The Anglo Saxons are all German descendants. Nobody is 100% English. We've all got foreign blood in our genetic set up, so racist remarks are complete nonsense and totally pointless.

Dear oh dear, what complete ignorance. German blood is no different to English blood. Europeans all come from the same racial stock. French, Dutch, Scandinavians etc. we are all genetically equal. You could take a new born baby from Germany, Holland or Belgium for example bring him over to England, leave him in the care of his newly adopted English parents and he would grow up to be identical to all other white English people around him, or Scottish or Welsh if thats where he was brought up. To say that there is no such thing as English beggars belief.The name England is derived from the word Anglo-land to which the Germanic tribe the Angles gave it's name. Along with the Saxons, Jutes, Flemings etc. arrived on these shores in about the 5th century AD. They were not all directly from Germany but they were all genetically from the same racial stock. They quickly intermarried with the original Britons, Celts and left over Romans who were already here who were also of the same European racial ancestry. The same applies to the later Viking and Norman invasions of them being the same genetically. Which means up until the 1950's third world immagration disaster, Britain was a completely racially pure place. We differ from our white European cousins in nationality alone and certainly not in race. Hence it is impossible for a white Englishman to be racist towards a white German or a white Frenchman etc. he could be nationalistic towards them but that is all. To members of other races ie. Negroes, Asians etc, well that is a different story. They are the ones that could racially bastadize these islands, NOT our German or European cousins.
Tut tut silly boy. Please do a little more research before you spout such rubbish in the future.

Thanks for providing me with a little laughter at this time of night,

St George

not a bad post for one with such a stupid and unoriginal name but the truth be the majority of people in the north have dna of vikings whilst the south have saxon and thats fact mate not having a dig.
you seem to be going down the road of saying we are all european yet the vikings themselves have been proven to have come in part from further east in what is now russia,and if you want to go all silly and go back and back they say we ALL emigrated from africa
And by the way you are aware that st.george was a turk werent you?
keep up the good posts though

I'm very sorry that I seemed to have offended you somewhat by using the name St George, but as a full blooded Englishman I happen to be very proud of our patron saint, so I'm afraid you'll just have to continue to feel offended or perhaps inferior, who knows.

Now, the statement you make regarding that the people in the north (I assume you mean England) have Viking dna but in the south they have Saxon, I concede may well be true. Incidently though, I am very happy that you have made that statement because by doing so, you have just, in effect, admitted that there ARE biological differences between the races. Thank you.

However, the differences between the white, European races are so miniscule that in reality, it makes no difference whatsoever when two of these separate groups come into contact with each other, inter-marry and ultimately breed. This is a very much different case however, when the white race happens to intermingle with the negro race for example, whose biological dna vastly differs from that of the afore mentioned white race. If only it were a matter of colour, I'm sure it would be completely overlooked and rightly so. To want to be able to live seperately from a certain group purely because of their colour would be total stupidity and would deserve contemp. But I happen to believe that there is much, much more to it than merely colour and it should at least be discussed in the open.

Now, you also pointed out that the Vikings themselves have been proven to have come from further east in what is now Russia. This statement also contains some truth but I would like to expand on it a little more if I may. It was not only the Vikings who happend to descend from Russia, but ALL of the white, European race happen to have their origins in that country. To be a little more exact, it was specificly a region in south, central modern day Russia known as the Caucasus mountains. Hence, even today, white Europeans are sometimes referred to as Caucasians. This one area happens to hold the secrets of the earliest origins of the white race known to man.

You are correct in pointing out that SOME biologists parade the theory that all human life bagan in Africa, although I have to add this theory is not universal and many are split on the subject. There happens to be still very much that is uncertain at present. This science is still relatively young and there is much to learn on the subject. In any case, even if these theories are correct and all human life was born in Africa, these same people also insist that sometime, hundreds of thousands of years ago, some people migrated north and spent the next few hundred thousand years evolving totaly seperately from the other human species still in Africa.

Lastly, St. George was a Turk? Did you know him personally? I also read somewhere that he was a Palestinian. Perhaps he was an Australian aboriginie, who knows. To me though, he was a mythical character who slayed an evil dragon and he's the patron saint of my great country. He is a figurehead, a noble warrior, who stands tall and proud protecting England's honour with his strength and might. There is no invader to these lands that he fears. The truth will be his ultimate weapon.

Thank you my friend for affording me further opportunity to spread yet more truth on this site.

Many regards,

St George

P.S. perhaps he was a Turk after all, seeing as their are many, many other Turks out there who also share the name George.

Cheers!

They are two of the best posts i think i have ever seen on any site like this one.Truthful educational and inspirational!! To my understanding St.George was in fact a Palistinian as you said and not a turk! It is about time that truthful posts were put on sites like these.I think you have definatly educated Pakistan!

With St.George in my heart

BCFC DRG

It`s about time people knew the the facts of being British,like i have said before you don`t have to be racist to be proud of your country,keep up the good work mate your doing your country proud!!

regards
Englands No 1

I thank you too my friend because I have noticed that you have also made some strong points on this website. It just goes to prove that we do not need to insult these people by using racial slang words and names etc. We are taking them on and coming out on top in these debates simply by telling the truth and using our logical ability to state the facts. They are not used to being up against this kind of thing and will not know how to react.

Keep it up my friend, I am sure many people out there are reading these posts and thinking, bloody hell, these guys are right.

Cheers,

St George

I am glad that you have been enjoying my posts on this site BCFC DRG as I hope many more of our people are enjoying them also. I for one, am sick and tired of our race and nation being constantly demonised by these people. Just because we happen to feel proud of our peoples achievements, we are made to feel evil somehow for our troubles. This has got to stop. It's high time that we all stop putting up with this rubbish and started speaking out, telling the truth and sticking up for ourselves. It seems to me that all these other groups of people, are positively encouraged to promote their own particular cultural ways of life, but we are just made to feel guilty for being white. I say to all of you now, we have absolutely NOTHING to feel guilty about.

Whether or not I have educated Pakistan during this debate, I am not sure. I believe that he is certainly entitled to his opinions as long as he understands that I am damn well entitled to mine. I hope he does though because I sure ain't going away and I eagerly await his reply.

Thanks for the vote of confidence though my friend and keep the faith.

Cheers,

St George

what is the differance between the black and white races. you say there are genetic differences apart from their skin color. what are these differences between these races and what do they mean.

this is some material ive picked up round the web that seem to contradict what youve been saying in some of your posts. the prince of wales words are really interesting. and look at some of the figures, esp those who fought in the war for us and how many docters etc who are black over here now. these figures suggest that theres a higher ratio of highly qualified medical people for black people living here than there is for white people.

i cant seem to find anything that says that black people are geneticaly different from white people. ive found stuff saying that black people make better sprinters etc but scandanavians seem to make better throwers and that doesnt make them geneticaly different from british. where does ur argument come from. people who live in different places do develop differently to suite their surroundings but this doesnt make them any different as human beings at a basic level. how can you say blacks are different from whites. i dont beleive it. prove your words. whats wrong with inter racial breeding. i dont see a problem with it. how will it weaken white blood. help me out here. and also from west to east it seems that skin colour and race just gets slowly different from one country or part of the world to the next. europe and asia are connected, not isoloated. you say everyone has developed seperately over the last few thousand years. how can this have happened. were all joined together, you can get to africa and china from europe on foot. And all nations exept a few have been seafaring since the earliest times. i dont see how you can be right.

-----------------------------------------------

Britain has always been a mixed society, a nation peopled by migrants - from the Bronze Age and Neolithic migrants who travelled to north west Europe 5,000 years ago, to the refugees from eastern Europe and Africa arriving in Britain today. Most people in Britain today are either immigrants or the descendants of immigrants.

Throughout the 50 years since it was established, Britain's National Health Service has depended heavily on ethnic minority doctors, nurses and auxilliary staff

Over two-thirds of independently-owned local shops belong to people from ethnic minorities.

27% of London Underground's staff are from ethnic minorities.

About 23% of Britain's doctors and 24% of restaurant employees were born overseas.

Curries and Chinese takeaways are as popular as fish and chips.

Sol Campbell, Nasser Hussain and Audley Harrison rank among Britain's best sports stars.

British culture has never stood still, and its literature, art, music, dance and theatre are constantly being enriched and revitalised by people who can draw on a wide variety of cultural influences from around the world.


Britain has benefited from ethnic diversity throughout its history. From industry and commerce to art and dance, from sport and music to science and literature, the activities of individuals and groups from ethnic minorities have enriched life in Britain for all.


Immigrants past & present
If we go back far enough, we can say that everyone who lives in Britain today has origins somewhere else. Many of us can probably trace the immigrants in our own family histories.


Jewish merchants in medieval England
Some may have been among the various invading armies - Roman, Saxon, Viking or Norman. Others had little choice about coming: Africans were brought to Britain by force in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries as slaves or servants; and thousands of people arrived at various times as refugees from France, Ireland, Russia, and other countries, escaping from persecution or famine in their own countries.

Most people probably came because they thought they could make a better life for themselves here. Before 1914, when the First World War broke out, there were fewer restrictions and it was possible to travel to many countries without passports, visas or work permits. People could just decide to make a new life somewhere else, provided they had enough money for the passage. Often they were encouraged by the monarch or government because immigration was a way of dealing with local shortages of capital, skills or labour.

At any one time, newcomers have only been a tiny proportion of the British population. Even today, only about 7% of the population were not born in Britain. Newcomers have often met hostility and resentment, yet even a quick study would show that they have brought skills and qualifications, set up businesses and created jobs, not only for themselves but also for local people. Many have been willing to do jobs that have been difficult to fill locally. What is remarkable and often not understood is that the contributions immigrants and their immediate descendants have made, and continue to make, to Britain are out of all proportion to their numbers.

In 1066, for example, a small community of French Jews were encouraged by William I to bring their capital and financial skills to Britain. At its peak the community was only 5,000 strong or around 0.025% of the population, but it became an indispensable source of finance for king and commoner alike. At the time, canon law forbad Christians from lending money at interest, and Jews were not allowed to do any other work, leaving money-lending as the only profession they could enter — and to them being the founders of banking and financial services in Britain.

From the fourteenth century, Flemish and French weavers, German mining engineers, Dutch canal builders, printers, brewers and brickmakers brought new manufacturing skills and techniques at a time when wool was Britain's only major export.

