The crisis-hit Commonwealth Games has suffered a further blow to its credibility after three of England's highest profile athletes, Phillips Idowu, Christine Ohuruogu and Lisa Dobriskey, announced that they were withdrawing.
Studying those names, what does it tell you about the racial make up of England today?
63 comments:
All born in Britain. Two have degrees. One has a linuguistics degree. One can trace her English roots back to 1780. They've done more than some of the layabouts that I have to put up with around here.
They tell us that Englands migrant population is 3-5-7% or whatever but a glance at any random picture of London, Manchester or Birmingham shows thast it is clearly 20-25% in reality.
Couchers, the one with the roots, fair enough. The other two, if an Alsatian dog is born in Peking from Alsatian parents, does that make it a Pekinese? Just posing the question. i.e. Are they English if they're born here, or does that happen in 200 years once they have integrated into the English culture? The layabouts are maybe a fucking nuisance, but you know what those Saxons were like.
Banned, I don't know. Obviously I don't live there and I certainly don't want Scotland becoming like some parts of England. They tell me that you are struggling to hear an English voice in London now, although I never could understand that cockney accent anyway!
couch potato,
DL's stolen my line but realistically if an Alsatian mates with another Alsatian and gives birth in a room full of rottweilers does that make it's offspring a rottweiler?
Black and British go together like positive and positive magnets. There will never be anyything British other than Caucasian I'm afraid to say. African = African. Asian = Asian. Asutralasian = Australasian etc.
Pull your head out of the multicultural brainwashing rampant within society. Nationality has FUCK all to do with birth. Are you saying to me that if me and my white wife give birth in China my offspring's Chinese? If you think so you're 6 cans short of a six pack! Now some poster like Stan will disagree with me because they're brainwashed Africans who think they automatically take the nationality, cultural and ancestral heritage because they're born in another land, yet fail to see that they're the alsations who think they're rottweilers.
There will never be Black or Asian British. It's nothing but NWO propaganda and the sooner people see this the better. If you really want to understand what British is then look up the word, that is look up the word BRITON and see that it's got fuck all to do with Africa, Asia or any other non European peoples (white that is).
And I hate to say it but they're ain't no black in the Union Jack and there's nothing racist about that term whatsoever. It's nothing but complete and utter common sense and nothing more when you think about it. That is if you can remove the 50 years of continued brainwashing that stated we're all the same.
If you are born in a stable does that make you a horse.
Harbingers, fuck me you gave old couch potato a blast there. That was what I was trying to say, but you are much more eloquent than I am. Not that it's for me to comment on your comment, but it's probably better not to answer someone who doesn't have a Google ID with such a long comment, IMHO.
Getaffyanaff, no, that makes you the Messiah!
Nice to see some national pride,good luck to em?.....
Descendants of Black Africans who arrived in America 200 years ago are treated as equal Americans as descendants of white Europeans who arrived in America 200 years ago. The blacks aren't seen as less American becuase of the colour of their skin.
Oh nooooo couch potato,
According to Harby`s law,Americans are not Americans unless they are Red Indians,Aussies are not Aussies unless there Aborigionies,Scots are not Scots unless they have fiery red hair,New Zealanders are not New Zealanders ...well you get the picture...no one is no one unless you tick certain boxes..:).
Stan ..yes it is a bit ambiguous.
Harbers
Your plan does come unstuck when you look at Oz and the US/ canada. They had indigenous populations for thousands of years before we came along and took their land and called the new white settlers Australians, Americans or Canadians.
By your theory the settlers had no right to declare themselves Australian etc. They had the wrong features/culture/ ancestry etc for this.
Stan, nice to hear from you again. where have you been?
Harbingers, yes I stand corrected and I know it is important to put the point across. What I meant was that you can't have an argument with someone who constantly changes their moniker. At least with, I am Stan, you know who, you are dealing with, presuming he bothers to sign in with his google ID.
Couchers, what you say is 100% correct. They may be 'Australian' nationally but they are not originally, genetic Australians. There would be some point however where the genetic race, ie the Aborigines were overwhelmed by these immigrants and what I don't want is for that to happen to the 'white Christian' native civilisation in Scotland, because that is what is planned for us. That is one of the reasons that I want independence for Scotland, because that frustrates their plans as would Britain leaving the EU.
