Not yet a member? Register now.
Username
Password

December 3, 2008 12:41 pm PST

Advertise | Subscribe | Email Newsletter | Archive Search | |

COMMENTS

We welcome your feedback.

Privacy Policy

Your information will not be shared or sold without your consent. Get all the details.

I guess Funnye has not had a significant influence on his cousin’s family. Else why would they join and remain in a congregation led by an ex-Muslim converted to a bizarro Christoid-like cult leader?

Comment by Ben Plonie on 9/03/08 at 9:08 pm

And so what! What’s the big deal! I would say that this information is interesting but it’s not. I think everyone in the world knows that Africans can be Jews and that the original Hebrews were Africans. So this information isn’t shocking on less someone was hiding in a cave for the pass thousand years.

Comment by Vince on 9/04/08 at 4:03 pm

The original Hebrews were the people who the Bible says they were. Earth to Vince: Not Africans. That is the bizarro cult I was referring to, plus the dudes with robes and bling stars standing around screaming and babbling on street corners. The ‘original Hebrews’ theory assumes that all the real Jews just forgot they were Jews until some crackpot reminded them, and all the non Jews started believing they were Jews and forgot they were non Jews. You are probably not aware that there are over a dozen weird movements out there who claim to be the original Jews. Get in line.

Comment by Ben Plonie on 9/04/08 at 5:32 pm

we all come from africa

Comment by The Web Guy on 9/04/08 at 6:11 pm

According to Jewish tradition, Adam was created on the spot of the Holy of Holies, and was taken(moved? inspired? motivated?) to dwell in Eden at the intersection of the rivers in the land of Shinar. It may be significant that the land of Canaan is the only known locus of the the intersection of Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon species, and that experience may well form a naarative in the racial memory with a resonance in the Bible, the single oldest continuous living record of the original historical and spiritual knowledge of humankind.

Without developing all of the theory right now, any predecessor Cro-Magnon as may be is irrelevant, as we all come from Adam, circa 5768 years ago or 3768 BCE. (We will be celebrating his birthday in a couple opf weeks). That means that if Adam had contemporaries, they were all dead ends. More specifically, we all come from Noah circa about 2950 BCE. That means that if Noah had contemporaries, they were all dead ends.

The bottom line is that the people of Afica are not the origanal people of Africa, just as with the rest of the world.

Comment by Ben Plonie on 9/04/08 at 7:15 pm

Oh stop living in denial! There is no such thing as an indigenous so-called white African. Don’t be silly!

Africans along the Red Sea
Reported
May 5, 2000
A new study shows ancient Africans (called blacks by some) began living along a coast as much as 10,000 years earlier than previously known and suggests they may have left Africa’s Red Sea coast rather than going up Africa’s Nile River valley as is traditionally assumed.
The conclusions come from what scientists say is the earliest well-dated example of an oyster bar: a fossil reef on Africa’s Red Sea coast where Africans apparently waded out to collect oysters, clams and crabs some 125,000 years ago.
The site, in Eritrea, contains stone tools along with shells but no remains from whoever made the tools. The tools’ makers were probably early anatomically modern humans, said Robert Walter of the Center for Scientific Investigation and Higher Education in Ensenada, Mexico.
He led the study published in today’s issue of the journal Nature. The tools include small stone blades and hand-size, teardrop-shaped stones with sharpened edges. The early Africans may have used the tools to remove shellfish from boulders and to crack or pry open shells.
Researchers also found fossils of large land mammals such as elephants, rhinos and hippos. The ancient Africans may have trapped the animals against the sea and butchered them there, Walter said. A site in South Africa also shows signs that ancient Africans lived along a coast and harvested shellfish.
The researchers noted evidence that this site is 10,000 years younger than the Eritrea site. But in
interviews, other experts put the difference at about 5,000 years. So the Eritrea site is not markedly older, they said. In either case, the two sites show that coastal living spread rapidly in Africa, though it probably didn’t begin at the Eritrea site, Walter said.
Since that site falls within the dimly understood period when anatomically modern humans arose, the work suggests that coastal sites could reveal new information about the early days of the species, he said.
Walter said he suspects the species arose inland and then migrated to the coasts, perhaps driven by climate changes that dried up rivers and lakes. Eventually their coastal settlements may have spread out so much that some settlers left Africa at the northern or southern edge of the Red Sea, using an ancient land bridge, he said.
Sally McBrearty, an archaeologist at the University of Connecticut at Storrs, said she isn’t convinced that humans were harvesting shellfish at the Eritrea site. Just finding stone tools with shells is not enough for that conclusion, she said. It is not clear whether the Africans really left the tools there when the shellfish were alive, she said.
“That’s a very exciting aspect that expands our thinking,“ Dr. Christopher Stringer noted, a paleoanthropologist at the Natural History Museum in London. Homo sapiens must have traveled from Africa to Australia by 60,000 years ago, as ancient human burials there show.
Migrating along the coast might have provided an easy alternative to trekking inland, through wildly varying environments of desert, savannah, mountains and so on. “It doesn’t mean they were migrating, but it certainly would provide an easy way for them to migrate,“ he said.
“If you can live on the coast in the Red Sea, you can live on the coast in Arabia and in India.“
But none of this is very surprising, said Ofer Bar-Yosef, of Harvard University’s Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology. Few anthropologists would argue that the coastal route is any less likely than an inland one.
The indigenous Africans, out of Africa idea is boosted by the fact that the oldest known bones of Homo sapiens are found only in Africa, from about 115,000 years ago. These same indigenous African species isn’t found outside of Africa until roughly 90,000 to 100,000 years ago, in western Asia, in the area now known as Israel.