In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, Protestant refugees from France and the Low Countries played a revolutionary role in manufacturing, silk weaving, science and banking.

The Irish who fled in their thousands from rural poverty and famine between the 1830s and 1850s helped to build much of the infrastructure of an industrial society in Britain, doing jobs that local people often did not want, in mines and docks, and building canals, roads, railways, and factories.


Olaudah Equiano was taken as a slave from West Africa. As a free man in Britain, he fought the slave trade vigorously and influenced the abolitionist movement in America
By the end of the eighteenth century, British traders and merchants had made fortunes through the trade in African slaves. Millions worked in appalling conditions on sugar, cotton and tobacco plantations in the Americas and the West Indies, and there were about 20,000 black people in London, many of them compelled to work as servants in the big houses.



Seamen unloading tea in London in the nineteenth century. The first Chinese communities in Britain were formed by seafarers.
The British Empire, which by the end of the nineteenth century covered large parts of the globe, owed its success to over two million Indian and Chinese labourers working on plantations, mines, docks, ships and railways. Their labour was crucial to the prosperity and industrial expansion Britain achieved during the nineteenth century.

As British subjects, people from the Empire were expected to fight in all Britain's wars, even wars of colonial expansion, and the part they played in both World Wars made a crucial difference to Britain's prospects.


Indian soldiers in Flanders during the First World War.

In 1882, Lord Salisbury had compared India to 'an English barracks in the Oriental seas from which we may draw any number of troops without paying for them'.


Faced with the massive task of reconstruction after the Second World War, and acute labour shortages, the British govenment encouraged immigration, first from among European refugees displaced by the war, and then from Ireland and the Commonwealth. Before long, in some factories, mills and plants, the overwhelming majority of workers were Asian or black.

However, by the end of the 1970s, strict controls on immigration had been brought in. Most immigrants to Britain today come from other parts or Europe, or are work permit holders - mainly from the USA, India, Australia, Japan and South Africa. Others are admitted as refugees. Since the end of the Second World War, refugees have come from many countries including Hungary, Chile, Cyprus, Argentina, Somalia, Lebanon, Sudan, Iran, Sri Lanka, Vietnam, Nigeria, Turkey, Iraq and the former Yugoslavia.

Roots of the future

'The most ambitious project ever undertaken to breathe life into an abstraction [multiculturalism]'
The Observer

The Roots of the Future project highlighted and celebrated the contributions that have been made over the centuries by ethnic minorities to Britain's economic, social, and cultural development. It was launched in 1996 with the publication of a richly illustrated book (still available), and a widely-acclaimed exhibition which toured venues all over Britain until 2001.

Britain's ethnic diversity is a strength. Far from impoverishing the country, immigrants have brought fresh ideas, new skills, labour, capital, resourcefulness, and a diversity of cultures that make the country richer and the lives of its people more varied.

Young visitors to the Roots of the future exhibition at Plymouth.

Since 1996, hundreds of thousands of people all over Britain have seen the touring exhibition.


Our culture is continually changing as minorities and majorities learn from each other, and as the society they share is subtly altered by the new assumptions, values and possibilities they negotiate. As the Prince of Wales said at the project's launch at St James' Palace in July 1996: 'The diversity of so many immigrants and ethnic minorities is very much a part of what makes Britain what it is, and what makes it such a rich and fascinating country.'

The aim of Roots of the Future was above all to show that Britain's ethnic minorities have not been a drain on this country, but have enriched it.



Memorial for Indian Soldiers
Brighton and Hove Black History

In total India provided 1.27 million men to the fighting in Europe during the Great War, over 12,000 wounded Indian soldiers returned to "Doctor Brighton" for treatment
On Sunday the 22nd of June 2003 at 2pm. a memorial service will be held at the Chattri in Patcham, for Sikh and Hindu soldiers who died while in hospital in Brighton and Hove during the Great War (1914- 1918).
In Remembrance to the Brave Indian Soldiers who died so far from home, these brave Indian soldiers preparing to defend and die for our freedom and liberty, fighting side by side with British soldiers. In total India provided 1.27 million men to the fighting in Europe during the Great War, over 12,000 wounded Indian soldiers returned to "Doctor Brighton" for treatment. Many buildings in the City were converted and especially adopted for the wounded Indian soldiers, including the Royal Pavilion Estate, Indian General Hospital, Elm Grove, now Brighton General Hospital, and York Place School.

The Gateway to the Royal Pavilion from the South, a gift from the people of India to the inhabitants of Brighton & Hove, as a thank you for caring for its wounded soldiers.

This year memorial service is expected to be attended by the Chief Executive of Brighton & Hove City Council, David Panter, The Mayor- Elect Councillor Jeane Lepper of Brighton and Hove City, including World War II Indian veterans of the Indian Association, together with representatives from the Indian High Commission, the Indian Army, members of the Royal Air Force, The British Army, the Police, and Local people, to witness the wreath laying, prayers, and to hear the last post sounded.

The Chattri bears the following inscription, in Urdu, Hindi and English The inscription, reads:

"To the memory of all Indian soldiers who gave their lives for their King-Emperor in the Great War, this monument, erected on the site of the funeral pyre where the Hindus and Sikhs who died in hospital at Brighton passed through the fire, is in grateful admiration and brotherly affection dedicated".

20 bodies were cremated at the Chattri, their ashes were then taken to be scattered in the sea. Moslem bodies were taken by ambulance to a mosque in Woking for burial.

It is believed to be the only service of its kind in all England.

I must admit that at the time of writing my last post I had not seen the next one written by the "interested" gentleman. I must say though that his writings seem remarkably similar to those of my arch rival Pakistan's. I do hope this is not the case though because I had more respect for ol' Pakistan than that. If he doesn't have the guts to face me as Pakistan, then I can only assume that he is running scared and has no answers for the previous challenges I set for him a few days ago. Whoever this chap may be though he's certainly done his homework but I will have to respond to him tomorrow alas because tonight I fancy a few beers.

Stay tuned my friends and have no fear, I am going to cream him anyway. He cannot possibly win.

St George

ive only just seen this post. im not pakistan. im someone else. cant a bloke come on here and make a few points or what.

Now now toy`s back in the pram please!!!I am just interested too know what colour and nationality are you my friend, i am white and English and before you throw it in,i am not!! a racist.Could you please answer me that in a few possible lines because i havnt got time to read any books so please keep it short Regards

im english and white

Why is it you are taking on on another white gentlemen ie:St George on what he has to say,do you,yourself feel inferior to the white race,believe me there is nothing wrong in being proud of where you come from regardless of colour and nationality but the way you are defending the black/asian races makes me wonder are you sure you are comfortable with your own skin colour?or would you rather be different?
anyway big up the massive,respect and keep it real hommie. word!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The Prince of Wale's words may well be, as you say "interesting", but as much as I would be willing to fight and die for Queen and country,the Prince of Wales doesn't have to live in the front line of the
multi-racial experiment. He is well out of the way living in plush cosy palaces. I put to you that if you want the views of people that really count regarding this issue, then you ask the ordinary white, working classes of Oldam, Bradford, Burnley or any of the other dozens of hell holes that have been enforced to except this disasterous multicultural
beast.

Now then, you claim that certain places are connected. Indeed this is true. But you amuse me somewhat by the comment you make that you can
casually "walk from france to india via the caucasus if you want. and then double back from there to go to africa, all on foot." Bloody hell, have you ever tried it? You are talking about quite a few thousand
miles there my friend. Then you go on to talk about that you can "get to africa and china from europe on foot." Even Ian Botham would be hard pressed to do that mate, or perhaps they travelled by magic carpet. No but seriously though, It wasn't quite as to and fro as you are trying to make out. Obviously there were white migrations from the Caucasus region, but it didn't happen just like that but over many generations and they were few and far between. The question I put to you that will smash your theory to smithereens is what about Australia? That continent was completely untouched by any outside influence or
interference until the Dutch discovered it back in
the 17th century. The people there are very distinct from all the other races of the world. The same may be said of much of the animal and plant life, Kangaroos and koalas being two examples of many.You won't find them anywhere else, they are unique to Australia and have evolved totally seperately from any other species on any other continent. If
you have happened to have read all the posts under this topic, you will notice that I happened to agree with the gentleman (st george the turk) I think it was who stated that in the north of England, many
people still have Viking dna and in the south they have Saxon. Now then sir, if the people of this tiny little island have still not mixed to the extent of us all having the same amounts of Viking and Saxon dna, then how the hell do you expect people to believe that we have mixed sufficiently with all these other races that you talk of, who are tens of thousands of miles away and have absolutely nothing to do with us.

The next part of your rather impressive research is something that I have come across many times before in my debates with the anti-white brigade. It goes "Britain has always been a mixed society, a nation peopled by migrants" How utterly insulting. To insinuate that we are a mongrel nation made up of half breeds is put around by people like you
because you are obviously pro multi-racial and youare trying to convince everybody that we should have an open border policy for every African or Asian immagrant that feels like coming here and taking a
share of what we have worked hard for. I have already stated in previous posts that the people that inhabit this island, all come from the same white, European racial stock and I am not going over old ground again.


I can not understand why you seem to think that
because large numbers of immagrants work as shopkeepers, in restaurants or on the London underground that its a massive achievement in itself but I have to concede that there are large numbers of foreign doctors in this country, although personally, I would much rather go and see an English one everytime. I'm pretty sure I heard once though, that over 50% of all doctors who get struck off are Asian. Don't quote me on that yet , I have to do a bit more research on that one. As for the point about curry being as popular as fish and chips, well, I agree with that one but let us not forget that curry was first made by the British out in India to try and disguise rotton meat that they were trying to feed to
the troops out there (and I sometimes wonder whether the same practice is still used in some of the curry houses over here today). I have to say though, I have my doubts whether it would remain as popular as fish
and chips, if that before the meal, the customer was invited to take a quick tour around the kichens where the succulent meal was being prepared. Third world immagration, in many cases, brings with it third
world hygene standards. For example, you can not deny that in Asia, many people use one hand for eating and the other hand for.... let's just say, cleaning certain bodyparts with.

