₦airaland Forum

noetic:
Thinking, reasoning, progressive ideas, intellectual disscuss or beautiful ideas is/are not peculiar to any tribe, nation or race be it black or white. knowledge is in abundance for all that seek it.

Any attempt to idolize the white man or promote neo-colonialist ideas in the name of worldbank, imf, or foreingn aids or watever is unpatriotic, intellectually bankrupt, morally debauchive, socially unjustifiable and a reflection of inherent inferiority complex, mentality and aura of thinking. not forgeting hypocrisy.
The ills of nigeria as a nation be it corruption, injustice, underdevelopment, poverty and lack of infastructure are not peculiar to nigeria at this time or in the past. instances or nations that have expirienced similar problems and now have a good tale to tell, applied knowledge with homegrown solutions derived from guts at the detriment of all "other things".

from the uk to the us, switzerland to dubai, saudi arabia to japan, they all have elements of corruption and underdevelopment. this may not be prevalent like ours because of their positive image projection campaign that cost billions of dollars/pounds. but there is an element of greed in every human being. the diffrence between their corruption n that of nigeria is that theirs does not invariably prevent the common man from recievin certain social and basic benefits but our own brand of corruption is a winner takes all approach. notin makes the whiteman special and or unique, notin makes him more intelligent. he only attained civilisation earlier and used it to his benefits, nonetheless he still has his problems.

there are home made suggested solutions already in nigeria and beautiful progresive, intellectually driven ideas are being proposed daily in nigeria within the corridors of power. what is however lacking is the will to aggressivly implement them, this the whiteman cannot do for us. we need a revolutionarily driven followership that will stand up to propagate what they believe in. but who is ready? and who will lead?

I refuse to think like a whiteman, I choose to think as an intellectual.

Eloquently put. I think all the Western c#%k suckers should learn a thing or two from the above Observation. The WEST did not create progress. Its manifestation depends on the approach and definition one attributes to its meaning.

Emad:
the slaves were taken from African over 400 years ago
they were first shipped to Portugal, then to france and Britain , then to south America and then to America

the have been so many intermarriages between the Slaves from Generation to generation and so many Mixed raced children over the years
so that Now there is single nation or place in africa that can boast that any one black american is more than 2% originally from there
(  60% is completely ridiculous )

Michael Jackson once did some research to try to find his  origin and the name Ethiopia came up, but that was only a rough estimate which was suceptible to so many
varying parametres!

so i have just one piece of advice for you Mr poster, GO AND GET A JOB!!
because you are obviously suffering from an extreme lack of joblessness

LMAO

That statement is not quite accurate. Y chromozone DNA can help establish a patrilineal lineage of AA linking a cluster of their genes to a single ethnic group from Africa if that chromosones marking remains consistent with the geneflow in a specific area then it is safe to say that person is from that area.

Its not impossible for anyone of them to be classified as Igbo. 400 years is a very small amount of time when talking about genetics.

Blatant:
Nairaland sometimes reminds me of Oyibos Online where the white people then sometimes just enjoy classifying all Nigerians as imbeciles.

I thought I was the only one who expressed that thinking!!!1

[quote author=idey_craze link=topic=143728.msg2410145#msg2410145 date=1214252181]the thing with Nigerians living abroad is that they are so eager for quick money that they result to doing anything to make it so - in my travels abroad - I have seen loads of Nigerians in the UK/America riding the kind of cars that even oyinbos will bow say meen this one get pay - but look for their records - they don't have correct papers to live there - they make the loudest noise, they attend the loudest parties, the throw money around - so - why wont the peaceful countries want them out?

The other day I went to ghana, and a ghanian told me - there are no thieves here o - except Nigerians - oh men - can u beat that? The same in south Africa - they say - Nigerians are the thieves here - same in the Uk and in America - check the prisoners in London alone - you will see that Naija men/women na im full there pass - I don tire.


Why we no go just relax and take things easy whenever we travel abroad? This one get nothing to do with bad leadership or bad country - na our long throat dey kill us.[/quote]Change the mind set of the next generation coming  from grassroot level and inevitably the country will change.