Keeping white white and (reducing/stopping/sending them home) immigration is are different issue`s to Britishness.
Fact is if you are a Bull Terrier and you join a pack of Poodles,your still a Bull Terrier and your still part of the pack.
Woof woof .....
DL said,
"Scots are not Scots unless they have fiery red hair"!What an extraordinary statement.
Not extraordinary at all.we all have our tick boxes according to Harby`s Law.
I will not consider a Scot a Scot unless he /she has fiery red hair.
I am Stan,
Do you really know anything about anything? I mean you've got an honours degree in speaking shite but really do you know anything about anything?
Do you know the ancestry of Scotland? Do you know why it's called Scotland?
The bottom line is a simple one - you're an African (black) who is born in England, most certainly not English or British, but because of fucked up, left wing brainwashing of society, you truly believe you are British??? The sad reality is you're living in limbo along with all other blacks born in the UK. You don't belong to our culture and history and because you're born here you never grew up in your own. Therefore you and all other blacks have been fucked over big time by the left who continually try to state that blacks are British because they're born here (and we go back to Alsatian and Rottweiler analogy).
And sure you may run with the pack but you're not of the pack. Big difference there.
It's got fuck all to do with tick boxes? Are you going to start telling me that word meanings in the dictionary are what they are because of tick box specification?
I tell you what let's just do away with definition shall we? In fact, let's all just start making up our own language or even better just grunt and point.....
harbers / darkers....
" In Australia the whites who live there are still and always will be European settlers."
Maybe by your logic. But not if you're Australian. The new Australian PM was born in Wales ( 6 previous Oz PM's born outside Australia).
She has Australian citizenship and calls herself Australian yet she wasn't even born there.
She would take exception to being told she's not Australian.
If you step back and imagine you're looking at the earth from the other side of the galaxy can't you see that we're all just humans in a small planet amongst billions of other planets and skin colour etc are unimportant ?
We'll be gone in the blink of an eye and the human race won't be missed or it's existence ever remebered in the overall scheme of things.
couch potato,
It's not my logic whatsoever. It's fact. The people in Australia up until a couple or so years back were part of the Commonwealth who lived in Australia. They were white European descendents, the grew up under a British culture and obviously were loyal to the Queen and lived by our laws and regulations. Therefore they are white Europeans, living in Australia, the land of the Aborigines, nothing but long staying guests. This is the truth of the matter. I'm sure an Australian would be offended but regardless they're still what I've described at the end of debate regardless. A black man will be offended if I called him a nigger, yet a black man is a nigger from the word niger, Latin for black. And what's even more ironic is that a black man calls himself black (when he isn't), doesn't like being called a negro (Spanish for black but is in Spain) and our whole language (not his culture/ancestry) is based on Latin and yet we have to change it in order to not offend those who have no right to do so. LMAO!!!
Harbers..
It's a complicated system you've set up right enough. By your logic there must be billions of people around the world who are just 'long staying guests'. Maybe each country should have a set of definitive charactersitics and culture that allows a person to be considered a 'native'.
But there would have to be a time scale set up aswell since saxons who mingled with angles are considered natives in Britain. I'd go for 1,000 years. That would stop Spaniards who colonised Peru etc from trying to claim to be Peruvians too early.
I've only come across this logic with 3 folk I can think of. Adolf, Idi Amin and Mugabe. Not good company to keep.
Couch potato,
I dont think it would be difficult to establish a time line to Harby`s law no logic is required thats the beauty of it,how about 1 bc? ;)
couch potato,
This really is not hard to understand. I'll say it again just so you might be able to understand it:
BRITISH AS IN BRITON.
Now is this too hard to understand? This is not about me creating any complicated system. This is about people claiming to be what they most certainly are not. It's a case of Goebbel's lie theory at play here - continue telling someone that they are something even though they're not and everyone will believe it.
It seems not only Stan but you also are unable to understand the situation.
Bottom line is that British means the people of the 4 kingdoms that make up Britain and that means indigenous peoples not non European immigrants I'm afraid to say. Then again I suppose in your dictionary up is down, left is right and in is out?
harbers..
I understand exactly what you mean but I'm trying to point out that by your logic billions of people around the world are falsely claiming to be nationalities that they're not.
We colonised these islands and are now called Britons.
What is the time scale in your naturalisation process ?