We now move along to the part in which you are trying to prove that we have had all kinds of people from other races coming here in great numbers and mixing with us for thousands of years. You start off by
pointing out the Jewish merchants in medieval England. A good point my friend, but what you don't go to say is that in the year 1290, England formally expelled all of its Jews from it's borders. Every last one had to leave. It's well documented in Simon Schama's book "A history of Britain", Who happens to be a Jew himself. Jews have also been expelled from a number of other European countries aswell, right up to Germany in the 1930's and 40's.You write about Flemish, French, German and Dutch immagrants coming to this land from the fourteenth century onwards and later the starving Irish who were trying to escape from the disasterous Irish potato famine of the 1840's. ALL these groups of people were as I have said before, basically the same racially as the people of their new host country. So far, after all your painstaking research, I see no evidence whatsoever that Britain was a mixed race, mongrelised country before the mass immagration of the 1950's.


This next part, is the closest we have come to it so far. During the Elizabethan era, there were, as you rightly said 20,000 black slaves living in London. This however was obviously far too many for Queen Elizabeth 1 who in 1601 ordered every single on expelled from England and taken back to the (then British) American colonies. Again you have
failed to mention this important fact. You can go and read about it yourself if you like, it is featured in March of the Titans by Arthur Kemp, but it does also appear in various other good history books. You
seem to be trying to lead the reader of this website up the garden path a little bit. It is unfair for you to be coming up with these half truths and yet presenting them as if it were the whole picture. I, on the other hand, am trying to tell the whole truth to the best of my ability. So it is to you sir that I urge to "play the game".


The section in which you touch upon the subject of slavery, is one I am particulary prepared to agree that it was totaly immoral and down right wrong. Again though, very rarely is the full truth often told about this dark chapter of history. Whites alone seem to be exclusively blamed for this practice and that is just not fair. It was black Africans who were enslaving each other, long before white Europeans got in on it. The slaves were later traded with white Europeans for manufactured goods such as metlewares and firearms for example, which the black, African negro hadn't the knowledge to make for himself. So it was the blacks who were selling their own people by the thousands for material goods. It was the British empire who in the early 1800's, saw the error of their ways and stamped out slavery in the British
empire. Under pressure from Britain (being then the most powerful country on earth), the rest of the white world erradicated the evil human trafficking not long after. The black or Asian people never did a
thing to stop it. In fact between many non white races, slavery still exists to this very day. Although the very thought of slavery is
completely discraceful to the white people of the world, the non white races seem to think that it's still perfectly fine to carry on with human trafficking. It isn't just a small problem either. It is a massive business. So I don't see why whites should have to be made to shoulder all the blame for this crime when in fact it was black Africans and other non whites who started it, but the white race ended it.


I would now like to adress the point about other races fighting in "Britains" wars. The one that seems to come up rather a lot from you people is "Oh what about India! They fought for Britain." Well did they fight for Britain, or were they fighting for themselves? Do you think that old Adolf (master race) Hitler would have been quite prepared to just let Indians live in peace? I put it to you that as much as I am glad these people were on our side, They had their own interests to fight for believe me. Anyway, there were also thousands of Indians that actually joined Hitlers side and fought in the SS. It may sound unbelievable but look it up my friend. As I am personally quite interested in this subject, I have had many conversations with world war two veterans and in every case when I have asked them about non
white troups on our side (with the exception of the Ghurka's), they say that Indian troups etc didn't do much of the actual fighting. They played their part but most of them were things like stretcher bearers
or dispatch riders etc. The main bulk of the actual combat was very much left to white troups because they were considered to be far superior to non white troups as disciplined fighting men. This can be judged by the numbers of actual dead of both countries at the end of world war two. At the end of the second world war, out of a poulation of about 40 million, Great Britain lost around 350,000 people to the horrors of world war 2. Out of a population of around about 500 million, India lost about 62,000. So the numbers lost are vastly disproportionate. Which means that India's overall war effort was miniscule in comparison to Britains. And considering India herself was at stake, I would have to say that if anything, Britain fought for India and not the other way round as some would have it.


Finally, I would like to say to the reader that if you think about it, you hear the same kind of stuff all the time from these multi-racialists. How many times have you heard the phrases "enriched our wonderful ethnically diverse society" or "these cultures should be embraced and celebrated" or "we are far richer for having such a wonderfully diverse society". You know the kind of stuff I'm talking about. Now, although these may be pretty little phrases, they mean absolutely nothing without any evidence to back them up. Don't be fooled by this liberal nonense my friends. These words mean nothing to me, as I am still waiting to see with my own eyes how these people have made this country better than it was 50 years ago. This gentleman asks me what is wrong with inter racial breeding and what difference does it make. Well, there are people out there who are tring to save all kinds of animal life who are nearing extinction. They say it would be a terrible thing if any of these animals became extinct and they devote their lives to trying to save these creatures. O.K. fair enough. But what about the white race? What about us? We have done far more for this world than any other species ever will. And due to suicidally low white birth rates coupled with mass third world immagration, we are going to become a minority in our own land by the year 2060. And then what? How long do we have left after that? Another few decades? Once we are gone it is impossible for us to ever return. The world will sink into the abyss of a new dark age.

Sincerely,

St George

I believe that the proof of the pudding is in the eating. History tells us that the white race has crossed seas, harnessed rivers, tamed deserts, and colonised the most barren of ice fields. I have already stated in my previous posts that it has been responsible for virtually all of the technological achievements and medical scientific advancements that are known today. It's members have included such greats as Socrates, Aristotle, Plato, Tacitus, Julius Ceasar, Mozart, Magellan, Columbus, Cabot, Edison, GrahamBell, Mendel, Darwin, Newton, Galileo, Watt, Ford, Devinci, Tennyson and thousands upon thoundands of other notable achievers.

In contrast to this, throughout 6000 years of recorded history, the black African (sub Saharan) negro has invented nothing. Not a written language, weaved cloth, a calender, a plow, a road, a bridge, a railway, a ship, a system of measurement or even the wheel. He is not known to have cultivated a single crop or domesticated a single animal for his own use (although many powerful and docile beasts abounded around him). His only known means of transporting goods was on top of his head. For shelter he never progressed beyond the common mudhut.

Now, apologists will say " Oh it isn't their fault, it's the environment. There is no industry over there. Much of the land is covered in jungle, they can't help it. You know, the usual stuff. Well, it is a fact that Africa is the richest continent on earth in natural resources (especially minerals), but they have never taken any advantage of anything. It's certainly true that there was no industry there (until colonial whites settled there during the imperial age) but there was no industry here either once upon a time. This land was covered in forest as Africa's covered in jungle but we started from scratch and built this land up over generation after generation (as all the white lands did). Nobody gave it too us, WE built it ourselves. Nobody gave us billions of pounds each year in aid as we do with the African countries, oh no.

We are inherently different to them. They seemed to just stand still on the evolutionary scale, whereas we have always (up until quite recently) been ready to try and tackle the next challenge. Just think to yourself about the African immagrants we have over here. What sort of image do they portray? Do they come across to be exactly the same as whites? I think they are quite proud of their laid back, lazy culture. Yea maan, chill out man, be cool smoke some ganga man, let dem white boys rush around and work hard. And the media encourage this and in the process our young white men are being brought down to their level.

I believe that if the race mixing continues, soon in the not too distant future, we will lose our unique ability to strive ever forward in the race for evolution.

firstly ive just had a good look at the map of the world and see that you can walk from france to india via the caucasus if you want. and then double back from there to go to africa, all on foot. so your theory about isolated geenes goes out of the window. As for your last message, it is absolutely fantasy. india and china for example have thousands of years of history with cities and building and irrigation and tecnology in its earliest form etc and had this long before the native britons and most of western europe were out of animal skins. This is fact. I dont know where you get your ideas from. it makes good reading but its just not true. ill get some stuff off the net and post it on here from the history pages with dates and all. youll be able to see. dont have time to do it now but promise ill be back with these. the stuff you write on here pal is as mythical as you say st george is on one of your posts. if your going to write stuff, no matter how good it sounds, at least get ur facts right. and as for your portrail of blacks saying chill out man, be cool etc this is just your view of things. my view of things is ive got a indian doctor. the nurse who treats me in hostpital is black and theres asian and black busnismen out there that are serious guys and seriously minted up and doing better than u or me ever will probably. for gods sake check ur facts and stop putting fantasy on the site. i may not be the most brilliant bloke in the world but at least ive gone to the trouble of having a look round for reality. come on. play the game.

I think st george's first post on this thread hits the nail on the head!

You proved them all wrong but they still feel this thread should be at the top!

ARF ARF

ENGLAND

BNP

Sieg Heil !!!

English scum make me sick. The only thing you're good for is a laugh. After all you have the best league in Europe - not. What a disgrace Manure getting stuffed at home today and a shit team like Brum in 4th position. A lot has been said about the master race coming down to join the Premiership (Scotland) but u twats are running scared off and on the pitch. Especially that cunt Ken Bates. C'mon England admit the fact that the premiership is in decline and the only way to revive it is to have your Northern Conquerers come and join. Up the RA.
Hail! Hail!

What the fuck are you talking about you thick sweaty inbred? Scottish,master race,dont make me laugh.You have 2 average football teams and the rest would only cope in our 2nd and 3rd divisions,and we dont need any sweaty`s coming and joining our league although it would give us the chance to give you boys abit of a kickin.
Celtic came to Birmingham for a pre-season friendly afew years ago we beat them 1-0 and kicked them all over Digbeth.We wasnt even in the Prem then either! Maybe we should allow you to join for 1 season so every English man can could give you all abit of a slap and teach you a lesson like we did William Wallace!! We went to Glasgow when ENGLAND beat you 2-0 (scholes 2) and had 160 lads in the centre of Glasgow and not one scottish firm came close to doing us.All you lot we`re interested in was trying to pick off stragglers,typical scottish cowards.Oh yeah...Birmingham are 4th because we deserve to be fourth we may not last in the top 5 all season but im fuckin certain we would beat Livingston and not draw 0-0!!

ENGLISH & PROUD FUCK THE JOCKS

BCFC DRG

We need to keep this one at the top lads.
I want as many decent, self respecting white lads as possible to read this. Come on, let's start sticking up for ourselves.

