Sun Weidong found that ancient Chinese and Egyptian bronzes were chemically identical leading to the only obvious conclusion.

[img]http://i1.rgstatic.net/ii/profile.image/AS%3A272404320616456@1441957659462_l/Weidong_Sun.png[/img]

He also studied ancient Chinese Xia dynasty records and found

He also cited several ancient Chinese classics, at one point quoting historian Sima Qian’s description of the topography of the Xia empire — traditionally regarded as China’s founding dynasty, dating from 2070 to 1600 B.C. “Northwards the stream is divided and becomes the nine rivers,” wrote Sima Qian in his first century historiography, the Records of the Grand Historian. “Reunited, it forms the opposing river and flows into the sea.”

[b]In other words, “the stream” in question wasn’t China’s famed Yellow River, which flows from west to east. “There is only one major river in the world which flows northwards. Which one is it?” the professor asked. “The Nile,” [/b]someone replied. Sun then showed a map of the famed Egyptian river and its delta — with nine of its distributaries flowing into the Mediterranean. This author, a researcher at the same institute, watched as audience members broke into smiles and murmurs, intrigued that these ancient Chinese texts seemed to better agree with the geography of Egypt than that of China.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/09/02/did-chinese-civilization-come-from-ancient-egypt-archeological-debate-at-heart-of-china-national-identity/
I've always known definite linguistic and craniometric evidence of Africans in early Asia but to my knowledge this is the first time its in the MSM even if not BBC/CNN/Al Jazeera. Also the thesis suggests a direct movement of Egyptians to China not a slow gradual overland migration as would be expected;they knew where they were going.
Fyi he was forced to sit on his findings for 20 years! What else are they hiding? Imo,it doesn't matter the truth will always out.

Lol they are only saying that because they found out Ancient Egypt is older than Ancient China

They have evidence to back it. China is a develop Nation and people are doing research on the ancestry. So, won't it be necessary for the most populous people in the world to find out their IDENTITY? Despite, some of these people condemning it, they have even begun to strengthen more tie with Egypt based on this finding. Compare this two artifacts..

Majority of Ancient Egyptians were stock of different black people. Ancient Chinese were white in color. It isn't, but even if we assume they were black, it's unrealistic for a black skin tone to change to white in just 4000 years.

Nubian, Beja people(Cushite) and some Mediterraneans were definitely part of Ancient Egyptians. Another Cushite people like Afar, Agew and other groups like Berber and some west Africans may be part of it, but there is no concrete evidences to support it.

Hati13:
Majority of Ancient Egyptians were stock of different black people. Ancient Chinese were white in color. It isn't, but even if we assume they were black, it's unrealistic for a black skin tone to change to white in just 4000 years.

Nubian, Beja people(Cushite) and some Mediterraneans were definitely part of Ancient Egyptians. Another Cushite people like Afar, Agew and other groups like Berber and some west Africans may be part of it, but there is no concrete evidences to support it.

You are right. Chinese DNA is nothing like the ancient Egyptian haplogroup (E3b) which is carried by many Afro-asiatic speaking people such as the Cushitic and Berber ethnicities.

Ancient Egypt has been ruled by non-blacks only 3 times - they consisted of two short periods (compared to ancient Egypt's long history) where the Hyksos and the Persians invaded. Finally, the last time Egypt was invaded by foreigners was when the Greeks and Romans established the Ptolemaic and Roman period, thus causing the downfall of this great empire. After that, it became completely different in terms of religion, culture, language and inhabitants.

The Chinese had their own empires and kingdoms. They had been warring for nearly 5000 years until the establishment of the Republic of China, which eventually caused more bloodshed and the deaths of 80 million Chinese people.

fanficgirl:
Lol they are only saying that because they found out Ancient Egypt is older than Ancient China

It is common knowledge. Egypt's civilization is 8000 years old, while China has had 5000 years of unbroken civilization.

ArtanK:


You are right. Chinese DNA is nothing like the ancient Egyptian haplogroup (E3b) which is carried by many Afro-asiatic speaking people such as the Cushitic and Berber ethnicities.

During what centuries range the Somalia ethnicity created? What was their previous homeland before their current?

Like you said, the Afro-Asiatic family in general and Cushite in specific were among Ancient Egyptians. Somalians should also be included. Am I right?

