A blue eyed white man founded Martial Arts!
M.A.J.I.C
"blue-eyed barbarian" and "blue-eyed monk". He is also said to have had
red hair.
M.A.J.I.C
Allan Matthews
Majesti...@webtv.net says...
> His name was Bodhidharma. Chinese writers referred to him as the
> "blue-eyed barbarian" and "blue-eyed monk".
Where? I have never seen him described or depicted this way in any of
the texts I've read. Given that he was from India such descriptions
would be very odd indeed. There aren't many Indians with blue eyes.
> He is also said to have had red hair.
Funny that all the Chinese pictures and statues of him show him with the
coloration one would expect of someone from India - dark hair, skin and
eyes. The porcelain statue of him in the V&A museum in London is an
excellent example.
Of course the depictions also show that he cut off his eyelids so that
he wouldn't fall asleep during meditation.
The Chinese usually referred to Bodhidharma with monikers such as "the
bearded barbarian" or "the bearded foreigner" (foreigner and barbarian
being the same thing in their eyes).
You white power rangers can't get anything right.
allan
--
allan_m...@bigfoot.com
=========================================
A monk asked the Master: "Why did
Bodhidharma come to China?"
The Master answered "The oak tree in the
front garden."
=========================================
http://www2.shore.net/~matthews/
M.A.J.I.C
The error that you made, dumbass, was opening up your asshole and
spewing forth your ignorant shit.
>>Here's a site for reference;
>>http://www.tang-soo-do.co.uk/thestyle.html
>Nothing there about Bodhidharma being anything
>but Indian, just like I said.
I never said he wasn't an Indian, idiot. You challenged my claim that he
had blue eyes, so I provided you with a site that confirmed my claim. I
can provide more sites for reference, midjet.
>How many blue-eyed,
>red-haired Indians do you know
How many red-haired blue-eyed Welsh do you know? There exists probably
none now a days, but in Roman times they were plentiful in that area
(Wales). How many red-haired Germans do you know? They're rare in
Germany now, but in Roman times, all Germans were described as having
red hair. So by your childish reasoning, there must have never been
red-haired Welsh or Germans in large numbers simply because they are
rare in those countries now a days. See what an idiot you are?
Allan Matthews
>
> The error that you made, dumbass, was opening up your asshole and
> spewing forth your ignorant shit.
In other words, you still can't point out my error.
> >>Here's a site for reference;
> >>http://www.tang-soo-do.co.uk/thestyle.html
> >Nothing there about Bodhidharma being anything
> >but Indian, just like I said.
>
> I never said he wasn't an Indian, idiot. You challenged my claim that he
> had blue eyes, so I provided you with a site that confirmed my claim.
All it does is make the claim. It provides no confirmation of it.
> I can provide more sites for reference, midjet.
Can you provide me with the original Chinese texts that your claim
supposedly is based on?
> >How many blue-eyed,
> >red-haired Indians do you know
>
> How many red-haired blue-eyed Welsh do you know?
A couple. I am Welsh, after all.
> There exists probably none now a days,
Bzzzzzz! Wrong answer. Thanks for playing.
> but in Roman times they were plentiful in that area
> (Wales).
The ethnic composition of the people populating Cymru today is quite a
bit different than that which lived in the area 2000 years ago. Indeed,
Ireland is probably a better approximation of the ethnic composition of
Cymru 2000 years ago.
> How many red-haired Germans do you know?
The number of Germans I know is too small to use as a reasonable
statistical sample to base opinions regarding their range of hair color
on.
> They're rare in Germany now,
> but in Roman times, all Germans were described as having
> red hair.
Proof?
Of course, the composition of the population of Germany has also changed
significantly since Roman times.
> So by your childish reasoning, there must have never been
> red-haired Welsh or Germans in large numbers simply because they are
> rare in those countries now a days.
Clearly you have no clue as to what my reasoning actually is.
And, BTW, your evidence to support your inference that Indians with blue
eyes and red hair were more common in the first centuries A.D. than they
are now is what, exactly? In other words, just what is the statistical
probability that Bodhidharma had blue eyes and red hair if he was from
the India of that time period?
> See what an idiot you are?
Actually, you're still the idiot, as you have missed my basic argument
completely. I pointed out that there are no depictions of Bodhidharma
in any text or in any art work I have ever seen (which is quite a bit)
that back up your claims regarding his appearance. All the ones I've
seen actually contradict it. He is always depicted, not surprisingly,
as dark haired and dark eyed.
And, not surprisingly, you have yet to do anything other than wave your
arms in the air when asked for proof of your claim.
Simply repeating your claim is not proof. Neither is pointing to a
website that simply repeats it.
allan
--
allan_m...@bigfoot.com
=================================================
Someone asked Zen Master Hyang Gok,
"What is great liberation?"
He replied, "Mad cow crossed a big river."
=================================================
http://www.shore.net/~matthews/
saka...@my-deja.com
> Funny that all the Chinese pictures and statues of him show him with
the
> coloration one would expect of someone from India
India was invaded by a few different ethny :
- One of them being the aryans from Iran in a latter date they formed
the brahmani caste
- Greek army with the leadership of Alexander
In the infamous region between India and Pakistan (Kashmir)there must
be some sighting of blue eyes and red haired.I met quiet a few
pakistani with blond hair (redish) and blue or green eyes .
Hassani youssouf
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Dan
Allan Matthews wrote:
> In article <5144-39E...@storefull-156.iap.bryant.webtv.net>,
> Majesti...@webtv.net says...
> > >Funny then that you can't point out my error.
> >
> > The error that you made, dumbass, was opening up your asshole and
> > spewing forth your ignorant shit.
>
> In other words, you still can't point out my error.
>
> > >>Here's a site for reference;
> > >>http://www.tang-soo-do.co.uk/thestyle.html
> > >Nothing there about Bodhidharma being anything
> > >but Indian, just like I said.
> >
> > I never said he wasn't an Indian, idiot. You challenged my claim that he
> > had blue eyes, so I provided you with a site that confirmed my claim.
>
> All it does is make the claim. It provides no confirmation of it.
>
Did you bother reading the entire article the guy cited? Here's a bit you
must have missed:
"Chinese writers refer to him as the "blue-eyed barbarian. " He is most
often depicted balding, with a beard, a pot belly, and having blue or
blue-green eyes, He was most probably born in Kanchipuran, India (near
Madras). It is almost certain he was the son of a lesser of the warrior caste,
but there are some indications he may have been of mixed caste of
Brahaman-Kshyatriya (priest-warrior caste). The clue being his caucasoid
features."
I've read similar accounts in books on the history of the martial arts
I've read.
M.A.J.I.C
>confirmation of it.
Retard, there are many sites that make this claim, some of which are
Chinese owned. Are you saying that they are all lying about this?
Where's your proof then?
>>I can provide more sites for reference, midjet.
>Can you provide me with the original Chinese texts
>that your claim supposedly is based on?
I will search for the text for you, idiot. It is somewhere on the
internet, I believe.