St George

heres some stuff i got off the web showing the earliest civilisations. As you will see by the timeline it is not actually the white man of western europe that kicked everything off. in fact i rekon that quite a lot of what eventually came to western europe through the greeks etc actually started in what is now india and china. notice that ancient india is the oldest recorded large civilisation in the world and notice the urban set up and economy. it seems that all we have today actually started in india and pakistan. of course the white man picked up on it well enough but without the kickstart and input from the people of india and china we could still be hunting dear for food and clothes. you tell me st george. although im white myself i rekon we wouldnt have done it without these people. i rekon were all equal and man has developed as one species. all this different geenes rubbish is wrong. we just happen to live in different parts of the world thats all. as for interbreeding slowing things down. i cant see that. i rekon its interbreeding thats speeded things up. i think the white man needed everything the black and yellow man had to offer along the line in order to succeed. and the other way round as well. all this crap about everybody else than the whiteman building nothing better than a mud hut is fantasy and rubbish. i just dont get why you guys actually want to push this crap. or do you actually believe it.

http://www.itihaas.com/ancient/harappa1.html

notice that this article covers the area of india and pakistan.

Harappa Digest
Indus Valley civilizations covering approx 1/2 million miles of Northern Indian subcontinent is the largest ancient civilization in history till now. Since both stone and copper are used it is a chalcolithicivil.The Indus Valley people are highly artistic and skilled.Their chief features include a highly organized urban setup and a strong economy.

The IVC economy is flourishing with extensive cultivation of wheat, barley. The Indus river is used for transport, weights are all very accurate and highly standardized and traders have own personalised seals.





Latest Accessories





Pots and Other Utensils Fashion
The exact origins of the IVC people is disputed but appears to belong to four ethnic types including the Protoaustioloids, Mediterraneans, Mongoloids and Alpines. People enjoy a comfortable life with a variety of luxuries like ornaments in agate and gold, cosmetics (kajal) and elaborate toys for children. Painting on pottery is skillful and covers various themes while small sculptures in terracotta (animals, toys), soft stone (bearded man) and metal jewels abound.

The greatest artistic skill is in the seals. These engravings of animals, flowers and other symbols have artistic, religious and economic value .

Town Planning
The city of Mohenjo Daro is testimony to the town planning activities of the IVC. Cities are divided into lower dwellings & the Citadel which houses important buildings. The streets form a grid system and are of modulated width. Bricks of fixed sizes are used for building while stone and wood are also used.Municipal authorities who are responsible for the whole of the valley also regularly maintain a highly efficient drainage system.Buildings in the lower area are rather monotonous, being mainly functional rather than decorative. But many houses are 2 storeyed.


Architecture
Great Bath: Mohenjo Daro has a sophisticated system of water supply & drainage and its brickwork, is highly functional and the amazing part of it is - that it is completely waterproof. The granaries are also intelligently constructed, with strategic airducts and platform are divided into units.
The Dock at Lothal is to be used for inland & foreign trade.


Religion
The culture and religion of the IVC overlap and perhaps repetitive symbols such as the pipal leaf and swastika have religious significance. Human dieties include a "proto type of Shiva" and a mother goddess. Animal symbols such as the bull and unicorn and those of tree spirits and water dieties are also common.


Trivia
The IVC script is pictorial and never more than 20 consecutive symbols. There are a total of 300 symbols, these probably evolved from highly elaborate pictures but no further development took place in all these years. A two or three line linear. Inscription begins from left to right, then reverses in the next line. The IVC script remains a mystery though theories as to what its character is abound.

now on to china

http://www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/prehistory/china/ancient_china/neolithic.html


Neolithic China
The Yangshao and the Lungshan
The Neolithic period began in China about 12,000 B.C. However, good evidence of Neolithic settlements exists from only about 4,000 B.C. The Neolithic lasted until about 2,000 B.C. It is defined by a spread of settled agricultural communities, but hunting and gathering was still practiced. The largest concentration of agriculture was below the southern bend of the Yellow River and millet was the main crop. The geography of Neolithic China was different from today. It was much wetter, with most of Northern China being lakes and marshes and central China covered in an enormous lake. The climate was warm and moist, rather than the colder, arid China of today. The mountains were well forested and there was a variety of animals.

Silk production, for which China is famous, had already been invented before this time period began. The process began in Northern China. It involved feeding the silkworms mulberry leaves, helping them molt and spin their cocoons, and finally, boiling the cocoons to produce the raw silk. Pottery was also present during this time period. The two main types, Painted Pottery and Black Pottery, belong to the two distinct cultural groups of the Neolithic, the Yangshao and the Lungshan. These two types of pottery were not for everyday use, rather, a plain course type of pottery was used that varied between the colors gray, black, red, and white. The dwellings of this time were in clusters that suggest kinship was important. Clothing was made of hemp and the main domesticated animals were pigs and dogs.

The Yangshao lived in the mountainous regions of northern and western China in round or rectangular houses that were below ground level and surrounded by little walls of earth. They created Painted Pottery that had geometric designs on it. The pottery was fired at 1000-1500°C, but the potters wheel was not used. Axes and arrowheads were made of polished stone and other tools were made of stone chips. Millet was the main crop of the Yangshao. They domesticated two main animals, the dog and the pig, with the pig being the more important.

The Lungshan lived on the plains of eastern China. Their villages were similar to those of the Yangshao, but evidence of stamped earth fortresses is found in some sites. They created Black Pottery. This pottery was of exceptional quality. It had a polished exterior, was never painted, and is almost always without decoration. This pottery may have been a direct predecessor to later Chinese pottery, as the forms of the vessels are typical of Chinese pottery. Firing bones for the purpose of divination, which continued into the following dynasties, also began during this time. The Lungshan began to bury their dead facing downwards, which is how all bodies were buried during the Bronze Age. They used bones for arrowheads and small tools, but used polished stones for axes and sickles. Their domesticated animals were the pig, dog, sheep, and ox.

Qin Dynasty
The Qin came to power in 221 B.C. They were one of the western states that existed during the Warring States Period. They conquered the other Warring States, unifying China for the first time. Their leader named himself the First Emperor, or Shi huangdi, thus beginning the tradition of having emperors for rulers. The Qin, while not the most culturally advanced of the Warring States was militarily the strongest. They utilized many new technologies in warfare, especially cavalry. The Qin are sometimes called the Ch'in, which is probably where the name China originated.

The Qin made many changes that were meant to unify China and aid in administrative tasks. First, the Qin implemented a Legalist form of government, which was how the former Qin territory had been governed. The area was divided up in 36 commanderies which were then subdivided into counties. These commanderies had a civil governor, a military commander, and an imperial inspector. The leaders of the commanderies had to report to the Emperor in writing. The Legalist form of government involved rewards and punishments to keep order. Also, the state had absolute control over the people, and the former nobility lost all of their power. The nobility were also transplanted from their homes to the capital. Groups were formed of units of five to ten families, which then had a group responsibility for the wrongdoings of any individual within the group.


Image courtesy of Giam Vien
The achievements of the Qin are numerous. They standardized the language and writing of China, which had varied greatly from area to area during the Warring States Period. This was done partially out of a need to have a consistent way to communicate across the country; administrators had to be able to read the writing of the commandery to which they were sent. Also, currency became standardized as a circular copper coin with a square hole in the middle. Measurements and axle length were also made uniform. This was done because the cartwheels made ruts in the road, and the ruts had to all be the same width, or carts with a different axle length could not travel on them. Many public works projects were also undertaken. A Great Wall was built in the north, to protect against invasions. Roads and irrigation canals were built throughout the country. Also, a huge palace was built for Shi huangdi. The Qin are also famous for the terra cotta army that was found at the burial site for Shi huangdi. The army consisted of 6,000 pottery soldiers that protected the tomb. They may be a replacement for the actual people who had previously been buried with the rulers.

Despite all of these accomplishments, Shi huangdi was not a popular leader. The public works and taxes were too great a burden to the population. It seemed that Shi huangdi could not be satisfied. Also, the nobility disliked him because they were deprived of all their power and transplanted. Finally, he banned all books that advocated forms of government other than the current one. The writings of the great philosophers of the One Hundred Schools time were burned and more than 400 opponents were executed.

The Qin rule came to an end shortly after the First Emperor's death. Shi huangdi had only ruled for 37 years, when he died suddenly in 210 B.C. His son took the throne as the Second Emperor, but was quickly overthrown and the Han dynasty began in 206 B.C.

What is it you are exactly trying to achieve here i can`t understand, it seems to me that you are trying to put the white race down,i could understand if you were black then you would be right trying to defend your colour,it`s not as if you are trying to say we are all equal regardless of colour. But you are trying to make claims that they are far more superior than us.Is there something about your identity that your unsure of ....just interested that`s all

Listen thick Brummie twat. Do I have to remind you of our results against Blackburn and Liverpool last year? Both of whom I remember finished above City in the league. By the way thanks for taking Tebily off our hands. Having trouble scoring I see. That's what u get from having a Frog and a Finn up front. Seriously though I don't have a problem with the Blues and I would enjoy shitting on the Villa given a chance as well. I run with Boro now and again so maybe we can meet up next February. My mates there tell me that they spanked u good and proper last season. I also hear that away from your back yard is not something that the blues enjoy anymore. Pity but if that's the case you had better stay in Digbeth (wherever the fuck that is). Oh by the way you may recall the 2nd leg of our nations last meeting where I again pissed in Trafalgar square fountain (along with around 10,000 others and not a St George in sight. Ahh memories....

Look, how many more times do I have to put you right on this?