Where is your evidence that 'Majority of Ancient Egyptians were stock of different black people'. Ancient Egyptians were Africans who simply mixed up with non-Africans as time went on. You find such mixed people across the African continent. In Nigeria we have a population of mixed African and Asian origin. Scholars like Diop and many others others have shown using African languages, DNA, customs from West, Central,South and East Africa, that every African alive, has roots in Ancient Egypt. Ancient Egypt's African relationships or ancestry wasn't solely restricted to an area of the continent but the entire continent.

Hati13:

During what centuries range the Somalia ethnicity created? What was their previous homeland before their current?

Like you said, the Afro-Asiatic family in general and Cushite in specific were among Ancient Egyptians. Somalians should also be included. Am I right?

Scholars estimate the birth of the Somali ethnicity at around 3000 years ago, which is also the time when most Cushitic ethnicities were born. The homeland of the ancient Somali population is said to be the northern coast of Somalia, Djibouti and north east Ethiopia

I wouldn't say that Somalis are descendants of the Egyptians, but they were closely related and shared a common language, culture and customs with them. This is also the reason why the Pharaohs of the 18th dynasty of ancient Egypt said that the Land of Punt (Horn of Africa) was their ancestral homeland and where the ancient Egyptians came from. If I was to point to a specific Cushitic group, I'd say the Beja people.

ArtanK:


Scholars estimate the birth of the Somali ethnicity at around 3000 years ago, which is also the time when most Cushitic ethnicities were born. The homeland of the ancient Somali population is said to be the northern coast of Somalia, Djibouti and north east Ethiopia

I wouldn't say that Somalis are descendants of the Egyptians, but they were closely related and shared a common language, culture and customs with them. This is also the reason why the Pharaohs of the 18th dynasty of ancient Egypt said that the Land of Punt (Horn of Africa) was their ancestral homeland and where the ancient Egyptians came from. If I was to point to a specific Cushitic group, I'd say the Beja people.

Great!

ArtanK:


You are right. Chinese DNA is nothing like the ancient Egyptian haplogroup (E3b) which is carried by many Afro-asiatic speaking people such as the Cushitic and Berber ethnicities.

No. Fyi a lot of dna nomenclature is deliberately misleading. Remember 6 yrs back the MSM claimed King Tut was Euro since he had haplogroup R? Left out was the fact that it originates in W AFRICA!

If not an expert use dental morphology,linguistics,cultural toolkits like Olu317 shared or forensic anthropology studies to identify ancient Africans around the world. That has been done with respect to ancient China-read the OP fully!

kikuyu1:


No. Fyi a lot of dna nomenclature is deliberately misleading. Remember 6 yrs back the MSM claimed King Tut was Euro since he had haplogroup R? Left out was the fact that it originates in W AFRICA!

If not an expert use dental morphology,linguistics,cultural toolkits like Olu317 shared or forensic anthropology studies to identify ancient Africans around the world. That has been done with respect to ancient China-read the OP fully!

Dude, the R haplogroup originated in west Asia and travelled to western Europe, more specifically around the Caucasus region. That's why the oldest human found carrying R marker is found in northern Italy.

As for the OP, it speculates the idea that the Hyksos invaders of Egypt who ruled for less than 150 years made their way to China. Whilst this is plausible as the Hyksos were West Asian to begin with, they weren't of original Egyptian stock. As of now, there is no concrete evidence that points towards the Chinese coming from Egypt. A few metal pots are not enough to draw such conclusions.

ArtanK:


Dude, the R haplogroup originated in west Asia and travelled to western Europe, more specifically around the Caucasus region. That's why the oldest human found carrying R marker is found in northern Italy.

As for the OP, it speculates the idea that the Hyksos invaders of Egypt who ruled for less than 150 years made their way to China. Whilst this is plausible as the Hyksos were West Asian to begin with, they weren't of original Egyptian stock. As of now, there is no concrete evidence that points towards the Chinese coming from Egypt. A few metal pots are not enough to draw such conclusions.

