Were Egyptians black?
MAN...an ancient race aka Pugnacio
recently all depictions of egyptians in movies have tended to favor
black actors.
I understand ancient Egyptians had a mixture of caucasian, negroid, and
other elements but what is this nonsense with casting actors of bantu
background as Egyptians?
--
http://www.koreananimals.org/dogs.htm
http://www.koreananimals.org/cats.htm
http://thenewrepublic.com/ & http://www.newcriterion.com/
http://www.observer.com/arts.htm
http://www.chicagoreader.com/movies/
http://www.villagevoice.com/film/
a photo of yours truly:
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Square/8781/seadevil.jpg
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
MAN...an ancient race aka Pugnacio
ci...@my-deja.com
MAN...an ancient race aka Pugnacio <anthon...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Blacks have been insisting ridiculously that Egyptians were black and
> recently all depictions of egyptians in movies have tended to favor
> black actors.
>
> I understand ancient Egyptians had a mixture of caucasian, negroid,
and
> other elements but what is this nonsense with casting actors of bantu
> background as Egyptians?
>
> --
unsuccesful attempt at proving that negroes have a rich cultural
history, too.
Pete.
James
>
> Blacks have been insisting ridiculously that Egyptians were black and
> recently all depictions of egyptians in movies have tended to favor
> black actors.
>
> I understand ancient Egyptians had a mixture of caucasian, negroid, and
> other elements but what is this nonsense with casting actors of bantu
> background as Egyptians?
The massive majority of Egyptians were caucasian, of semitic stock to be
exact (like today's Arabs, and Jews). As for why some idiots think
they're black, they're just white supremists needing to convince
themselves that negroes invented civilisation because otherwise they
think people won't respect negro culture.
I personally fully respect negro culture already, am *fully comfortable*
with myself in acknowledging that Egyptians were white (apart from
slaves), without in any way taking away from black culture or heritage.
I do not need to make up lies to myself in order to lead a satisfying
life.
Foresight
> unsuccesful attempt at proving that negroes have a rich cultural
> history, too.
>
Napoleon's soldiers shooting off the nose of the Sphinx was that it was
Negroid in appearance.
Sawfish
My guess is that the source of this information is the same as the source
for the fact that Beetovan was black.
Just how sure are you that the nose was actually shot off? I can recall
enough contra info that the idea of shooting it off (before the negroid
nonsense) was merely an urban legend.
More research needed.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"If we use Occam's Razor, whose razor will *he* use?" --Sawfish
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Matt Giwer
>
> recently all depictions of egyptians in movies have tended to favor
> black actors.
>
> I understand ancient Egyptians had a mixture of caucasian, negroid, and
> other elements but what is this nonsense with casting actors of bantu
> background as Egyptians?
Using accuracy and Hollywood in the sentence is like using Clinton and
honesty in the same sentence.
--
The rush to make each dinosaur extinction explanation
look worse than the lastleaves us to ask how anything
survived.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 364
Matt Giwer
And the fact is the nose was missing when his troops got there.
--
I'm serious. What does Jesse Jackass do for a living?
-- The Iron Webmaster, 393
tim gueguen
"Matt Giwer" <jul...@ij.net> wrote in message
news:3A7C549F...@ij.net...
> "MAN...an ancient race aka Pugnacio" wrote:
> >
> > Blacks have been insisting ridiculously that Egyptians were black and
> > recently all depictions of egyptians in movies have tended to favor
> > black actors.
> >
> > I understand ancient Egyptians had a mixture of caucasian, negroid, and
> > other elements but what is this nonsense with casting actors of bantu
> > background as Egyptians?
>
> Using accuracy and Hollywood in the sentence is like using Clinton and
> honesty in the same sentence.
>
salient characteristics.
tim gueguen 101867
tim gueguen
<ci...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:95gpep$s5g$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
tim gueguen 101867
Cherokee Hall
And the slaves where also the Arabic/Jewish and some blacks.
"James" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:3A7C05...@nospam.com...
Matt Giwer
Those who insist upon calling known facts lies and then imputing
dishonesty have an impervious belief structure very like those who
believe Abraham, Moses, David, Solomon and most others were other than
myths.
--
Some peoples' memories only work backwards.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 63
Matt Giwer
Is that why people the world over study the Bantu philophers and attend
concerts playing the works of Zulu composers?
Are you dumbing down "rich," "cultural" or both?
--
If drugs are as bad as they say there is nothing
the law can do to a user that is worse.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 97
MAN...an ancient race aka Pugnacio
a few african kingdoms created great sculpture and metallurgy, but even
they didn't have the written language. and much of their wealth was
derived from selling blacks first to arabs and then to whites.
and most africans had great drum music.
but please do inform me as the great subsaharan african discoveries and
advances in:
science
law
philosophy
religion
painting
architecture(okay, there was zimbabwe and the kingdom of kush)
literature
medicine
textiles
and such.
I have an open mind.
--
http://www.koreananimals.org/dogs.htm
http://www.koreananimals.org/cats.htm
http://thenewrepublic.com/ & http://www.newcriterion.com/
http://www.observer.com/arts.htm
http://www.chicagoreader.com/movies/
http://www.villagevoice.com/film/
a photo of yours truly:
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Square/8781/seadevil.jpg
Matt Giwer
And he is ready to scream "racist" at anyone who does not expand to
couple modest examples, isolated in space and time, to all of Africa at
all times. It is the nature of the beast.
--
Weyland-Yutani. Making space a better place to scream.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 325
Tom Lehman
Egyptians as Black(for lack of a better term) in feature. Possibly the
older term Negroid would be a better descriptive in this case. Anyway an
ancient African based civilization scares some people. Really, little is
known about ancient Ethiopia too.
With the main trade route running north-south along the Nile,
pre-Alexander, this makes even more sense.
Tom
"MAN...an ancient race aka Pugnacio" wrote:
hamilton
> Any ancient art I've seen, that that pre-dates Alexander, sure portrays the
> Egyptians as Black(for lack of a better term) in feature. Possibly the
> older term Negroid would be a better descriptive in this case. Anyway an
> ancient African based civilization scares some people. Really, little is
> known about ancient Ethiopia too.
>
> With the main trade route running north-south along the Nile,
> pre-Alexander, this makes even more sense.
the old tomb drawings clearly show both semitic peoples [most of the
Egyptian rulers and their courts are portrayed this way] and negroid
peoples. the differences in how they are portrayed is quite obvious.
Clearly Egypt and the whole area was a place where different peoples and
cultures came together -- which was true of most places where great
progress was made -- but the primary racial group in Egypt before the
Ptolomeys appears to have been more like the mediterranean people than the
subsuharan African people.
Man...an ancient race(Best but not not the Beast)
"Tom Lehman" <TLe...@Lor.net> wrote in message
news:3A7C71E2...@Lor.net...
> Any ancient art I've seen, that that pre-dates Alexander, sure portrays
the
> Egyptians as Black(for lack of a better term) in feature. Possibly the
> older term Negroid would be a better descriptive in this case. Anyway an
> ancient African based civilization scares some people. Really, little is
> known about ancient Ethiopia too.
>
> With the main trade route running north-south along the Nile,
> pre-Alexander, this makes even more sense.
>
> Tom
>
i think if we use the american definition of black with the one drop rule,
then you're right. but in terms of racial mixture based on dna data, were
egytians more caucasian or negroid?
i've also seen egyptian paintings where egyptians clearly distinguish
themselves from nubians who are black.
Lord Jubjub
Pugnacio <anthon...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Blacks have been insisting ridiculously that Egyptians were black and
> recently all depictions of egyptians in movies have tended to favor
> black actors.
>
> I understand ancient Egyptians had a mixture of caucasian, negroid, and
> other elements but what is this nonsense with casting actors of bantu
> background as Egyptians?
The ancient Egyptians were probably not causasoid to any extent, but
they were not sub-Saharan, either. Many Mediterranean and Near East
cultures were in existence at the time the Indo-Europeans began to
spread.
The original northern European stock has since been largely displaced by
the southerners migrating into their areas.
--
Lord Jubjub
Ruler of the Jabberwocky, Guardian of the Wabe, Prince of the Slithy Toves,
Leader of the raths
tim gueguen
> tim gueguen wrote:
> >
> > <ci...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:95gpep$s5g$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > > In article <95gfir$m74$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> > > MAN...an ancient race aka Pugnacio <anthon...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Blacks have been insisting ridiculously that Egyptians were black
and
> > > > recently all depictions of egyptians in movies have tended to favor
> > > > black actors.
> > > >
> > > > I understand ancient Egyptians had a mixture of caucasian, negroid,
> > > and
> > > > other elements but what is this nonsense with casting actors of
bantu
> > > > background as Egyptians?
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > My guess is misguided political correctness. A ridiculous and
> > > unsuccesful attempt at proving that negroes have a rich cultural
> > > history, too.
> > >
> > And in what way does Africa not have a rich cultural history?
>
> Is that why people the world over study the Bantu philophers and attend
> concerts playing the works of Zulu composers?
>
forgot for an instant who I'm talking to.
tim gueguen 101867
tim gueguen
> tim gueguen wrote:
> >
> > "Matt Giwer" <jul...@ij.net> wrote in message
> > news:3A7C549F...@ij.net...
> > > "MAN...an ancient race aka Pugnacio" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Blacks have been insisting ridiculously that Egyptians were black
and
> > > > recently all depictions of egyptians in movies have tended to favor
> > > > black actors.
> > > >
> > > > I understand ancient Egyptians had a mixture of caucasian, negroid,
and
> > > > other elements but what is this nonsense with casting actors of
bantu
> > > > background as Egyptians?
> > >
> > > Using accuracy and Hollywood in the sentence is like using Clinton and
> > > honesty in the same sentence.
> > >
> > Anyone who knows you Matty knows that honesty isn't exactly one of your
> > salient characteristics.
>
> Those who insist upon calling known facts lies
Which is what you do incessantly. After all the large majority of your
Usenet posts have been in one way or another attempts to deny the Holocaust.
tim gueguen 101867
Matt Giwer
Yes you are very silly if not down right stupid.
But you do a great job of proving liberals have IQs in the 50-60 range
and liberals can not object as IQ is meaningless to them.
As to your list of composers, not quite in the list of classics are
they.
--
If Israel were Yugoslavia, Tel Aviv would be rubble.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 106
Matt Giwer
Observing the fact of the absense of physical evidence of gas chambers
is not an attempt but an observation.
Only an IQ 60s drooler would think anecdote and stories is physical
evidence.
--
I have never had any plans to get out of this world alive.
I hope you didn't either.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 194
dart...@my-deja.com
slaves. It's pretty simple to glance at their paintings found in
various tombs and such and decipher the ways in which the Egyptians
artistically portrayed themselves. Don't the pictures appear sort of
Arabic-looking?
In article <95gfim$m73$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
Helen & Bob
tim gueguen wrote:
> Which is what you do incessantly. After all the large majority of your
> Usenet posts have been in one way or another attempts to deny the Holocaust.
>
> tim gueguen 101867
Mr. Gueguen, is Mr. Giwer on of silly fools who say the holocost never happened,
or is he one of the vile neonazis that say the same thing? For anybody who says
it never happened must be one of the two. Is it not interesting that Eisenhower
insisted on filming all the over 100 death camps in Germany, and made the local
people go into the camps to make sure they knew it happened also. And he
predicted there would be some who would say it never happened. That's why it is
so well documented.
What fools these nazi's be.
Bob
MuckiePup
"MAN...an ancient race aka Pugnacio" wrote:
>
> Blacks have been insisting ridiculously that Egyptians were black and
> recently all depictions of egyptians in movies have tended to favor
> black actors.
>
> I understand ancient Egyptians had a mixture of caucasian, negroid, and
> other elements but what is this nonsense with casting actors of bantu
> background as Egyptians?
Egyptians were black. Black as coal ... or a little black any way.
We ALL are black. Black as coal ... or a little black any way.
MuckiePup
Matt Giwer wrote:
> -- The Iron Webmaster
The Iron Webmaster!
The dildo of choice for geeks world wide!
The Iron Webmaster has surpassed the Steely Dan in sales!!
The Iron Webmaster!!! (by Ronco)
MuckiePup
Matt Giwer wrote:
> Observing the fact of the absense of physical evidence of gas chambers
> is not an attempt but an observation.