I'm still contemplating on if this was a strategic move by Tsvangiri. He has been through quite a lot to be giving up now.

mmmmmm!! I wonder.

Maybe cause many african mythologies and cultures have connected cats to the underworld and even before Christianity came into Naija we did the same.

I don't know anywhere in the bible where a cat is mentioned with any significance or if there is please someone enlighten me

While we are at it. Lets seperate the Igbos from the Yorubas and then from the hausa's and then warri and then calabar and then so on.

its people who like to hide in their ignorance that would suggest such a thing i.e The great religion forum. Please don't encourage xtians to be like that.

Only through discussion,confrontation and discord can one become wiser.

By no means am I making excuses, but African nations are sensitive to the relationship they have had with the WEST over the past century and rightly so. For you to understand the mentality of a man who came through that era might give you insight into his actions and stubborness to relenquish power.  You can't teach and old dog new tricks.

Mugabe does believe that what ever life he is sacrificing now are a means to an end. The end being little interferance of the WEST in Zimbabwean affairs.

He knows his time is up but will go down fighting even if it costs lifes. I 4 one believe that even if MDC wins after a couple of noise making and couple years pass it will be the same old same old with another set of people calling for the ousting of that party. If its not Mugabe today it will be Tsvangiri tommorrow. Change the mentality and not the leaders of the people and that is change you can sustain.

African countries need to stop jumping up cause they will jump back down again but if they grow up they'll stay up.

landis:
yeah. same old story. You should always look at the big picture.

who was behind the food basket: whites

who support the whites to be food basket producer: WEST.

if same WEST give same support they give to their brothers to BLACKS when they took over. It will still be success story.

But I see good in this:

If ANY african country cannot feed its people. Let them Die!

When the UK told Ghandi to allow them bring cloths for India. He replied if India cannot cloth its people, let us all Go NAKED.

Today, same India just bought LandRover.

Landis
I second that opinion whole heartedly.  "Survive or Die" If we can't do it oourselvesthen we don't deserve to exist. As much as I am not in support of many of Mugabe's policies. I fail to believe he truly wants to see the demise of his people.

I fail to see how a lot of people refuse to see things in a wholistic context. The WEST is an empire, like many other empires before it and will support its allies and those who support its world view/Economics. Its SURVIVE OR DIE

I mean why shouldn't Mugabe be allowed to play the by the same rules. Its not like the WEST really care about people dying in Zimbabwe and I don't think all this publicity is because they love the people of Zimbabwe for all they care they can all die of aids or nuke themselves and no westerner will loose sleep over it. Let see it play out and see if History vindicates Mugabe.

tpia:
how do you control population growth in a country where people insist on polygamy as a way of life?

Education and awareness. It was successful with spread of Aids and related diseases.

Create social incentives to marry one wife or at least have smaller number of children.

There is a sense of competition that exists among other Africans and Nigerians in terms of measuing the success of Nigerians compared to other African countries . The aggressiveness with which Nigerians choose to approach whatever they do is an asset and as well as a liability to us.

I believe the reason many African countries choose to pick on Nigerians is not only because of the bad things we do but the ability and level or success at which we reach certain goals. That's undeniable.

You can't blame them though they are only protecting their citizens and nation from competition of the HIGHEST caliber so of course they will focus on the bad things we do and neglect any mention of good things this competition brings into their societies.

Its not like anyone who has the opportunity ain't doing it. The East the West, you name it.

From the words of Brother Malcolm "When you tell your PEOPLE to put away their guns then I'll tell my PEOPLE to do the same."

Maybe we can start by controling our population growth so there will not be an overwhelming number of us fighting for limited resources in our own country thus forcing many to leave to find greener pastures in new horizons.

Grass root reducation of our young ones to turn away from corruption and instilling a sense of national pride. Its too late for us and those baboons who are running government we are already infected with the plague so I don't see any changes coming with this generation.