There is no point just going to some history website and copying down everything word for word. Most people on here arn't really going to be that interested in what kind of pots and pans Chinese people made 2 thousand years ago. You seem to be rather pleased with yourself about discovering that the Indus Valley Civilisation was one of great achievement. I agree with you on that entirely. It was an extremely influentual period of history. BUT...
I hate to have to do this to you again my friend, but if you had looked into it just a little bit further, you would have discovered that the racial makeup of the people responsible for this great civilisation were white. The Indus Valley people were made up of a tribe called the Aryans. Ever heard of them? They were white, blonde haired, blue eyed nordic types. They migrated from much further north and settled in the Indus Valley region (present day northern India). They quickly set about conquering the non white race of people who already inhabited this part of India and exaulted their rule over them. One of their symbals did however happen to be the swastika which incidently, meant "well being". The swastika was later, as we all know, adopted by Adolf Hitler and Germany. The reason for them adopting the ancient swastika was because the nazi's were advocating that the German third reich was going to be yet another great, white civilisation. Things obviously never turned out as they intended, which is why for many people today, the swastika is synonamous with everything evil. So do you think that Hitler, being an extreme racist would have been proud to wave a banner which actually happened to have been created by non whites? I don't think so either my friend. Anyway, let's get back to the Indus valley. It wasn't long before the conquering Aryan's, realised that some of their number were interbreeding with their non white neighbours. Something had to be done. They risked being breeded out. They set up something called "The Caste System" which basically meant that it would be against their law to breed with people who were from outside of their race (or caste). Over thousands of years though, they gradually mixed with the surruonding non whites until they bit by bit, lost their unique, Aryan special ability and were absorbed into the genepool of their mixed race neighbours. There still happens to be a rigid caste system in place in India to this day. And if you take notice, you will see that top ranking Indians (government officials etc.) are made up of the highest caste and still happen to be quite white in comparison to those Indians of a much poorer class, who are extremely dark and happen to be classed as the lowest caste (who are called the untouchables). It is forbidden in India today, for two people of different castes to mix. That is fact. Anybody reading this could if he's interested, find this out. Just look up the history of the Indian caste system or the history of the Aryan peoples and you will see this for yourselves.

There is a lesson to be learned here. The whites did in fact, achieve all these great things regaurding advancement in civilisation just as this man has stated, but as soon as they lost their unique racial identity, they also lost their ability to continue to maintain the afore mentioned high standard of progressive civilisation (I hate doing this to this chap, he has worked so hard).

I agree with you that the oriental race, achieved a relitively good standard of early civilisation, but all of a sudden, it just seemed to stop. That was the peak of their existance. They advanced no more. They stood still for thousands of years. The white race however, has never stood still. We have constantly continued evolving throughout the centuries. We have even managed to travel to the moon. Our achievements are second to none and I mean NONE.

Look, just because I think we have a right to preserve our race, doesn't mean that I hate people from other races. I am all for being interested in their cultures etc, but that doesn't mean that I wish for them to come to our land and have my culture defiled, erroded or replaced with theirs. Their is nothing wrong with our own culture. It doesn't need replacing by anybody elses. Why is it that you seem hellbent on getting rid of us? What is your problem? These people have every right to do as they want but please, let's have them do it in their own lands O.K.? Please just accept that us white, British people have every right to want to be left to live with our own kind and not have our country turned into something from the third world that we just simply don't want.

I appreciate the trouble you have gone to but you are wasting your time my friend.

St George

Why have you not counter argued some of the facts I put to you in my last post ie The Australian evolutionary isolation theory, Britain saving India in world war two or any of the other many dozens of solid, documented facts that I threw at you in response to your previous posts.

Let's have some balance here. You are visiting these obscure websites and duplicating your findings on these pages with a few theories of supposed non white supremacy and I am, to my credit, smashing your theories to tiny little pieces by stating facts, showing hard evidence and using unshakeable logic.

I have responded to every single one of the theories that you have thrown at me and replied sensibly and honestly. The least you could do in return is, as I have said, answer my questions. If by tomorrow, instead of doing this you have just written another chapter about Chinese pots and pans from 2 thousand years ago, I will be most dissapointed and will feel that you do not really have an argument at all but you just wish to get in on a bit of (or a lot of) typing practice.

Answer some of my points and you will get a lot more respect my friend.

Hopefully,

St George

you say that you are smashing my arguments to pieces by stating facts, showing hard evidence and using unshakeable logic. where is your evidence. all i see is your words and opinion. i put it to you that you have uttered a lot of believable words and countered my theories with pure fantasy. although you dont seem to like me posting stuff from other websites on here, it is my way of showing that these are not just my opinions but are documented evidence. counter them if you like but at least post on here references to prove your words. without this all your words just become opinion and bluster and nothing else.

the point that i think is the most important one is that you are trying to make on here is that the human species is not the same everywhere. as for the aborigine theory, there is no doubt that they have developed far more slowly than the whole of europe and asia, but you must remember that this is only a very small portion of the human race, and I put it to you that if a small group of white man were to be cut off in somewhere like australia for millenia, then this tribe of white men would probably fall as far behind as the aborigines obviously. opinion i know, but im just following your lead with this kind of argument.

now, about your theory about the ayrians. this theory is one that was used by fashists and british whites to try and put an argument that it was white people that really started everything off. i put it to you that this theory was untrue and the aryans never acutally ended up in the part of india under discussion. to back up my words i am posting an articel off the web, with references to documents and books and ancient writings, which can prove my words far better than i can. please see below. if you are going to disprove this argument, please do not try to do it just with you own words and opinion, but try do find some documented evidence to back it up and post it on here. otherwise your arguments are completely floored. Sorry if you dont like me taking stuff off the web and using them as evidence to prove my arguments, but believe me it is by far the best way. that way you can see that it is not just me thats saying these things, but far more knowledgeable people on these subjects than you or me.
as for your arguments about indias war efforts and figures, and everything else for that matter, these are no good without evidence to back them up. please reply with evidence, then i will try to argue against it. without evidence posted on here your arguments are nowt but bluster and hot air with a little truth thrown in.

hopefully

malc.

I think you will find this very balanced and well researched.




Demise of Aryan Invasion/Race Theory-Part 1
Prof. Dinesh Agrawal
Address: 156 Aberdeen lane, State College, PA 16801 USA
Tel: (814)-234-3558 (Home), (814)-863-8034 (Office)

Aryan Race and Invasion Theory is not a subject of academic interest only, rather it conditions our perception of India's historical evolution, the sources of her ancient glorious heritage, and indigenous socio-economic-political institutions which have been developed over the millennia. Indian culture and nationalism have been evolved and fostered over the millenia by India's ancient rishis who at the banks of holy rivers of Saptasindhuand Saraswati had composed the Vedic literature - the very foundation of Indian civilization, and realized the eternal truths about the Creator, His creation, and means to preserve it. These pioneers of the ancient Vedic culture were indigenous people of mother India, this fact is mendaciously denied by the Aryan Invasion theory which professes their foreign origin, and thereby challenges the very raison d'etre of Indian culture and nationhood. In this article an attempt has been made to expose the myth of Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT) by quoting scriptural, historical and archaeological evidences, and presenting proper interpretation of Vedic literature.
The Aryan issue is quite controversial and has been the focus of historians, archaeologists, Indologists, and sociologists for over a century. AIT is merely a proposed 'theory', and not a factual event. And theories keep modifying, are discredited, nay even rejected with the emergence of new knowledge and new data. Now with the emergence of new information in last couple of decades, and an objective analysis of the archaeological data and scriptures, the validity of AIT is seriously challenged by scholars, and by many is outrightly discarded. The most weird aspect of the AIT is that it has its origin not in any Indian records but in European politics and German nationalism of 19th century. No where in any of the ancient Indian scriptures or epics or Puranas, etc. is there any mention of Aryan migration or invasion or Aryan race.

In the last couple of decades, the discovery of the lost track of the Rig Vedic river Saraswati, the excavation of a chain of Harappan sites from Ropar in the Punjab to Lothal and Dhaulavira in Gujarat all along this lost track, the discovery of the archaeological remains of Vedis (alters) and Yupas connected with Vedic Yajnas (sacrifices) at Harrapan sites like Kalibangan, decipherment of the Harappan/Indus script by many scholars as a language belonging to Vedic Sanskrit family, the view of the archaeologists like Prof. Dales, Prof. Allchin etc. that the end of the Harappan civilization came not because of the so called Aryan invasion but as a result of a series of floods, the discovery of the lost Dwarka city beneath the sea water near Gujarat coast and its similarity with Harappan civilization, and an objective, accurate and contextual interpretation of Vedas indicate convincingly towards the full identity of the Harappan/Indus civilization with post Vedic civilization, and demand a re-examination of the entire gamut of Aryan Race/Invasion Theories.

For thousands of years the Hindu society has looked upon the Vedas as the fountain-head of all knowledge: spiritual and secular, and the mainstay of Hindu culture, heritage and its existence. Never our historical or religious records have questioned this fact. Even western and far eastern travellers who have documented their experiences during their prolonged stay and sojourn in India have testified the importance of Vedic literature and its indigenous origin. And now, suddenly, in the last century or so, these the so-called European scholars are telling that the Vedas do not belong to Hindus, they were the creation of a barbaric horde of nomadic tribes descended upon north India and destroyed an advanced indigenous civilization. They even suggest that the Sanskrit language is of non-Indian origin. This is all absurd, preposterous, and defies the commonsense. A nomadic, barbaric horde of invaders cannot from any stretch of imagination produce the kind of sublime wisdom, pure and pristine spiritual experiences of the highest order, a universal philosophy of religious tolerance and harmony for the entire mankind, one finds in the Vedic literature.


Major Flaws in Aryan Invasion Theory
A major flaw of the invasion theory was that it had no explanation for why the Vedic literature that was assumed to go back into the second millennium BC had no reference to any region outside of India. Also the astronomical references in the Rig Veda allude to events in the third millennium BC and even earlier, indicating origin of Vedic hymns earlier than 3000 BC. If it is assumed that the so-called Aryans invaded the townships in the Harappa valley and destroyed its habitants and their civilization, how come after doing that they did not occupy these towns? The excavations of these sites indicate that the townships were abandoned. And if the Harappan civilization had a Dravidian origin, who were allegedly pushed down to the south by Aryans, how come there is no Aryan - Dravidian divide in the respective literatures and historical traditions. The North and South have never been known to be culturally hostile to each other. Prior to the descent of British on Indian scene, there was a continuous interaction and cultural exchange between the two regions. The Sanskrit language, the so-called Aryan language was the lingua-franca of the entire society for thousands of years. The three greatest figures of later Hinduism - Shankaracharya, Madhavacharya and Ramanujam were Southerners who are universally respected in the North, and who have written commentaries on Vedic scriptures in Sanskrit only for the benefit of the entire population. Even in the ancient times some of the great Sutra authors like Baudhayana and Apastamba were from South. Agastya, a celebrated Vedic rishi from North India, is widely venerated in the South as the one who introduced Vedic learning to the South India. And also was the South India un-inhabitated prior to the pushing of the original population of Indus Valley? If not, who were the original inhabitants of South India, who accepted the newcomers from North without any hostility or fight?