Is there anything like original Egyptians? I thought, it was a city of multi ethnic coloration. Considering, the different groups that had to rule at different times. From Kushites—Ethiopians—Middle Eastern —Europeans etc. If there are artifacts that showed correlations, shouldn't it be taken seriously? After all, writing begun in Egypt presumably 5000+ years ago. I don't really get your points about the original Egyptians because most people that lived during that era ranging around Ancient Ethiopia and other part of Horn of Africa to Babylonians enclave had a lot of colour people. This doesn't mean they were black descendants. Are you inferring that if a white man marries a black lady of African descent, will the descendants patrilineal be of black ancestor? Isn't it true that where one's group is much in population, is the location where the large population of their blood are traceable ? Isn't it true that the theory of return back to Africa is real? I want to learn from the theory of yours as too whom were regarded as the original Egyptians.

Olu317:
Is there anything like original Egyptians? I thought, it was a city of multi ethnic coloration. Considering, the different groups that had to rule at different times. From Kushites—Ethiopians—Middle Eastern —Europeans etc. If there are artifacts that showed correlations, shouldn't it be taken seriously? After all, writing begun in Egypt presumably 5000+ years ago. I don't really get your points about the original Egyptians because most people that lived during that era ranging around Ancient Ethiopia and other part of Horn of Africa to Babylonians enclave had a lot of colour people. This doesn't mean they were black descendants. Are you inferring that if a white man marries a black lady of African descent, will the descendants patrilineal be of black ancestor? Isn't it true that where one's group is much in population, is the location where the large population of their blood are traceable ? Isn't it true that the theory of return back to Africa is real? I want to learn from the theory of yours as too whom were regarded as the original Egyptians.

Let me address your points in chronological order.

1 - Yes there is such thing as an original Egyptian. The people who established the empire to begin with are the original stock. The rest are just short-term occupiers. This is evident in the culture and language that is used in this part of the region at that time. You can see how the invaders adapted to the culture and language of the people they were occupying. Take the Greek/Roman, Persian or the Hyksos era as an example, they came and tried to assimilate themselves into Egyptian culture. By saying that there is no such thing as an original Egyptian, it is technically the same as saying there was no original British tribe when we in fact know that prior to the Roman, Viking and Norman invasions, the land was entirely inhabited by Celtic tribes. The difference here is that the invaders stayed in the Island and gradually became British by influencing the people through language and culture. Whereas, with the Egyptians, the invaders didn't stay for long. The Hyksos were ousted in the end, the Persian empire regressed in Africa after the death of Xerxes III, an event that paved the way for Alexander the Great's conquest of Egypt. After that conquest the empire became a vassal state and the Egyptian culture began to decline.

2 - If there were artifacts from Egypt that showed up in China, why do we have to assume that Egyptians established the Chinese civilisation? Could they not have ended there through trade? Could the artifacts not have ended up in China via the Persian empire or the Greeks who ended up at the gates of the Chinese dominion?
The ancient Chinese people were great seafaring people, they were trading with the Puntites in 500 BC. That's why I don't understand why we're outright crossing out other explanations such as trade.

3 - People have always been separated into language groups. There were many different tribes spanning from the horn of Africa to the fertile crescent, but their distinct dialect or language always gave away their origin i.e. Akkadians, Elamites, Canaanites, Libyans, Nubians in upper Egypt Egyptians in lower Egypt, Puntites and etc. The question about their race depends on who of those people you class as black.

4 - The back migration into Africa occurred millennia before the establishment of the Egyptian empire. As a horn African man, I know that my people migrated back into Africa and settled in upper Egypt before making their way down to the horn of Africa. If you're alluding to the people who migrated back to be non-black then you should know that the Y-Dna of these people is most certainly African, however it is their mtDNA that shows the admixture meaning that their ancestors were by and large African.

ArtanK:


Dude, the R haplogroup originated in west Asia and travelled to western Europe, more specifically around the Caucasus region. That's why the oldest human found carrying R marker is found in northern Italy.

As for the OP, it speculates the idea that the Hyksos invaders of Egypt who ruled for less than 150 years made their way to China. Whilst this is plausible as the Hyksos were West Asian to begin with, they weren't of original Egyptian stock. As of now, there is no concrete evidence that points towards the Chinese coming from Egypt. A few metal pots are not enough to draw such conclusions.

My,my,my! Don't take any MSM pronouncements seriously until and unless you've done your own research! If not AE and Nubia would still be white. Outright lies,misleading nomenclature and false 'Caucanization' is used eg,'black brunettes,' Eurafrican and my personal fav 'a mysterious race.'