I don't care if they build all the infrastructure in the world in Nigeria. We willl maintain anything cause we don't have that culture in us.

If your insides are rotten there is no amount of outwardly cosmetic surgery that can change what is going on in your head. My 2CENTS

morpheus24:
I am shipping about 4 cars into naija. All of them are Year 2000 models. Can I ship them into naija or will I have any problems i.e to say are they all still under the 8 year mark.

I am not sure how naija calculates their 8 year mark as far as cars as concerned. Please confirm for me. I don't want to get to the port in naija and start hearing stories.

Thanks.

Jenju

Thanks for the info. Its all ML 430 benz but I will look into the specs on that. I know the shipping company will quote me a time it gets to naija but i want to know from hands on experience how long it normally takes by ship ( leaving from houston, tx) and when it gets there how long normally does it take to clear vehicle at port so I can gestimate when to leave for naija to pick it up.

Also other factors that might interfer with normall process such as time of year, does rainy season affect arrivals of cargo.

busynett:
All things being equal, turn around time should me 3weeks, Car dealers would respond to time taken to clear from Nigeria port.

Maybe inspired_m, jenju and viperman would help

Thanks again for your quick response.

Guys

Please I have one more question. Whats the turn around time for shipping the car and then how long normally to clear the car from the ports. Max time frame.

busynett:
Go ahead and ship them legally. 2000 is still within permitted period of time.

I appreciate it . Thanks

I am shipping about 4 cars into naija. All of them are Year 2000 models. Can I ship them into naija or will I have any problems i.e to say are they all still under the 8 year mark.

I am not sure how naija calculates their 8 year mark as far as cars as concerned. Please confirm for me. I don't want to get to the port in naija and start hearing stories.

Thanks.

Uche2nna:
I thought the question should be "How did white people become white?"

Huh?

Fadeioloro:
I'm sorry if i offended you by saying you were ignorant ,did not mean to offend. All I am saying is that you cannot base your understanding of the world on the bible as you will know if you have delved into the history of the bible, that it is not historically accurate and it is a plagiarised and falsified amalgamation of various ancient African texts, furthermore it has been tampered with over the years even after the canonisation. The canonisation of the bible itself is something that you should look into before you start taking it literally.

I agree with you however that we as Africans are the main architects of our own demise for various reasons, however that does not mean that we are not under siege. All you have to do is open your eyes and look around you, and you will see that we are under a well planned and coordinated attack and this is not a new phenomenon either, it has been at work for at least six thousand years. The question is what are we going to do about it in order for the future generation of so called Africans may prosper in the midst of all this.

Amerigo Vespucci was a plunderer and a rapist of those lands and the native Americans have all but been killed off by people like him, are you saying that the so called native Americans should honour such a man by naming their lands after him. I beg to differ they did not have a choice in the matter.

I would just like to conclude by saying that i had read your earlier post, and i guess i overreacted when i read the last one so for this I apologise. I am only interested in the re-education and upliftment of my peoples so I tend to be a bit too passionate when i see things like Adam was the first man it ticks me off because we know from scientific evidence that no such person existed and he was just a fabrication and even if he did exist as the first man he must have been a black man. I am here to have a healthy debate about things so you have my apologies once again for the offence i obviously caused you. Finally a wise man realises he is ignorant on various topics as no one knows everything.

Apology is accepted and I respect anyone who is a deep thinker and questions what seems illogical cause that is the only way to grow in my opinion both spiritually and intellectually. I am still a very spiritual person and am not fully convinced in matters concerning scientific breakthroughs on understanding everything around us therefore I remain skeptical on matters that I cannot verify until i have a full understanding of them to the best of my human ability.

The amalgamation of African texts is partially true as other stories in the bible can be linked to other civilizations outside of Africa and not necessarily from Egypt which most of the plagarism is associated with. I think there is more manipulation of imformation that tampering. Tampering suggest deliberate change of text in an effort to deceive. In my opinion I don't think that was the purpose. I don't think there was any grand conspiracy as many purport.