>
> Only an IQ 60s drooler would think anecdote and stories is physical
> evidence.
SO my silly little dildo, I sure you have gone to Germany and Poland to
confirm for yourself that those places thought to have been
concentration camps, that have been persevered with gas chambers intact,
are merely phony hollywood type sets meant to hoax us all, correct?
Surly you wouldn't get the idea in your head that "the absence of
physical evidence of gas chambers" is fact, solely from reading material
sent to you from the Tom Metzger Publishing Company?
A smart dildo like you would absolutely have to go check that out for
yourself, wouldn't you?
MuckiePup
Matt Giwer wrote:
> But you do a great job of proving liberals have IQs in the 50-60 range
> and liberals can not object as IQ is meaningless to them.
More carping about "liberals" from the scared lil' dildo.
Over and over you prove what an insecure and frightened bunch your ilk
on the far-right be.
"O' woe is us! Someone of another race, creed, color, religion or sex,
might come and take our stuff!!! OR worse yet, MAKE US SHARE IT!!"
...that's what it boils down to, doesn't it?
Take racism, xenophobia, homophobia, misogyny and torture a philosophy
to wrapped up it up in and call it conservatism. But it's still all
about not having to share a piece of the pie with anyone who you feel is
your inferior.
Man...an ancient race(Best but not not the Beast)
"Helen & Bob" <chil...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:3A7CE3E3...@ix.netcom.com...
I don't think people who deny the nazi genocide of the jews are necessarily
neo-nazi or a silly fool.
people's understanding of history comes from what they've read. if giwer
mainly read literature that denies or debunks the nazi genocide of the jews,
then he will think what he thinks.
i've always thought that the nazi genocide of the jews did happen and
millions of jews perished and hitler was one megamurderous loon.
but i've been misled and lied to by the mainstream media and historians, and
so i'm not surprised that some people go overboard with their skepticism of
all mainstream 'truth'.
but even today, much of the mainstream versions of history are horrendously
misleading or slanted.
but let's not lose sight of what the nazis were about. even if they hadn't
killed a single jew, their record against slavic peoples, their ruthless
expansionist policies and their antidemocratic campaigns make them bungholes
indeed.
Jason McNorton
says...
You're so full of shit that I'm stunned.
Katherine Griffis
soc.history.ancient, wrote the following:
>"Foresight" <fore...@glibnet.net> writes:
>
>>> My guess is misguided political correctness. A ridiculous and
>>> unsuccesful attempt at proving that negroes have a rich cultural
>>> history, too.
>>>
>>There's a theory doing the rounds in some circles that the motivation for
>>Napoleon's soldiers shooting off the nose of the Sphinx was that it was
>>Negroid in appearance.
>
>My guess is that the source of this information is the same as the source
>for the fact that Beetovan was black.
>
>Just how sure are you that the nose was actually shot off? I can recall
>enough contra info that the idea of shooting it off (before the negroid
>nonsense) was merely an urban legend.
>
>More research needed.
In another thread on a Usenet newsgroup, Troy Sagrillo gave both the
answer and citations to your question. He noted:
"...The *fact* remains that in AH 780 (1378 CE), the nose, ears, and
face (all mentioned specifically) were damaged by a sufi of the khanqah
of Sa`id al-Su`ada, nicknamed "Sa'im al-dahr" ('He Who Constantly
Fasts', something forbidden in Islam, btw). This is reported in
al-Maqrizi's "Khitat". See:
al-Maqrizi, Taqi al-Din Ahmad ibn `Ali ibn `Abd al-Qadir ibn Muhammad,
and Gaston Wiet. 1924. el-Mawa`iz wa'l-i`tibar fi dhikr el-khitat
wa'l-athar. Volume 4: Deuxieme partie, chapt. L-XCIV. Memoires publies
par les membres de l'Institut francais d'archeologie orientale du Caire
49. Cairo: Imprimerie de l'Institut francais d'archeologie orientale.
section 2:415.
al-Rashidi (who died in AH 803/1400-1 CE) wrote those who mutilate the
monuments of the pharaohs are NOT doing Islam a service. He specifically
mentioned how the sahabah (the Companions of the Prophet PBUH) did not
harm the Sphinx, and then launches into an attack on the iconoclasts of
Sa'im al-dahr's day for doing so. (source: Haarmann, Ulrich. 1980.
"Regional Sentiment in Medieval Islamic Egypt." Bulletin of the School
of Oriental and African Studies 43:64 citing ibn `Abd al-Salam, Fayd,
folio 52a-b)."
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 09:54:49 -0600
Subject: Re: The ORIGINAL Sphinx...
From: Troy Sagrillo <mesh...@hotmail.com>
Newsgroups: alt.history.ancient-egypt
Message-ID: <B5515769.591E%mesh...@hotmail.com>
Selim Hassan noted similar information in his work, _The Sphinx: Its
History in Light of Recent Excavations_ (Government Press: Cairo, 1949)
81-83. Sa'im al-dahr is said to have pried off the nose with a crowbar
to deface the Sphinx's nose since, al-Maqrizi cites, as late as this
period, some Egyptians were still burning milk-thistle (shuka'a) and
safflower (badhaward) at the foot of the Sphinx and murning a verse 63
times in hope that their wishes would be fulfilled; the extremist sufi
took it upon himself to destroy the object of their idolatry.
Tom Holmberg, in writing his Napoleon FAQ on this topic, Sa'im al-Dahr's
fate is also known:
".... According to one account, Haarmann [1980: cited, supra] states,
the residents in the neighborhood of the Sphinx were so upset by the
destruction that they lynched him and buried him near the great monument
he ruined."
Tom Holmberg, in writing on this topic vis a vis the oft-repeated
folktale that Napoleon's troops had defaced the Sphinx, also noted:
"...European visitors to Egypt prior to Napoleon's expedition had
already discovered the vandalism to the Sphinx. In 1546, for example,
when Dr.Pierre Belon explored Egypt, he visited 'the great colossus.'
'The Sphinx,' writes Leslie Greener in _The Discovery Of Egypt_ (London,
Cassell, 1966), p.38, by this time 'no longer [had] the stamp of grace
and beauty so admired by Abdel Latif in 1200.' Greener goes on to say:
'this exonerates the artillerymen of Napoleon Bonaparte, who have the
popular reputation of having used the nose of the Sphinx as a target.'
The charge against Napoleon is particularly unjust because the French
general brought with him a large group of 'savants' to conduct the first
scientific study of Egypt and its antiquities."
Mr. Holmberg's full FAQ on this aspect of the Sphinx's damage can be
found at
http://www.historyserver.org/napoleon.series/
Go to FAQ ---> #11: Did Napoleon's troops shoot the nose off the
Sphinx?
HTH.
Regards --
Katherine Griffis-Greenberg
Member, American Research Center in Egypt
International Association of Egyptologists
University of Alabama at Birmingham
Special Studies
http://www.griffis-consulting.com
Reading mail from me in a Usenet group does not
grant you the right to send me unsolicited commercial e-mail.
All senders of unsolicited commercial e-mail will be
reported to their postmasters as Usenet abusers.
Helen & Bob
I live in a neighborhood with a lot of retired military. I have a neighbor
around the corner, Jack, who is in his late 70's early 80's. Jack was one of
the first GI's to enter a concentration camp. He saw it. He has told me some
of it. Jacks comment is that anybody who doesn't believe it was true is an
idiot or a nazi.
In the 24 years I have lived in this house, Jack has never lied to me.
Bob
Pappachulo Rico Suave'
MAN...an ancient race aka Pugnacio <anthon...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Blacks have been insisting ridiculously that Egyptians were black and
> recently all depictions of egyptians in movies have tended to favor
> black actors.
>
> I understand ancient Egyptians had a mixture of caucasian, negroid,
and
> other elements but what is this nonsense with casting actors of bantu
> background as Egyptians?
>
> http://www.koreananimals.org/dogs.htm
> http://www.koreananimals.org/cats.htm
> http://thenewrepublic.com/ & http://www.newcriterion.com/
> http://www.observer.com/arts.htm
> http://www.chicagoreader.com/movies/
> http://www.villagevoice.com/film/
> a photo of yours truly:
> http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Square/8781/seadevil.jpg
>
> Sent via Deja.com
> http://www.deja.com/
>
Hell,I'd be black too if I ran around in the desert naked all the time.I
guess they had'nt discovered sun tan lotion yet!!
Pappachulo Rico Suave'
ci...@my-deja.com wrote:
> In article <95gfir$m74$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> MAN...an ancient race aka Pugnacio <anthon...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Blacks have been insisting ridiculously that Egyptians were black
and
> > recently all depictions of egyptians in movies have tended to favor
> > black actors.
> >
> > I understand ancient Egyptians had a mixture of caucasian, negroid,
> and
> > other elements but what is this nonsense with casting actors of
bantu
> > background as Egyptians?
> >
> > --
> unsuccesful attempt at proving that negroes have a rich cultural
> history, too.
>
OUCH!!!
Pappachulo Rico Suave'
"Foresight" <fore...@glibnet.net> wrote:
> > My guess is misguided political correctness. A ridiculous and
> > unsuccesful attempt at proving that negroes have a rich cultural
> > history, too.
> >
for
> Napoleon's soldiers shooting off the nose of the Sphinx was that it
was
> Negroid in appearance.
>
Pappachulo Rico Suave'
Man...an ancient race(Best but not not the Beast)
>
> I live in a neighborhood with a lot of retired military. I have a
neighbor
> around the corner, Jack, who is in his late 70's early 80's. Jack was one
of
> the first GI's to enter a concentration camp. He saw it. He has told me
some
> of it. Jacks comment is that anybody who doesn't believe it was true is
an
> idiot or a nazi.
> In the 24 years I have lived in this house, Jack has never lied to me.
> Bob
>
That's exactly my point. I believe it happened. I trust that most
historians are benders and twisters of truth but never such liars that they
cooked it all up.
A guy like Jack saw it with his own eyes.
And you know him personally. but an overly distrustful person who has read
only one kind of literature--say, the works of david irving--might have a
different view of what happened.
There are some people today who think stalin was a good guy.
BLVD1940
Since, the GI's didn't free any concentration camps that historians think were
extermination camps, don't you think your Jack could be wrong?
Matt Giwer
>
> Matt Giwer wrote:
>
> > But you do a great job of proving liberals have IQs in the 50-60 range
> > and liberals can not object as IQ is meaningless to them.
>
> More carping about "liberals" from the scared lil' dildo.
>
> Over and over you prove what an insecure and frightened bunch your ilk
> on the far-right be.
Shouldn't you be doing your homework?
> "O' woe is us! Someone of another race, creed, color, religion or sex,
> might come and take our stuff!!! OR worse yet, MAKE US SHARE IT!!"
>
> ...that's what it boils down to, doesn't it?
Only liberals have that psychotic belief.
> Take racism, xenophobia, homophobia, misogyny and torture a philosophy
> to wrapped up it up in and call it conservatism. But it's still all
> about not having to share a piece of the pie with anyone who you feel is
> your inferior.
Very liberal of you. Now go finish your homework.
--
Even the Boy Scouts are politically incorrect.
What a world, what a world.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 123
Matt Giwer
>
> Matt Giwer wrote:
>
> > Observing the fact of the absense of physical evidence of gas chambers
> > is not an attempt but an observation.
> >
> > Only an IQ 60s drooler would think anecdote and stories is physical
> > evidence.
>
> SO my silly little dildo,
You won't get your homework finished if you keep playing on the
internet.
> I sure you have gone to Germany and Poland to
> confirm for yourself that those places thought to have been
> concentration camps, that have been persevered with gas chambers intact,
> are merely phony hollywood type sets meant to hoax us all, correct?
I see demolished buildings. What do you see, Mr. Rorshach?
> Surly you wouldn't get the idea in your head that "the absence of
> physical evidence of gas chambers" is fact, solely from reading material
> sent to you from the Tom Metzger Publishing Company?
From the information published by the Simon Wiesenthal Center and the
US Holocaust Memorial Museum are more than sufficient to come to that
conclusion.
> A smart dildo like you would absolutely have to go check that out for
> yourself, wouldn't you?
You gay or something?
--
Judaism has evolved beyond its genocidal roots in the Old
Testament. Zionism embraces those roots.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 187
Matt Giwer
>
> tim gueguen wrote:
>
> > Which is what you do incessantly. After all the large majority of your
> > Usenet posts have been in one way or another attempts to deny the Holocaust.