>>>How many blue-eyed,
>>>red-haired Indians do you know
>>How many red-haired blue-eyed Welsh do you
>>know?
>A couple. I am Welsh, after all.
A couple, that's all? Just as expected.
>There exists probably none now a days,
Bzzzzzz! Wrong answer. Thanks for playing.
Idiot.
>>but in Roman times they were plentiful in that area
>>(Wales).
>The ethnic composition of the people populating
>Cymru today is quite a bit different than that which
>lived in the area 2000 years ago. Indeed, Ireland is
>probably a better approximation of the ethnic
>composition of Cymru 2000 years ago.
>>How many red-haired Germans do you know?
>The number of Germans I know is too small to use
>as a reasonable statistical sample to base opinions
>regarding their range of hair color on.
I will answer it for you, idiot. They are rare in Germany.
>>They're rare in Germany now,
>>but in Roman times, all Germans were described as
>>having red hair.
>Proof?
For reference, just read Tacitus or Vitruvius.
>Of course, the composition of the population of
>Germany has also changed significantly since
>Roman times.
>>So by your childish reasoning, there must have
>>never been red-haired Welsh or Germans in large
>>numbers simply because they are rare in those
>>countries now a days.
>Clearly you have no clue as to what my reasoning
>actually is.
Your reasoning is that because there are hardly any blue eyed people in
India now, Bodhidharma must not have had blue eyes.
>And, BTW, your evidence to support your inference
>that Indians with blue eyes and red hair were more
>common in the first centuries A.D. than they are
>now is what, exactly?
Bodhidharma had blue eyes, which suggests that there 'might' have been
more blue eyed people in India than there are now. But then again, he
could have just been an albino, but isn't that what white people are,
albinos?
>In other words, just what is
>the statistical probability that Bodhidharma had blue
>eyes and red hair if he was from the India of that
>time period?
What is the stastical probability for an Iranian having blue eyes? Very
low, but they do exist. So even if blue eyes were rare in India in
Bodhidharma's time, that doesn't mean he could not have had blue eyes.
>>See what an idiot you are?
>Actually, you're still the idiot,
A pot-kettle-black and an I-know-you-are-but-what-am-I all in the same
sentence. Nice going, jackass.
>as you have missed
>my basic argument completely.
>I pointed out that
>there are no depictions of Bodhidharma in any text
>or in any art work
Are you saying that the web-site I refered you to is lying? If so, then
please provide me with some proof that they are telling a fib. I'm
waiting.
>I have ever seen (which is quite a
>bit) that back up your claims regarding his
>appearance.
When were these art depictions made and where?
>All the ones I've seen actually
>contradict it.
See above.
>He is always depicted, not surprisingly,
>as dark haired and dark eyed.
See above.
>And, not surprisingly, you have yet to do anything
>other than wave your arms in the air when asked for
>proof of your claim.
I gave you proof. You, on the other hand, have not. Your word alone does
not constitute evidence.
>Simply repeating your claim is not proof.
Back at you, moron.
>Neither is
>pointing to a website that simply repeats it.
At least it's more proof than you have given me to support you claims.
M.A.J.I.C
http://www.hsuyun.org/Dharma/nanhua/7thworld/c4p1.html
As you can see, idiot (yes, that means you, Allan), the author of this
page is Chinese. So this rules out the work of a "white power ranger".
Now what proof do you have that she/he is lying?
Paul Kekai Manansala
Majesti...@webtv.net (M.A.J.I.C) wrote:
> His name was Bodhidharma. Chinese writers referred to him as the
had
> red hair.
>
This is just a legend connected with the Shaolin temple. There are many
written legends out there, some giving very ancient origins to Tai Chi.
Some have chosen this legend because it fits into worldviews that come
from the same common root as yours.
At one time, there were very serious historians (like Harold Lamb) who
tried to claim Genghis Khan was a blue-eyed, red-haired "Aryan". They
did this by distorting a few isolated verses here and there. For
example, one description of Genghis has having "cat-like eyes" was
somehow interpreted as meaning they were light in color.
Regards,
Paul Kekai Manansala
--
Check out http://AsiaPacificUniverse.com/
M.A.J.I.C
>Harold Lamb) who tried to claim Genghis Khan was
>a blue-eyed, red-haired "Aryan". They did this by
>distorting a few isolated verses here and there. For
>example, one description of Genghis has having
>"cat-like eyes" was somehow interpreted as
>meaning they were light in color.
Are you saying that the descriptions of Bodhidharma are being distorted
by Europeons? If so, then give me your proof.
Hey, aren't you that same idiot who claimed that the ancient Egyptians
were black?? Are you a negro?
The fact is, he was a blue-eyed. This is how Chinese refered to him.
Face it, the inventor of martial arts was not of your kind!
Allan Matthews
says...
>
>
> Allan Matthews wrote:
>
> > In article <5144-39E...@storefull-156.iap.bryant.webtv.net>,
> > Majesti...@webtv.net says...
> > > >Funny then that you can't point out my error.
> > >
> > > The error that you made, dumbass, was opening up your asshole and
> > > spewing forth your ignorant shit.
> >
> > In other words, you still can't point out my error.
> >
> > > >>Here's a site for reference;
> > > >>http://www.tang-soo-do.co.uk/thestyle.html
> > > >Nothing there about Bodhidharma being anything
> > > >but Indian, just like I said.
> > >
> > > I never said he wasn't an Indian, idiot. You challenged my claim that he
> > > had blue eyes, so I provided you with a site that confirmed my claim.
> >
> > All it does is make the claim. It provides no confirmation of it.
> >
>
Yes.
> Here's a bit you must have missed:
>
> "Chinese writers refer to him as the "blue-eyed barbarian. " He is most
> often depicted balding, with a beard, a pot belly, and having blue or
> blue-green eyes, He was most probably born in Kanchipuran, India (near
> Madras). It is almost certain he was the son of a lesser of the warrior caste,
> but there are some indications he may have been of mixed caste of
> Brahaman-Kshyatriya (priest-warrior caste). The clue being his caucasoid
> features."
As I said, claims but no evidence. BTW, most Indians are caucasoid,
regardless of the darkness of their skin.
> I've read similar accounts in books on the history of the martial arts
> I've read.
Big deal. That is not evidence.
allan
--
allan_m...@bigfoot.com
=========================================
"Did you make mankind after we made you?"
- from XTC's "Dear God"
=========================================
http://www2.shore.net/~matthews/
Allan Matthews
Majesti...@webtv.net says...
> >At one time, there were very serious historians (like
> >Harold Lamb) who tried to claim Genghis Khan was
> >a blue-eyed, red-haired "Aryan". They did this by
> >distorting a few isolated verses here and there. For
> >example, one description of Genghis has having
> >"cat-like eyes" was somehow interpreted as
> >meaning they were light in color.
>
>
> Are you saying that the descriptions of Bodhidharma are being distorted
> by Europeons? If so, then give me your proof.
You made the first claim - that he had blue eyes and red hair. You have
yet to offer any proof. It is therefore hypocritical of you to be
demanding it of others.