Every empire or civilization has sort to supplant existing so called "inferior" ones either through assimilation or conquest which goes back to my theory of survival instincts of Humans. Again, I do not believe there is any grand scheme in play here. There however are people with extreme ideas and view who can sway the many into believing incorrect information as we as humans are susceptible to this. This is what is in play today and has been in play for centuries on end.

A vast majority of Africans already know what needs to be done to get the continent in play but we are only a few voices and are unable to sway the majority to our favor because of the interference by the "survival of the fittest" rule which coincidentally is the corner stone of the new world order. Religion, faith and spirituality are as relevant a factor in human existence as science because though having short comings is a factor in ensuring our own survival as well. Think about it.

My point in mentioning Amerigo was to point out that He was an Italian and most Americans are not of that ancestry, so are they being bamboozled into calling themselves after an Italian since most are not of such origin.


Even if the first man or ADAM was black, its relevance is overstated. He is your forbearer and that reason doesn't give you any better title over anyone per say. It only means you genetic pull has been here longer therefore you can stake a claim that it will be harder to extinguish your breed seeing that it is dominant and has gone through more molecular evolution.

I started this thread to clear up the issue concerning Races using science and history to make my point. The reference to the bible was to show how historical information can be manipulated to suit ones opinion of things and to urge people who read it to disregard the references to race cause they are irrelevant and misconstrued.

Fadeioloro:
@morpheous24 don't be so ignorant open your mind , try and open your eyes and mind maybe you may learn something. There was no Adam all that stuff is just mythology. Don't you know that melanin protects you from developing skin cancer like a white person would get if exposed to the amount of uv rays you are exposed to daily. Really even the term Africa should be contested because that was a conquerors name , have you ever read about your real history , if you have then you would know that we are under seige and your ignorance makes it easier for the seige to work. Read more and don't limit your self to the bible a book that is obviously contradictory, unscientific and definitely been tampered with. Please try and wake up Black people , you were the first and now you occupy the lowest strata , wake up so we can rise up.

Yes master, I will try not be too ignorant for your comfort. If you were quite smart you would go back and read my responses on this topic and know I am quite versed on scientific matters concerning the origins of man before responding to my post. I don't really care how Africa was named as no one is quite sure "Please see etymology of the word "Africa". I don't know what conqeuerors name you are mentioning. "Africanus" perharps but that is not verifiable. Its the attachment to the name and what it represents that matters and not its origins. I mean America is named after Amerigo Vespucci. Does that mean all Americans are being hoodwinked or shouldn't be proud to call themselves such. That point is irrelevant.

It is my studies into African histories that has brought me to the discussions of the bible and how it affects Africans and its history so reading the bible is not limiting my understanding but giving me a wholeistic view of subject matters. The bible is not based on rational thought but faith that much I understand which is why I have limited my discussions of Human races and not delved fully into the topic of Human evolution or origins. It is a historical document and can be used as a guide when trying decipher human history.

Please stop that we are under siege thing. We are the architects of our own demise. Survival is the key to unlocking Human struggles. Life will always strife to exist. Its what drives our existence. No one is putting us under siege and your ancestors being first to evolve as far as color is concerned has no bearings on where you are going now. It only enhances your most primate instinct of survival which your ancestors passed down to you and reason you are still here. So if you want to have a real discussion then say so and stop tagging people as ignorant before you even know what they are talking about cause that just exposes your own Ignorance buddy!!

[/quote][quote author=OyO link=topic=133599.msg2349765#msg2349765 date=1212944934]An interesting question and even more interesting responces!

Please consider this we did not become black - we were created Black!

The original man of creation Adam was Black and perfect. He was set in the savanah, which today is called Africa.

The mystery of the Black pigment known as Melanin is a profound blessing confered on man.

All peoples sprung forth from this original template - as genetic research has confirmed all gene codes are in the Black mitochondrial DNA.

It is sad the gross ignorance displayed by many so called educated Nigerians. Sad but not surprising - considering that most educated Nigerians are mentally colonised people, who are as confused as the white people whose
academic conferments they esteem so highly.