> Mr. Gueguen, is Mr. Giwer on of silly fools who say the holocost never happened,
No holohugger has ever stated the position correctly. That is either a
mental disability or an intention to misrepresent the position.
> or is he one of the vile neonazis that say the same thing? For anybody who says
> it never happened must be one of the two. Is it not interesting that Eisenhower
> insisted on filming all the over 100 death camps in Germany, and made the local
> people go into the camps to make sure they knew it happened also.
Today not even the most committed holohugger says there were
functioning gas chambers in Germany so such filming is meaningless. If
you want it to mean more than that, I have seen some of the US films I
can't tell ethnicity, can you?
> And he
> predicted there would be some who would say it never happened. That's why it is
> so well documented.
> What fools these nazi's be.
So show me the evidence for functioning gas chambers any place. Not a
demolished building with a caption saying so. I want to see the required
engineering features of a cyanide gas chamber.
--
It is an uncompromising world that will not behave
according to one's beliefs.
-- The Iron Webmaster. 248
Matt Giwer
>
I came to the conclusion after reading the material of the people who
promote the occurance of their holocaust. For example the material of
the US Holocaust Memorial Museum, the Simon Wiesenthal Center, Nizkor
and a handful of other aggressively pro-holocaust sources. There is no
need to go any further to see there were no gas chambers.
> i've always thought that the nazi genocide of the jews did happen and
> millions of jews perished and hitler was one megamurderous loon.
>
> but i've been misled and lied to by the mainstream media and historians, and
> so i'm not surprised that some people go overboard with their skepticism of
> all mainstream 'truth'.
The requirement is to provide physical evidence of gas chambers,
buildings, rooms, whatever with features which implement the required
engineering properties to handle cyanide such that they could function
as described.
> but even today, much of the mainstream versions of history are horrendously
> misleading or slanted.
And they are also the sole basis for the belief that gas chambers
existed.
> but let's not lose sight of what the nazis were about. even if they hadn't
> killed a single jew, their record against slavic peoples, their ruthless
> expansionist policies and their antidemocratic campaigns make them bungholes
> indeed.
Compared to the Allies they are rank amateurs barely learning the ropes
of such things.
--
Welcome to another edition of Florida!
Two men enter. One man leaves.
Gore Master. Daley Blaster.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 352
Dawn Taylor
> More carping about "liberals" from the scared lil' dildo.
> Only liberals have that psychotic belief.
> Very liberal of you. Now go finish your homework.
Garsh. Somebody done learned themselves a new word.
Dawn
-----------------
The people who are regarded as moral luminaries are those who forego
ordinary pleasures themselves and find compensation in interfering
with the pleasures of others. - Bertrand Russell
Matt Giwer
GIs never liberated any camp which today is claimed to have had
functioning gas chambers. So if he said he saw gas chambers he was just
repeating the post war lies told to him by his superiors.
--
In WWII Britain used the old "start a world war to prevent
a world war" trick. Some say it worked better than could
have been imagined.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 28
Dawn Taylor
>No holohugger has ever stated the position correctly.
Holohugger? What was that you were saying in that other thread about
not having any use for "Newspeak"?
Being a paranoid, ignorant, unbalanced nutball is bad enough. You
could at least be consistant about it.
Dawn
(is that so much to ask)
Matt Giwer
>
> >
> neighbor
> > around the corner, Jack, who is in his late 70's early 80's. Jack was one
> of
> > the first GI's to enter a concentration camp. He saw it. He has told me
> some
> > of it. Jacks comment is that anybody who doesn't believe it was true is
> an
> > idiot or a nazi.
> > In the 24 years I have lived in this house, Jack has never lied to me.
> > Bob
> >
>
> That's exactly my point. I believe it happened. I trust that most
> historians are benders and twisters of truth but never such liars that they
> cooked it all up.
You believe because you trust the victors' historians? Why in heavens
name would you do that? For the record NO academically credentialed
historian has addressed the existance of gas chambers.
What little is left of the gas chamber myth today is based upon a joint
Russian-Polish document partially read into the record at Nuremberg and
written by the same people who concluded Germany committed the massacre
at Katyn Woods.
That is hardly what a rational person would accept.
> A guy like Jack saw it with his own eyes.
GIs never got near Poland so it is impossible for any of them to have
seen today's remaining Egresses ... er... gas chambers.
> And you know him personally. but an overly distrustful person who has read
> only one kind of literature--say, the works of david irving--might have a
> different view of what happened.
>
> There are some people today who think stalin was a good guy.
And there are people who thing Britain was one of the good guys for
putting the entire resources of over one billion people enslaved by
Britain to saving Britain's sorry ass.
--
I have never had any plans to get out of this world alive.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 61
Matt Giwer
population.
And from mummies melanin content can be measured.
And they were not black.
--
Watch this SIG!
-- The Iron Webmaster, 177
Helen & Bob
Matt Giwer wrote:
> Helen & Bob wrote:
>
> > I live in a neighborhood with a lot of retired military. I have a neighbor
> > around the corner, Jack, who is in his late 70's early 80's. Jack was one of
> > the first GI's to enter a concentration camp. He saw it. He has told me some
> > of it. Jacks comment is that anybody who doesn't believe it was true is an
> > idiot or a nazi.
> > In the 24 years I have lived in this house, Jack has never lied to me.
>
> GIs never liberated any camp which today is claimed to have had
> functioning gas chambers. So if he said he saw gas chambers he was just
> repeating the post war lies told to him by his superiors.
>
> --
>
Vas you dere, Sharlie?
Jack was.
Bob
Cox, Michael
several years ago, and I thought I would share with you all what I learned
via discussion and a few books I had read.
The theory that the Ancient Egyptians were black, and that the Greeks got
their culture from the (Black) Egyptians (ergo, Western Civilization is
descended from a Black Civilization) was promugated in a book called "Black
Athena" written by Martin Benal.
I tried to read the book once. In my opinion it is poorly written, and the
arguments are not convincing, but I only got through a couple of chaters
before I couldn't take reading it any more. I would not recommend anyone
read it, just my opinion on it.
Two books that refute Mr. Benal's theories, that I found very interesting
and well written were :"Not our of Africa" and "Black Athena Re-visited". I
do not remember the Authoress's name. I recommend them to anyone
interersted in reading further on this issue.
Another book that is pertinent to the discussion is Basil Davidson "History
of Africa", which discusses the different physical characteristics of the
Negroid races.
The Ancient egyptians do not help to resolve the issue either. They were
very adept at depicting the different racial and ethnic groups they dealt
with, but they used a special "Color Scheme" to show themselves. Because a
North-Eastern African might have a "semetic" apearing nose, and because the
Egyptians wore wigs and artifical beards, it is hard to use their scuptures
to clarify the issue as to whether they were black or caucasian either.
I haven't read if any DNA testing has been done on any mummies to clarify
the issue once and for all. I am of the opinion, after what I have read, is
that the Ancient Egyptians were probably pretty much as they are today,
brown skinned, a mixture of African and Middle Eastern people.
Bye
Mike
<dart...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:95in44$8ni$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> No, I don't think the ancient Egyptian people were black, aside from
> slaves. It's pretty simple to glance at their paintings found in
> various tombs and such and decipher the ways in which the Egyptians
> artistically portrayed themselves. Don't the pictures appear sort of
> Arabic-looking?
>
>
> In article <95gfim$m73$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
Matt Giwer
>
> On Sun, 04 Feb 2001 17:43:52 GMT, Matt Giwer <jul...@ij.net> wrote:
>
> >No holohugger has ever stated the position correctly.
>
> Holohugger? What was that you were saying in that other thread about
> not having any use for "Newspeak"?
It refers to those in the holocaust industry.
http://www.normanfinkelstein.com if you are interested.
> Being a paranoid, ignorant, unbalanced nutball is bad enough. You
> could at least be consistant about it.
>
> Dawn
> (is that so much to ask)
Is it too much to ask you to read 1984 and discover Newspeak refers to
new meanings for existing words and not the creation of new words?
Is it too much to ask you to know the subject before you post?
--
The difference between men and women in the bathroom
is that men look before they squat. Is it easier to
train men to put it down or women to just look?
-- The Iron Webmaster, 369
tim gueguen
"Matt Giwer" <jul...@ij.net> wrote in message
news:3A7CD534...@ij.net...
> tim gueguen wrote:
> >
> > "Matt Giwer" <jul...@ij.net> wrote in message
> > news:3A7C5C72...@ij.net...
> > > tim gueguen wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Matt Giwer" <jul...@ij.net> wrote in message
> > > > news:3A7C549F...@ij.net...
> > > > > "MAN...an ancient race aka Pugnacio" wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Blacks have been insisting ridiculously that Egyptians were
black
> > and
> > > > > > recently all depictions of egyptians in movies have tended to
favor
> > > > > > black actors.
> > > > > >
negroid,
> > and
> > > > > > other elements but what is this nonsense with casting actors of
> > bantu
> > > > > > background as Egyptians?
> > > > >
and
> > > > > honesty in the same sentence.
> > > > >
> > > > Anyone who knows you Matty knows that honesty isn't exactly one of
your
> > > > salient characteristics.
> > >
> > > Those who insist upon calling known facts lies
> >
> > Which is what you do incessantly. After all the large majority of your
> > Usenet posts have been in one way or another attempts to deny the
Holocaust.
>
> is not an attempt but an observation.
>
the Holocaust. Indeed, you should be honest and admit your real problem
with the Holocaust is that Hitler didn't kill enough Jews and other
"subhumans."
tim gueguen 101867
tim gueguen
"Helen & Bob" <chil...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:3A7CE3E3...@ix.netcom.com...
>
>
> tim gueguen wrote:
>
> > Usenet posts have been in one way or another attempts to deny the
Holocaust.
> >
>
> Mr. Gueguen, is Mr. Giwer on of silly fools who say the holocost never
happened,
> or is he one of the vile neonazis that say the same thing?
Under his own name, or aliases such as Louis Epstein, Giwer is one of the
better known online denier kooks, having been at it since the days of
Fidonet. If you're really bored you can read about ole Matthias at
http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/g/giwer-matt/
tim gueguen 101867
Matt Giwer
> Vas you dere, Sharlie?
> Jack was.
Then he should document it before he dies because the official US
history of WWII does not mention liberating any camp in Poland. Current
history mentions no functioning gas chambers in Germany. Even Simon
Wiesenthal and Eli Wiesel said there were none in Germany nearly thirty
years ago.
Jack's knowledge should not remain hidden from the world. Don't forget
to have him describe liberating it singlehanded.
When I was growing up just after WWII, even us kids knew not to take
war stories seriously. The adult joke was, "What did you do in the war,
Daddy." I suggest you learn the frequent and liberal usage of grains of
salt which even pre-teens had in the 1950s.
--
I have a deal with Reagan, Bush, Clinton, John Paul II, Limbaugh,
Moses, Jesus Christ, Mohamet, and all the Gods and Goddesses.
I don't speak for them and they don't speak for me.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 147
BLVD1940
You are one of the few people, that would think Jack had seen gas chambers in
those camps. Even most of the anti-Revisionist historians admit that the GI's
didn't see any extermination camps.
Tom Lehman
because the main trade route in Egypt would be on a north-south basis along the
Nile river.
Of course having Oprha playing Cleo rather than Liz would be amusing
speculation. :o)
Tom
louisa
> Your view is well balanced. I would tend to favor a Blacker
pre-Alexander Egypt
> because the main trade route in Egypt would be on a north-south basis
along the
> Nile river.
>
> Of course having Oprha playing Cleo rather than Liz would be amusing
> speculation. :o)
>
> Tom
Cleopatra was a Ptolomey was she not? They were of definitely caucasian
descent -- no question at all of her being sub saharan African in
heritage.
Susan Umpleby
news:3A7DA78B...@Lor.net...
> Your view is well balanced. I would tend to favor a Blacker pre-Alexander
Egypt
> because the main trade route in Egypt would be on a north-south basis
along the
> Nile river.
>
> Of course having Oprha playing Cleo rather than Liz would be amusing
> speculation. :o)
>
> Tom
-------------Cleopatra was Greek, not Egyptian. Her father was Ptolemy
Auletes, and she was the last of the Ptolemaic kings of Egypt. Alexander
the Great appointed the first Ptolemaic king after conquering Egypt.