There is enough positive evidence in support of the religious rites of the Harappans being similar to those of the Vedic Aryans. Their religious motifs, deities and sacrificial altars bespeak of Aryan faith, indicating continuity and identity of Vedic culture with the Indus valley civilization.

If the Aryan Hindus were outsiders, why don't they name places outside India as their most holy places? Why should they sing paeans in the praise of India's numerous rivers crisscrossing the entire peninsula, and mountains - repositories of life giving water and natural resources, nay even bestow them a status of goddesses and gods. If Aryans were outsiders why should they consider this land as the 'holy land' and not their original land as the 'holy land' or motherland? For the Muslims, their holy place is Mecca. For the Catholics it is Rome or Jerusalem. For the Hindus, their pilgrim centers range from Kailash in the North, to Rameshwaram in the South; and from Hingalaj (Sindh) in the West to Parusuram Kund (Arunchala Pradesh) in the East. The seven holy cities of Hinduism include Kanchipurum in the south, Dwarka in the west and Ujjain in central India. The twelve jyotirlings include Ramashwaram in Tamil Nadu, Srisailam in Andhra Pradesh, Nashik in Maharashtra, Somnath in Gujarat and Kashi in Uttar Pradesh. All these are located in greater India only. No Hindu from any part of India has felt a stranger in any other part of India when on a pilgrimage. The seven holy rivers in Hinduism, indeed, seem to chart out the map of the holy land. The Sindhu and the Saraswati (now extinct) originating from the Himalayas and move westward and southwards into the western sea; the Ganga and the Yamuna also start in the Himalayas and move eastward into the north-eastern sea; the Narmada starts in central India and the Godavari starts in western India, while the Kaveri winds its way through the south to move into the southern sea. More than a thousand years ago, Adi Shankaracharya, who was born in Kerala, established several mathas (religious and spiritual centers) including at Badrinath in the north (Uttar Pradesh), Puri in the east (Orissa), Dwaraka in the west (Gujarat), and at Shringeri and Kanchi in the south. That is ancient India, that is modern Bharat, and that is Hinduism.

These are some of the obvious serious objections, inconsistencies, and glaring anomalies to which the invasionists have no convincing or plausible explanations which could reconcile the above facts with the Aryan invasion theory and destruction of Indus Valley civilization.

Origin of Aryan Race Theory: Max Muller, a renowned Indologist from Germany, is credited with the popularization of the Aryan racial theory in the middle of 19th century. Though later on when Muller's reputation as a Sanskrit scholar was getting damaged, and he was challenged by his peers, since nowhere in the Sanskrit literature, the term Arya denoted a racial people, he recanted and pronounced that Aryan meant only a linguistic family and never applied to a race. But the damage was already done. The German and French political and nationalist groups exploited this racial phenomenon to propagate the supremacy of an assumed Aryan race of white people, which Hitler used to its extreme absurdities for his political hegemony and his barbaric crusade to terrorize Jews and other societies. This culminated in the holocaust of millions of innocent people.

What, really, is Aryan Invasion Theory?: According to this theory, northern India was invaded and conquered by nomadic, light-skinned race of a people called 'aryans' who supposedly descended from central Asia (or some unknown land ?) around 1500 BC, and destroyed an earlier more advanced civilization of the people habitated in the Indus Valley, and then imposed upon them their culture and language. These Indus Valley people were supposed to be either Dravidian, or Austrics or now--days' Shudra class etc.

The main elements on which the entire structure of AIT has been built are: Arya is a racial group, their invasion, they were nomadic, light-skinned, their original home was outside India, their invasion occurred around 1500 BC, they destroyed an advanced civilization of Indus valley, etc. And the evidences AIT advocates present in support of all these wild conjectures can be sumarized as follows:


Evidence for Invasion: Mention of Conflicts in Vedic literature, findings of skeletons at the excavated sites of Mohanjodro and Harappa

Evidence for Aryans being Nomadic and Light-skinned: None whatsoever, Pure conjecture except some misinterpretated quotes from Vedas.

Evidence for Non-Aryan/Dravidian Nature of Indus civilization: Absence of horse, Siva worshippers, chariots, racial differences, etc.

Evidence for proposed date of invasion, 1500 BC: Arbitrary and speculative, in Mesopotamia and Iraq the presence of the people worshipping Vedic gods around 1700BC, Biblical chronology.

Now let us examine the facts about the so-called evidences in support of AIT:
1. Real Meaning of the Word 'ARYA'

In 1853, Max Muller introduced the word 'Arya' into the English and European usage as applying to a racial and linguistic group when propounding the Aryan Racial theory. However, in 1888, he himself refuted his own theory and wrote:


I have declared again and again that if I say Aryas, I mean neither blood nor bones, nor hair, nor skull; I mean simply those who speak an Aryan language...to me an ethnologist who speaks of Aryan race, Aryan blood, Aryan eyes and hair, is as great a sinner as a linguist who speaks of a dolichocephalic dictionary or a brachycephalic grammar.
(Max Muller, Biographies of Words and the Home of the Aryas, 1888, pg 120)
In Vedic Literature, the word Arya is nowhere defined in connection with either race or language. Instead it refers to: gentleman, good-natured, righteous person, noble-man, and is often used like 'Sir' or 'Shree' before the name of a person like Aryaputra, Aryakanya, etc.

In Ramayan (Valmiki), Rama is described as an Arya in the following words: a;yR: sv;R-smWcewv: sdwv ip[y;dxRn (Aryah sarvasamashchaivah sadaiv priyadarshan ) :Arya - who cared for the equality to all and was dear to everyone.

Etymologically, according to Max Muller, the word Arya was derived from ar- (ar-), "plough, to cultivate". Therefore, Arya means - "cultivator" agriculturer (civilized sedentary, as opposed to nomads and hunter-gatherers), landlord;

V.S. Apte's Sanskrit-English dictionary relates the word Arya to the root r- (r-) to which a prefix a (a) has been appended to give a negating meaning. And therefore the meaning of Arya is given as "excellent, best", followed by "respectable" and as a noun, "master, lord, worthy, honorable, excellent", upholder of Arya values, and further: teacher, employer, master, father-in-law, friend, Buddha.

So nowhere either in the religious scriptures or by tradition the word Arya denotes a race or a language. There are only four primary races, namely, Caucasian, the Mangolian, the Australians and the Negroid. Both the Aryans and Dravidians are related branches of the Caucasian race generally placed in the same Mediterranean sub-branch. The difference between the so-called Aryans of the north and the Dravidians of the south or other communities of Indian subcontinent is not a racial type. Biologically all are the same Caucasian type, only when closer to the equator the skin gets darker, and under the influence of constant heat the bodily frame tends to get a little smaller. And these differences can not be the basis of two altogether different races. Similar differences one can observe even more distinctly among the people of pure Caucasian white race of Europe. Caucasian can be of any color ranging from pure white to almost pure black, with every shade of brown in between. Similarly, the Mongolian race is not yellow. Many Chinese have skin whiter than many so-called Caucasians.

Further, a recent landmark global study in population genetics by a team of internationally reputed scientists over 50 years (The History and Geography of Human Genes, by Luca Cavalli-Sforza, Paolo Menozzi and Alberto Piazza, Princeton University Press) reveals that the people habitated in the Indian subcontinent and nearby including Europe, all belong to one single race of Caucasion type. According to this study, there is essentially, and has been no difference racially between north Indians and the so-called Dravidian South Indians. The racial composition has remained almost the same for millennia. This study also confirms that there is no race called as an Aryan race.



continued ...

References:

1. The Aryan Invasion Theory and Indian Nationalism (1993)


By Shrikant G. Talageri (Voice of India)


2. Vedic Aryans and the Origins of Civilization (1995)

By N.S. Rajaram and David Frawley (World Heritage Press)


3. Aryan Invasion of India: The Myth and the Truth

By N.S. Rajaram (Voice of India Publication)


4. Indigenous Indians: Agastya to Ambedkar (1993)

By Koenraad Elst

it is here that i would like to remind you that during the space programe in america, which you mentioned in one of your posts above as being another soley white achievement, that many black people who were and are a part of an interacial usa took part in this greatest of achievements. and may i say that you are quite correct about all the great british achievements and i dont disagree with you about these and im rightly proud of these, but of all the achievements the world has known it is landing a man on the moon that i think is mans greatest acomplishment. This sir was done by a multi racial society.


I would remind you here that opinion and hot air are not enough to argue against documented fact. please bear with me and read on. I look forward to your reply.
Demise of Aryan Invasion/Race Theory-Part 2
Prof. Dinesh Agrawal
Address: 156 Aberdeen lane, State College, PA 16801 USA
Tel: (814)-234-3558 (Home), (814)-863-8034 (Office)


continued
2. References in Rigveda
The voluminous references to various wars and conflicts in Rigveda are frequently cited as the proof of an invasion and wars between invading 'white-skinned' Aryans and 'dark-skinned' indigenous people. Well, the so-called conflicts and wars mentioned in the Rigveda can be categorized mainly in the following three types:

A. Conflicts between the forces of nature:
Indra, the Thunder-God of the Rig Veda, occupies a central position in the naturalistic aspects of the Rigvedic religion, since it is he who forces the clouds to part with their all-important wealth, the rain. In this task he is pitted against all sorts of demons and spirits whose main activity is the prevention of rainfall and sunshine. Rain, being the highest wealth, is depicted in terms of more terrestrial forms of wealth, such as cows or soma. The clouds are depicted in terms of their physical appearance: as mountains, as the black abodes of the demons who retain the celestial waters of the heavens (i.e. the rains), or as the black demons themselves. This is in no way be construed as the war between white Aryans and black Dravidians. This is a perverted interpretation from those who have not understood the meaning and purport of the Vedic culture and philosophy. Most of the verses which mention the wars/conflicts are composed using poetic imagery, and depict the celestial battles of the natural forces, and often take greater and greater recourse to terrestrial terminology and anthropomorphic depictions. The descriptions acquire an increasing tendency to shift from naturalism to mythology. And it is these mythological descriptions which are grabbed at by invasion theorists as descriptions of wars between invading Aryans and indigenous non-Aryans. An example of such distorted interpretation is made of the following verse:


The body lay in the midst of waters that are neither still nor flowing. The waters press against the secret opening of the Vrtra (the coverer) who lay in deep darkness whose enemy is Indra. Mastered by the enemy, the waters held back like cattle restrained by a trader. Indra crushed the vrtra and broke open the withholding outlet of the river.
(Rig Veda, I.32.10-11)
This verse is a beautiful poetic and metamorphical description of snow-clad dark mountains where the life-sustaining water to feed the rivers flowing in the Aryavarta is held by the hardened ice caps (vrtra demon), and Indra, the rain god by allowing the sun to light its rays on the mountains makes the ice caps break and hence release the water. The invasionists interpret this verse literally on human plane, as the slaying of vrtra, the leader of dark skinned Dravidian people of Indus valley by invading white-skinned Aryan king Indra. This is an absurd and ludicrous interpretation of an obvious conflict between the natural forces.

