do with the conditions of East Africans. It has nothing to do with whether or not the Ancient Greeks were nordic. Did you even read my post?

My point was that your average modern black person, like the kind that live in your town, is more advanced than your average white person as of 2000 years ago. They have access to modern technology and modern knowledge. It doesn't matter who discovered it. It doesn't matter who invented what. The point is that they have access to it. I used the example of a black doctor and a black soldier because their simple. A black doctor using modern technology is a lot more likely to save your life than a white doctor as of the year 2. Would you agree? A modern black soldier with modern training and modern weaponry is more likely to kill a white soldier from 2000 years ago. Can you really argue that point?

by citing greek influence I was insinuating that Plutarch was a homosexual. because he found Sulla most extraordinary looking.

>>>. A black doctor using modern technology is a lot more likely to save your life than a white doctor as of the year 2. Would you agree? A modern black soldier with modern training and modern weaponry is more likely to kill a white soldier from 2000 years ago. Can you really argue that point?<<<

No. Thts because its irrelevant, obviously true, and in no way related to the question at hand. Giving blacks white technology and then saying, "See, theyre equal, they are more efficient than White ancestors in the bronze age" is ridiculous. Blacks in their own environment, in Africa, are to this day less advanced than the White people of antiquity. They just have some soviet supplied machine guns. A Roman physician would still be better.

If you raise and teach a chimp sign language, it can communicate better than if you left a deaf man in the jungle from childhood. My goodness, these allegations that chimpanzees are less intelligent than people is racism. You cant blame a chimpanzee for its conditions in the jungle, right?