Tom Lehman
first paragraph I mentioned pre-Alexander.
By the same token, what do you know about Siwah. A greek god(?) worshiped in
the middle of the Egyptian desert pre- Alexander. Interesting anomaly?
Tom
Tom Lehman
Tom
Matt Giwer
The subject is gas chambers. That there is something called holocaust
does not mean there were gas chambers any more than something called
Christmas means there was a Christ.
The greatest lie is not that there were gas chambers. The greatest lie
is that there is no doubt.
> Indeed, you should be honest and admit your real problem
> with the Holocaust is that Hitler didn't kill enough Jews and other
> "subhumans."
That sounds like the Israeli view of Palestinians.
--
Only Israelis think murder is trivial as long as it it not Jews.
Palestinian deaths do no count for them as they do not consider
Palestinians to be human.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 277
Matt Giwer
Why refer people to forgeries?
Matt Giwer
>
> Your view is well balanced. I would tend to favor a Blacker pre-Alexander Egypt
> because the main trade route in Egypt would be on a north-south basis along the
> Nile river.
Yes but ... nothern trade was to the east overland and the entire
eastern Med by sea. Any southern trade leading to darker would have a
northern trade leading to lighter.
So far as I am aware we don't know much about the intermarriage habits
of the non-royalty. But if they married with the next village and at
even a two mile village separation that would be 500 generations for a
gene at one end to reach the other end. At 15 years per generation that
is 7500 years.
In a more realistic diffussion sense we would expect to find a rapid
increase in darker skins in the southern couple hundred miles and a
similar proponderance of Mediterannean types in the northern couple
hundred miles. In the middle we would expect more or less the same
people who retreated there from the spread of the desert in the Sahara.
Which begs the question of what were they like. The presumption is
caucasian but that doesn't narrow it down very much.
> Of course having Oprha playing Cleo rather than Liz would be amusing
> speculation. :o)
Too mature. Watching Black comedy night on the WB network should result
in someone the right age -- and even more ridiculous.
--
Even paranoids have enemies.
Only paranoids create them.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 119
Tom Lehman
was up and down the Nile. Ethiopia presents an interesting ancient case too.
Tom
Matt Giwer
Alright already.
Besides, it has been done. See the movie Wholely Moses however it is
spelled.
--
If you can't say something good about the dead don't say anything at
all.
Gus Hall is dead and that's good.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 240
Matt Giwer
>
> I dunno. Alexandria wasn't founded until the time of Alexander. Most of the action
> was up and down the Nile. Ethiopia presents an interesting ancient case too.
May I inquire what founding Alexandria had to do with the existance of
sea trade in Egypt? Not being sarcastic but he did not introduce sea
trade to Egypt.
I have not come across anything on the subject of founding that city
other than it happened. I note it was not a tradition in those days to
take over the cities of others unless there were few to no surviors.
Also, who wanted to go native if they didn't have to.
I would guess what he did after founding the city was to order all
shipping to go through his city so that he could tax it coming and
going. And that taxation being the reason for building the city.
--
France sent Inspector Clouseau to assist Lt. Frank Drebbin
in the investigation of Waco.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 305
Katherine Griffis
soc.history.ancient, wrote the following:
>Thank you, Susan. That was a joke. :o) = joke. Particularly, since in the
>first paragraph I mentioned pre-Alexander.
>
>By the same token, what do you know about Siwah. A greek god(?) worshiped in
>the middle of the Egyptian desert pre- Alexander. Interesting anomaly?
Uhm, no. Siwa is the name of an oasis located in the Western Desert of
Egypt, where an Alexandrine oracular shrine to Amun as Jupiter Ammon was
established. In the form of Min-Amun, the god was worshipped as an
oracular omphalos-shaped deity since the Late Period, just before the
Alexandrine conquest of Egypt.
At Siwa, Alexander built a Temple to the Oracle at Siwa, which is about
14 x 22 m in size. It is thought that Alexander favored the area (there
is a myth he was buried there, although most Roman histories claim his
body was to be found in Alexandria itself, where his general Ptolemy
buried him).
However, the identification of Amun with Jupiter was definitely of
Alexandrine creation.
Regards --
Katherine Griffis-Greenberg
Member, American Research Center in Egypt
International Association of Egyptologists
University of Alabama at Birmingham
Special Studies
http://www.griffis-consulting.com
Reading mail from me in a Usenet group does not
grant you the right to send me unsolicited commercial e-mail.
All senders of unsolicited commercial e-mail will be
reported to their postmasters as Usenet abusers.
Susan Umpleby
> Thank you, Susan. That was a joke. :o) = joke. Particularly, since in
the
> first paragraph I mentioned pre-Alexander.
>
> By the same token, what do you know about Siwah. A greek god(?) worshiped
in
> the middle of the Egyptian desert pre- Alexander. Interesting anomaly?
--------------Siwah was not a god. It was an oasis and the site of the
Temple of Ammon. Ammon was an Egyptian god, originally of reproductive
forces & later identified with the sun god Ra--came to be known as Ammon-Ra
("the father of the gods, the fashioner of men, the creator of cattle, the
lord of all being." ). As such he became the highest god of the Egyptians.
As Ammon was also worshipped in such Greek colonies as Cyrene, he came to be
identified with Zeus & laster the Roman's Jupiter. And *that* is why
Alexander stopped & consulted the oracle at the Temple of Ammon in Siwah--he
claimed to be a direct descendent of Zeus. It rather helped cement his
mastery of Egypt, as the Egyptians believed their pharoahs to incarnations
of their god Ammon-Ra.
Tom Lehman
oracle of Jupiter a Greek god was worshiped in its Egyptian manifestation.
Prior to Alexander there was no harbor along the Egyptian coast---an oracle
devoted to a Greek god in the middle of the Egyptian desert---bizzare.
Tom
Tom Lehman
than the name of a god.
Alexander drawing a parallel between his god and the god of the Egyptians makes
sense!
I wonder if there has been any historical research or historical archeology done
in that area around Siwah?
Here's an interesting url relating to ancient Ethiopia,
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/nubia1.html
Tom
Raul Bloodworth
news:95jsj5$ll$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <3A7C5CEA...@ij.net>,
> Matt Giwer <jul...@ij.net> wrote:
> > tim gueguen wrote:
> > >
> > > <ci...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> news:95gpep$s5g$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > > > In article <95gfir$m74$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> > > > MAN...an ancient race aka Pugnacio <anthon...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > > Blacks have been insisting ridiculously that Egyptians were
> black and
> > > > > recently all depictions of egyptians in movies have tended to
> favor
> > > > > black actors.
> > > > >
> negroid,
> > > > and
> > > > > other elements but what is this nonsense with casting actors of
> bantu
> > > > > background as Egyptians?
> > > > >
> > > > My guess is misguided political correctness. A ridiculous and
> > > > unsuccesful attempt at proving that negroes have a rich cultural
> > > > history, too.
> > > >
> > > And in what way does Africa not have a rich cultural history?
> >
> > Is that why people the world over study the Bantu philophers and
> attend
> > concerts playing the works of Zulu composers?
> >
> > Are you dumbing down "rich," "cultural" or both?
> >
> > --
> > If drugs are as bad as they say there is nothing
> > the law can do to a user that is worse.
> > -- The Iron Webmaster, 97
> >
>
> ZULU COMPOSERS!!??Give me a break!!!
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com
> http://www.deja.com/
I dunno, listen to their war 'ditties' in "Zulu" and tell me it's not
persuasive.
Raul Bloodworth
news:3a869447....@news.pacifier.com...
> On Sun, 04 Feb 2001 17:33:43 GMT, Matt Giwer <jul...@ij.net> wrote:
>
> > More carping about "liberals" from the scared lil' dildo.
>
> > Only liberals have that psychotic belief.
>
> > Very liberal of you. Now go finish your homework.
>
> Garsh. Somebody done learned themselves a new word.
>
> Dawn
>
>
> -----------------
> The people who are regarded as moral luminaries are those who forego
> ordinary pleasures themselves and find compensation in interfering
> with the pleasures of others. - Bertrand Russell
>
> http://www.dvdjournal.com
> da...@dvdjournal.com
>
That the L-word or the D-word?
Katherine Griffis
soc.history.ancient, wrote the following:
>I should have been more clear in that I was referring to Siwah as a place where an
>oracle of Jupiter a Greek god was worshiped in its Egyptian manifestation.
>
>Prior to Alexander there was no harbor along the Egyptian coast---an oracle
>devoted to a Greek god in the middle of the Egyptian desert---bizzare.
Uhm, what does a coast have to do with the worship of Min-Amun at Siwa?
The worship of this god is established in Egypt at least as far back as
Middle Kingdom, and at Siwa since the Late Period (pre-Alexander
conquest). It is only when _Alexander arrives_ does *he* equate the
Egyptian god Min-Amun with the god Jupiter. The Egyptians never did.
It's called syncretism, BTW [Reconciliation or fusion of differing
systems of belief, as in philosophy or religion, especially when success
is partial or the result is heterogeneous].
Katherine Griffis-Greenberg
Member, American Research Center in Egypt
International Association of Egyptologists
University of Alabama at Birmingham
Special Studies
http://www.griffis-consulting.com
Reading mail from me in a Usenet group does not
grant you the right to send me unsolicited commercial e-mail.
All senders of unsolicited commercial e-mail will be
reported to their postmasters as Usenet abusers.
==============
Matt Giwer
Is it different from listening to an opera in Italian?
Please do not expect anyone to take you seriously in the implication
you know the subject.
--
<a href="http://www.giwersworld.org/holo2/holo-faq.phtml">This is
where I come from and have been.</a>
-- The Iron Webmaster, 157
patrick burke
> Tom Lehman wrote:
> >
> > I dunno. Alexandria wasn't founded until the time of Alexander. Most
of the action
> > was up and down the Nile. Ethiopia presents an interesting ancient case
too.
>
> May I inquire what founding Alexandria had to do with the existance of
> sea trade in Egypt? Not being sarcastic but he did not introduce sea
> trade to Egypt.
I think he was implying that the bulk of trade in Egypt flowed up and
down the Nile. While I would not speculate on the amount, a great deal of
trade did flow in that way, and Egypt drew a great part of her wealth from
Africa.
>
> I have not come across anything on the subject of founding that city
> other than it happened. I note it was not a tradition in those days to
> take over the cities of others unless there were few to no surviors.
> Also, who wanted to go native if they didn't have to.
Actually most of the cities Alexander took simply surrendered and were
spared, inhabitants and all. Tyre and a few others resisted and were
destroyed. Founding cities was a part of the Greek concept of kingship, a
holdover from all those colonies. Alexander founded them all over his
empire, largely to settle his veterans in. The Alexandria in Egypt was
merely the most successful, more likely due to the Ptolomies than Alexander.
Helen & Bob
Matt Giwer wrote:
> "Man...an ancient race(Best but not not the Beast)" wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > I live in a neighborhood with a lot of retired military. I have a
> > neighbor
> > > around the corner, Jack, who is in his late 70's early 80's. Jack was one
> > of
> > > the first GI's to enter a concentration camp. He saw it. He has told me
> > some
> > > of it. Jacks comment is that anybody who doesn't believe it was true is
> > an
> > > idiot or a nazi.
> > > In the 24 years I have lived in this house, Jack has never lied to me.
> > > Bob
> > >
> >
> > That's exactly my point. I believe it happened. I trust that most
> > historians are benders and twisters of truth but never such liars that they
> > cooked it all up.
>
> You believe because you trust the victors' historians? Why in heavens
> name would you do that? For the record NO academically credentialed
> historian has addressed the existance of gas chambers.
>
>
Jahwohl, herr untergruppenfuehrer. Sie hatte gericht.
Sehr Gut, das todtmachen der juden, Ja?
Bob
Helen & Bob
tim gueguen wrote:
> "Helen & Bob" <chil...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
>
> >
> > Mr. Gueguen, is Mr. Giwer one of silly fools who say the holocost never
> happened,
> > or is he one of the vile neonazis that say the same thing?
>
> Under his own name, or aliases such as Louis Epstein, Giwer is one of the
> better known online denier kooks, having been at it since the days of
> Fidonet. If you're really bored you can read about ole Matthias at
> http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/g/giwer-matt/
>
> tim gueguen 101867
Thank you. He IS a glib liar, but a liar nonetheless.