B. Conflict between Vedic and Iranian people:
Another category of conflicts in the Rigveda represents the genuine conflict between the Vedic people and the Iranians. At one time Iranians and Vedic people formed one society and were living harmoniously in the northern part of India practising Vedic culture, but at some point in the history for some serious philosophical dispute, the society got divided and one section moved to further north-west, now known as Iran. However, the conflict and controversy were continued between the two groups often resulting into even physical fights. The Iranians not only called their God Ahura (Vedic Asura) and their demons Daevas (Vedic Devas), but they also called themselves Dahas and Dahyus (Vedic Dasas, and Dasyus). The oldest Iranian texts, moreover depict the conflicts between the daeva-worshippers and the Dahyus on behalf of the Dahyus, as the Vedic texts depict them on behalf of the Deva-worshippers. Indra, the dominant God of the Rigveda, is represented in the Iranian texts by a demon Indra. What this all indicate that wars or conflicts of this second category are not between Aryans and non-Aryans, but between two estranged groups of the same parent society which got divided by some philosophical dichotomy. Vedas even mention the gods of Dasyus as Arya also.

C. Conflicts between various indigenous tribal groups over natural resources and various minor kingdoms to gain supremacy over the land and its expansion:
A well-known global phenomenon to share the natural resources like, water, cattle, vegetation and land, and expand the geographical boundaries of the existing kingdoms. This conflict in no way suggests any war or invasion by outsiders on the indigenous people.


3. Excavations at Harappa and Mohenjo-daro
It is argued that in the excavations at Harappa and Mohenjo-daro the human skeletons found do prove that a large scale massacre had taken place at these townships by invading armies of Aryan nomads. Prof. G. F. Dales (Former head of department of Southasean Archaeology and Anthropology, Berkeley University, USA)in his "The Mythical Massacre at Mohenjo-daro, Expedition Vol VI,3: 1964states the following about this evidence:


What of these skeletal remains that have taken on such undeserved importance? Nine years of extensive excavations at Mohenjo-daro (1922-31) - a city of three miles in circuit - yielded the total of some 37 skeletons, or parts thereof, that can be attributed with some certainty to the period of the Indus civilizations. Some of these were found in contorted positions and groupings that suggest anything but orderly burials. Many are either disarticulated or incomplete. They were all found in the area of the Lower Town - probably the residential district. Not a single body was found within the area of the fortified citadel where one could reasonably expect the final defence of this thriving capital city to have been made.

He further questions:

Where are the burned fortresses, the arrow heads, weapons, pieces of armour, the smashed chariots and bodies of in the invaders and defenders? Despite the extensive excavations at the largest Harappan sites, there is not a single bit of evidence that can be brought forth as unconditional proof of an armed conquest and the destruction on the supposed scale of the Aryan invasion.

Colin Renfrew, Prof. of Archeology at Cambridge, in his famous work, "Archeology and Language : The Puzzle of Indo-European Origins",Cambridge Univ. Press, 1988, makes the following comments about the real meaning and interpretation of Rig Vedic hymns:
"Many scholars have pointed out that an enemy quite frequently smitten in these hymns is the Dasyu. The Dasyus have been thought by some commentators to represent the original, non-Vedic-speaking population of the area, expelled by the incursion of the warlike Aryas in their war-chariots. As far as I can see there is nothing in the Hymns of the Rigveda which demonstrates that the Vedic-speaking population were intrusive to the area: this comes rather from a historical assumption about the 'coming' of the Indo-Europeans. It is certainly true that the gods invoked do aid the Aryas by over-throwing forts, but this does not in itself establish that the Aryas had no forts themselves. Nor does the fleetness in battle, provided by horses (who were clearly used primarily for pulling chariots), in itself suggest that the writers of these hymns were nomads. Indeed the chariot is not a vehicle especially associated with nomads. This was clearly a heroic society, glorifying in battle. Some of these hymns, though repetitive, are very beautiful pieces of poetry, and they are not by any means all warlike.

...When Wheeler speaks of the Aryan invasion of the Land of the Seven Rivers, the Punjab', he has no warranty at all, so far as I can see. If one checks the dozen references in the Rigveda to the Seven Rivers, there is nothing in any of them that to me which implies an invasion: the land of the Seven Rivers is the land of the Rigveda, the scene of the action. Nothing implies that the Aryas were strangers there. Nor is it implied that the inhabitants of the walled cities (including the Dasyus) were any more aboriginal than the Aryas themselves. Most of the references, indeed, are very general ones such as the beginning of the Hymn to Indra (Hymn 102 of Book 9)

To thee the Mighty One I bring this mighty Hymn,for thy desire hath been gratified by my praise


In Indra, yea in him victorious through his strength,


the Gods have joyed at feast, and when the Soma flowed.

The Seven Rivers bear his glory far and wide, and heaven and sky and earth display his comely form.

The Sun and Moon in change alternate run their course

that we, 0 Indra, may behold and may have faith . . .

The Rigveda gives no grounds for believing that the Aryas themselves lacked for forts, strongholds and citadels. Recent work on the decline of the Indus Valley civilization shows that it did not have a single, simple cause: certainly there are no grounds for blaming its demise upon invading hordes. This seems instead to have been a system collapse, and local movements of people may have followed it."

M.S. Elphinstone (1841):(first governor of Bombay Presidency, 1819-27) in his magnum opus, History of India, writes:

Hindu scripture....

"It is opposed to their (Hindus) foreign origin, that neither in the Code (of Manu) nor, I believe, in the Vedas, nor in any book that is certainly older than the code, is there any allusion to a prior residence or to a knowledge of more than the name of any country out of India. Even mythology goes no further than the Himalayan chain, in which is fixed the habitation of the gods...

...To say that it spread from a central point is an unwarranted assumption, and even to analogy; for, emigration and civilization have not spread in a circle, but from east to west. Where, also, could the central point be, from which a language could spread over India, Greece, and Italy and yet leave Chaldea, Syria and Arabia untouched?

And, Elphinstone's final verdict:

There is no reason whatever for thinking that the Hindus ever inhabitated any country but their present one, and as little for denying that they may have done so before the earliest trace of their records or tradition.

So what these eminent scholars have concluded based on the archaeological and literary evidence that there was no invasion by the so-called Aryans, there was no massacre at Harappan and Mohanjo-dara sites, Aryans were indigenous people, and the decline of the Indus valley civilization is due to some natural calamity.

4. Presence of Horse at Indus-Saraswati sites
It is argued that the Aryans were horse riding, used chariots for transport, and since no signs of horse was found at the sites of Harappa and Mohanjo-daro, the habitants of Indus valley cannot be Aryans. Well, this was the case in the 1930 - 40 when the excavation of many sites were not completed. Now numerous excavated sites along Indus valley and along the dried Saraswati river have produced bones of domesticated horses. Dr. S. R. Rao, the world renowned scholar of archeology, informs us that horse bones have been found both from the 'Mature Harappan' and 'Late Harappan' levels. Many other scholars since then have also unearthed numerous bones of horses: both domesticated and combat types. This simply debunks the non-Aryan nature of the habitants of the Indus valley and also identifies the Vedic culture with the Indus valley civilization.

5. Origin of Siva-worship

The advocates of AIT argue that the inhabitants of Indus valley were Siva worshippers and since Siva cult is more prevalent among the South Indian Dravidians, therefore the habitants of Indus valley were Dravidians. But Shiva worship is not alien to Vedic culture, and not confined to South India only. The words Siva and Shambhu are not derived from the Tamil words civa (to redden, to become angry) and cembu (copper, the red metal), but from the Sanskrit roots si (therefore meaning "auspicious, gracious, benevolent, helpful kind") and sam (therefore meaning "being or existing for happiness or welfare, granting or causing happiness, benevolent, helpful, kind"), and the words are used in this sense only, right from their very first occurrence. (Sanskrit-English Dictionary by Sir M. Monier-Williams). Moreover, most important symbols of Shaivites are located in North India: Kashi is the most revered and auspicious seat of Shaivism which is in the north, the traditional holy abode of Shiva is Kailash mountain which is in the far-north, there are passages in Rigvada which mention Siva and Rudra and consider him an important deity. Indra himself is called Shiva several times in Rig Veda (2:20:3, 6:45:17, 8:93:3). So Siva is not a Dravidian god only, and by no means a non-Vedic god. The proponents of AIT also present terra-cotta lumps found in the fire-alters at the Harappan and other sites as an evidence of Shiva linga, implying the Shiva cult was prevalent among the Indus valley people. But these terra-cotta lumps have been proved to be the measures for weighing the commodities by the shopkeepers and merchants. Their weights have been found in perfect integral ratios, in the manner like 1 gm, 2 gms, 5 gms, 10 gms etc. They were not used as the Shiva lingas for worship, but as the weight measurements.

6. Discovery of the Submerged city of Krishna's Dwaraka

The discovery of this city is very significant and a kind of clinching evidence in discarding the Aryan invasion as well as its proposed date of 1500 BC. Its discovery not only establishes the authenticity of Mahabharat war and the main events described in the epic, but clinches the traditional antiquity of Mahabharat and Ramayana periods. So far the AIT advocates used to either dismiss the Mahabharat epic as a fictional work of a highly talented poet or if not fictional would place it around 1000 BC. But the remains of this submerged city along the coast of Gujarat were dated 3000BC to 1500BC. In Mahabharat's Musal Parva, the Dwarka is mentioned as being gradually swallowed by the ocean. Krishna had forewarned the residents of Dwaraka to vacate the city before the sea submerged it. The Sabha Parva gives a detailed account of Krishna's flight from Mathura with his followers to Dwaraka to escape continuous attacks of Jarasandh's on Mathura and save the lives of its subjects. For this reason, Krishna is also known as rnzo@ (ranchhor: one who runs away from the battle-field). Dr. S. R. Rao and his team in 1984 - 88 (Marine Archaeology Unit) undertook an extensive search of this city along the coast of Gujarat where the Dwarikadeesh temple stands now, and finally they succeeded in unearthing the ruins of this submerged city off the Gujarat coast.