Observe for instance that most responces to the question - Why were we made black- generate responces from Black people merely parroting what they have been told by white people. Consider it a sad situation when you have to go to another people who who have a low regard for you tell you who you are and where you came from!

There must be an internal (Spiritual and Mental )advancement before there can be an external, tangible external and manifested advancement.

If we don't know where we come from - we can't know where we are going.

Do we really know who we are? Ouside of the designations of white people?

Have you considered, even the very name Nigeria is a designation from white people.

That is why till today we consume much - but produce little.

is that a fact or your opinion? Adam was created black ? Huh?

Blessing for what purpose? So he can survive the terrain or what?

It still doesn't mean Adam was black. Infact the so called genetic research is leaning towards a man who definitely had dark skin but due to migration into the interior of Africa and outside of it diverged into two different spectrums of color being the extreme black you see today and the extreme white as well. So that would make Adam by your theory somewhere in the middle.

White people do not own knowledge. It is something that can be understood by pratically anyone who observes and examines the evidence, white people do however interject theri bias into their studies and observations, therefore when we tackle this subject we must be as subjective as possible.

Nigeria is a designation by colonials but so are many european nations concorded by europeans as well so we are not the only ones.

simmy:
@kag
im sure the guys that wrote the bible werent even aware that the chinese folks existed, so i don't get your point.
@morpheus
im forced to agree with u. many people inteprete the bible and make it say what it never said, however, note that when pastors preach, they tend to make analogies and don't expect you to take them literarilly. Many people are just stupid! so they do. others like just don't understand enough of the Christian culture. As a pastor i can come to the pulpit and tell u that the black man was cursed by noah and assume you understand the, should i call it, almost poetic way of positioning things. now, i state i have no idea what Asimolowo said and meant so im not defending him but all im saying is i can see myself as a pastor saying stuff like that and assuming people understand im not discussing science

If many people inteprete the bible and make it say what it never said isn't it an irresponsible thing to do. Even if the pastors tasks is to feed the spiritual needs of the congregation, he shouldn't lie or misconstrue the information he is diseminating to them or accept teachings he absorbed from seminary shcool without trully invesitgating such important matters. At least we have clarified the matter that I am not disputing what the bible says but what people say about what the bible says.

Ignorance is the worst type of disease a man can have, to point out errors which are evident is to do justice to Christianity and mankind as a whole. My beef with Pastor Oshimolowo is against what a poster here who obviously goes to his church and hears him preach about this topic simply believes what he is told without invesitgating the facts. For the pastor to continue to preach the origins of races based on accounts linked to biblical references, assuming the follower to be intelligent enough to distinguish analogy from fact is wrong.

Teaching about the adaptations of man in a more scientific context should be encouraged without necessarily referencing to the Bible to justify or confirm such discoveries. The Bible is intentionally silent on this matter because differences in mankind in terms of race are not important to its overall message and the concept of race and color or the way your nose is shaped is man made.

simmy:
@morpheus
i have no idea what Asimolowo wrote or did not write in his book so i shal not comment on that.
However, i have said repeatedly that saying the biblical account is wrong or innacurate is taking things out of context. You are judging it by the wrong standards! did the black man evolve from Ham No! but was he grouped as Hamitic in the bible? definitely! that was the bible s way of making a grouping of the races that existed in those times. So saying the information in the bible is innacurate is like saying because my primary school science textbook said the sun is a ball of fire , then its innacurate and false!

The story of the Ham Shem and japheth are biblical accounts alright. Their relationship or genealogy cannot be verified as the the roots of races that exist in the world today. I am not judging the bible accounts of the 3 sons. I am judging the account of the authors or the so called historical opininon that these three human beings spawn the races of the world.

THE BIBLE DOES NOT SUPPORT that opinion. No one was grouped as Hamitics in the bible. No one called black people sons of Ham in the bible. Re interpretations and translations have a lot to do with the manipulation of information.