I will no longer read his missives.
Bob
tim gueguen
> tim gueguen wrote:
> >
> > "Helen & Bob" <chil...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
> > news:3A7CE3E3...@ix.netcom.com...
> > >
> > >
> > > tim gueguen wrote:
> > >
> > > > Which is what you do incessantly. After all the large majority of
your
> > > > Usenet posts have been in one way or another attempts to deny the
> > Holocaust.
> > > >
> > > > tim gueguen 101867
> > >
> > > Mr. Gueguen, is Mr. Giwer on of silly fools who say the holocost never
> > happened,
> > > or is he one of the vile neonazis that say the same thing?
> >
> > Under his own name, or aliases such as Louis Epstein, Giwer is one of
the
> > better known online denier kooks, having been at it since the days of
> > Fidonet. If you're really bored you can read about ole Matthias at
> > http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/g/giwer-matt/
>
> Why refer people to forgeries?
>
you'll accuse Deja of falsification if people use it to gather some of your
notorious "bon mots."
tim gueguen 101867
tim gueguen 101867
Tom Lehman
Then would Isis, be more of the African oriented god?
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/nubia1.html
Tom
Katherine Griffis
soc.history.ancient, wrote the following:
>Ah. Sort of the same view of Alexander and Ammon/Zeus as Arrian.
Exactly. My point is that it was the Alexandrine influence that
identified _their_ Greek gods with the Egyptian equivalents. Herodotus,
Diodorus, Strabo, and so on, carry this sort of syncretism on in their
writings, although by the Roman Period, the deity Isis' worship had
spread to most of the Mediterranean world, primarily due to the
Ptolemaic influence.
>Then would Isis, be more of the African oriented god?
>
>http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/nubia1.html
She is an indigenous _Egyptian_ deity, if that is what you mean. She is
a politically-oriented deity, evolved to support the institution of
kingship, and is mentioned as far back as the Pyramid Texts of the Old
Kingdom (ca. 2500 BCE). The goddess herself absorbed almost all
attributes of other Egyptian goddesses by the end of the Late Period
(ca. 600 BCE), and by the time of Alexander and the Ptolemies (ca. 330
BCE), all of her attributes were a combination of a multitude of
Egyptian and other ANE powerful goddesses. The Greeks and Ptolemaic
writers tended to then syncretize these functions into identification
with _their_ goddesses as well.
Read Apuleius' work, _The Golden Ass_, for the "Self-Described
Attributes of the Goddess Isis," for how this syncretism occurred.
Another book worth reading on the issue of syncretism of Egyptian
deities by the Greeks would be
Witt, R.E. _The Goddess Isis in the Greco-Roman World_. (aka _Isis in
the Ancient World_.) 1997 (rept). (Boston: John Hopkins Univ Press).
See Amazon at
rick++
south.
Two of the dynasties were probably numbian.
Didn't matter as much as today.
Talented people of all backgrounds rose in the civil service,
including foreigners like Joseph and Moses.
Osiris
Matt Giwer <jul...@ij.net> wrote:
> because they left mummies. And from a wide cross-section of the
> population.
>
> And from mummies melanin content can be measured.
>
> And they were not black.
>
With several rather cleverly crafted sentence fragments you attempt to
imply that:
1. AE mummies have been tested for melanin content, and
2. The results definitively prove that they were not "black".
IMO, there either have not been any tests of this sort performed or
there have been but the results were inconclusive re: Egyptian
ethnicity. If they were conclusive, then they would've already been
used as ammunition in the numerous debates that periodically arise
between the Afrocentrists and their detractors on the newsgroups and
elsewhere.
If you actually do know of any studies on the melanin content of AE
mummies then please post a reference.
Osiris
Schlau
Something else to be considered is melanin production can be changed
due to climate, that's why people tan. And diet, age, and sex also
affect melanin production. All of which is why anthropologists haven't
bothered testing for melanin levels yet, it wouldn't prove anything.
--Oscar Schlaf--
skept...@my-deja.com
> > > > > > "MAN...an ancient race aka Pugnacio" wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Blacks have been insisting ridiculously that Egyptians
were
> black
> > > and
> > > > > > > recently all depictions of egyptians in movies have
tended to
> favor
> > > > > > > black actors.
> > > > > > >
> negroid,
> > > and
> > > > > > > other elements but what is this nonsense with casting
actors of
> > > bantu
> > > > > > > background as Egyptians?
> > > > > >
Clinton
> and
> > > > > > honesty in the same sentence.
> > > > > >
> > > > > Anyone who knows you Matty knows that honesty isn't exactly
one of
> your
> > > > > salient characteristics.
> > > >
> > > > Those who insist upon calling known facts lies
> > >
of your
> > > Usenet posts have been in one way or another attempts to deny the
> Holocaust.
> >
chambers
> > is not an attempt but an observation.
> >
> Please stop lying. You know there's a ridiculous amount of evidence
about
problem
> with the Holocaust is that Hitler didn't kill enough Jews and other
> "subhumans."
Giwer said "Using accuracy and Hollywood in the sentence is like using
Clinton and honesty in the same sentence."
I found that an amusing comment, and it would be unexceptional among
any of my friends. Somewhere between that and here you all got back to
discussing WWII yet AGAIN. WWII is not ancient history. Please
remove "Re: Were Egyptians black?" from your titles and betake
yourselves off to alt.revisionism where you belong. You are all
hopeless trolls who are killing this ancients group. NEITHER side does
any credit to your respective causes in the eyes of impartial
observers. Indeed you're all a disgrace.
Skeptical1
skept...@my-deja.com
Giwer said "Using accuracy and Hollywood in the sentence is like using
MAN...an ancient race
> Sehr Gut, das todtmachen der juden, Ja?
> Bob
>
>
wo ist das brot?
--
http://thenewrepublic.com/ & http://www.newcriterion.com/
http://www.observer.com/arts.htm
http://www.chicagoreader.com/movies/
http://www.villagevoice.com/film/
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Square/8781/seadevil.jpg
skept...@my-deja.com
In article <3A7DC862...@Lor.net>,
Tom Lehman <TLe...@Lor.net> wrote:
> I dunno. Alexandria wasn't founded until the time of Alexander.
> Most of the action was up and down the Nile. Ethiopia presents an
> interesting ancient case too.
>
> Tom
>
> Matt Giwer wrote:
>> Yes but ... nothern trade was to the east overland and the
>> entire eastern Med by sea. Any southern trade leading to darker
>> would have a northern trade leading to lighter.
>>
>> So far as I am aware we don't know much about the
>> intermarriage habits of the non-royalty. But if they married with
>> the next village and at even a two mile village separation that
>> would be 500 generations for a gene at one end to reach the other
>> end. At 15 years per generation that is 7500 years.
>>
>> In a more realistic diffussion sense we would expect to find
>> a rapid increase in darker skins in the southern couple hundred
>> miles and a similar proponderance of Mediterannean types in the
>> northern couple hundred miles. In the middle we would expect more or
>> less the same people who retreated there from the spread of the
>> desert in the Sahara. Which begs the question of what were they
>> like. The presumption is caucasian but that doesn't narrow it down
>> very much.
There is a paper which has dealt with migration vs bottleneck:
Matthias Krings, Abd-el Halim Salem, Karin Bauer (1999): "mtDNA
Analysis of Nile River Valley Populations: A Genetic Corridor or a
Barrier to Migration?" (Am. J. Hum. Genet. 64)
A couple of points:
1) Bear in mind they're only looking at female lineage here (mtDNA).
2) There has been no recent rapid replacement, so the Egyptians today
will look pretty much how they always did, though perhaps somewhat
less "caucasoid".
3) While there have not been any significant local barriers to
migration along the Nile River Valley, and although the results
indicate that migrations have occurred in both directions, "these mi-
grations have not been extensive enough to genetically homogenize the
mtDNA gene pools of Nile River Valley populations."
4) The migration of northern mtDNA types to the south is either older
than the migration of southern mtDNA types to the north, or else there
has been less gene flow from north to south than from south to north.
This indicates that Egyptians would be somewhat more "caucasoid" the
further one goes back in time.
5) Egypt and Nubia have had more genetic contact than either has had
with the southern Sudan.
6) The authors *speculate* that the migration from north to south may
coincide with the early Pharaonic colonization of Nubia during the
Middle Kingdom (12th Dynasty, 1991–1785 BC) and New Kingdom (from the
reign of Thotmosis III 1490–1437 BC). The migration from south to north
may coincide with the 25th Dynasty (730–655 BC), when kings from Napata
in Nubia conquered Egypt. The latter would then have had the greater
impact on racial phenotype in the current population.
Here is the abstract:
"To assess the extent to which the Nile River Valley has been a
corridor for human migrations between Egypt and sub-Saharan Africa, we
analyzed mtDNA variation in 224 individuals from various locations
along the river. Sequences of the first hypervariable segment (HV1) of
the mtDNA control region and a polymorphic HpaI site at position 3592
allowed us to designate each mtDNA as being of 'northern' or 'southern'
affiliation. Proportions of northern and southern mtDNA differed
significantly between Egypt, Nubia, and the southern Sudan. At slowly
evolving sites within HV1, northern-mtDNA diversity was highest in
Egypt and lowest in the southern Sudan, and southern-mtDNA diversity
was highest in the southern Sudan and lowest in Egypt, indicating that
migrations had occurred bidirectionally along the Nile River Valley.
Egypt and Nubia have low and similar amounts of divergence for both
mtDNA types, which is consistent with historical evidence for long-term
interactions between Egypt and Nubia. Spatial autocorrelation analysis
demonstrates a smooth gradient of decreasing genetic similarity of
mtDNA types as geographic distance between sampling localities
increases, strongly suggesting gene flow along the Nile, with no
evident barriers. We conclude that these migrations probably occurred
within the past few hundred to few thousand years and that the
migration from north to south was either earlier or lesser in the
extent of gene flow than the migration from south to north."
Skeptical1
Foresight
time. Maybe Usenet isn't a complete waste of time after all.
"Katherine Griffis" <k.gr...@griffis-consulting.com> wrote in message
news:0shq7ts9hb1dm1cm3...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 03 Feb 2001 17:21:50 GMT, m...@q7.com (Sawfish) in
> soc.history.ancient, wrote the following:
>
> >"Foresight" <fore...@glibnet.net> writes:
> >
> >>> My guess is misguided political correctness. A ridiculous and
> >>> unsuccesful attempt at proving that negroes have a rich cultural
> >>> history, too.
> >>>
> >>There's a theory doing the rounds in some circles that the motivation
for
> >>Napoleon's soldiers shooting off the nose of the Sphinx was that it was
> >>Negroid in appearance.
> >
> >My guess is that the source of this information is the same as the source
> >for the fact that Beetovan was black.
> >
> >Just how sure are you that the nose was actually shot off? I can recall
> >enough contra info that the idea of shooting it off (before the negroid
> >nonsense) was merely an urban legend.
> >
> >More research needed.
>
> In another thread on a Usenet newsgroup, Troy Sagrillo gave both the
> answer and citations to your question. He noted:
>
> "...The *fact* remains that in AH 780 (1378 CE), the nose, ears, and
> face (all mentioned specifically) were damaged by a sufi of the khanqah
> of Sa`id al-Su`ada, nicknamed "Sa'im al-dahr" ('He Who Constantly
> Fasts', something forbidden in Islam, btw). This is reported in
> al-Maqrizi's "Khitat". See:
>
> al-Maqrizi, Taqi al-Din Ahmad ibn `Ali ibn `Abd al-Qadir ibn Muhammad,
> and Gaston Wiet. 1924. el-Mawa`iz wa'l-i`tibar fi dhikr el-khitat
> wa'l-athar. Volume 4: Deuxieme partie, chapt. L-XCIV. Memoires publies
> par les membres de l'Institut francais d'archeologie orientale du Caire
> 49. Cairo: Imprimerie de l'Institut francais d'archeologie orientale.
> section 2:415.
>
> al-Rashidi (who died in AH 803/1400-1 CE) wrote those who mutilate the
> monuments of the pharaohs are NOT doing Islam a service. He specifically
> mentioned how the sahabah (the Companions of the Prophet PBUH) did not
> harm the Sphinx, and then launches into an attack on the iconoclasts of
> Sa'im al-dahr's day for doing so. (source: Haarmann, Ulrich. 1980.