Comment by Vince on 9/04/08 at 7:29 pm

That’s fine. We won’t deal with the fact that the study is tentative and suggestive and stated as ‘probable’ etc. You have to know how to read these things. Let’s deal with the complete lack of evidence of the color or race of these ancient people. Let’s also understand that this field is 99.99 percent speculative in the first place. A clamshell here, a worn tooth there… and someone gets to write fuzzy paper and hopefully get finding or tenure out of it. All of these speculations are regularly overturned. Not a week goes by without someone saying “Hey, this is really five million years older than we thought. And that thing we thought was extinct really lives.“ Etc. etc. I bet you didn’t know that the aboriginal inhabitants of Japan were Caucasians. They still live there and on some islands off China. The current Japanese people migrated into Japan from China. And that is recent history. Do you really think anyone can make a definite statement about what happened 130,000 years ago?

The fact is this - unless you think that people evolved all over the earth in different variations, we all come from one source. In theory it doesn’t matter if it was Adam and Eve 5768 years ago, or Ricky and Lucy 125,000 years ago. If they were black, then whiteness came later. if they were white, then blackness came later. There is no reason to advocate one or the other.

My personal theory is that the aboriginal inhabitants of Africa were white, and that they all moved out when the black people started moving in.

Comment by Ben Plonie on 9/04/08 at 9:16 pm

Wow. I love how no matter what, people always bring it back to race—because (nevermind whether factual or not) it would be horrible if father Abraham was a black man. It would be so horrible if Adam and Eve actually were formed from dark earth… How sad. When are we going to get over this!

The article is about Michelle Obama trying to claim she’s somehow Jewish—hello!

So, my rant about that: how ridiculous. Maybe ‘someone’ will start an e-mail campaign to propagate the idea… in some favorable fashion (if even possible). You know, like that ‘Obama is a muslim’ e-mail still popping up in iboxes…

Comment by Lavrai on 9/05/08 at 5:09 pm

Ben Plonie wrote: My personal theory is that the aboriginal inhabitants of Africa were white, and that they all moved out when the black people started moving in.

LOL You write some fine fantasy my friend. How about using evidence. Have you heard of it? LOL White indigenous Africans? White Japanese? LOL Gee, how embarrassing. I guess it’s much easier to hide behind a monitor and make things up.