Blacks were the original settlers of Europe, some them, especially in Central Europe, were also Y-dna haplogroup "R". Results of the DNA tests indicate that in the Nuclear family, the Father was Y-dna R1a, the Mother was MTdna - K

The husband and wife are African Haplogroup R. See the prognathism.
Its a lot of reading. Let me highlight:

Haplogroup R1b (Y-DNA) is the dominant paternal lineage of Western Europe, so of course the Albino people want to stake out that particular Haplogroup as the "WHITE" haplogroup. But there is just one problem, there are also lots of R1b people in Africa

http://realhistoryww.com/world_history/ancient/Misc/Data/European_DNA_table.htm

The Hyksos were also African! Look at their statues. Also it helps to read posts. If you had you'd have seen a laundry list of Egypt/China links,linguistic,cultural toolkits,building eg pyramids,craniofacial morphology even the identical bronzes you dismiss.

The claim has to be carefully studied. In a span of 200yrs Western Europeans entered and colonized every land of West Africa. Before their entry we were black, after their exit we are still black...but our landscape is no longer what it was, our language, culture, worship, judicial and even political structure all went through a complete new birth and changed our consciousness and philosophy from afrocentric to eurocentric, yet from outside looking at us there is nothing to suggest we ever had contact with the European. It is not impossible that the two cultures were at one point in contact.

Bullshit. Egyptians traded with Chinese, so Chinese cannot be from Egypt at all. Ancient Egyptians were black people. Over the years they have been invaded by several cultures hence the mixture and look of the people. A lot of Arabs, Greeks and Romans also migrated there in great numbers because Egypt was a very prosperous land. Think of how America is today. Majority might be white, but they can never be American Indian. Neither should the American Indian history be ascribed to them.

ArtanK:


Let me address your points in chronological order.

1 - Yes there is such thing as an original Egyptian. The people who established the empire to begin with are the original stock. The rest are just short-term occupiers. This is evident in the culture and language that is used in this part of the region at that time. You can see how the invaders adapted to the culture and language of the people they were occupying. Take the Greek/Roman, Persian or the Hyksos era as an example, they came and tried to assimilate themselves into Egyptian culture. By saying that there is no such thing as an original Egyptian, it is technically the same as saying there was no original British tribe when we in fact know that prior to the Roman, Viking and Norman invasions, the land was entirely inhabited by Celtic tribes. The difference here is that the invaders stayed in the Island and gradually became British by influencing the people through language and culture. Whereas, with the Egyptians, the invaders didn't stay for long. The Hyksos were ousted in the end, the Persian empire regressed in Africa after the death of Xerxes III, an event that paved the way for Alexander the Great's conquest of Egypt. After that conquest the empire became a vassal state and the Egyptian culture began to decline.

2 - If there were artifacts from Egypt that showed up in China, why do we have to assume that Egyptians established the Chinese civilisation? Could they not have ended there through trade? Could the artifacts not have ended up in China via the Persian empire or the Greeks who ended up at the gates of the Chinese dominion?
The ancient Chinese people were great seafaring people, they were trading with the Puntites in 500 BC. That's why I don't understand why we're outright crossing out other explanations such as trade.

3 - People have always been separated into language groups. There were many different tribes spanning from the horn of Africa to the fertile crescent, but their distinct dialect or language always gave away their origin i.e. Akkadians, Elamites, Canaanites, Libyans, Nubians in upper Egypt Egyptians in lower Egypt, Puntites and etc. The question about their race depends on who of those people you class as black.

4 - The back migration into Africa occurred millennia before the establishment of the Egyptian empire. As a horn African man, I know that my people migrated back into Africa and settled in upper Egypt before making their way down to the horn of Africa. If you're alluding to the people who migrated back to be non-black then you should know that the Y-Dna of these people is most certainly African, however it is their mtDNA that shows the admixture meaning that their ancestors were by and large African.