> "Regional Sentiment in Medieval Islamic Egypt." Bulletin of the School
> of Oriental and African Studies 43:64 citing ibn `Abd al-Salam, Fayd,
> folio 52a-b)."
>
> Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 09:54:49 -0600
> Subject: Re: The ORIGINAL Sphinx...
> From: Troy Sagrillo <mesh...@hotmail.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.history.ancient-egypt
> Message-ID: <B5515769.591E%mesh...@hotmail.com>
>
> Selim Hassan noted similar information in his work, _The Sphinx: Its
> History in Light of Recent Excavations_ (Government Press: Cairo, 1949)
> 81-83. Sa'im al-dahr is said to have pried off the nose with a crowbar
> to deface the Sphinx's nose since, al-Maqrizi cites, as late as this
> period, some Egyptians were still burning milk-thistle (shuka'a) and
> safflower (badhaward) at the foot of the Sphinx and murning a verse 63
> times in hope that their wishes would be fulfilled; the extremist sufi
> took it upon himself to destroy the object of their idolatry.
>
> Tom Holmberg, in writing his Napoleon FAQ on this topic, Sa'im al-Dahr's
> fate is also known:
>
> ".... According to one account, Haarmann [1980: cited, supra] states,
> the residents in the neighborhood of the Sphinx were so upset by the
> destruction that they lynched him and buried him near the great monument
> he ruined."
>
> Tom Holmberg, in writing on this topic vis a vis the oft-repeated
> folktale that Napoleon's troops had defaced the Sphinx, also noted:
>
> "...European visitors to Egypt prior to Napoleon's expedition had
> already discovered the vandalism to the Sphinx. In 1546, for example,
> when Dr.Pierre Belon explored Egypt, he visited 'the great colossus.'
> 'The Sphinx,' writes Leslie Greener in _The Discovery Of Egypt_ (London,
> Cassell, 1966), p.38, by this time 'no longer [had] the stamp of grace
> and beauty so admired by Abdel Latif in 1200.' Greener goes on to say:
> 'this exonerates the artillerymen of Napoleon Bonaparte, who have the
> popular reputation of having used the nose of the Sphinx as a target.'
> The charge against Napoleon is particularly unjust because the French
> general brought with him a large group of 'savants' to conduct the first
> scientific study of Egypt and its antiquities."
>
> Mr. Holmberg's full FAQ on this aspect of the Sphinx's damage can be
> found at
>
> http://www.historyserver.org/napoleon.series/
> Go to FAQ ---> #11: Did Napoleon's troops shoot the nose off the
> Sphinx?
>
> HTH.
Tom Lehman
physical features attributed by the artists of the different periods to the
people of their time. Generally the artist flatters; wouldn't you say.
Tom
Ned Latham
> Osiris wrote:
> > Matt Giwer wrote:
> > >
> > > because they left mummies. And from a wide cross-section of the
> > > population.
> > >
> > > And from mummies melanin content can be measured.
> > >
> > > And they were not black.
> >
> > With several rather cleverly crafted sentence fragments you attempt to
> > imply that:
> > 1. AE mummies have been tested for melanin content, and
> > 2. The results definitively prove that they were not "black".
> >
> > IMO, there either have not been any tests of this sort performed or
> > there have been but the results were inconclusive re: Egyptian
> > ethnicity. If they were conclusive, then they would've already been
> > used as ammunition in the numerous debates that periodically arise
> > between the Afrocentrists and their detractors on the newsgroups and
> > elsewhere.
> >
> > If you actually do know of any studies on the melanin content of AE
> > mummies then please post a reference.
>
> Something else to be considered is melanin production can be changed
> due to climate, that's why people tan. And diet, age, and sex also
> affect melanin production. All of which is why anthropologists haven't
> bothered testing for melanin levels yet, it wouldn't prove anything.
The important thing to remember is that the Egyptians left multitudes
of depictions of themselves and of the peoples they were in contact
with. Staues in the round, bas-reliefs and full-colour paintings.
The Egyptians were dark (mediterranean dark) but they were not black.
There were some black (Numidian) pharoahs.
--
Ned ++++++ Democracy means "the people rule".
Forget the republic: fight for the power of assent.
To reply, cut out my nose and make the met a net.
Albert Wittmann
Matt Giwer wrote:
> Albert Wittmann wrote:
> >
> > My regrets if you thought that was an attack of a personal nature, it was not
> > intended. I was referring to general racism, and the fact that it is not based in
> > logic.
>
> I have no idea what general racism is. Since the liberals politicised
> there word the best I can tell it means whatever liberals say it means.
I would say it means the belief that noe race is superior to another (religion included)
As long as one doesn't use it to inflict harm or restrict the rights of others, I think it
is a personal issue.
>
>
> > I think that the truth of any subject is important to examine so long as that
> > is the only goal of the discovery. I also feel that if someone suggests something
> > that is politcally incorrect, it should be assumed, unless the person acts or speaks
> > otherwise, that his/her intentions are scholarly in nature. I also think that when
> > someone is called names for brining up these facts, we should examine why this is
> > so.Remember, when the Vietnam War was being protested, these people were dismissed as
> > anti-American radicals. We have a somewhat different picture today. It would make
> > sense that a terribly treated group (American Blacks, Jews, Indians, half of Europe
> > under Napolean, The Roman Empire, et al) would inflate claims against them.
>
> We need also keep in mind many such beliefs are plainly false. European
> royalty suffered under Napolean but the "civilians" never had it so
> good.
There are many Germans who might disagree. Napolean wanted to 'cleanse' the culture of
Germany away. Grimm's Fairy Tales were written primarily to preserve language and culuture
>
> Others are extracted far out of context such as the Amerind story. The
> conflict was initiated by the French and British bringing their European
> conflict to the Americas. In most all subsequent conflicts every
> campaign against one tribe had the cooperation of other tribes. I do not
> intend to argue it here, simply to point out it was much more complex
> than presented today.
Complex indeed, although they were terribly mistreated and pitting two side against each
other doesn't explain the curious lack of land when they stared with most of it. a few
broken treaties wee in there too. That being said. Might makes right and I don't believe we
US need apologize for being the same brutes that every culture has been, including the
Indians themselves.
>
>
> In that regard, the British introduced slavery their American colonies
Yeah, but it stuck around way to long to blame the Brits (this time they get a free ride)
> As to the Jews, presuming you mean in Christian Europe, first we
> recognize the Diaspora is a Jewish myth. It never happened. Any Jews in
> Europe were their by choice. Second we recognize were it not for the
> soft spot for Jews in the Christian heart they would have gone the way
> of the worshippers of Zeus and Odin.
>
> The current cult of victimhood and suffering is disgusting. As little
> as thirty years ago, "Stop whining and grow up!"
>
> > That's
> > human nature. My point is even if these claims are somewhat deflated, what is left is
> > as horrible as any other crime aginst a group of people. I don't belief in justifying
> > by quantifying. If 100 Jews were killed in WWII, they would consider it a holocaust.
>
> More than 100 German civilians were killed in even the most modest of
> Allied air raids. Over 100 Palestian children have been killed in the
> last four months. At your threshold of concern half the countries in the
> world are presently having their "holocausts." And that is very
> politicized word these days, invoked mainly to excuse Israeli atrocities
> but being rapidly appropriated by others for its politcal value.
I actually meant not that 'Jews' would consider it a holocaust, but rather that the hundred
dead would cosider it so. Quantifying suffering (My people had it worse than your people)
is ridiculous and destructive. I don't know whether I believe it is used to excuse Jewish
atrocities, but I know it is used to deflect criticism. Agin, I think this is huma nature,
have a tool, use it. We had Hillary Clinton winning a small Hassidic town by 1400 to 12.
Two other Hassidic communities surrounding it voted the opposite way. Four Rabbis got a
full pardon for steallin FORTY MILLION DOLLARS in money earmarked for education. Several
reporters go to the community and one genious says "This is like Hitler all over again, all
the hate" (paraphrasing closely). If I were a camp survivor I would ahve kicked his ^%^%*&*
ass. Have a tool and use it. Human nature . Every group has people taht practice this.
>
> > We've been around long enough for every race and creed to have suffered under the
> > thumb of another. No single group has ownership of the 'worst' holocaust. They all
> > suck. Allwe can do is try to treat people and governments as fairly and best as we
> > can and hope that history treats us the same.
>
> Pious words are meaningless. When a surviving spouse focuses on the one
> who died for more than a few months it is time for intervention and
> tough love. Sympathy only makes it worse.
>
> Morbid attention towards those one knew long dead borders upon
> psychotic. Such attention upon those one never knew going back centuries
> is truly psychotic.
I agree, that is why we have to be clear and armed with the facts before we trod into
places like Kosovo. History will judge, I think, that we overreacted ther partly because we
were told about the 'horrors of a new Hitler'. I remember being very suspicious at the time
because the death tolls reported were 10 or 20 here and there. I remember extrapolating the
numbers at the time and figuring ou it would have taken 400 years to kill 6 million (forget
about the total number suggested). I always wonder when people think we are that stupid
what they are up to. That kinds of over the top rhetoric turns me off. perhaps we did a
good thing there, but then why the bluster?
>
>
> > Matt Giwer wrote:
> >
> > > Albert Wittmann wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I have read the writings of what people have called 'revisionist'. I think if
> > > > done for the right reason (ie the true nature of the destruction of the
> > > > American Indian culture), it can be enlightening and helpful to undertstand
> > > > motivations of peoples in their histories. We should not get our histories from
> > > > movies and it is quite clear that history is written by the victors in some
> > > > cases (the casualty estimates form the allies, which bombed it for several
> > > > days, was more than double what they first suggest - even they admit it now).
> > > > Beacuse of the way we and others like to feel about themselves as cultures,
> > > > events and numbers tend to be exagerated or played down. That being said, even
> > > > if the Jews were not gassed on the order of millions,
> > >
> > > The only issue is gas chambers.
> > >
> > > > they were brutalized,
> > > > taken from their homes, starved to death, and allowed to spread disease amongst
> > > > themselves in prison camps. I for one would like to know if only 3 million died
> > > > or perhaps 12 million died.
> > >
> > > Considering there were less than 3 million total ever under German
> > > control (assuming they didn't have the sense of a Kosovar to run away)
> > > and given so many today claim to have been holocaust survivors and
> > > considering there are no pre and post war census figures any number, if
> > > large enough and including "likely many more" is acceptable.
> > >
> > > > The events speak for themselves and cannot be muted
> > > > by a revision as long as it is correct. If the views are clear and
> > > > dispassionate, it is useful to examine.
> > >
> > > The only foundation is physical evidence in the strict sense of the
> > > word. In the same sense it is applied in soc.history.ancient. Absent
> > > such evidence it is no more than myth, perhaps since current, it should
> > > be called urban legend.
> > >
> > > > I do find it a bit disturbing that the
> > > > mere mention of these facts brand one a rasist, without a full examination of
> > > > the works and presentaion. A racist will hate with or without the facts.
> > >
> > > Ad hominem is a logical fallacy. Jews are not a race save to the
> > > racists in Israel as demonstrated.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
> > > -- The Iron Webmaster, 419
>
> --
> Goreflash, 79 year old woman picks up returnable bottles
> to support her Winnebago.
> -- The Iron Webmaster, 179
Matt Giwer
>
> Matt Giwer wrote:
>
> > Albert Wittmann wrote:
> > >
> > > My regrets if you thought that was an attack of a personal nature, it was not
> > > intended. I was referring to general racism, and the fact that it is not based in
> > > logic.
> >
> > I have no idea what general racism is. Since the liberals politicised
> > there word the best I can tell it means whatever liberals say it means.
>
> I would say it means the belief that noe race is superior to another (religion included)
> As long as one doesn't use it to inflict harm or restrict the rights of others, I think it
> is a personal issue.
Superiority has never been a topic in this newsgroup. Why are you
trying to bring it up?