Comment by Vince on 9/05/08 at 5:34 pm

Here is some info from a European American who stop lying to himself and to others.
——

Dreaming of a Non-White Christmas
Santa, Jesus and the Symbolism
of Racial Supremacy
By Tim Wise
December 23, 2000
Well it’s that time of year again. Time for all good Americans to focus on what really matters. Not family, community, or world peace, but that national sacrament of late-stage capitalism known as holiday shopping. Whether you do it online, or drag yourself to the mall amidst the sea of humanity scraping and fighting for the latest must have gizmo, rest assured that your actions are vital to the national interest. In fact, the annual consumer bonanza unleashed in the last fiscal quarter is so central to defining life in the U.S., that the economy’s strength in the beginning of the following year is literally tied to how much stuff we buy. So get out there and do your duty. Buy American. Be American. Shop ‘till you drop, and remember, this is what it means to be a patriot!
Now, being one who doesn’t like to give advice that I myself am unwilling to follow, I must say that I too have been making the pilgrimage to the shopping centers lately, both to purchase desired items, and also to observe others in the process of this sociologically fascinating ritual. As someone who regularly writes about racism, you can probably imagine that I have long been especially intrigued by the way in which holiday symbolism replicates notions of whiteness as rightness, and acts to reinforce, however subtly, racial supremacy. Yet, the full force of this process never really hit me until last week.
It was then that I found myself at the mall, passing a line of parents and their children, waiting to have a few seconds alone with Santa. You know Santa, right? The big white guy who only works one day a year and yet no one calls him lazy; the big white guy who exploits elfin labor in a sweatshop for no pay while his wife does all the housework, and yet no one calls him a slave master; the big white guy who invades millions of homes on Christmas Eve, and yet no one arrests him for breaking and entering. Yeah, that one.
Though one can see a few Santas of color in malls around the country lately, I think we can all agree this is pretty absurd, if Santa were black, there’s little question he’d have been shot dead years ago in the vestibule of some New York City apartment by the NYPD’s Street Crimes Unit. After all, how could the cop be sure that toy gun he was bringing to the kid inside wasn’t real? Better safe than sorry, and anyway, that bright red suit would make him a logical target, seeing as how red is the color favored by members of the Bloods street gang.
But it wasn’t this kind of irony about a black Santa that animated the comment I heard while strolling through the mall that day. No, it was pure racial resentment and nothing else leading the white woman, child in tow, to say to her friend, “don’t you think it’s silly to have these Black Santas? Everybody’s trying to be so P.C. I mean, come on, a Black Santa? Everyone knows Santa is white.“
Her friend agreed. Everyone knows Santa (a make believe entity for those who haven’t figured it out yet) is white. The insistence on the racial purity of this entirely fictional being struck me as hilarious, right up there with the folks who send get well cards to their favorite soap opera characters when they fall ill on the shows. Ronald and Nancy Reagan are reported to have done this once. Fantasy, reality, ah screw it, who cares? I’m starting to realize the awful truth, white people are certifiably insane.
It all made sense though once I passed the woman and noticed the holiday stationary and cards in her bag. The ones with the calming, soothing face of Jesus staring back at me. You know the Jesus I’m talking about right? The one with the pale skin, blue eyes, and rock star good looks? Yeah, that one. The same Jesus that has occupied the minds of Western Christians for the last five centuries, ever since Michelangelo was commissioned to paint his image, and used his cousin as the model.
My wife and I have received many a Christmas card this year, and as always, the representations of Jesus that adorn so many of them cast the Christian Messiah as nothing if not European. Now I know my gentile friends have that song, “A Child is Born in Bethlehem,“ but I never realized until now that they had meant Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, circa 1930.

Silly me, but I always thought he was born in that part of the world we call the “Middle East,“ which, if we were being honest, we would easily recognize as basically a part of Africa, separated from the continent by the man made Suez Canal. And since first century Semites were quite a bit darker than the mostly European-derived Jewish communities of today, the odds of him looking the way he does in churches across America are slim and none. But don’t tell that to most of his followers, especially the white ones.

The suggestion that Jesus would have had dark enough skin to qualify as a person of color is about as blasphemous to most Christians as anything one could say. Of course, no one wants to admit their indignation at the notion, so they typically couch it in ecumenical platitudes like, “it doesn’t matter what Jesus looked like, it only matters what he did.“