You haven't answered my question. I have seen a lot of people on different forum claiming what's not true about Egyptians history . Like I had earlier inferred, Egypt was a a city that thrived because of Nile . And all manner of people came into her because of it. There were places that had thrived before Egypt . Places like Babel, which is around Middle East, the Gobekli Tepe in Turkey was estimated to had existed between 10th—8th BCE. And this city ruins had been made known to the rest of world. What I am inferring here is that Egypt was a cosmopolitan Empire. And in fact,the North Africans Berbers were the original settlers in that part. While other came along. And this people were not as the Hamitic as you can think. The people spans all through Middle East until ISLAM subdued them and identity of these people were subdued by Islam. The account of the world history on Egypt during their wars with different groups that came to assimilate with others Egyptians gave a description of these people alongside Ethiopians as having a curly hair different from Ethiopians when these wars were fought at different points in time. This shows the fact there were different people that lived in Egypt. And struggle to control the Empire always arise as result of political setting in Egypt after much years of interrelationship between these groups. Suffice here to infer that Ethiopia covered a lot of part of Sub sahara Africa that were in existence during these ancient times and were perpetual Hamitic lineage until the admixture begun. The DNA test on Egypt proves this that they weren't related to West Africa as people might think. And not because of the location but as result of location of their ancestors. Here is the break down of Egypt's DNA link:

North Africans –68%
,
Asia minor–3%

Southern Europe –3%

Eastern Africa –3%

Arabia –17%

Jewish Diaspora –4%

Considering, the statistics I have given which is verifiable, can arguably be said that some groups in China did migrated from Egypt because Egyptian Empire encompass many part of Middle East. And if one can consider these migrations of people based on conquests ,rebellions,religion factor,greener pasture etc, it will not be a presumption to agree to the fact that the evidence given is true, until proven otherwise. The materials used in the production of the artifacts I uploaded weren't from China environment .The fact that civilisations was pinned down to 5000+ years of Egypt's greatness, doesn't mean, Egypt wasn't in existence but the time it became WORLD POWER, was the period given as mentioned earlier. If seafaring were to be a factor, perhaps, no one will argue that but DNA traces still agree to the fact that many people's civilisations after Egypt's greatness, still testify to linkage with this monstrous powerful entity called Egypt.


Based on what I read from other contributors, it is obvious that people are emotionally attached to skin colour pigment. I will advise people to do more self research on how humanity came into being. Africa was the beginning of World human migration to other places. And there was nothing like Africans but people were Identified with their tribes. I have kept wondering the reason people think colour people owns the continent newly called Africa. The continent belong to all humanity. If most people do extensively study ,it will be a shocker to realise that all the world ethnicity live in even present day Africa as it was from the beginning.

The original Ancient Egyptians came from Horn of Africa. It's a fact. All Horners(Ethiopians, Eritreans, Somalians and Djiboutians) were one people and spoke one language called Afro-Asiatic around 10,000 BC. Afro-Asiatic was originated in Horn of Africa. Later this single language branched out into Cushitic, Semitic, Omotic, Berber, Chadic and Ancient Egyptians.

Ancient Egyptians themselves said, they came from the land of Punt(Kingdom around Horn of Africa, but also included other East African territories).

kikuyu1:
Sun Weidong found that ancient Chinese and Egyptian bronzes were chemically identical leading to the only obvious conclusion.

[img]http://i1.rgstatic.net/ii/profile.image/AS%3A272404320616456@1441957659462_l/Weidong_Sun.png[/img]

He also studied ancient Chinese Xia dynasty records and found

http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/09/02/did-chinese-civilization-come-from-ancient-egypt-archeological-debate-at-heart-of-china-national-identity/
I've always known definite linguistic and craniometric evidence of Africans in early Asia but to my knowledge this is the first time its in the MSM even if not BBC/CNN/Al Jazeera. Also the thesis suggests a direct movement of Egyptians to China not a slow gradual overland migration as would be expected;they knew where they were going.
Fyi he was forced to sit on his findings for 20 years! What else are they hiding? Imo,it doesn't matter the truth will always out.

Fascinating ! I think this practice of trying to infuse revolutionary thinking and sloganeering into a purely scientific endeavor should stop. I speculate that the Chinese authorities are afraid of the findings of this research will upset their carefully crafted narrative about Chinese origins.
ArtanK, prior to the Viking invasion of Britain, the invading Angles, Saxons and other north German tribes were the dominant force in much of England. The native Celtic tribes were already squeezed back into Wales and Scotland, and were the most dominant group on the British isles. The Romans had never managed to conquer Scotland, so it was a bastion of Gaelic culture. The Vikings and Normans became completely anglicized and lost their language and culture for good.

