Jimbosay, go straighten your bowtie and get your dark blue suit cleaned.  The Nation Of Islam's racist BS won't fly here.

Originally posted by Jimbosay There is an absolute abundance of evidence that most of White history is simply pathological lying. if the history itself is not being proved as pure fabrication the very people who write that history and anthropology are being exposed as complete frauds. And nobody is scared of anyone you hold up as a hero nor would I want him not to be here. He sounds like a fraud and presents no evidence for anything he claims. But here is something for you to mull over. The foremost authority on the Neanderthal has been exposed as a complete fraudster. I have millions of other articles like this that proves most Germanic history is little more than a mishmash of complete nonsense; http://www.theguardian.com/science/2005/feb/19/science.sciencenews

No more recent articles? BTW, who discovered him to be a fraud? Weren't it white men who did so?
Protsch is not only a fraud but as well a criminal. The court which sentenced him, even attested him mental problems. all scientific works and research by him are obsolete today.
To call people liars, just because they are white is racist.

Why are you sending me private messages? post whatever you have to say to me on here and I already told you everything you are asking.

Don't waste my time with your pathetic and pitiful White supremacist angst.

Originally posted by Jimbosay There is an absolute abundance of evidence that most of White history is simply pathological lying. if the history itself is not being proved as pure fabrication the very people who write that history and anthropology are being exposed as complete frauds. And nobody is scared of anyone you hold up as a hero nor would I want him not to be here. He sounds like a fraud and presents no evidence for anything he claims. But here is something for you to mull over. The foremost authority on the Neanderthal has been exposed as a complete fraudster. I have millions of other articles like this that proves most Germanic history is little more than a mishmash of complete nonsense; http://www.theguardian.com/science/2005/feb/19/science.sciencenews

Mate, your post is coming very close to trolling, imho.

Edited by toyomotor - 06-Feb-2014 at 01:50

There is an absolute abundance of evidence that most of White history is simply pathological lying. if the history itself is not being proved as pure fabrication the very people who write that history and anthropology are being exposed as complete frauds.

And nobody is scared of anyone you hold up as a hero nor would I want him not to be here. He sounds like a fraud and presents no evidence for anything he claims.

But here is something for you to mull over. The foremost authority on the Neanderthal has been exposed as a complete fraudster. I have millions of other articles like this that proves most Germanic history is little more than a mishmash of complete nonsense;


http://www.theguardian.com/science/2005/feb/19/science.sciencenews

Redclay, this undoubtedly the perfect place for your favorite expression, to wit;

"Arguing with someone who hates you or your ideas, is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter what move you make, your opponent will walk all over the board and scramble the pieces".
Unknown.

BTW, can you restore the examples that now contain nothing but an "x"?

Ron

Edited by opuslola - 05-Feb-2014 at 11:59

I don't like anyone, black or white, who claims historic credit for advancements, inventions or victories to which their race (and I use that term with caution) are not entitled.

Unfortunately, we see from time to time examples of nationalistic claims for unworthy credit, and I don't agree with them either.

I find it all rather distateful

I can only say that the best words on this thread were these;

"Reginmund
Members Profile
Send Private Message
Find Members Posts
Add to Buddy List
Arch Duke



Joined: May-08-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1946   Post Options
Post Reply
Quote Reginmund
Report Post   Quote Reply Posted: Mar-19-2009 at 14:31
There is a surprising amount of scholarly tolerance for Black supremacist psuedo-history.

I work on a daily basis with a Black African scholar who's in the field of Black European studies. Occasionally assisting him, I've come into contact with some of the literature and while many of these books are critically acclaimed and written by moderate historians of Black history, they still operate with a number of misunderstandings, exaggerations and oversimplifications that I suspect they are only able to get away with unmolested because most scholars avoid the quagmire of complications they risk by exposing them.

Typical is the definition of everything non-European as Black, for apparently everyone turns Negroid the moment you cross the Bosphorus or the Ural mountains. Also typical are gross exaggerations of "the Black achievement", if you will, by either redefining non-Negroid populations as Black or exaggerating the impact of Sub-Saharan Africans outside of their region. Opposing views tend to be undermined not by deconstruction of the arguments, but by associating them with racism and imperialism."

Regards,

There is a surprising amount of scholarly tolerance for Black supremacist psuedo-history.

I work on a daily basis with a Black African scholar who's in the field of Black European studies. Occasionally assisting him, I've come into contact with some of the literature and while many of these books are critically acclaimed and written by moderate historians of Black history, they still operate with a number of misunderstandings, exaggerations and oversimplifications that I suspect they are only able to get away with unmolested because most scholars avoid the quagmire of complications they risk by exposing them.

Typical is the definition of everything non-European as Black, for apparently everyone turns Negroid the moment you cross the Bosphorus or the Ural mountains. Also typical are gross exaggerations of "the Black achievement", if you will, by either redefining non-Negroid populations as Black or exaggerating the impact of Sub-Saharan Africans outside of their region. Opposing views tend to be undermined not by deconstruction of the arguments, but by associating them with racism and imperialism.

Originally posted by pebbles Kathy Najimy is also Lebanese-American,a well-known name in American entertainment.She looks typical Arab,don't have " black appearance " fit their Afrocentrism agenda !   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathy_Najimy