OK, I’m down with that. Although not a Christian, I’ve always thought Jesus said and did some pretty exemplary stuff. So if it doesn’t matter what he looked like, then why not make him black?
I’ve asked this question when giving speeches on racism at religiously affiliated colleges, and let’s just say, there’s nothing like it if you’re looking to see how fast you can get folks to start clearing their throats. Again they insist, “no you don’t understand, it doesn’t matter what he looked like, it’s what he did.“ And again I repeat, O.K., fine, if it really doesn’t matter then let’s make him black, just for a year. Then you can change him back again if you really want to.
No dice, and no takers. We go round and round, as white folks check their watches and try to figure out how they can leave the room without seeming to be rude.
But let’s be clear, the white iconography of Jesus that predominates in this culture makes absolutely no sense, except as an artifact of a white supremacist worldview.
First off, the earliest representations of Jesus, Mary, and Christ’s disciples appear in the catacombs of Rome, where offshoots of the Jewish sect known as the Essenes buried their dead. All of these portrayals picture a dark-skinned Jesus. In addition, many years after his death, the Roman Empire under Justinian II, minted a gold coin that pictured Jesus. This coin, which is displayed in the British Museum, shows a man with clearly non-white facial features and tightly curled hair, consistent with the description of Jesus offered in the Book of Revelations, wherein it is noted he had hair like wool, feet the color of burnt brass, and resembled jasper and sardine stones, both of which were brown in color.

Now I don’t much care about the scriptural references myself, and far be it from me to insist on the infallibility of the Bible. But if the folks who swear that every word of it has to be accepted as literal don’t also accept these descriptions, which clearly contradict the imagery on the Christmas cards and in the nativity scenes one sees everywhere at this time of year, then they are nothing if not hypocrites.

And don’t forget, according to Biblical lore, when Jesus was born, Herod sent search parties out to find him and slay him as an infant. To hide the supposed Christ child, his family absconded with him to Egypt, and if there is one thing we can be pretty sure of, it’s that one would not have been likely to try hiding an Aryan baby and family in pre-Arab Egypt, of all places.

This was, after all, a society comprised mostly of medium-to-dark-skinned Africans, as evidenced in their own hieroglyphs, visible in the tombs of Senwosret (Sesostris) I, and Ramses III, among others, and as made clear by the stone likeness of Narmer the Pharaoh of the first dynasty that has survived to this day. Indeed, the Egyptians had referred to their country as Kemet (the Black land) for thousands of years, and themselves as “Kemetcu” (the black humans).

The “father” of modern history, Herodotus (1), himself acknowledged as much when he said that the Egyptians, like the Ethiopians had “thick lips, broad nose, wooly hair and are of burnt skin.“ Elsewhere, he actually referred to them as “black.“ Although there had been various incursions by lighter skinned folks into Egypt before the birth of Christ, namely the Persians, Assyrians and Greeks, it would only be with the Arab conquest in 639 that any real lightening of the nation’s color scheme would take place. If Jesus had been white, Mary and Joseph would have put him on a slow boat to Iceland, not trekked to Egypt where finding them would have been like shooting fish in the proverbial barrel.

Of course, for some this will all seem absurd, maybe even sacrilegious. But if you really want to see absurd, go pick up Volume I of the Robert Maxwell Bible Stories Series for children, which I assure you, is sitting on a table in your pediatrician or gynecologist’s waiting room right now. There you will find Adam and Eve depicted as if the Garden of Eden had been in Norway, despite the fact that Biblical scholars all agree the Garden, whether viewed as a literal place or as a fictional metaphor, was bordered by two rivers, the Biblical description of which only fits that of the Tigris and Euphrates, or perhaps the Blue and White Niles, none of which, last time I checked were in Scandinavia.

In fact, to the extent “black” skin cannot come from “white” skin (as the absence of melanin is a recessive trait), and to the extent geographic dispersal would not have been likely to darken previously fair-skinned persons to the extent we see the “blackest” on the planet, since by the time they could get that dark, third stage carcinoma would have long since killed them, there is only one possible conclusion to be reached, namely, anyone who accepts the Biblical account of creation must believe that “Adam and Eve” were absolutely coal black. Only from those original persons, of the darkest human shade imaginable, could lighter-skinned folks possibly come. Science virtually precludes it from working the other way around.

Some may ask what the point of all this is though frankly, it ought to be obvious. So long as our culture pictures Adam, Eve, Moses, Jesus, Mary, the Apostles, and even God “himself” as fair-skinned, despite the obvious preposterousness of such representations, we will continue to plant the seeds of racial supremacy in the hearts and minds of millions.