Will the Spaniards who colonised Peru ever be Peruvians ? Will they have to wait until history forgets where they came from before they can claim to be locals ? 2,000 years into the future ?
What timeline are we talking here ?
Only you can understand Harby`s Law Harby,its obviously far too complex for the likes of me eh!
If the principal is that you can only claim to be Scottish or British if you are white and that you're ancestors need to have been born here then the isles would be empty. These isles have been conquereu by, and in particular order - vikings, Romans, Normans. The original tribes from Scotland no longer exist given the interbreeding between the eg picts and Vikings. So perhaps all of you should fuck off back to Scandanavia, Italy, France etc. What a bunch of fascist half wits.
There's a simple solution. Get everyone DNA tested to see where their genes originated. I net you won't find many in Scotland who have DNA which is solely from this country or these isles.
harbers..
Calm down buddy. You're starting to lose it. Calling people 'jellyheaded fuckwits' and 'shit for brains' just makes you look silly.
We all understand what you're saying but we don't agree with you.
Your preference for racial purity has been done and has failed in the past. It only leads to the 'final solution'.
We'd all agree that immigration has got out of control but the answer is to stop all immigration not do a racial profile on people before they can settle here to make sure they are pure enough.
All, what you gentlemen and anonymous have to understand is that East is East and West is West. All the migration is coming from non-European settled parts of the World like Africa, the Indian Sub-Continent, large swathes of Asia and Arabic countries into the European run parts of the World like the US, Western Europe and the Antipodes. Now at some point in the future I'm sure that these immigrants will be able to call themselves British etc etc, but it will be well into the future. Even in simple civilisations, how long did it take for the Saxons to put up with the Normans. Robert de Brus was still using his French name 250 years after the battle of Hastings and he became the King of a United Scotland leading onto the Rule of the Stewarts. Did you know you can trace the Queen back to Robert the Bruce. Funny that! He became Scots 250 years after his family came here, so there may be hope for your offspring at some point, Stan. This whole argument is of course different from the one that asks, do we want more immigration? My answer to that would be no. Why do I say that? Well because most immigrants who would be coming to our country would be from parts of the World where their religious and culture would stop them adopting the host culture of Scotland. I think in particular, not of Stan's family but of people from the Indian sub-continent and in particular Pakistan, whose religious beliefs, unfortunately, tends to make them form ghettos in many cities and towns in England, mainly in the North rather than adopting the host culture. Selling us curry is not integrating, guys, I'm sorry. I don't honestly fear the Pakistani or Asian peoples, they are people just like ourselves. What I fear most is the hidden hand that is pushing for more immigration and the enlargement of the EU. Stanners and Couchers if you haven't done the research, do it. If you want any starting points, give me a shout and I'll be glad to steer you in the right direction.
Harbingers, you're being attacked over at the blogpost about the Kirking of the Session, BTW.
harbers..
" And look up the word fascist shit for brains. I'm not being fascist in the least."
Mussolini and Hitler were fascists who wanted a pure nation of white people. They eventually strted murdering just about anyone who didn't fit their ideal..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism
DL...
We're not arguing about immigration. We agree it's too high. We're arguing about harbers fascist policies.
Couchers, if we all agree that immigration has got out of control, that at least is a starting point. Mind you the fact that we are arguing about it at all is fucking stupid because it has all been decided for our Government by the EU and corrupt politicians. But ok, if we have to accept EU immigrants, there is nothing we can do on that score. From my point of view, that is acceptable because they are European and have no problem adapting to our culture as we have to theirs. I don't feel that we should however be accepting anyone from outside the EU, unless they can adapt to our culture and have special skills to ad to our society. Let me give you an example of what I mean. I had a stomach operation at the beginning of May. The surgeon a MR Majid Ali is Libyan. A really nice guy. Unfortunately he is also a Muslim. I don't have a problem with that, but he doesn't do operations during Ramadan. Now it just so happens, that at the start of Ramadan, my Father in Law was admitted to the same hospital with Pancreatic Cancer. Now he is the Cancer surgeon and he wasn't able to operate. I expect he was still drawing his salary as well. He wasn't too happy when he was discussing his Christmas arrangements and I asked him why he wasn't working over Christmas, if he was a Muslim. I got the usual mumbled reply.