You can see I am not deviating from the topic. I ain't talking about Genesis, the flood or even the exodus of the Jews from Egypt. My point is who ever traced the origins of the races of man to tribal clans using the stories in the bible as evidence of this had little knowledge of evolutionary principles which have completely debunked the rational that in a short span of time, people's phenotypes could morph to be undeniably distinguishable from one another.

debosky:
To the first part in bold, this is the basic problem with Africans - yes he was good before, but now he is PAST IT - He has lost all reasonable ability to run Zimbabwe properly, and therefore he SHOULD GO. Why must he rule the country forever? Situations and circumstances of the world economy have changed, and he could not adapt, hence his failure. HE SHOULD LEAVE. At his age now i'm sure some degree of senility has crept in, he is no longer at his prime and others can serve Zim better.

As to the second part in bold, you show, again, your lack of understanding of the fundamental issues. Zimbabwe was the FOOD BASKET (not wine and tobacco basket) of southern Africa, meaning substantial food cultivation was going on alongside those cash crops; you make it seem like only wine and cheese were being produced, or are the maize and milk producers in Shonga, Kwara state who came from Zim also growing wine there?

Mugabe has lost the plot - he claims it is the West causing problems but there are NO SANCTIONS against their trade, so whatever 'wine, tobacco and cheese' they can produce has willing buyers, if they are making any. His pig-headed policies have led to the country's demise.

The West is not demonstrating anything, rather Zimbabwe's foolishness has become Zambia and others' gain - the white farmers are moving there and creating value with their expertise, while Zimbabwe continues to hurtle down into poverty.

Your statments are quite accurate however it most be noted that the "WEST's" only interests in Zimbabwe is economical and they don't care too much about the people that live there but what they can exploit. It was Mugabe's job to understand that fact fully before taking such drastic land reforms. There could have been other compromises with the Land owners. he did give htem a lot of time to negotiate but they fought vigorously to keep the advantage.

They are now waiting for a pro western govt like Tvansgiri's to usher them back in to continue what they started. Mugabe doesn't want this and in as much as his decision is causing the country hardship, history may vindicate him later on.

savanaha:
While I maintain the position that Mugabe was on the right for handling the white farmers the way he did seeing as the British did not hold up their end of the deal. He screwed up with the way he distributed it and his inability to leave his position. I wonder though if he finally leaves his presidency for life position if those whites would go back given the opportunity.

Don't think they would. That ship has sailed. he does need to go though. His staying in power now is just a Bravado attempt to show the West his resilience and nothing more. He is damaging his people.

"THe Lancaster agreement" is what caused Mugabe to take such a drastic move in land reform matters. He was hoodwinked into signing this agreement when that particular issue was not tackled properly and the British relented on their plan of assisting in the redistribution of land equitably.

What do you expect the guy to do. They didn't keep their end of the bargain so why should he?

Mugabe no be Mugu-gabe.

simmy:
Here we go again! People ascribing what they believe to the bible and presenting their viewpoint as fact! dude you made a few assumptions
1. That human beings have chimpanzees as a common ancestor is not fact! its your opinion
2. Modern humans are at least 100,000years old, maybe, i never contested that fact with you. Neither did the bible.
3. Neandarthal now i really don't understand what ure getting at
4. Human migration was from Africa outward. agreed. findings indicate so. However, the reality is a little more complex than that. humans migrated outwards from Africa, settled in the Arabian desert and remigrated to all parts of the world including back to Africa. the bibe is silent about the location of man s origins. i t implies it was somewhere in the fertile crescent but elsewhere also implied that man existed in other parts of the world.

the bible makes a lot more sense if its taken in context. its a religious book that makes claims that can't be substantiated anyways. i mean how am i supposed to convince you that a place exists somewhere burning with fire and brimstone (which by the way i don't think is a literal fire) in which a loving God is going to throw you for all eternity for not loving Him?

On subjects that can be substantiated, the bible is simply a historical book written by simple folks for simple people. it was defintiely not written for the post jet age Homo sapiens. it explains or at least attempts to phenomena in a very simplistic way. u can accuse the bible of naivety in scientific matters but to call it innacurate is taking it out of context.