After all, to believe that divinity is white like you leads one to easily assume that others are somehow less complete, less than human. If God supposedly made man in his image, and God is always portrayed as a bearded white guy (kinda like Santa without the suit), how hard a leap is it, especially for children whose introduction to religion is always nine-tenths forced propaganda anyway, to assume that persons of color are somehow not full and equal “children of God?“ Not to mention the sexist aspect of the male sky, God imagery, of course, which is a whole different can of worms.

So now that I have managed to piss everyone off, here’s wishing you all a very merry Christmas, Happy Hanukkah, Joyous Kwanzaa, Resplendent Ramadan, Super Solstice, and Terrific Tet. Now get out there and shop! And take that damned Swedish-looking angel off the top of your tree for God’s sake.

Tim Wise is the Director of the newly formed Association for White Anti-Racist Education (AWARE) in Nashville, Tennessee. Mr. Wise is also a commentator with ZNet.org, a community of people committed to social change. He lectures across the country about the need to combat institutional racism, gender bias, and the growing gap between rich and poor in the United States.

Comment by Vince on 9/05/08 at 5:43 pm

“White indigenous Africans? White Japanese?“ Making things up? Imagination? Creativity? No. I’m afraid thats a little bit beyond Rifkah’s skill set. What Rifkah does do well, is borrow from others whatever unsubstantiated claptrap THEY MADE UP, that seemingly validates his xenophobic worldview. You’ll have to forgive this walking menstrual cycle. She is under the delusion that what is unmitigated horseshit under any other circumstances becomes an empirical fact once it spews forth from that anal orifice that doubles as a mouth. No my little kahane-obsessed frumit. I hate to rain on your Nuremberg Rally, but all science is not trembling at the searing logic that is the product of two gerbils running on a wheel inside the habitrail that doubles as your head.

Ainu culture dates from around 1200 AD[2] and recent research suggests that it originated in a merger of the Okhotsk and Satsumon cultures.[3] Their economy was based on farming as well as hunting, fishing and gathering.[4]

Full-blooded Ainu are mostly fair-skinned, with the men generally having dense hair development.[5] Many early investigators proposed a Caucasian ancestry although recent DNA tests have found no traces of Caucasian ancestry. [6]“

“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ainu_people”

Maybe I’m being too hard on you(not bloody likely). Just to be on the safe side, why don’t we charter a tramp steamer, sail to the sea of okhost and see if we can’t prove your theories on eugenics and racial superiority. I think I know one that will suit your needs perfectly. Its called the S.S. Nitwit of dubious panamanian registry. I believe the skippers name is Captain Mondrowitz. He’s a little queer if you know what I mean, but he knows his place, that usually being below decks raping the cabin boy. He likes payes. You might wannna get a hair cut. Okay, Dr. Mengele. I’ll go get my hawaian shirt and cabana wear, you go pack your calipers, tape measure, skin pigment chart, and Jewish Task Force Home Phrenology Kit and then its off to the Kurils. Maybe on the way back we can stop in the Howland Islands and re-animate the corpse of Amelia Earheart.

Comment by Shoded Yam on 9/06/08 at 7:58 pm

Vince,
Kindly refrain from pasting in thousands of words of articles, especially propaganda articles.

The aborigines of Japan are called Ainu. Since the Meiji days they have been discriminated against, pressured to lose their ways and assimilate, and now they are largely mixed. You can come up with all kinds of contradictory scholarly articles and speculation about them as the lunatic tried to do, but I invite you to Google “Ainu” or Ainu Indigenous both in Web, News and Images and you will find tons of information. The Japanese parliament has reluctantly acknowleged them as indigenous people of Japan.

Now these are the people that were described in a PBS spefial from WGBH of Boston this way:
“NARRATOR: The Ainu are the indigenous people of Japan. Their ancestry reaches back deep into prehistory, long before the ethnic Japanese arrived some 2000 years ago. Today there are fewer than 100 full-blooded Ainu left. But in the 19th century, there were many more. Anthropologists called them Asiatic Caucasoids, because they had facial features and body hair that seemed more European than Asian. In fact, the Ainu are thought to be a remnant of a very ancient population that was once widespread in the Old World. The first anatomically modern humans are thought to have come out of Africa about 100,000 years ago, and spread throughout Europe and Asia.“

If you want to argue about their racial features, here are some Ainu as of 1904
http://www.fieldmuseum.org/research_collections/anthropology/anthro_sites/boone/ainu/ainu_popups/ainu_pop1.html

So it looks as if it is people like this who came out of Africa and spread out. I actually said that about white people moving out of Africa as a joke, but look at the evidence.