Steven Hawkers, sorry I missed you there. It would be dependent on how far you want to go back. I mean I suppose we're all supposed to be descended from some African tribe or some such pish! I think though, that in Scotland, you would find that the 'race' is quite pure as we didn't tend to get ourselves fucked so many times from invaders as England did.
DL,
What they're trying to do is say that at the end of the day we're all humans so culture, ancestry, nationality means fuck all. So in essence they are nothing more than globalists who are actually heralding in the NWO's one world people and culture, under a banking system.
Yet they seem to forget that the western civilisation that they are part of is a white civilisation. Once you read up in the attack against whites you begin to realise where they're coming from.
The problem that has been from time immemorial is that non whites have always been insanely jealous of white peoples because of what they've done. It is a hatred in fact, an inate prejudice that they have, that automatically creates this "fuck your love for your culture, I'm here in your land and I'll call myself whatever I want and if you don't like it fuck you.."
It's so ironic because I lived in London, dated black women most of my life there until I realised and saw the overwhelming hatred and prejudice of blacks to whites. It was huge. Here was me, stupid white boy, in company with non whites happily pulling down my culture and civilisation while they happily lived and benefited within. I woke up, smelled the coffee and saw the simple situation begin - the demolition of white culture, yet the continuing promotion of non white, minority culture over the majority and of course introdcution of race /religious hatred laws and hate speech - School of Frankfurt/Communist subversion tactics of society. So you see DL, non whites will never see the picture like white people because they're not only living in our society but attacking it from all sides, no more so by claiming affiliation to our culture and ancestry, when their family, non white has been here for 20-50 years.
It is pointless debating any longer with them because they are oblivious to reality. They do not understand culture and tradition and more importantly what creates a nation. Now they're probably ok people to have as friends, but I realised a while back that black people and Asian will never ever be British. Their ancestors may have been within a colony of the British Empire but that still gives them no affiliation to our culture. However, if they are mixed race and one parent is indigenous British then of course they will have connection, but any other way and they'll always be nothing but Africans and Asians, living in a foreign land, even if born here, because they have no connection whatsoever with the indigenous peoples.
It's really that simple. Subversion of society by forced multiculturalism and non white immigration. It's a wanting to belong to something without a care in the world of the people whom you want to belong to.
Couchers, I've got to agree with Harbinger. The Black man blames the whites for the slave trade, but it was the Blacks and the Arabs who started it. The only reason other non-European cultures want to come here is economic. I don't see a big rush of Whites going to live in Africa, Asia, the Middle East or Pakistan. I wonder why? I don't think with 8 million people economically inactive we need any more immigration, full stop, whether from the EU or not.
DL,
You've got a couple of my posts in the spam box. One I posted twice, you can delete one of them.
Harbingers, sorry I saw that and I thought I had deleted one and posted the other but I don't see it.
Harbingers, you are wasting your time at least trying to convince me because I am in complete agreement with you. It's just a miracle of birth, that we happen to be born white Scots. We could have been Africans or Pakistanis and then of course I think we would be in their situation of wanting to mix with a more successful tribe. We've had this discussion before and no one yet has been able to tell me yet, apart from the Chinese inventing Gunpowder 2000 years ago, what have the non-Europeans ever done for civilisation? What has an African ever invented? What has a Pakistani leader ever done apart from fuck his own people and get richer. What have the Indians achieved since independence? Call centres filled with graduates? Despite the money we still pump into India, they can't even run a Commonwealth Games for fuck's sake!
DL..
I agree that we should protect our own seperate identity and culture. I agree that immigration should stop and repatriation should be provided to illegal immigrants and overstayers. But I don't agree that I'm a better person than someone else just because I was born white and not black. Both colours of people have good and bad people.
Couchers, I didn't say I was any better than a black person, just different and I want to maintain my difference. I think you're beginning to get it!
couch potato,
I called you an ignorant idiot for reasons explained, but you continue to prove your idiocy:
"Harbers argument isn't to do with immigration it's the fact that no one can be British unless they pass a certain number of cultural and ethnic tests."
It's not about passing cultural or ethnic tests. You either are white caucasian, of the European cultures that make up the UK or you're not. You're problem is you are completely ignorant to definition.
Harbers Law even if we only had one non white UK citizen he wouldn't really be a UK citizen.
Correct. He would be a citizen within Britain but not a British citizen.
