English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Hmm...lots to think about.

Americans ...there is no pure white. you are the original illegal immigrants. show some compassion!!

2007-11-15 07:49:01 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Cultures & Groups Other - Cultures & Groups

Sure JDT ..i will get right on that.

2007-11-15 08:15:20 · update #1

15 answers

Some say we are all "Black" because of the findings in the Hadar Valley. This is a site of paleoanthropological excavations in the lower Awash River valley in the Afar region of Ethiopia. It lies along the northernmost part of Africa's Eastern (Great) Rift Valley, about 185 miles (300 km) northeast of Addis Ababa. The lower valley of the Awash River

Many feel that the finding of “Lucy,” a 3.2-million-year-old Australopithecus Afarensis skeleton, is the oldest fossel.
Thusly proving that we all came from Africa.

Gracile australopithecines shared several traits with modern apes and humans and were widespread throughout Eastern and Northern Africa as early as 3.9 to as late as 3 million years ago. The earliest evidence of fundamentally bipedal hominids can be observed at the site of Laetoli in Tanzania. These hominid footprints are remarkably similar to modern humans and have been positively dated as 3.7 million years old. Until recently, the footprints have generally been classified as Australopithecine because that had been the only form of pre-human known to have existed in that region at that time; however, some scholars have considered reassigning them to a yet unidentified very early species.

2007-11-16 01:59:48 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Most of these comments are asinine... Sicilians did not get Sub Saharan DNA from North Africans (Arabs/ Berbers) The North Africans did not use many black soldiers based on the fact that Blacks (Nubian s... not sub Saharan Africans) And North Africans are vehement enemies... especially Ethiopians. The most likely cause is the Roman empire... The Romans did long distance trade with many countries and controlled parts of north Africa. Most of the slave bases in Italy were near the coast and same regions where black DNA is present in high rates. If the "Moors" (who are Muslim Arabs... not black) were the cause then all their regions of control would have the same phenomenon... Spain, Portugal, Etc dont have these high rates... Because Romans did not send the millions of slaves shipped into the Empire all over... just the port regions in Italy! These slaves were mostly men... but women concubines were also common. The problem arises from the fact that people like "Fresh Jeff" who are from North Africa were the first to be called Moors... But then the word later became synonymous with all blacks... Creating the confusion. However there are not, a lot of Sub Saharan Africans in Africa now... Let alone in the 700 s The North And West Africans are right below North Africa... Why not take slaves from there? I would Surmise that trade with Ethiopia is where the Romans acquired these slaves...

2016-05-23 07:28:57 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0 0

Wow... Um.. you know if you keep this up.. your going to be in the same boat as my last account.. But you know what.. I got yo back.. so look me up when they delete you!!

But on the real.. Why do people Neglect the fact why Africa is called the Mother Land..

Thats where Adam and Eve was created and the Garden of Eden.. and from there the human race branched off after they was kicked out...

BTW... Black people are still the only race that can give birth to all types of colors and different types of hair, and eyes..

besides that.. whe make every race look good when brought in the mix..

2007-11-15 08:52:18 · answer #3 · answered by ☻Jay ™☻ 4 · 4 1

Most Italians believe that they are of pure Roman stock, it's just the people living south of them who are Africans. So the Milanese think the Romans are African, the Romans think the Neapolitans are African, the Neapolitans think the Sicilians are African and the Sicilians are a bit worried about the folk who live in Lampedusa.

2007-11-15 07:55:57 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2 2

Haha. Actually they are the second. Asians who came across the Bering Strait are the first (So-called Maya, etc.). The Black Olmecs are the indigenous of course.

Nancy Kay:
Legal European immigrants? Oxymoron. WHO made them legal??? Exactly, other illegals! LOL.

2007-11-15 07:53:56 · answer #5 · answered by pinnie 2 · 4 1

I think what she's referring to is the fact that America was taken illegally in the first place. I don't care when you came here or what passport or document you had, you are still living on stolen land. Indian treaties being broken has become kind of a joke, but the basis is in reality - we signed treaties, colonizers broke them. We tried to fight honorably, colonizers threw us blankets infected with smallpox and snuck into our camps to slaughter our women and children when the men were away. Those were later written about as "battles." Some battles, more like cowardice.

In the most famous example, the Trail of Tears, the Cherokee signed a treaty with Andrew Jackson to stay in their ancestral homelands (ancestral - that means they had been in that area since time immemorial. There culture evolved there, their churches and spiritual areas were there, their ancestors were buried there). When gold was discovered, he ordered them removed. They went to the SUPREME COURT with their treaty, and the Court ruled in favor of the Cherokee! Know what Jackson said? He said, "I dare the Court to uphold their ruling," and ordered them removed. Over half of them died - it was a death march equivalent to what the Nazis did.

So don't tell me you're not illegal immigrants. You think European law is the only law in this world?

Oh, and she's also right - there is no such thing as "pure white." Why would you even want to be "pure?" Don't you know anything about genetics? Look at the royal family - they kept it as "pure" as possible, and they're all...umm...not very attractive people (I said something meaner first, but I'm trying to be nice). "Pure" means recessive disease and unattractive physical features. But have fun with your "pure" little-D white men.


Nothing - of course there's no "pure black" or pure anything else, but white people seem to be the ones who are most often whining about "keeping their race pure." Not all white people, or even the majority. But whenever I hear this kind of rhetoric, it's usually talking about the "purity of the white race."

If you know anything about genetics, you know that "purity" isn't possible and race itself is a fallacy. Isolated gene pools breed disease and aren't as healthy (the fewer genes, the more sickly the gene pool). But some ignorant people continue to insist on judging character off skin color.

2007-11-15 08:04:10 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2 3

WRONG-O! All of my ancestors had passports!
If you want to believe there are "no pure white", you had better believe there are NO PURE BLACK, or yellow, or red, or brown.
Read your history!
Since you brought it up, I suppose that is why the Sicilians are so hot tempered and always run their mafia?

2007-11-15 07:54:08 · answer #7 · answered by Nothingusefullearnedinschool 7 · 4 0

Who is Angela Andretti and why is what she may or may not realize of any importance?

2007-11-15 07:55:39 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

The original illegal immigrants. LOL. That's funny. I like that.

2007-11-15 07:52:59 · answer #9 · answered by kelly4u2 5 · 3 1

Thats what im saying. how could we not allow other races to enter our country and be looked down upon. when in reality the only people that can say they are from here are the native americans.

2007-11-15 07:53:40 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

fedest.com, questions and answers