> The fact is, he was a blue-eyed.
Fact is you haven't provided any evidence to back this up. Indeed,
Chinese portraits of him contradict your claim, as they show him with
dark hair and dark eyes.
> This is how Chinese refered to him.
Where?
allan
--
allan_m...@bigfoot.com
=========================================
A monk asked Un Mun, "What is Buddha?"
He answered, "Dry shit on a stick."
=========================================
http://www2.shore.net/~matthews/
Allan Matthews
Majesti...@webtv.net says...
> >All it does is make the claim. It provides no
> >confirmation of it.
>
> Chinese owned. Are you saying that they are all lying about this?
There are many sites that say that Hitler was a wonderful guy or that
the Earth is only 6000 years old. That doesn't make the claims true.
Where is your evidence?
> Where's your proof then?
Where is yours? You made the original claim. You back it up.
Here's one famous depiction of Bodhidharma with dark hair and eyes:
http://acc6.its.brooklyn.cuny.edu/~phalsall/images/bodhidma.gif
There are thousands more like it.
> I will search for the text for you, idiot. It is somewhere on the
> internet, I believe.
I'll believe it when I see it.
> >>>How many blue-eyed,
> >>>red-haired Indians do you know
> >>How many red-haired blue-eyed Welsh do you
> >>know?
> >A couple. I am Welsh, after all.
I live in America. I don't actually know that many people who actually
live in Cymru.
> A couple, that's all? Just as expected.
> >There exists probably none now a days,
> Bzzzzzz! Wrong answer. Thanks for playing.
>
> Idiot.
ROTFL!! What a brilliant counter-argument!! Worthy of a third grader!
The idiot is the one who makes claims he can't support. That's you.
> Bodhidharma had blue eyes,
Just repeating your claim ad nauseum doesn't make it true.
> which suggests that there 'might' have been
> more blue eyed people in India than there are now. But then again, he
> could have just been an albino, but isn't that what white people are,
> albinos?
I'm white and I'm certainly not albino. Albinism is a rare and serious
medical condition.
> Are you saying that the web-site I refered you to is lying?
A claim of lying indicates some intention to deceive. I can't prove
that and am not saying that. They can be wrong without being liars.
> If so, then
> please provide me with some proof that they are telling a fib. I'm
> waiting.
It is hypocritical of you to demand proof of claims when you have not
provided any for your own.
However, I have, in the interest of brevity, provided one link to an
image that counters your claims. As I said there are thousands of
pictures like this one.
> I gave you proof.
Repeating a claim is not proof.
Allan Matthews
Majesti...@webtv.net says...
It calls him blue-eyed. However, the original Chinese text from which
this description is drawn is not given. Therefore, this page only
repeats a claim without given any proof it is true.
> As you can see, idiot (yes, that means you, Allan), the author of this
> page is Chinese.
And that somehow makes it true?
> Now what proof do you have that she/he is lying?
I have no proof that this person is lying. However, that doesn't mean
that they aren't wrong.
I can see that you intend to go around and around in circles trying to
pass off repeating a claim as proof it is true. That is not a strategy
for success.
eqtr...@020.co.uk
(M.A.J.I.C) wrote:
>>At one time, there were very serious historians (like
>>Harold Lamb) who tried to claim Genghis Khan was
>>a blue-eyed, red-haired "Aryan". They did this by
>>distorting a few isolated verses here and there. For
>>example, one description of Genghis has having
>>"cat-like eyes" was somehow interpreted as
>>meaning they were light in color.
>
>
>Are you saying that the descriptions of Bodhidharma are being distorted
>by Europeons? If so, then give me your proof.
>
>Hey, aren't you that same idiot who claimed that the ancient Egyptians
>were black?? Are you a negro?
>
>The fact is, he was a blue-eyed. This is how Chinese refered to him.
>Face it, the inventor of martial arts was not of your kind!
Is this sort of like the myth that Jesus Christ had blonde hair blue
eyes?
Sounds like racist "aryan" propaganda to me, unless there is actual
historical documentation to back up the claim I find the source to be
rather dubious.
saka...@my-deja.com
> Hey, aren't you that same idiot who claimed that the ancient Egyptians
> were black?? Are you a negro?
I do not know who is the real idiot here,check a map of the world you
will notice the location of Egypt (soudan & senegal & maghreb & israel)
and consider a second point also :population movement.
>
> The fact is, he was a blue-eyed. This is how Chinese refered to him.
> Face it, the inventor of martial arts was not of your kind!
He never implied this ,he just rung a bell and provided a few warning
about legends and mythology .
Hassani youssouf
ordosclan
(M.A.J.I.C) wrote:
>Here's a site for reference, idiot;
>http://www.tang-soo-do.co.uk/thestyle.html
He didnt found martial arts. Mongolian wrestling is the oldest,
unchanged martial art in the world. It predates written history. Yet
is immutable over years of oral and physical transmission.
Buddha, like bodiharma, as if he really existed (you ever see what he
would have had to traverse to get to china?) was supposed to have been
some kind of iranian type nomad.
Perhaps even persian mongol type. My mother was telling me about some
connection between Gaelic and Sanskrit.
All this and he believes what the chinese say about all martial arts
coming from shaolin. Peshaw.
-=-=-=-=-=-=- INTERNATIONAL! -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
$10 to join. $10 for every person you refer.
Fraudproof electronic payment system. Send money to anyone with e-mail.
Business accounts available.
Bit Player
"ordosclan" <go...@ij.net> wrote in message
news:sl47usc3ki4hrki7o...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 9 Oct 2000 22:55:12 -0400 (EDT), Majesti...@webtv.net
> (M.A.J.I.C) wrote:
>
> >Here's a site for reference, idiot;
> >http://www.tang-soo-do.co.uk/thestyle.html
>
> He didnt found martial arts. Mongolian wrestling is the oldest,
> unchanged martial art in the world. It predates written history. Yet
> is immutable over years of oral and physical transmission.
sounds like herpes.
M.A.J.I.C
>wonderful guy or that the Earth is only 6000 years
>old.
Are these sites Jewish owned, retard? No.
>That doesn't make the claims true.
It makes them more credible than yours. You have asserted that there are
no depictions that show him with blue eyes, but you have not provided
any reference to back up this assertion. I, on the other hand, have
given references.
>Where is
>your evidence?
The sites I gave you, dumbass. You have yet to show that they are wrong.
And they probably know much more about this than you do, as both the
sites I refered you to are Chinese owned, white boy.
>>Where's your proof then?
>Where is yours?
I gave it to you, dumbass. Now give me yours.
>You made the original claim.
Which I backed up with two Chinese owned sites. If you can prove that
they were wrong then you win, otherwise you lose. This is how the game
will be played.
>You
>back it up.
I did, now back up yours.
>Here's one famous depiction of Bodhidharma with
>dark hair and eyes:
When was this blurry depiction made and where?
>http://acc6.its.brooklyn.cuny.edu/~phalsall/images/
>odhidma.gif
>There are thousands more like it.