> > > I think that the truth of any subject is important to examine so long as that
> > > is the only goal of the discovery. I also feel that if someone suggests something
> > > that is politcally incorrect, it should be assumed, unless the person acts or speaks
> > > otherwise, that his/her intentions are scholarly in nature. I also think that when
> > > someone is called names for brining up these facts, we should examine why this is
> > > so.Remember, when the Vietnam War was being protested, these people were dismissed as
> > > anti-American radicals. We have a somewhat different picture today. It would make
> > > sense that a terribly treated group (American Blacks, Jews, Indians, half of Europe
> > > under Napolean, The Roman Empire, et al) would inflate claims against them.
> >
> > We need also keep in mind many such beliefs are plainly false. European
> > royalty suffered under Napolean but the "civilians" never had it so
> > good.
>
> There are many Germans who might disagree. Napolean wanted to 'cleanse' the culture of
> Germany away. Grimm's Fairy Tales were written primarily to preserve language and culuture
The obligatory "satanic Corsican" prefix to his name was dropped in
general by 1880. I see no reason to attempt to revive it at this late
date.
> > Others are extracted far out of context such as the Amerind story. The
> > conflict was initiated by the French and British bringing their European
> > conflict to the Americas. In most all subsequent conflicts every
> > campaign against one tribe had the cooperation of other tribes. I do not
> > intend to argue it here, simply to point out it was much more complex
> > than presented today.
>
> Complex indeed, although they were terribly mistreated and pitting two side against each
> other doesn't explain the curious lack of land when they stared with most of it. a few
> broken treaties wee in there too. That being said. Might makes right and I don't believe we
> US need apologize for being the same brutes that every culture has been, including the
> Indians themselves.
Your usage of terminology right out of the liberal handbook rather than
from actual records of the events is not a legitimate basis for
discussion in s.h.a. For example, "pitting sides against each other"
does not address the animosity between tribes that was discovered by the
Europeans when they first arrived. The idea of the Amerinds as a
monolithic group is something one can hope Bush's education reform will
help correct.
> > In that regard, the British introduced slavery their American colonies
>
> Yeah, but it stuck around way to long to blame the Brits (this time they get a free ride)
Once something becomes an integral part of an economy it is very
difficult to eradicate. The British and northern interest in low cotton
prices which could only be obtained with the use of slaves is an aspect
of the issue rarely addressed. The education reform plan may also result
in an understanding of the War of Northern Aggression.
> > As to the Jews, presuming you mean in Christian Europe, first we
> > recognize the Diaspora is a Jewish myth. It never happened. Any Jews in
> > Europe were their by choice. Second we recognize were it not for the
> > soft spot for Jews in the Christian heart they would have gone the way
> > of the worshippers of Zeus and Odin.
> >
> > The current cult of victimhood and suffering is disgusting. As little
> > as thirty years ago, "Stop whining and grow up!"
> >
> > > That's
> > > human nature. My point is even if these claims are somewhat deflated, what is left is
> > > as horrible as any other crime aginst a group of people. I don't belief in justifying
> > > by quantifying. If 100 Jews were killed in WWII, they would consider it a holocaust.
> >
> > More than 100 German civilians were killed in even the most modest of
> > Allied air raids. Over 100 Palestian children have been killed in the
> > last four months. At your threshold of concern half the countries in the
> > world are presently having their "holocausts." And that is very
> > politicized word these days, invoked mainly to excuse Israeli atrocities
> > but being rapidly appropriated by others for its politcal value.
> I actually meant not that 'Jews' would consider it a holocaust, but rather that the hundred
> dead would cosider it so.
The opinion of the dead has not been known since seances went out of
fashion.
> Quantifying suffering (My people had it worse than your people)
> is ridiculous and destructive. I don't know whether I believe it is used to excuse Jewish
> atrocities, but I know it is used to deflect criticism.
Read talk.politics.mideast
> Agin, I think this is huma nature,
> have a tool, use it. We had Hillary Clinton winning a small Hassidic town by 1400 to 12.
> Two other Hassidic communities surrounding it voted the opposite way. Four Rabbis got a
> full pardon for steallin FORTY MILLION DOLLARS in money earmarked for education. Several
> reporters go to the community and one genious says "This is like Hitler all over again, all
> the hate" (paraphrasing closely). If I were a camp survivor I would ahve kicked his ^%^%*&*
> ass. Have a tool and use it. Human nature . Every group has people taht practice this.
By the estimate of the Allies in 1946 and by demographics there can be
no more than 10,000 camp survivors alive today in the entire world. I
doubt 14% of them are in one town in New York.
> > > We've been around long enough for every race and creed to have suffered under the
> > > thumb of another. No single group has ownership of the 'worst' holocaust. They all
> > > suck. Allwe can do is try to treat people and governments as fairly and best as we
> > > can and hope that history treats us the same.
> >
> > Pious words are meaningless. When a surviving spouse focuses on the one
> > who died for more than a few months it is time for intervention and
> > tough love. Sympathy only makes it worse.
> >
> > Morbid attention towards those one knew long dead borders upon
> > psychotic. Such attention upon those one never knew going back centuries
> > is truly psychotic.
>
> I agree, that is why we have to be clear and armed with the facts before we trod into
> places like Kosovo. History will judge, I think, that we overreacted ther partly because we
> were told about the 'horrors of a new Hitler'. I remember being very suspicious at the time
> because the death tolls reported were 10 or 20 here and there. I remember extrapolating the
> numbers at the time and figuring ou it would have taken 400 years to kill 6 million (forget
> about the total number suggested). I always wonder when people think we are that stupid
> what they are up to. That kinds of over the top rhetoric turns me off. perhaps we did a
> good thing there, but then why the bluster?
2100 bodies from all causes and by both sides have been found. The
search has been ended with the conclusion there is nothing to support
NATO propaganda. In the process NATO murdered some 600 Yugoslav
civilians.
As GBS wrote, "History as usual will tell lies."
--
If Edgar Bergen had gotten into politics
I would have believed him. His lips
didn't move.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 68
Albert Wittmann
Matt Giwer wrote:
> Albert Wittmann wrote:
> >
> > Matt Giwer wrote:
> >
> > > Albert Wittmann wrote:
> > > >
> > > > My regrets if you thought that was an attack of a personal nature, it was not
> > > > intended. I was referring to general racism, and the fact that it is not based in
> > > > logic.
> > >
> > > I have no idea what general racism is. Since the liberals politicised
> > > there word the best I can tell it means whatever liberals say it means.
> >
> > I would say it means the belief that noe race is superior to another (religion included)
> > As long as one doesn't use it to inflict harm or restrict the rights of others, I think it
> > is a personal issue.
>
> Superiority has never been a topic in this newsgroup. Why are you
> trying to bring it up?
Just giving my view of racism, you said you had no idea what that meant.
Correct, but they managed to live without killing each other off for hundreds of years. Europeans
show up and within a couple of hundred years buffalo are almost extinct and they are all living
on reservations. Come on, that can't be whitewashed. It is the North American Holocaust if you
will. The idea of any group being monolithic is just wrong, yet in general we still refer to
whites, Jews, Europeans out of covenience. I am certainly not a liberal, but I know what I see.
Blacks couldn't pee in the same areas as whites until the ssecond half of last century in
America. Things like this can't and shouldn't be ignored. Nor should they be used as an excuse
for present day behaviors or misfortunes.
>
> > > In that regard, the British introduced slavery their American colonies
> >
> > Yeah, but it stuck around way to long to blame the Brits (this time they get a free ride)
>
> Once something becomes an integral part of an economy it is very
> difficult to eradicate. The British and northern interest in low cotton
> prices which could only be obtained with the use of slaves is an aspect
> of the issue rarely addressed. The education reform plan may also result
> in an understanding of the War of Northern Aggression.
Absolutely. The South would have been brought to its knees because of the way their agrarian
society was based. This does not justify enslavement, however, it simply makes the South's
impetus for secession more understandable and demonizes them less. It is important that people
realize that they wanted to leave the union, not take it over. As a country, however, we embraced
slavery longer than we should have.
>
> > > As to the Jews, presuming you mean in Christian Europe, first we
> > > recognize the Diaspora is a Jewish myth. It never happened. Any Jews in
> > > Europe were their by choice. Second we recognize were it not for the
> > > soft spot for Jews in the Christian heart they would have gone the way
> > > of the worshippers of Zeus and Odin.
> > >
> > > The current cult of victimhood and suffering is disgusting. As little
> > > as thirty years ago, "Stop whining and grow up!"
> > >
> > > > That's
> > > > human nature. My point is even if these claims are somewhat deflated, what is left is
> > > > as horrible as any other crime aginst a group of people. I don't belief in justifying
> > > > by quantifying. If 100 Jews were killed in WWII, they would consider it a holocaust.
> > >
> > > More than 100 German civilians were killed in even the most modest of
> > > Allied air raids. Over 100 Palestian children have been killed in the
> > > last four months. At your threshold of concern half the countries in the
> > > world are presently having their "holocausts." And that is very
> > > politicized word these days, invoked mainly to excuse Israeli atrocities
> > > but being rapidly appropriated by others for its politcal value.
>
> > I actually meant not that 'Jews' would consider it a holocaust, but rather that the hundred
> > dead would cosider it so.
>
> The opinion of the dead has not been known since seances went out of
> fashion.
It is obvious what I meant. The quantification of evil deed means nothing to those who bear its
weight. As always all politics are local and it depends who's ox is getting gored, etc.
>
> > Quantifying suffering (My people had it worse than your people)
> > is ridiculous and destructive. I don't know whether I believe it is used to excuse Jewish
> > atrocities, but I know it is used to deflect criticism.
>
> Read talk.politics.mideast
Both sides in that conflict are not thinking logically, as witnessed by voting for Sharon, the
Jews for doing it and the Arabs for not rallying around Barak (Lesser of two evils for them). I
agree that we are not taught Zionism and the founding of Israel in an unbiased form in this
country (and THAT should be rectified), but there is enough atrocity to go around over
there.................although if you look at the ration of dead Arabs vs. Israelis in this last
'uprising', it is hard not to fault the Jews for overreacting or at least using more force than
was necessary. This cry that 'They want to drive us into the sea' doesn't hold much water as you
are plunking a bunch of rock throwers like target practice.
>
>
> > Agin, I think this is huma nature,
> > have a tool, use it. We had Hillary Clinton winning a small Hassidic town by 1400 to 12.
> > Two other Hassidic communities surrounding it voted the opposite way. Four Rabbis got a
> > full pardon for steallin FORTY MILLION DOLLARS in money earmarked for education. Several
> > reporters go to the community and one genious says "This is like Hitler all over again, all
> > the hate" (paraphrasing closely). If I were a camp survivor I would ahve kicked his ^%^%*&*
> > ass. Have a tool and use it. Human nature . Every group has people taht practice this.
>
> By the estimate of the Allies in 1946 and by demographics there can be
> no more than 10,000 camp survivors alive today in the entire world. I
> doubt 14% of them are in one town in New York.
The total vote in the town was 1400 to 12. Assuming a high turnout (and the fact that it is about
5 blocks square) ther could be 2000 or so people there. I'm sure there are not that many camp
survivors. My point was that the man that called the ghost of Hitler to distract from 4 common
thieves minimizes the suffering of those who were there, and illustrates the using of holocaust
as a weapon to beat people with.
>
>
> > > > We've been around long enough for every race and creed to have suffered under the
> > > > thumb of another. No single group has ownership of the 'worst' holocaust. They all
> > > > suck. Allwe can do is try to treat people and governments as fairly and best as we
> > > > can and hope that history treats us the same.
> > >
> > > Pious words are meaningless. When a surviving spouse focuses on the one
> > > who died for more than a few months it is time for intervention and
> > > tough love. Sympathy only makes it worse.
> > >
> > > Morbid attention towards those one knew long dead borders upon
> > > psychotic. Such attention upon those one never knew going back centuries
> > > is truly psychotic.
> >
> > I agree, that is why we have to be clear and armed with the facts before we trod into
> > places like Kosovo. History will judge, I think, that we overreacted ther partly because we
> > were told about the 'horrors of a new Hitler'. I remember being very suspicious at the time
> > because the death tolls reported were 10 or 20 here and there. I remember extrapolating the
> > numbers at the time and figuring ou it would have taken 400 years to kill 6 million (forget
> > about the total number suggested). I always wonder when people think we are that stupid
> > what they are up to. That kinds of over the top rhetoric turns me off. perhaps we did a
> > good thing there, but then why the bluster?