I personally wouldn’t care if Abraham was black as coal, but unfortunately for that theory Abraham was a native Mesopotamian, as was his wife Sara, their son Isaac, Isaac’s wife Rivka, their sons Esau and Jacob, Jacob’s wives Leah and Rachel, and their sons.

Now Abraham fathered children with the Egyptian Hagar, and Keturah who might have been Hagar as well. The Arabs claim to be descended from Hagar although there is no evidence of that, and it is said that his children by Ketura went East and were the Brahmins of India. The origins of Bilha and Zilpa, nurses of Leah and Rachel and concubines to Jacob are not expressed,although it is a good bet they were not Mesopotamian, perhaps they were African, as the black Ethipian Jews are said to be descended from the Israelite branch of Dan, son of Bilha, maidof Rachel. It is also known that the Egyptians used various pigments to draw the ‘hapiru’ or Hebrew slaves indicatingn that the Israelites were a diverse people. This is consistent with Abraham’s mission of revitalizing the original mission of Adam in realating to God, that is transcending physical ethnicity in a search for universal and absolute truth.

The fact is that the Torah (Bible to you) has few references to color or race other than to prove that there are more than one within the Israelites, but you are obviously a victim of black supremacist propaganda who unfortunately hope to name-drop Israel and God as a substitute for genuine accomplishment. You look as foolish as do the white supremacists, and as irrelevant to the Jews.

Comment by Ben Plonie on 9/06/08 at 11:57 pm

Check spam as usual.

Comment by Ben Plonie on 9/06/08 at 11:58 pm

When reality is feared, censorship and control is put in place. Which is why my computer IP address has been blocked. Demonization of the indigenous must continue, while the ignorance of the masses will be maintained.

Comment by Vince on 9/07/08 at 5:58 am

Nothing contradictory about it Dr Mengele. You made an assertion based on faux-science or no science at all. When you’re shown to be wrong, you proclaim that the entire discipline is contradictory, and that everyone is wrong.

“...But in the 19th century, there were many more. Anthropologists called them Asiatic Caucasoids, because they had facial features and body hair that seemed more European than Asian. In fact, the Ainu are thought to be a remnant of a very ancient population that was once widespread in the Old World. The first anatomically modern humans are thought to have come out of Africa about 100,000 years ago, and spread throughout Europe and Asia.”

Sorry as previously mentioned, there is no DNA evidence to support your master race fairey tales. Once again science disproves the solipsistic, child-like meanderings of a jail-house educated, wanna-be-kahane. What a surprise.

Oh btw. Don’t kid yourself about spam, Rifkah. No one is waiting around with baited breathe to read your next lecture about why Jews are better than other people or why timourous shtetl melameds are better than other Jews. They want to be entertained. They’re waiting for you to be bitch slapped again. They’re waiting for me. I feel my obligations to them acutely, however business and other interests will not allow me to indulge as much as I’d like. It’s like reading the comics in the Sunday paper.

They fight! They bite!
They fight and bite and fight!
Fight fight fight!
Bite bite bite!
The Itchy and Scratchy Show!

(If only that was real life. I’d love to shove your head coated with honey and red ants into a fish tank filled with piranaha. )

They’ll just have to wait till next week.

Comment by Shoded Yam on 9/07/08 at 9:14 am

“...I personally wouldn’t care if Abraham was black as coal, but unfortunately for that theory Abraham was a native Mesopotamian, as was his wife Sara, their son Isaac, Isaac’s wife Rivka, their sons Esau and Jacob, Jacob’s wives Leah and Rachel, and their sons.“

Lookee here. Its Rabbi Racist and his wacky crew of Jewish Exceptionalists. The tanach makes no mention of skin pigmentation in regards to Abraham. So, either the indigenous people of the time were either color blind or everyone was black. Whatever it was, the default was certainly not vitamin-D defiecient, pasty-faced, talmud thumping child-rapists from the vermin ridden shtetls of Poland or Brooklyn.