But when were they made and where? Have you seen the ones at Tebit?
>>I will search for the text for you, idiot. It is
>>somewhere on the internet, I believe.
>I'll believe it when I see it.
Sure.
>>A couple. I am Welsh, after all.
>I live in America. I don't actually know that many
people who actually live in Cymru.
>>A couple, that's all? Just as expected.
>>>>There exists probably none now a days,
>>>Bzzzzzz! Wrong answer. Thanks for playing.
>>Idiot.
>ROTFL!!
Why do you laugh at me kicking your ass, fuckface? Are you a masochist
or something?
>What a brilliant counter-argument!! Worthy
>of a third grader!
You sound like a geek.
>The idiot is the one who makes claims he can't
>support.
The idiot is the one who can't debunk my references. Give me a source
that contradicts it. One undated picture and your word will not do, I'm
afraid.
>That's you.
The pot calls the kettle black.
>>Bodhidharma had blue eyes,
>Just repeating your claim ad nauseum doesn't make
>it true.
That's what the sites claim. You haven't refuted what they said.
>>which suggests that there 'might' have been more
>>blue eyed people in India than there are now. But
>>then again, he could have just been an albino, but
>>isn't that what white people are, albinos?
>I'm white and I'm certainly not albino. Albinism is a
>rare and serious medical condition.
Blue eyes are a form of albinism, dumbass.
>>Are you saying that the web-site I refered you to is
>>lying?
>A claim of lying indicates some intention to deceive.
You implied that they were lying. Prove this, or shut the fuck up.
>I can't prove that
Of course, you can't. You're just an ignorant shit.
>and am not saying that.
Yes, dumbass, you are.
>They can
>be wrong without being liars.
Where is your proof that they are wrong?
>>If so, then
>>please provide me with some proof that they are
>>telling a fib. I'm waiting.
>It is hypocritical of you to demand proof of claims
>when you have not provided any for your own.
I have provided, dumbass. Now it's your turn.
>However, I have, in the interest of brevity, provided
>one link to an image that counters your claims.
No it doesn't.
>As I
>said there are thousands of pictures like this one.
But when were they made and where?
>>I gave you proof.
>Repeating a claim is not proof.
The claim is backed up by Chinese owned sites.
Dan
Allan Matthews wrote:
> Here's one famous depiction of Bodhidharma with dark hair and eyes:
>
> http://acc6.its.brooklyn.cuny.edu/~phalsall/images/bodhidma.gif
>
How would you be able to tell what color his eyes are from a black and
white sketch? But here's yet another article on Bodhidarma, the Aryan
Blue-Eyed Demon:
http://www.hsuyun.org/Dharma/MartialArts/martial3.html
Not that even any of this matters, because the fact is that the first
comprehensive martial art in the world (not mere wrestling) which included
punching, open-handed strikes, kicking, joint locks, leg sweeps,
grappling, and even anticipated the later eastern katas with something
called the Pyrhhic Dance, was invented by the European Greeks and was
already a fully developed sport in the Olympic Games by 648 B.C. It was
called the Pankration, and it predated all of the eastern systems. Do a
yahoo search on pankration, and then read and weep.
Allan Matthews
says...
> Not that even any of this matters, because the fact is that the first
> comprehensive martial art in the world (not mere wrestling) which included
> punching, open-handed strikes, kicking, joint locks, leg sweeps,
> grappling, and even anticipated the later eastern katas with something
> called the Pyrhhic Dance, was invented by the European Greeks and was
> already a fully developed sport in the Olympic Games by 648 B.C. It was
> called the Pankration, and it predated all of the eastern systems. Do a
> yahoo search on pankration, and then read and weep.
Why would I weep? I never said anything about where martial arts first
appeared. I personally couldn't care less.
Allan Matthews
Majesti...@webtv.net says...
> >There are many sites that say that Hitler was a
> >wonderful guy or that the Earth is only 6000 years
> >old.
>
> Are these sites Jewish owned, retard? No.
And the relevence of this observation is what, exactly?
> >That doesn't make the claims true.
>
> It makes them more credible than yours.
Nonsense. Simply repeating claims doesn't make them true.
> You have asserted that there are
> no depictions that show him with blue eyes, but you have not provided
> any reference to back up this assertion. I, on the other hand, have
> given references.
All of which do nothing but make the same unsupported claim you
originally made.
> >Where is
> >your evidence?
>
> The sites I gave you, dumbass.
These simply repeat your original assertion, not prove it.
> You have yet to show that they are wrong.
You have yet to show they are right. As you made the assertion that
Bodhidharma had red hair and blue eyes, I expected you'd be able to
prove it. Guess I was wrong.
Dan
Allan Matthews wrote:
> In article <39E3A7BC...@earthlink.net>, Dan...@earthlink.net
> says...
> > Not that even any of this matters, because the fact is that the first
> > comprehensive martial art in the world (not mere wrestling) which included
> > punching, open-handed strikes, kicking, joint locks, leg sweeps,
> > grappling, and even anticipated the later eastern katas with something
> > called the Pyrhhic Dance, was invented by the European Greeks and was
> > already a fully developed sport in the Olympic Games by 648 B.C. It was
> > called the Pankration, and it predated all of the eastern systems. Do a
> > yahoo search on pankration, and then read and weep.
>
> Why would I weep? I never said anything about where martial arts first
> appeared. I personally couldn't care less.
>
Sure you do. That's why you've spent post after post questioning the
authenticity of accounts of Bodhidarma's blue eyes; the implication being you
doubted a blue-eyed white man founded the martial arts, which was the whole point
of this thread. Now that the inescapable fact has caught up to you that whites
did in fact invent these arts, you claim not to care. Unpersuasive and
transparent.
P.S.: I recently returned from a trip to India, having visited Calcutta,
Bombay, Agra, Jaipur, Varanasi, and Delhi. And yes, there are still occasional
blue-eyed Indians left, vestiges of the myriad invasions over the centuries from
Aryan tribes from the north. You need to both read a little more history and
travel a bit, sonny.
Paul Kekai Manansala
Majesti...@webtv.net (M.A.J.I.C) wrote:
>
> The fact is, he was a blue-eyed. This is how Chinese refered to him.
> Face it, the inventor of martial arts was not of your kind!
>
You say the Chinese referred to him as such, but don't give any
references.
Maybe that's just your imagination. Up until this century there weren't
many blue-eyed martial artists around. I guess he was the only one,
right?
Regards,
Paul Kekai Manansala
--
Check out http://AsiaPacificUniverse.com/
Allan Matthews
says...
> Allan Matthews wrote:
>
> > In article <39E3A7BC...@earthlink.net>, Dan...@earthlink.net
> > says...
> > > Not that even any of this matters, because the fact is that the first
> > > comprehensive martial art in the world (not mere wrestling) which included
> > > punching, open-handed strikes, kicking, joint locks, leg sweeps,
> > > grappling, and even anticipated the later eastern katas with something
> > > called the Pyrhhic Dance, was invented by the European Greeks and was
> > > already a fully developed sport in the Olympic Games by 648 B.C. It was
> > > called the Pankration, and it predated all of the eastern systems. Do a
> > > yahoo search on pankration, and then read and weep.