MtuMsuper:

Fascinating ! I think this practice of trying to infuse revolutionary thinking and sloganeering into a purely scientific endeavor should stop. I speculate that the Chinese authorities are afraid of the findings of this research will upset their carefully crafted narrative about Chinese origins.
ArtanK, prior to the Viking invasion of Britain, the invading Angles, Saxons and other north German tribes were the dominant force in much of England. The native Celtic tribes were already squeezed back into Wales and Scotland, and were the most dominant group on the British isles. The Romans had never managed to conquer Scotland, so it was a bastion of Gaelic culture. The Vikings and Normans became completely anglicized and lost their language and culture for good.

EXACTMUNDO! I can't add anything. Often political narratives get in the way of truth.

MtuMsuper:

Fascinating ! I think this practice of trying to infuse revolutionary thinking and sloganeering into a purely scientific endeavor should stop. I speculate that the Chinese authorities are afraid of the findings of this research will upset their carefully crafted narrative about Chinese origins.
ArtanK, prior to the Viking invasion of Britain, the invading Angles, Saxons and other north German tribes were the dominant force in much of England. The native Celtic tribes were already squeezed back into Wales and Scotland, and were the most dominant group on the British isles. The Romans had never managed to conquer Scotland, so it was a bastion of Gaelic culture. The Vikings and Normans became completely anglicized and lost their language and culture for good.

To correct you, Vikings never succeeded in invading Britain. Like you said, Britain was first inhabited by different Celtic tribes. After the Romans left Britain, different Germanic tribes, mainly Angels and Saxons invaded Britain and mixed with some of the locals Celtic tribs. Again in 11 century, Normans(mixed people of Vikings and local population around present day Normandy coast in northern France) invaded Britain and mixed with the local Britains, which created modern day English. Like you said, Welshs and Scottish are predominantly Celtic than Germanic.

Hati13:

To correct you, Vikings never succeeded in invading Britain. Like you said, Britain was first inhabited by different Celtic tribes. After the Romans left Britain, different Germanic tribes, mainly Angels and Saxons invaded Britain and mixed with some of the locals Celtic tribs. Again in 11 century, Normans(mixed people of Vikings and local population around present day Normandy coast in northern France) invaded Britain and mixed with the local Britains, which created modern day English. Like you said, Welshs and Scottish are predominantly Celtic than Germanic.

I beg to differ. There is a very long road in England called Watling Street. This street was a boundary set by the kings of the southern part of England to stop any Dane (Viking ) from crossing south of it on pain of death. North of it were very many Danish settlements in England. They had been invading so long they set up Danes only villages and lived with the local saxons there. But none was allowed south of this line which was called the Danelaw. In fact its so interesting, all names of towns north of this wall end in -by. So think of any English town with the name ending in -by like Rugby, Derby or names like Kirkby and you had a Danish ancestor! The Vikings founded Dublin and yes, the Normans were merely frenchified Vikings. They simply got tired of killing and settled and assimilated. Don't forget the Viking Rus tribe founded Russia. These fellas were just badass!

MtuMsuper:

I beg to differ. There is a very long road in England called Watling Street. This street was a boundary set by the kings of the southern part of England to stop any Dane (Viking ) from crossing south of it on pain of death. North of it were very many Danish settlements in England. They had been invading so long they set up Danes only villages and lived with the local saxons there. But none was allowed south of this line which was called the Danelaw. In fact its so interesting, all names of towns north of this wall end in -by. So think of any English town with the name ending in -by like Rugby, Derby or names like Kirkby and you had a Danish ancestor! The Vikings founded Dublin and yes, the Normans were merely frenchified Vikings. They simply got tired of killing and settled and assimilated. Don't forget the Viking Rus tribe founded Russia. These fellas were just badass!

Thanks for the correction and info. Is the boundary road you are talking about the one that was built by Romans?

Hati13:

Thanks for the correction and info. Is the boundary road you are talking about the one that was built by Romans?

not sure who built it. Perhaps wikipedia can help

Olu317 and kikuyu1 nice replies, I'm a little busy with work and Ramadan these days. I'll get back to you soon.

So I understand this theory is based on the chemical contents of the bronze used in both civilizations.

The geochemist really couldn't think of how that could have been so, except that one people must have come out of the other people?

ArtanK:
Olu317 and kikuyu1 nice replies, I'm a little busy with work and Ramadan these days. I'll get back to you soon.

Oh k. May almighty God grant your prayers....