White settlers in OZ, the US etc will never be real citizens of that country but just settlers under Harbers Law.
Again, stupidity. You've either got a land that is because of indigenous culture or you have a land that is because of non indigenous culture. You can't have both. Autralians and New Zealanders will always be white European settlers regardless, for they colonised a land that was not theirs to colonise and do not uphold and live by the indigenous cultures that were there before.
Harbers denies being a fascist but if you looked at the link I gave you explaining fascism it is clear he is a fascist.
Fascists see the nation state as one ethnic race fighting against other 'inferior' groups and expelling or killing them to 'purify' their country.
You have called me fascist because I do not agree with your warped, post 50 definition of Britain. And you say I'm fighting? I'm fighting against no one and I certainly see no one else as inferior, that's your presumption, not I.
Now if fascist is the new slur word to attack anyone who disagrees vehemently on non European immigration due to obvious reasons of alien cultural growth due to higher demographics within aliens leading to subsequent removal of indigenous cultures, then call me a fascist. However if you believe that I choose to forcibly suppress opposition and criticism, believe in state control of a land and persecuting non indigenous then you're 100% wrong in your attack. What I speak of is way over your head for you to understand.
I'll continue seeing Britain as it was before the Communist subversion of our society post 1950's. You can look at it anyway you will.
The fact that you still can't see reality after umpteen posts explaining it to you proves you'll never see it. You have your belief, as wrong as it is (as I've explained), but to you it will always be the right one. You just do not see the bigger picture, which is understandable because of your ignorance and complete disrespect for the indigenous peoples and their ways of life.
Blacks will always be Africans, Asians will always be Asians and Whites will always be Europeans wherever they are in this world.
DL,
I wasn't trying to convince you as I know you understand the bigger picture. I was merely reminiscing.
You have hit the nail on the head when you say:
We could have been Africans or Pakistanis and then of course I think we would be in their situation of wanting to mix with a more successful tribe.
The reason why slur words such as fascist were created was to destroy just what you've said, even though it's 100% true. Let's look at this more closely;
1. The white civilisations are far superior to any other civilisation on this land.
2. The very fact that immigration is coming from Africa and Asia on a regular basis here proves that we have something that they want, in the fact that our economy, way of life, education systems, health systems, work prospects etc are far superior to what they have in their own lands. Do we see the same emigration of whites to their lands? No, we do not.
3. Every single major invention in this world has been created in the western civilisation, overwhelmingly by white people. Yet to say this people will call you a racist, for racist has come to mean showing pride in white success. It is exactly the same kind of liberal/left wing brainwashing that stopped children from celebrating success in sporting events, because it would upset those who were inferior i.e. not as good as they, hence why they never won.
This is the brainwashing of society and words were created in order to destroy our civilisation, culture and heap on white guilt that was never there in the first place.
To compare the uses of fascism and racism in today's society from what I've said, it would be like Linford Christie winning the 100 metres and the person who came second calling him a fascist and a racist for celebrating his victory. He has proven that he is a superior runner, therefore all those who came after him were inferior. Therefore immediately him thinking he is a superior athlete to the others will automatically make him a fascist and thus a racist (as the others who lost were predominantly white [racial superiority]).
Don't you see how these words have been used and created in order to enforce immigration and cultural destruction? I'm amazed that people can't see this [not saying you can't DL] but it's obvious. Lev Davodavitch Bronstein (Trotsky) penned the first usage of racist when he attacked the Slavic people for not accepting Communist takeover. When you understand this you understand racism.
It's all about Communist subversion of our society, that is Jewish Zionist subversion of our society and culture and it's working as you can see from the ignorant replied from couch potato.
DL,
In a nutshell, the attack on the west has been through the word the usage of slur words. How better for a society to accept open immigration and the forced integration (and segregation) within their lands by pulling on the heartstrings of the white peoples, who have given continued charity to those in the world far less fortunate than themselves?
It was a wicked and insidious act that the Communists have played on the west in order to take over and destroy it, by reaping imaginary guilt upon us, for crimes committed in our ancestral past, especially when the Bolshevik Jews were responsible for hideous attrocities within Russia during their reign within the USSR.