> >
> > Why would I weep? I never said anything about where martial arts first
> > appeared. I personally couldn't care less.
>
> Sure you do.
Where did you learn to read minds?
> That's why you've spent post after post questioning the
> authenticity of accounts of Bodhidarma's blue eyes;
Nope. You are wrong as to my motivation. I really couldn't care less
about the martial arts angle of this thread.
> the implication being you
> doubted a blue-eyed white man founded the martial arts,
No, I simply doubt that Bodhidharma had red hair and blue eyes.
> which was the whole point of this thread.
Gee, and here I thought we were simply talking about what the guy looked
like.
Paul Kekai Manansala
eqtr...@020.co.uk wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Oct 2000 11:15:34 -0400 (EDT), Majesti...@webtv.net
> (M.A.J.I.C) wrote:
>
> >>At one time, there were very serious historians (like
> >>Harold Lamb) who tried to claim Genghis Khan was
> >>a blue-eyed, red-haired "Aryan". They did this by
> >>distorting a few isolated verses here and there. For
> >>example, one description of Genghis has having
> >>"cat-like eyes" was somehow interpreted as
> >>meaning they were light in color.
> >
> >
> >Are you saying that the descriptions of Bodhidharma are being
distorted
> >by Europeons? If so, then give me your proof.
> >
Egyptians
> >were black?? Are you a negro?
> >
> >Face it, the inventor of martial arts was not of your kind!
>
> eyes?
>
"The Aryan Myth" by Leon Poliakov, discusses how serious "scholars" once
suggested that Jesus was an Aryan culture bearer to the barbarous
Semitic tribes.
Leo
Shaolin. However, Shaolin temple is credited for having the first organised
martial arts movement. Bodhidarma is credited for laying down formal sets of
rules.
"ordosclan" <go...@ij.net> wrote in message
helend...@my-deja.com
In article <8s0p9e$dlr$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
Brian
BTW, It bothers me to read posts by retards, so you're in the killfile.
Brian
"Paul Kekai Manansala" <mana...@my-deja.com> skrev i melding
news:8s0p9e$dlr$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
Dan
Allan Matthews wrote:
Silly boy. Why would anybody make a stink about what what color somebody's eyes
were? Completely irrational and illogical red herring. It just bothered you that blue
eyes were indicative of Bodhidarma's white ancestry, and now you're pretending this
was never the issue because evidence suggests he was white. What a lame and immature
attempt at obfuscation.
Allan Matthews
says...
> Why would anybody make a stink about what what color somebody's eyes
> were?
I have found that racists get pissed off when their little fantasies are
exposed as having no basis in fact.
I enjoy pissing racists off.
> It just bothered you that blue
> eyes were indicative of Bodhidarma's white ancestry,
As he was Indian, Bodhidharma was almost certainly caucasoid. However,
the white power ranger need to see him as being "white" (fair skin,
light hair, blue eyes) has no basis in fact. I was just pointing this
out.
> and now you're pretending this
> was never the issue because evidence suggests he was white.
What evidence? I have yet to see any evidence he was "white." However,
there is a great deal of evidence to the contrary.
[childish ad hominem attacks snipped]
TetsuwanATOM
white man is someone people credit as "starting" martial arts means
absolutely nothing. First it completely ignores that this man was probably
raised in a "non-white" culture. Second, it ignores all the developments
that came after. And, if someone were to accept this claim as fact, what
would it prove other than cultures learn things from each other, which we
already know. I rank this up there with the Black Jesus theories. I mean,
who cares?
"Allan Matthews" <allan_m...@bigfoot.nospam.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.144eb5f84...@news.ne.mediaone.net...
> In article <39E4E50E...@earthlink.net>, Dan...@earthlink.net
> says...
> > Why would anybody make a stink about what what color somebody's
eyes
> > were?
>
> I have found that racists get pissed off when their little fantasies are
> exposed as having no basis in fact.
>
> I enjoy pissing racists off.
>
> > It just bothered you that blue
> > eyes were indicative of Bodhidarma's white ancestry,
>
> As he was Indian, Bodhidharma was almost certainly caucasoid. However,
> the white power ranger need to see him as being "white" (fair skin,
> light hair, blue eyes) has no basis in fact. I was just pointing this
> out.
>
> > and now you're pretending this
> > was never the issue because evidence suggests he was white.
>
> What evidence? I have yet to see any evidence he was "white." However,
> there is a great deal of evidence to the contrary.
>
> [childish ad hominem attacks snipped]
>
Dan
Allan Matthews wrote:
> In article <39E4E50E...@earthlink.net>, Dan...@earthlink.net
> says...
> > Why would anybody make a stink about what what color somebody's eyes
> > were?
>
> I have found that racists get pissed off when their little fantasies are
> exposed as having no basis in fact.
>
> I enjoy pissing racists off.
Translation: You don't care what the evidence is; you argue just to be
adversarial.
>
>
> > It just bothered you that blue
> > eyes were indicative of Bodhidarma's white ancestry,
>
> As he was Indian, Bodhidharma was almost certainly caucasoid. However,
> the white power ranger need to see him as being "white" (fair skin,
> light hair, blue eyes) has no basis in fact. I was just pointing this
> out.
Newsflash: Tfhere are plenty of "White" people in the world who don't
necessarily have blonde hair or even blue eyes. And just because Bodhidarma
wasn't blonde doesn't mean he was any less white than, for example, Al Gore.
But your argument does reveal the afro-centric provenance of your world view.
If this is the basis for your refusal to admit Bodhidarma was white, you
are one seriously deluded dude.
Obviously his whiteness does have a basis in fact because the numerous
sites that have been cited have not been racialist in any way, shape, or form.
They have merely been sites devoted to Zen and the history of the martial arts.
Did you even bother reading them, or do your posts to somebody else who can
read and write for you?
>
>
> > and now you're pretending this
> > was never the issue because evidence suggests he was white.
>
> What evidence? I have yet to see any evidence he was "white." However,
> there is a great deal of evidence to the contrary.
What evidence to the contrary? Like the fact that it is common knowledge he
was descended from the Ksatriya warrior class, which was one of the Aryan
castes in India second only to the Brahmin priesthood? Like the black and white
picture you yourself posted on this NG from where you doltishly observed he
didn't have blue eyes? He might have had darker hair, but from your own
depiction, the guy in no way looked like a modern black Indian. In fact, the
skin tone in your own reference is much lighter than anybody today would
portray a modern Indian in a sketch. It's obvious from sketches that Bodhidarma
simply represented an Indian Aryan type which was still extant in India in the
6th century B.C. before the Aryans became completely submerged within the
Dravidian substratum. The "Blue-eyed demon" legendary epithet bolsters this
view. Being a martial artist myself, I've read this in many well referenced
books on the subject written by Asians. But I'm not going to jump through
hoops for you to find the books and bibliographies just to prove something you
deep down already know is true but can't admit. So keep telling yourself he
wasn't white because he didn't have blonde hair, negro. You're an open book.