>
> 2100 bodies from all causes and by both sides have been found. The
> search has been ended with the conclusion there is nothing to support
> NATO propaganda. In the process NATO murdered some 600 Yugoslav
> civilians.
Some holocaust, huh. I bet the Hutu /Tutsi suvivors. might chuckle (+1,000,000 dead) as The Great
NATO told us the Serbs unleashed the greatest swath of genocide since the BIG ONE.
>
>
> As GBS wrote, "History as usual will tell lies."
History tells two stories, it is up to us to examine them both and conclude wherein the truth
lies. If we are lucky, we get pretty close.
crowfoot
that in the Egyptian wall paintings on exhibit at the Metropolitan Museum
of Art the ancient Egyptian tomb painters presented Egyptians as
red-brown, and war captives identified by the Museum's captions as
"Nubian captives" or "Nubian slaves" as black and somewhat different in
facial features from the standardized Egyptian features shown.
This suggests to me a number of things regarding the question raised:
l. The question itself is not illegitimate, although motives for
raising it may be.
2. Perhaps Egyptian society perceived itself as red-brown/tan in order
to differentiate itself from surrounding, "inferior" (that is, colonized
or hoped-to-be-colonized) peoples. Perhaps Egyptian tomb painters,
working for the rich who could afford their services, mirrored this
perception in their work.
3. If there were black slaves taken from surrounding populations --
"foreign" people of very dark skin -- they would be at the bottom of
the social pyramid (foreign, slaves, captives) and black skin could
easily become associated with the lowest social and economic levels
of Egyptian society. Compare modern Brazil, where there is a great
range of skin colors but where pale skin is prized because it is
associated with European ancestry rather than African slave ancestry
or native Indian ancestry. Despite Brazil's official pride in its
racial equality, there is a saying: "In Brazil everyone can get his
hands on a Mercedes: a white man to ride in it, a brown man to open
the door for him, and a black man to wash off the mud." The reality
is a society heavily stratified by skin color, based on who were the
conquerors and the slave-holders, and who was conquered or imported
from Africa as slave-labor.
4. If there were many black slaves taken in war or otherwise obtained
by the Egyptians, there was undoubtedly a good deal of "racial" mixing
going on (as there always is when people of one color have power over
people of another); so there would indeed have been black Egyptians,
even if the Egyptians started out as a predominantly red-brown people.
5. If this resulted in the insistence of the upper classes on relative
pallor as a sign of superiority and "purer" Egyptianness, the painters
of the tomb paintings would perhaps have in fact been showing as
"Egyptians" the kind of people who were paying for their work, ie rich,
red-brown aristocrats. And they would perhaps have shown black people
as slaves and captives to gratify the prejudices and snobbery of their
patrons, and possibly of themselves too, as well as to create pictorial
boasts of Egyptian prowess in battle against surrounding peoples.
That, at any rate, is what I figured might be the some of the
expalantion of this oddity of Egyptian tomb painting. Does anyone here
know more about this art?
Crow
Katherine Griffis
soc.history.ancient, wrote the following:
>When I was teaching Ancient History in High School in New York, I noticed
>that in the Egyptian wall paintings on exhibit at the Metropolitan Museum
>of Art the ancient Egyptian tomb painters presented Egyptians as
>red-brown, and war captives identified by the Museum's captions as
>"Nubian captives" or "Nubian slaves" as black and somewhat different in
>facial features from the standardized Egyptian features shown.
>
>This suggests to me a number of things regarding the question raised:
<snip of speculative motives of the Egyptians having to do with modern
views of "racial bias.">
>That, at any rate, is what I figured might be the some of the
>expalantion of this oddity of Egyptian tomb painting. Does anyone here
>know more about this art?
The ancient Egyptian artist was a keen observer of detail in the foreign
peoples they encountered. So, if they painted foreigners as very pale
or very dark (and they painted all kinds of "foreign" peoples in their
tombs, BTW), they did so because that is how they _appeared_ to them. In
reality, the most significant features of ancient foreigners the
Egyptian artists recorded were hair style, clothing, and, in the case of
the Libyans, their body tattoos/decoration.
Nothing was to be construed by coloration in Egyptian art about social
status (black was a highly regarded color in the Egyptian art palette --
it symbolized rebirth and regeneration, for example, and was also a
reflection of the fertile land of Egypt, which was called /kmt/- "the
black land."). Red/russet brown was a sexual differentiators of males
from the yellower/orange skin-tones of women, likely to distinguish the
physical fact that women worked more indoors (out of the sun) than did
males.
Richard Wilkinson did put the description best when he wrote the
following about the use of color in relation to people representations
in ancient Egyptian art:
"Egyptian men were almost invariably shown with the same russet
or red-brown skin tone which was used for many of the gods, though this
situation should be probably viewed the other way around, since the gods
of the Egyptians were, of course, created in the image of humans. The
color appears from the beginning of the dynastic period and probably
signified nothing more than a tanned, outdoor complexion in contracts to
the paler skin tone of the woman. In that sense, the color is symbolic
rather than naturalistic, yet clearly based upon objective reality.
Foreign peoples of different races were given appropriate
colors, but these were very stylized characterizations. While Nubians
and other peoples to the south of Egypt (including the "Cushite" kings
of the 26th Dynasty) were depicted as black in contrast to the
Egyptians' red- brown colorations, Libyans, Bedouin, Syrians, and
Hittites were all shown with light yellow skin, and these ethnic groups
must be differentiated on the basis of specific clothing and hair
styles...
_**Important for the understanding of Egyptian symbolism,
however, is the fact that skin color alone does not always define ethnic
or racial type.**_ (Emphasis added) For example, because black was used
for underworld deities and by extension became the color of the deceased
(the color of the pitch-covered mummy was also black), its used does not
always signify a dark complexion and can frequently be symbolic. This
can be seen in several representations of Tutankhamen. Usually, this
king is shown in canonical reddish skin used of all Egyptian males,
though occasionally he is shown in a much paler shade.
<...>
In one instance, that of a double cartouche-shaped ointment
container, the two images of the king (Tutankhamen) -- one with pale
pink-tone flesh, the other with the same pink-toned arms and feet, but
with a black face -- are shown side by side in order to portray the king
in life and death. Other variations in canonical skin tone can be
found...In the British Museum's great Harris Papyrus, which records
gifts made by Ramesses III of the 20th Dynasty to temples throughout
Egypt, the king is shown in several vignettes with startling white skin,
and a _yellow_ White Crown, which can be no more realistic than the
black representations already considered (above).
In contrast to the coloration given to men, women are usually
depicted with pale yellow skin in Egyptian art. This probably indicated
the typical indoor occupations of women...Interestingly, yellow was
occasionally used for the skin color of elderly men, probably indicating
their more sedentary and indoor lifestyle. A good deal of variation
existed in the shade and tonal value of the yellow used, however, and
some representations actually use a pale orange color to depict the skin
of Egyptian women. During the Amarna Period women were sometimes shown
in the same red tones as men which may have resulted from the sharing of
gender characteristics often seen in this period, or alternatively, the
desire to avoid the similarity with yellow portraits of goddesses (not
recognized during Aten worship - KGG)...
These, then, are the basic principles of the color symbolism of
Egyptian art. A vital and largely unchanging aspect of Egyptian
painting and sculpture, the significance attached to various colors
seems to have remained, overall, relatively static through the many
centuries of pharaonic history, and is largely accessible to us."
Drawn from:
Wilkinson, R. _Symbol and Magic in Egyptian Art_. 1994. (London:
Thames and Hudson)
I also suggest the following books on matters of ancient attitudes to
ethnicity (rather than presuming upon modern ones):
Snowden, F. M. _Before Color Prejudice: The Ancient View of Blacks_.
1991 (Cambridge: Harvard Univ Press).
Frank M. Snowden, "The Physical Characteristics of Egyptians and Their
Southern Neighbors: The Classical Evidence,"in Celenko, T (ed.), _Egypt
in Africa_. 1996. (Indianapolis: Indiana Univ Press/Indianoplis Museum
of Art): 106-108.
Regards -
John Savard
wrote, in part:
>"O' woe is us! Someone of another race, creed, color, religion or sex,
>might come and take our stuff!!! OR worse yet, MAKE US SHARE IT!!"
>...that's what it boils down to, doesn't it?
>Take racism, xenophobia, homophobia, misogyny and torture a philosophy
>to wrapped up it up in and call it conservatism. But it's still all
>about not having to share a piece of the pie with anyone who you feel is
>your inferior.
A racist is someone who wants to put obstacles in the way of people of
different colors so that they can't earn money to buy their own stuff.
As far as not wanting to have one's own stuff _stolen_ by other people
who don't have as much, yes, *lots* of people feel that way.
Decent people do care enough about those less fortunate as to be
willing to share _what they feel they can afford to share_. But losing
control is not an option; being subject to the dictation of others who
might feel envy and even hatred of you is not acceptable. So we *will*
spend billions on guns to keep out any invading armies from China or
Africa or wherever.
If you want to help the poor people of the world, look for realistic
schemes by which the rich countries can _afford_ to share more.
Something to reduce the threat of war; something to ensure that money
spent in poor countries will bring _permanent_ good results, not just
palliation that will be swallowed up by dictators or population
increase.
Tell the rich people of the world to just lie down and be raped, and
you won't get a positive answer.
John Savard
http://home.ecn.ab.ca/~jsavard/crypto.htm
427 FORD
"Raul Bloodworth" <r...@spamless.edu> wrote:
> "Pappachulo Rico Suave'" <bull...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> news:95jsj5$ll$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > Matt Giwer <jul...@ij.net> wrote:
> > > tim gueguen wrote:
> > > >
> > > > <ci...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> > news:95gpep$s5g$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > > > > In article <95gfir$m74$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> > wrote:
> > > > > > Blacks have been insisting ridiculously that Egyptians were
> > black and
> > > > > > recently all depictions of egyptians in movies have tended
to
> > favor
> > > > > > black actors.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I understand ancient Egyptians had a mixture of caucasian,
> > negroid,
> > > > > and
> > > > > > other elements but what is this nonsense with casting actors
of
> > bantu
> > > > > > background as Egyptians?
> > > > > >
> > > > > My guess is misguided political correctness. A ridiculous and
> > > > > unsuccesful attempt at proving that negroes have a rich
cultural
> > > > > history, too.
> > > > >
> > >
> > > Is that why people the world over study the Bantu philophers and
> > attend
> > > concerts playing the works of Zulu composers?
> > >
> > > Are you dumbing down "rich," "cultural" or both?
> > >
> > > --
> > > If drugs are as bad as they say there is nothing
> > > the law can do to a user that is worse.
> > > -- The Iron Webmaster, 97
> > >
> >
> > ZULU COMPOSERS!!??Give me a break!!!
> >
> >
> persuasive.
>
--
There's no substitute for cubic inches!!
SPQR AUGUSTA
Matt Giwer
> If you want to help the poor people of the world, look for realistic
> schemes by which the rich countries can _afford_ to share more.
> Something to reduce the threat of war; something to ensure that money
> spent in poor countries will bring _permanent_ good results, not just
> palliation that will be swallowed up by dictators or population
> increase.
Isn't that the sort of thing Miss America contestants say they wish to
dedicate their lives?
The reality is as it has been through all recorded history, a country
can have peace if it wants peace. The leader, even a dictator, having
the long term interests of his people in mind will not have revolution
or internal cooperation with an invader.
It is not rich against poor. The world is not Marxist.
--
Here is the rule and read it clear, only the US government can
invoke god and no one else can.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 167
Walter L. Williams
>
> Blacks have been insisting ridiculously that Egyptians were black and
> recently all depictions of egyptians in movies have tended to favor
> black actors.
>
> I understand ancient Egyptians had a mixture of caucasian, negroid, and
> other elements but what is this nonsense with casting actors of bantu
> background as Egyptians?
>
My Western Civilization text does not indicate wether they were
white or black. Some of the art shown in the book shows them as
being darker complected but not "black".
If will help to tell you this. I let a Egyptian individual (a fellow
member of my church) stay with me for a couple of weeks. He seemed
a member of the caucasoid branch of the human family to me. With the
exception that he left me holding the bag with an $80.00 phone bill
to Egypt.
Another thing, and I'm not trying to start a racest
argument either, I don't thing the Isrealites would
not have stayed long in Egypt if the residents were
black. This is, however, just my opinion.
Hope this helps
WW