How better to enforce their New World Order and Communist state by turning the truth into racism and fascism? For example:
"I like to associate with people of my own culture and my own race, but will gladly go on holiday and experience other races and culture's hospitality as well as spend my money to help their economy"
The definition of the above would be that I was a racist because I chose not to associate with non whites, even though I had no hatred or dislike of other peoples and culture, just a natural affiliation of my own.
To see this reverse racism in action (another Communist subversion tactic) would be to view Black History month, Black Mobo awards, Black newspapers (The Voice), Black beauty competitions and the hundreds of Black and non white organisations all over the world in the white European lands.
It is perfectly acceptable for non whites to continue to respect their ethnic identity, but for us to do so would be 100% racist. Thus what we see here is the allowing of non white cultures and people to celebrate their cultural diversity, thereby showing automatic segregation, overwhelming proof they are not nor will ever be part of our culture/society but yet through media propaganda this is 100% acceptable even though it's showing clear racial segregation?
The worst thing about it is that people are 100% oblivious to this because of continued media propaganda, subverted by the left 50 years ago. Our culture is being destroyed. We are no longer allowed to celebrate white success because it's automatically deemed racist and to deny immigration and removal of illegals and people who should be her we are branded as fascists.
This is reality and it's Communist subversion - the automatic use of slur words to destroy the truth and impose cultural takeover of other lands non Communist in belief. And everyone's fallen for it.
Harbingers, it certainly looks like they have fallen for it. I notice the 'what have the non-whites ever done for civilisation' question shuts them up, because then, they are forced to acknowledge the Elephant in the room, i.e that whites are superior in intellect to Blacks and also in most ways to Asians, with the exception of the Japanese and possibly in time to come, the Chinese. You can call me racist or fascist or whatever for saying that, but I don't give a fuck, because I am fed up couching my language in dishonest terms that I don't agree with.
The pyramid`s........
Stanners, FFS! Egypt is stuck on at the top right and is an Arabic country. And what he said, above.
*SIGH*
"Woe to the land of shadowing wings which is beyond the rivers of Ethiopia; Go, you swift messengers, to a nation who will be plundered and unrooted...to a people who will be dishonoured and trodden down...".
Thus spoke the prophet Isaiah (Chap.18 - 1 sqq), referring to a people who left neighbouring nations dumbstruck, despite the fact that invaders of all kinds were almost part of everyday life.
Out of the confines of Africa, driven by an irresistible force, having traversed the thousands of miles bordering the Nile, a new power emerged in the Middle-Eastern arena towards 730 B.C.
These tall, proud, dark-skinned warriors with wide shoulders and of athletic gait had come to claim their share of the Kingdom of Egypt, promised to them by their infallible god, Amon of Napata.
Their distant land "beyond the rivers", according to the prophet, bears different names: to the ancient Egyptians, it was the Land of the Bow (ta-sety), most likely referring to their talents as bowmen for which they were appreciated by the pharaohs.
For the Hebrews, it was Kush. For the Greeks, and later the Romans, it was to be Ethiopia, a general term encompassing the whole of Black Africa.
We call it Nubia, from the Egyptian word nebou, designating the gold that was mined there.
Lying to the north of today's Sudan between the 2nd and the 6th cataracts on the Nile, the land of Nubia was first the scene of a particularly inventive neolithic period.
It was later to know three successive kingdoms, each with its own capital: the Kingdom of Kerma (2300 - 1500 B.C.), that of Napata (1000 - 300 B.C.) and finally that of Meroë (300 B.C. - 33 A.D.).
Now both of you go sit on the naughty step and repeat these words!
"The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing."
Socrates
Stanners, that is all very interesting but what exactly does it prove. "These tall, proud, dark-skinned warriors with wide shoulders and of athletic gait had come to claim their share of the Kingdom of Egypt". So in other words Egypt was there before they got there and the Pharaohs used them as bowmen. What the fuck does that prove? Are you seriously telling me, that is your idea of what the Black African has brought to civilisation? Something 3000+ years ago? Stan, why I appreciate the trouble you took in writing the above comment, you can away and throw shite at yourself! :-)
It was later to know three successive kingdoms, each with its own capital: the Kingdom of Kerma (2300 - 1500 B.C.), that of Napata (1000 - 300 B.C.) and finally that of Meroë (300 B.C. - 33 A.D.).
This tells us that black civilization existed while Britons were pointing, grunting and eating their children.
Now go back to the naughty step and repeat.
"The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing."