>
>
> [childish ad hominem attacks snipped]
>
There's nothing childish about exposing how silly, immature, and lame your
logic is. By your own admission, you're more interested in pissing people off
than in logical discourse. Of course, you only admitted to this after I backed
you into a corner when you tried every imaginable obfuscation possible; "I
don't care who started the martial arts, I just care what he looked like". Yeah
right, amateur.
Allan Matthews
says...
> Allan Matthews wrote:
>
> > In article <39E4E50E...@earthlink.net>, Dan...@earthlink.net
> > says...
> > > Why would anybody make a stink about what what color somebody's eyes
> > > were?
> >
> > I have found that racists get pissed off when their little fantasies are
> > exposed as having no basis in fact.
> >
> > I enjoy pissing racists off.
>
> Translation: You don't care what the evidence is;
What evidence? I have yet to see any evidence. Please provide proof
that Bodhidharma had blue eyes and red hair, as was originally asserted.
If you can't you're just flapping your lips.
[remaining evidence-free yapping and ad hominem logical fallacies
snipped]
Allan Matthews
says...
> Allan Matthews wrote:
>
> > In article <39E4E50E...@earthlink.net>, Dan...@earthlink.net
> > says...
> > > Why would anybody make a stink about what what color somebody's eyes
> > > were?
> >
> > I have found that racists get pissed off when their little fantasies are
> > > exposed as having no basis in fact.
> >
> > I enjoy pissing racists off.
>
> Translation: You don't care what the evidence is;
Here's a Chinese statue of Bodhidharma at the Victoria & Albert Museum
in London:
http://www2.shore.net/~matthews/london/misc/V&A-Bodhidharma1.jpg
Note the dark skin, dark eyes and black beard.
M.A.J.I.C
>and red hair. You have yet to offer any proof.
I have offered proof, dumbass. Two CHINESE owned sites back up my claim.
There is absolutely nothing racist about those sites. Now why would they
lie? Give me a reason.
>It is
>therefore hypocritical of you to be demanding it of
>others.
Dumbass, I have provided proof.
>>The fact is, he was a blue-eyed.
>Fact is you haven't provided any evidence to back
>this up.
See above.
>Indeed, Chinese portraits of him contradict
>your claim,
What Chinese portraits are you talking about? The ones in your dreams?
Are you SURE you saw these portraits in the physical world, or are these
portraits just a figment of your imagination?
>as they show him with dark hair and
>dark eyes.
Your word alone is not proof of your claim. Many Chinese, however, back
up MY claim.
>>This is how Chinese refered to him.
>Where?
A Chinese man said that he was called the "blue-eyed barbarian". What
reason is there not to believe his word?
M.A.J.I.C
"I heard Anas bin Malik describing the Prophet saying, "He was of medium
height amongst the people, neither tall nor short; he had a rosy
complexion, neither absolutely white nor deep brown; his hair was
neither completely curly nor quite lank."
My words; Rosy color meaning PINK color (that is, white color). Yes, he
was dark-haired and dark-eyed, but so was the monster Joseph Stalin, and
no one asserts that he wasn't white.
As you can see, two of the worlds' major religions were founded by white
people. Bodhidharma, who was called the "blue-eyed devil" by ancient
Chinese writers, and Mohammed, who was described as having a rosy (pink)
complexion.
Allan Matthews
Majesti...@webtv.net says...
> >You made the first claim - that he had blue eyes
> >and red hair. You have yet to offer any proof.
>
> I have offered proof, dumbass. Two CHINESE owned sites back up my claim.
No, all they did was repeat it. That the sites are Chinese is
immaterial.
You really don't understand the difference between assertions and
evidence, do you?
And why am I not surprised?
Allan Matthews
Majesti...@webtv.net says...
> Narrated Rabia bin Abi Abdur-Rahman:
>
> "I heard Anas bin Malik describing the Prophet saying, "He was of medium
> height amongst the people, neither tall nor short; he had a rosy
> complexion, neither absolutely white nor deep brown; his hair was
> neither completely curly nor quite lank."
>
> My words; Rosy color meaning PINK color (that is, white color).
And what makes your interpretation correct? Also, what is the source of
this quote and what assurances can you give that the translation is a
good one?
Here's a better question - do you consider all Arabs white? If not, why
not?
> Yes, he
> was dark-haired and dark-eyed, but so was the monster Joseph Stalin, and
> no one asserts that he wasn't white.
Actually, the Nazis would have said he was a sub-human Slav, not an
Aryan.
> As you can see, two of the worlds' major religions were founded by white
> people. Bodhidharma
Gee, I didn't know Bodhidharma "founded" a religion. I always thought
Buddhism was founded by Shakyamuni Buddha.
You're a laugh riot.
saka...@my-deja.com
> As you can see, two of the worlds' major religions were founded by
white
> people. Bodhidharma, who was called the "blue-eyed devil" by ancient
> Chinese writers, and Mohammed, who was described as having a rosy
(pink)
> complexion.
Putting the controversial subject of race aside the question comes to:
are those source reliable and how historically accurate those narration
are ?
Any muslim ecclesiastic would tell you that Mohamed (peace be upon him)
was not the founder of the muslim faith because it would imply he
created the religion whereas the Quran describes his
predecessors :Adam ,Moses & Jesus (Issa) as muslims.
Mohamed (peace be upon him) was a chosen by Allah (God in arabic) and
there is no justification in the Quran why he was the chosen one.
The profession of faith gives a good indication of Mohamed (peace be
upon him)place in the muslim faith :There is only one God and Mohamed
is his prophet.
Hassani youssouf
Eugene Holman
Matthews <allan_m...@bigfoot.nospam.com> wrote:
> > Yes, he
> > was dark-haired and dark-eyed, but so was the monster Joseph Stalin, and
> > no one asserts that he wasn't white.
>
> Actually, the Nazis would have said he was a sub-human Slav, not an
> Aryan.
>
Wrong. Josef Vissarionovich Stalin [né Dzhugashvili] was neither Russian
nor a Slav. He was a Georgian, that is to say, a member of a non-Slavic,
non-Indo-European speaking ethnicity related to the Chechens and living in
the Caucasus mountains in the area between the Black Sea and the Caspian
Sea. The best known Georgian today is Edvard Shevardnadze, formerly Mikhael
Gorbachev's Foreign Minister and now the president of the independent
Republic of Georgia.
How the Nazis would have felt about Stalin if he were not the leader of the
USSR is a puzzle. Racially, Stalin belonged to a swarthy-skinned,
dark-haired branch of the Caucasian race which the Nazis regarded as
decidedly inferior to Aryans. On the other hand, the Chechens and some
other peoples of the Caucasus region, including many Georgians, were and
remain fiercely anti-Russian. Many Chechens, eager then as now to liberate
themselves from the hated Russian domination under which they have been
forced to live for the past two centuries, collaborated with the Nazis
against the Russians during WW II.