@kag
u don't know what i am or believe, so y assume? basically i don't agree with people who think the bible should be taken in a strict literal sense. a little bit of common sense and ability to put things in perspective is needed to understand the bible. Also a lot of skeptisicm in the scientific community

Simmy you are confusing me on your stance concerning this topic. I put the statement forward how did black people become black specifically refuting the 3 sons story as the origins of world races being that they are false stories based on ethnocentric view points and written by historians who were grossly biased and prejudice( Not an opinion but a fact) and further stating that their teaches be stricken from being preached anywhere possible. including Pastor Oshimolowo's sermons.

I am not stating that the Bible for any reason is a scientific book or should explain scientific facts and I do agree it can be used as a historical reference during investigations of historical matters. However the point I am trying to make here is that the historical account of the origins of races BASED ON THE INFORMATION FROM THE BIBLE is inaccurate. if something is proven inaccurate it is therefore false and if false should not be taught. This is the difference between pseudo science and science with the former being the manipulation of certain truths to come to an unverifiable/skewed conclusion rather than the facts standing out for themselves as verifiable by almost anyone.

The Noah/3 Sons story is a myth and cannot be verified. The Bible doesn't even support the story.

If one person accuses another person of being looney. It is an opinion or even worse an insult. If that opinion is confirmed by a hundred people all at the same time. I think that is what we call FACT.


Hmmmmmm?

simmy:
i don't think u read my post. scientists didnt abandon the noah approach because it was flawed, they modified it to suit present day scientific findings.
evolutionists still look to Darwin as the father of evolution though they have greatly modified his theory today.

I read the thread alright. "What modifications are you talking about?"

Please enlighten me by sighting them. I don't see how the jewish classificaton of human races was modified. If you are talking about the tribes and groupings mentioned in the "so called historical human race account" maybe they kept a few names and classifications of peoples seeing that it was of no relevance to rename these peoples. There is even till today dispute among those accurate classifcation of peoples since its difficult to trace the true origins of certain people mentioned in tth "historical account of races"

The comparison to Darwin's theory is inaccurate. His model was built upon and modified. The historical groupings by Josephus who is the culprit behind this classifications of peoples is built on myth and heresay.

Saying people are semitic, hamitic is more of a linguistic classification that a racial one which I'll agree scientist still use but by no means are they building upon the so called "blocks" of the historical account. The palestinian/Philistines of yesteryear are not the same as the palestinians of today, yet the people are called Palestinian cause of the region they come from. We cannot assume that because they are called palestinians some how they are the offspring of the original forebearers of that name unless invesitgated. We simply use those terms to simplify matters.

mekile:
eiishhhh, come on guys, look on the bright side.

k donkey raping tribal kings, im off. enjoy the rest of your night.

eiishhhhh, wena come back soon. We''ll be here waiting

savanaha:
I don't know about the colourreds since Mpeke Mpele thinks that dark skin is bad maybe they will kill the dark SA.

First they came for illegals and I said nothing because I was not an illegal
Then they came for the legals and I said nothing as I was a SA so legal
Then they came for the whites and I said nothing as I was not white
Then they came for the Indians and I said nothing as I was not an Indian
Then they came for me and nobody was left to speak for me.

You summarized my thoughts exactly.

mekile:
i don't have a problem with people who are the legitimately, but all the people there who are illegal residents, i say, if you obeyed the law, you would be in a position where you had your shop looted or your bum pinched

Yeah you do and so do your country men. you can't deny that SA have had a history of hatred and intolerance that has existed and still continues to exist in the society for a long period and its not going away anytime soon.


Are you the only people who have to deal with foreigners in your country? Haba what is wrong with you?

It always starts with the illegals. Soon it will be the legal, then the unwanted, then the indians, then the coloreds, then the cripples, then the darker skin blacks, then the tall, then the short.

Unitl you alone are left in the country then you will satisfied. Numskull