Socrates
Oh Stan....
"This tells us that black civilization existed while Britons were pointing, grunting and eating their children."
No Stan it tells us nothing for the simple fact that according to the definition in any dictionary translation of civilisation:
1. a human society that has highly developed material and spiritual resources and a complex cultural, political, and legal organization; an advanced state in social development...
we can clearly see that no Negro people have achieved anywhere near the above definition of the word civilisation. There have been many villages within the Africa's tribal societies, but never any civilisation has existed within West, East and South Africa, the domains of the Negroes.
We were continually told that Gospel was invented by blacks when that was clearly debunked. We were also told that Jesus was a Negro and that was debunked and throughout history we were told that Egypt was a Negro civilisation and that's been debunked on many occasions.
Like I said had it not been for the slave trade, East, West and South Africa would still be living as it had for thousands of years in a basic tribal system.
Tell me Stan, if Negroes had started off as well as you say then why on earth did they devolve into the tribal hell, that experienced by the colonists? If blacks had a civilisation where were all the advancements in medicine, technology, engineering, science, law and order and creating peace and stability? Bottom line, Negroes haven't ever invented anything, apart from those who have lived and grown up in white civilisations.
And as for cannibalism - Here be Cannibals
Now seeing as this is written evidence, tell me then that if your great black civilisation of Egypt (not!) existed 2300bc onwards did negroes all of a sudden get a taste for eating human flesh? The white Europeans never brought it over with them? Here's a simple fact for you Stan which blows your argument out of the water - civilisations evolve not devolve and cannibalism within any society shows devolving. Moreso, it's known that Cannibalism still continues in Africa, long after it ended in the west.
Stan I hate to say it but the white peoples have had numerous civlisations which proves beyond all shadow of a doubt that they were a much more highly advanced breed of the human race than the African negroes. African negroes have only slightly advanced since the white Europeans landed on their island in the latter middle ages and installed western establishments to drag them out of the stone age! This is not prejudice, this is merely stating fact and that there is a huge difference between blacks and whites and always has been. If as they say Africa was the cradle of human civilisation, why on earth isn't it they're not leading the way in life? And don't give me the shit about colonialism. Had you been superior, you'd have defeated the invaders, as did lands in Europe in the past.
"If as they say Africa was the cradle of human civilisation, why on earth isn't it they're not leading the way in life?"
You would have to ask someone more informed on the subject than the two of us Harbs.
"The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing."
Socrates
I'm afraid to say that Socrates' statement is a classic example of an oxymoron. Wisdom comes through knowledge and life experience, thus true wisdom is understanding. And here was me thinking that doublespeak evolved from Orwell's doublethink in 1984.....
Boys, Boys. Stanners, you are digging a hole. That's three times you have quoted the same Socrates quote, it's like telling a joke if no one laughs the first time, don't repeat it. It is patently obvious that there was some sort of civilisation 2500 BC in Africa. If it was advanced, how come they've gone back the way. Fuck me, 10 years ago in Rwanda they were hacking each other with machetes! So what happened to the African civilisation in 4500 years? You are desperately trying to stick up for your race and that is admirable, but stop digging Mate, you're dead in the water. How was that for a mixed metaphor!
Heh heh heh,what would Socrates know eh Harb`s ?
"A little learning is a dangerous thing; drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring: there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and drinking largely sobers us again."
Alexander Pope (1688 - 1744) in An Essay on Criticism, 1709
Stanners, by Christ Stan, you like your quotes.
"A man what Quoteth, can nary think for himself"-Shakespeare 1597
I am Stan,
I'm not kicking Socrates, I never said he was ignorant but that quote is an oxymoron.
And your quote by Alexander Pope..hmmm....
A little learning is a dangerous thing
Dangerous to whom? The master most certainly, to the slave liberation and ultimate freedom.
drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring: there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and drinking largely sobers us again.
Again an obvious oxymoron. However understandably alcohol excess does remove our inhibitions, but having worked in the pub trade as a barman, a manager and door security for most of my life, from 18 onwards up until 4 years ago at the age of 35, I can safely say that I've never seen any intelligence within drunk men or women.
Harbingers, yes I've hard about the Jewish angle before in the slave trade. What about the quote I dug up after several hours work by Shakespeare?
Impressive quote DL, I must say.
Post a Comment