Regards,
Eugene Holman
M.A.J.I.C
Roses are either white, pink or red. Choose a color that bests suits
your stubborness . But remember, there are other descriptions that
describe him as being "white and ruddy" and just simply "white". If
Mohammad wasn't white, then neither were Stalin or Eichmann. They both
had jet-BLACK hair and brown eyes.
>Also,
>what is the source of this quote
It is on the internet, look it up yourself. You know how to use a search
engine, right?
>and what
>assurances can you give that the translation is a
>good one?
I do not translate arabic, dumbass. So you're asking the wrong person.
By the way, what evidence do you have that that Bodhidharma statue you
showed wasn't painted over recently? That paint looks way too glossy to
be more than a hundreds years old. What assurance can you give me that
his skin was originally painted black and not white? Two can play at
this game, you see.
>Here's a better question - do you consider all Arabs
>white? If not, why not?
Some Arabs are white and some are not. The same goes for southern
Italians and Greeks. But they are all Caucasians in the end. A good
example of a white Arab today would be Yassar Arafat. You see how pasty
white his skin is?
>>Yes, he
>>was dark-haired and dark-eyed, but so was the
>>monster Joseph Stalin, and no one asserts that he
>>wasn't white.
>Actually, the Nazis would have said he was a
>sub-human Slav, not an Aryan.
I don't give a fuck what the Nazis would have said. There little group
was full of contradictions. How many blonds held top Nazi positions of
power? Anwser; only one, but everyone else (Hitler, Goebbels, Goering,
Eichmann, Himmler) were all brunettes - of the dark kind. When I say
brunette, I don't mean light brown hair, but medium to dark brown and
black. Both Eichmann and Goebbels had jet-black hair and brown eyes.
Besides, I don't fit their "Aryan" definition. I have dark brown hair
(like Hitler) and medium brown eyes. So fuck what the Nazis said.
Allan Matthews
Majesti...@webtv.net says...
> >And what makes your interpretation correct?
>
> your stubborness . But remember, there are other descriptions that
> describe him as being "white and ruddy" and just simply "white". If
> Mohammad wasn't white, then neither were Stalin or Eichmann. They both
> had jet-BLACK hair and brown eyes.
So you're saying that all Arabs are white then?
> >Also,
> >what is the source of this quote
>
> It is on the internet, look it up yourself. You know how to use a search
> engine, right?
evasion noted.
> >and what
> >assurances can you give that the translation is a
> >good one?
>
>
> I do not translate arabic, dumbass. So you're asking the wrong person.
Then you have no idea if the translation is accurate. Thanks for the
confirmation.
> By the way, what evidence do you have that that Bodhidharma statue you
> showed wasn't painted over recently? That paint looks way too glossy to
> be more than a hundreds years old.
That's called varish.
> What assurance can you give me that
> his skin was originally painted black and not white?
Personally, I believe that the statue and everything related to its
appearance are antique, as that's what the V&A Museum says about it. I
have no reason to doubt them, as their appraisers are experts in their
fields.
> >Here's a better question - do you consider all Arabs
> >white? If not, why not?
>
> Some Arabs are white and some are not. The same goes for southern
> Italians and Greeks. But they are all Caucasians in the end.
So, what's the difference between a white person and a Caucasian?
Please be specific.
> >>Yes, he
> >>was dark-haired and dark-eyed, but so was the
> >>monster Joseph Stalin, and no one asserts that he
> >>wasn't white.
> >Actually, the Nazis would have said he was a
> >sub-human Slav, not an Aryan.
>
> I don't give a fuck what the Nazis would have said.
You said "no one asserts that he wasn't white." I suggested that you
were wrong.
M.A.J.I.C
Where in the world did you get that from?
>>>Also,
>>>what is the source of this quote
>>It is on the internet, look it up yourself. You know
>>how to use a search engine, right?
>evasion noted.
You doubt my word?
>>I do not translate arabic, dumbass. So you're asking
>>the wrong person.
>Then you have no idea if the translation is accurate.
I trust that the translator did an accurate job. I'll leave it at that.
>Thanks for the confirmation.
Makes you feel better?
>>By the way, what evidence do you have that that
>>Bodhidharma statue you showed wasn't painted
>>over recently? That paint looks way too glossy to be
>>more than a hundreds years old.
>That's called varish.
How do you know that it is varnish? Did they tell you this? If so, how
do know that they are telling you the truth? For the matter, how do you
know that Statue is an original copy and not a fake? There are fakes
floating around out there you know. Also, what year was it made in? This
question is very important if we are to take its depiction as authentic.
>>What assurance can you give me that
>>his skin was originally painted black and not white?
>Personally, I believe that the statue and everything
>related to its appearance are antique, as that's what
>the V&A Museum says about it.
Do you believe that Museums have never been fooled by fakes before?
>I have no reason to
>doubt them, as their appraisers are experts in their
>fields.
Experts in their field? Do you know this to be fact, or did you just say
that for the hell of it?
>>Some Arabs are white and some are not. The same
>>goes for southern Italians and Greeks. But they are
>>all Caucasians in the end.
>So, what's the difference between a white person
>and a Caucasian? Please be specific.
A white person is a Caucasian. How can there be a difference between the
two?
>>>Actually, the Nazis would have said he was a
>>>sub-human Slav, not an Aryan.
>>I don't give a fuck what the Nazis would have said.
>You said "no one asserts that he wasn't white."
I said no one 'asserts', meaning present tense. The Nazi third reich has
been long dead. If I had said "no one has ever asserted", then you would
have had a case.
>I
>suggested that you
>were wrong.
I could be wrong, but it's your job to prove it.
Allan Matthews
>
> Where in the world did you get that from?
From what you said later.
> >>>Also,
> >>>what is the source of this quote
> >>It is on the internet, look it up yourself. You know
> >>how to use a search engine, right?
> >evasion noted.
>
> You doubt my word?
Yep. You've said plenty of inaccurate things about me, so why should I
give anything you say any credence?
> >>By the way, what evidence do you have that that
> >>Bodhidharma statue you showed wasn't painted
> >>over recently? That paint looks way too glossy to be
> >>more than a hundreds years old.
> >That's called varish.
>
> How do you know that it is varnish? Did they tell you this?
The description of the statue said so, yes.
> If so, how do know that they are telling you the truth?
Why would the V&A lie? It's not like they wouldn't be called on it if
they did. Lots of knowledgeable people look at their displayed works.
> For the matter, how do you
> know that Statue is an original copy and not a fake?
The British always stole the best. Besides, the V&A said it was
original. You have some evidence to the contrary? I see no reason to
doubt their account of what the statue is.
> There are fakes
> floating around out there you know. Also, what year was it made in?
Sadly, I no longer have my V&A guide. Suffice it to say that it is a
number of centuries old.
> This
> question is very important if we are to take its depiction as authentic.
It's certainly at least as authentic as your "blue-eyed, red haired"
claim, for which you have yet to present ANY supporting evidence, save a
couple contemporary repetitions of your claim (which are, therefore, not
evidence at all, of course).