Comment by Shoded Yam on 9/07/08 at 10:05 am

Not talking about about a master-race fairy tale. I was quoting a segment of NOVA, the science production of WGBH in Boston which is a public radio (PBS) outlet and a mainstream liberal institution. They care more about the oppression and depredation of the Ainu than specific racial issues. In this field of research, no DNA evidence is available and it takes the form of extrapolation from known findings and patterns.

And you are right that the tanach makes no mention of the skin pigmentation of Abraham. That cuts both ways. As you know from my Forum days when you were helpless to respond to my regular trouncings, I said (approximately) “the difference between white people and black people is the same as the difference between white horses and black horses”. And I said (approximately) “race is scientifically non-existent”. My favorite example is that all the king’s forensic specialists and all the king’s DNA/genetic testing specialists could not prove that the blood on OJ’s driveway belonged to a black or white man. The issue never came up. They did prove that there was a one in eight billion chance that the blood belonged to someone other than OJ, which is incidentally more than the number of people on earth. I do believe that races emerge by means of inbreeding and adaptation to climate and nutrition, under a not-quite Lysenko-like rate of selection. Similar to the way that cats for example were bred from one grey striped genotype and dogs out of one wolf-like genome. Dogs and cats revert to common type within a few short generations, and so would men. Jews an their Noahide coreligionists as I have mentioned are a divine project to revert to Adamic type, Adamic theology, Adamic Law.

Vince on the other hand is trying to one-up everyone by asserting the notion that everyone on the world owes current-day Africans something because they are the ancestors of the others. I do not accept that for all of the very good reasons I mentioned. In fact, Abraham the Mesopotamian went to war with his old ethnic fellows on behalf of the African Canaanites who had displaced the Mesopotamian Hurrians just three hundred years earlier. (See War of Four Kings Against Five Kings). It does seem evident that the two groups were not identical in ‘racial’ type.

Comment by Ben Plonie on 9/07/08 at 9:56 pm

Mr. Plonie,

You are using two hundred year old fantasies that won’t work anymore. So, if you could kindly refrain from passing out nonsense and propaganda it would be quite helpful.

Unfortunately, much of what you wrote appears to be like a joke, so if you can state when it’s not, it would be helpful.

“All our ancient history, as one of our wits remarked, is no more than accepted fiction.“

- Voltaire (Francois-Marie Arouet, 1694-177), French writer

Mesopotamian is the term that the Greeks created, it is not indigenous. As far as looking like present day people is not realitic. Western Asia/Eastern Africa is the most admixed area in the world in modern time. There has been many invasions by Europeans, you would call them white people.

Sir Henry Rawlinson, the translator of primitive Babylonian documents, declares the vocabulary employed to be “decidedly Cushhite or Ethiopian.“

- George Rawlinson, 1885 C.E.

Nimrod, and therefore probably his people, was of Cushite [African] origin, has been strenuously denied by some, even among modern critics. But ancient classical tradition and recent linguistic research agree in establishing a close connection between the early inhabitants of the lower Mesopotamian plain and the people, which under the various names of Cushites, Ethiopians, and Abyssinans, has long been settled upon the middle Nile.

- George Rawlinson, 1885 C.E.

Comment by Vince on 9/08/08 at 4:48 am

Post a Comment

Name:
Email:
URL:

Type the word you see below:

Comment:

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

About this Blog

Blog Home
About the Blogger(s)
Contact

Blog Archive

• By Month
• Categories

• By Month
• Categories

Blogs

Featured Stories

Site Sections

• Home
• Arts
• Calendar
• Education
• Food
• Israel

• Kids and Teens
• Los Angeles
• Obituaries
• Opinion
• Singles
• Sports

• Torah Portion
• U.S.
• World

Newspaper

• Current Edition
• Archive
• Contact Us
• FAQ
• Privacy Policy
• Terms of Service
• Site Map
• Advertise

Serving a community of 600,000, The Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angles is the largest Jewish weekly outside New York City. Our award-winning paper reaches over 150,000 educated, involved and affluent readers each week. Subscribe here.

© Copyright 2008 The Jewish Journal and JewishJournal.com
All rights reserved. JewishJournal.com is hosted by Nexcess.net