> >>What assurance can you give me that
> >>his skin was originally painted black and not white?
> >Personally, I believe that the statue and everything
> >related to its appearance are antique, as that's what
> >the V&A Museum says about it.
>
> Do you believe that Museums have never been fooled by fakes before?
> >I have no reason to
> >doubt them, as their appraisers are experts in their fields.
>
> Experts in their field? Do you know this to be fact, or did you just say
> that for the hell of it?
You just keep telling yourself that the first-rate museum like the V&A
hires people who don't know their fields and then publicly displays the
results of their evaluations to a knowledgeable public. I'll just sit
here and laugh at you.
Besides, it's not like this depiction of Bodhidharma is unique. Far
from it.
> >>Some Arabs are white and some are not. The same
> >>goes for southern Italians and Greeks. But they are
> >>all Caucasians in the end.
> >So, what's the difference between a white person
> >and a Caucasian? Please be specific.
>
> A white person is a Caucasian. How can there be a difference between the
> two?
So, you're saying that all Caucasians are white. Ok, then, if that's
the case, how can you also say that not all Arabs, Italians and Greeks,
who are all Caucasians, are not all white?
> >>>Actually, the Nazis would have said he was a
> >>>sub-human Slav, not an Aryan.
> >>I don't give a fuck what the Nazis would have said.
> >You said "no one asserts that he wasn't white."
>
> I said no one 'asserts', meaning present tense. The Nazi third reich has
> been long dead.
There are still plenty of Nazis around who believe Hitler's crap.
"Asserts" still applies to them.
> If I had said "no one has ever asserted", then you would
> have had a case.
What a lame dodge.
> >I suggested that you were wrong.
>
> I could be wrong, but it's your job to prove it.
Been there. Done that.
thei...@my-deja.com
> your stubborness . But remember, there are other descriptions that
> describe him as being "white and ruddy" and just simply "white". If
> Mohammad wasn't white, then neither were Stalin or Eichmann. They both
> had jet-BLACK hair and brown eyes.
> >what is the source of this quote
>
> engine, right?
> >assurances can you give that the translation is a
> >good one?
>
> showed wasn't painted over recently? That paint looks way too glossy to
> his skin was originally painted black and not white? Two can play at
> this game, you see.
> >white? If not, why not?
>
> example of a white Arab today would be Yassar Arafat. You see how pasty
> white his skin is?
>
C'mon he ain't that light. A perfect example of a white arab woud be Hafez
Assad,president of Syria.
>>Yes, he
> >>was dark-haired and dark-eyed, but so was the
> >>monster Joseph Stalin, and no one asserts that he
> >>wasn't white.
> >Actually, the Nazis would have said he was a
> >sub-human Slav, not an Aryan.
>
Now we're getting ridiculous...
> I don't give a fuck what the Nazis would have said. There little group
> was full of contradictions. How many blonds held top Nazi positions of
> power? Anwser; only one, but everyone else (Hitler, Goebbels, Goering,
> Eichmann, Himmler) were all brunettes - of the dark kind. When I say
> brunette, I don't mean light brown hair, but medium to dark brown and
> black. Both Eichmann and Goebbels had jet-black hair and brown eyes.
> Besides, I don't fit their "Aryan" definition. I have dark brown hair
> (like Hitler) and medium brown eyes. So fuck what the Nazis said.
>
>
thei...@my-deja.com
saka...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
>
> > Hey, aren't you that same idiot who claimed that the ancient Egyptians
> > were black?? Are you a negro?
>
> will notice the location of Egypt (soudan & senegal & maghreb & israel)
> and consider a second point also :population movement.
>
And what's that have to do with anything?...
Just because somethings built in Africa does'nt automatically assume that
Africans built it.
> >
> > The fact is, he was a blue-eyed. This is how Chinese refered to him.
> > Face it, the inventor of martial arts was not of your kind!
>
> He never implied this ,he just rung a bell and provided a few warning
> about legends and mythology .
>
> Hassani youssouf
M.A.J.I.C
No it doesn't.
M.A.J.I.C
I said a white person is a caucasian, not that all Caucasians are white.
Your original question had no logic to it because you treated the term
"caucasion" as a seperate enity from a white person. This is not logical
as a white person is generally considered to be a Caucasian. Thus there
can be no difference between the two as a white person is a type of
Caucasion. They are not seperate races.
Eric Chung-Hui Chang
The division of humans into Caucasian/Negroid/Mongoloid is very
unsatisfactory. Scientist could not find any clear lines of
division from a genetic standpoint. From a "intuitive" standpoint,
south asians and semitic peoples look very different from northern
Europeans. So, what is left to group them into the same "Caucasian"
category? I believe the original division was proposed by a
scandinavian about 100 years ago. This guy was later quoted as
calling "Negroid" and "Mongoloid" sly and cunning.
Eric
M.A.J.I.C
>difference between the two" (whites and
>Caucasians)?
You asked me "what's the difference between a white person and a
caucasian ". That's like asking me what's the difference between a
feline and a siamese cat. Your question was illogical. There can be no
difference between a siamese cat and a feline because a siamese IS a
feline. Don't ask stupid questions next time.
eqtr...@020.co.uk
..by using your logic, since religion is undisputedly the cause of
most of the world's strife, hunger, war, and human conflict we can
also assume white people can also be collectively blamed for this as
well.
eqtr...@020.co.uk
better yet why don't you stop posting stupid asinine flame bait topics
claiming that some mystery unsubstantiated caucasian founded most of
the world's religions.
saka...@my-deja.com
> You asked me "what's the difference between a white person and a
> caucasian ". That's like asking me what's the difference between a
> feline and a siamese cat. Your question was illogical. There can be no
> difference between a siamese cat and a feline because a siamese IS a
> feline. Don't ask stupid questions next time.
Interesting debate a bit like the difference between a norvegian and
let us say a sicilian.
Hassani youssouf
P.S. What is applicable for animal might not be for human being...
M.A.J.I.C
The main difference between a norwegian and a sicilian is the complexion
of skin and hair (sicilians are darker than norwegians in hair color and
to a lesser degree, skin color), but they are both "caucasians". Now
answer this, what is the difference between an Asian and a human being?
Give detailed answer, please.
Eugene Holman
(M.A.J.I.C) wrote:
>>Then why did you just say "How can there be a
>>difference between the two" (whites and
>>Caucasians)?
>
>
>You asked me "what's the difference between a white person and a
>caucasian ". That's like asking me what's the difference between a
>feline and a siamese cat. Your question was illogical. There can be no
>difference between a siamese cat and a feline because a siamese IS a
>feline. Don't ask stupid questions next time.
>
You need to take a course in elementary logic. All Siamese cats are
felines, but all felines are not necessarily Siamese cats. The set of
Siamese cats is properly included within the set of felines, the reverse is
not the case. Thus a Siamese cat will always be a feline, but a feline will
not always be a Siamese cat, as demonstrated by the existence of lynxes,
bobcats, lions, and tigers.
Regards,
Eugene Holman