7. Saraswati River Discovered

It is well known that in the Rig Veda, the honor of the greatest and the holiest of rivers was not bestowed upon the Ganga, but upon Saraswati, now a dry river, but once a mighty flowing river all the way from the Himalayas to the ocean across the Rajasthan desert. The Ganga is mentioned only once while the Saraswati is mentioned at least 60 times. Extensive research by the late Dr. Wakankar has shown that the Saraswati changed her course several times, going completely dry around 1900 BC. The latest satellite data combined with field archaeological studies have shown that the Rig Vedic Saraswati had stopped being a perennial river long before 3000 BC.

As Paul-Henri Francfort of CNRS, Paris recently observed, "...we now know, thanks to the field work of the Indo-French expedition that when the proto-historic people settled in this area, no large river had flowed there for a long time."

The proto-historic people he refers to are the early Harappans of 3000 BC. But satellite 'photos show that a great prehistoric river that was over 7 kilometers wide did indeed flow through the area at one time. This was the Saraswati described in the Rig Veda. Numerous archaeological sites have also been located along the course of this great prehistoric river thereby confirming Vedic accounts. The great Saraswati that flowed "from the mountain to the sea" is now seen to belong to a date long anterior to 3000 BC. This means that the Rig Veda describes the geography of North India long before 3000 BC. All this shows that the Rig Veda must have been in existence no later than 3500 BC. Aryan Invasion of India: The Myth and the Truth By N.S. Rajaram)

River Saraswati IN RIGVEDA

The river called Saraswati is the most important of the rivers mentioned in the Rig Veda. The image of this 'great goddess stream' dominates the text. It is not only the most sacred river but the Goddess of wisdom. She is said to be the Mother of the Veda.

A few Rig Vedic hymns which mention Saraswati river are presented below:

ambitame naditame devitame sarasvati (II.41.16)

(The best mother, the best river, the best Goddess, Saraswati)

maho arnah saraswati pra cetayati ketuna dhiyo visva virajati (I.3.12)

(Saraswati like a great ocean appears with her ray, she rules all inspirations)

ni tva dadhe vara a prthivya ilayspade sudinatve ahnam: drsadvatyam manuse apayayam sarasvatyam revad agne didhi (III.23.4)

(We set you down, oh sacred fire, at the most holy place on Earth, in the land of Ila, in the clear brightness of the days. On the Drishadvati, the Apaya and the Saraswati rivers, shine out brilliantly for men)

citra id raja rajaka id anyake sarasvatim anu; parjanya iva tatanadhi vrstya sahasram ayuta dadat (VIII.21.18)

(Splendor is the king, all others are princes, who dwell along the Saraswati river. Like the Rain God extending with rain he grants a thousand times ten thousand cattle)

Saraswati like a bronze city: ayasi puh; surpassing all other rivers and waters: visva apo mahina sindhur anyah; pure in her course from the mountains to the sea: sucir yati girbhya a samudrat (VII.95.1-2)

All these indicate that the composers of the Vedic literature were quite familiar with the Saraswati river, and were inspired by its beauty and its vasteness that they composed several hymns in her praise and glorification. This also inidates that the Vedas are much older than Mahabharat period which mentions Saraswati as a dying river.
8. Chronology of the pre-historic period of India
According to the invasionists, the Indian civilization or the Indus Valley civilization is only 4000-5000 years old. They place the end of this civilization around 1900BC, and invasion of Aryans around 1500BC. There is also no plausible explanation from these invasion advocates for a gap of 400 years between the end of the Indus Valley civilization (IVC) and the appearance of Aryans on the Indian scene if Aryans were responsible for the destruction of the IVC. They propose the period of 1400-1300 BC as the beginning of the Vedic age when the Vedas were composed and Aryans began to impose their culture and religion on the indigenous population of the northern India. The Ramayana and Mahabharat, if considered as real events, must be according to them arbitrarily be dated in the period 1200-1000BC. And only after 1000BC, the historic accounts of empire building, Buddha's birth etc. have to be dated. This chronology first proposed by Max Muller was primarily based on his firm belief in the Biblical date of the creation of the world, i.e. October 23, 4004 BC. Such chronology contradicts all the archaeological evidences, scriptural testimonies, traditional beliefs, and most importantly defies the commonsense and scientific method. Therefore, based on Vedic testimonies, Puranic references, archaeological evidences, and all the accounts presented here above, the most realistic and accurate chronological events of the pre-historic period of India should be fixed as follows:

7000-4000 BC
Vedic Age
3750 BC
End of Rig Vedic Age
3000 BC
End of Ramayana-Mahabharat Period
3000-2000 BC
Development of Saraswati-Indus Civilization
2200-1900 BC
Decline of Indus and Saraswati Civilization
2000-1500 BC
Period of Complete chaos and migration
1400-250 BC
Period of evolution of syncretic Hindu culture


9. New Archaeological findings

Since the first discovery of buried townships of Harappa and Mohenjo-Daro on the Ravi and Sindhu rivers in 1922, respectively, numerous other settlements, now number over 2500 stretching from Baluchistan to the Ganga and beyond and down to Tapti valley, covering nearly a million and half square kilometers, have been unearthed by various archaeologists. And, the fact which was not known 70 years ago, but archaeologists now know, is that about 75% of these settlements are concentrated not along the Sindhu or even the Ganga, but along the now dried up Saraswati river. This calamity - the drying up of the Saraswati - and not any invasion was what led to the disruption and abandonment of the settlements along Saraswati river by the people who lived a Vedic life. The drying up of the Saraswati river was a catastrophe of the vast magnitude, which led to a massive outflow of people, especially the elite, went into Iran, Mesopotamia and other neighboring regions. Around the same time (2000-1900 BC), there were constant floods or/and prolonged draughts along the Sindhu river and its tributaries which forced the inhabitants of the Indus valley to move to other safer and greener locations, and hence a slow but continuous migration of these highly civilized and prosperous Vedic people took place. Some of them moved to south east, and some to north west, and even towards European regions. For the next thousand years and more, dynasties and rulers with Indian names appear and disappear all over the West Asia confirming the migration of people from East towards West. There was no destruction of an existing civilization or invasion by any racial nomads of any kind to cause the destruction or abandonment of these settlements.

So, how can all these obvious anomalies and serious flaws be reconciled? By accepting the truth that the so-called Aryans were the original habitants of the townships along the Indus, Ravi, Saraswati and other rivers of the vast northern region of the Indian subcontinent. And no invasion by nomadic hordes from outside India ever occurred and the civilization was not destroyed but the population simply moved to other areas, and developed a new syncretic civilization and culture by mutual interaction and exchange of ideas.




References:

1. The Aryan Invasion Theory and Indian Nationalism (1993)


By Shrikant G. Talageri (Voice of India)


2. Vedic Aryans and the Origins of Civilization (1995)

By N.S. Rajaram and David Frawley (World Heritage Press)


3. Aryan Invasion of India: The Myth and the Truth

By N.S. Rajaram (Voice of India Publication)


4. Indigenous Indians: Agastya to Ambedkar (1993)

By Koenraad Elst




Ancient | Medieval | Modern | Independent
Home | Interactive | Comments | Contributions and Competition


© Copyright Sify Ltd, 1998-2003. All rights reserved. See Disclaimer, Privacy Policy. & Parental Guidance on pornography
Site optimized for Internet Explorer 4.0 and above.

taken from website http://www.itihaas.com/ancient/contrib1.html

after reading the argument through a second time, i rekon that i got something wrong in my previous post. i said that the ayrians didnt end up there. in fact it seems that the ayrians originated there and are related completely to all the other peoples of the indian subcontinatn. if this is true then all of us, you, me and your gran are direct decendents of the people of india. and these are your and my roots. mind boggling stuff, what do you rekon. some people seem to think that im biased. im not. and im not trying to destroy anything like englands no 1 says. i just trying to get to the truth.

malc.

you wrote "Now then, you claim that certain places are connected. Indeed this is true. But you amuse me somewhat by the comment you make that you can
casually "walk from france to india via the caucasus if you want. and then double back from there to go to africa, all on foot." Bloody hell, have you ever tried it? You are talking about quite a few thousand
miles there my friend. Then you go on to talk about that you can "get to africa and china from europe on foot." Even Ian Botham would be hard pressed to do that mate, or perhaps they travelled by magic carpet. No but seriously though, It wasn't quite as to and fro as you are trying to make out. Obviously there were white migrations from the Caucasus region, but it didn't happen just like that but over many generations and they were few and far between."

may i point out that a few thousand miles is absolutely nothing to walk over a number of years. im not saying it was to and fro, just very possible and without doubt it was done. just look at the roman empire. they conquered most of this area and would probobly have managed the rest if it werent for running out of recouses. its very possible for people to have migrated and remigrated over the generations. thats all im saying. and if this is possible this throws into real doubt your theories about an isolated white race. if there are any of your points iv missed that you want me to try and answer please just list them in short one by one and ill try to either agree or disagree with you. but when you argue my points please do so with the back up of documented evidence and not just your own words, which is what im trying to do for you. if i were to just answer you with my own words with nothing to back them up, and just tell you what i wanted you to believe about things with no real basis or truth behind them, then two sets of fantasy would ensue and not just one, which would be doubly bad for the truth. its up to you.

best wishes,

malc.

There's no such thing as English !!!

I go away for a few days and what happens.

I'm not sure it would be wise of me to butt in on this argument at the moment. Mr. St. George asked me, just after I went away, to answer a few of his points. But I think that this argument has reached way beyond the point where I can contribute anything substantial to the conversation by doing so.

Most of what I might have said has already been stated by Interested - Malc, if not quite a lot more.

I thank him for taking up the rains where it was impossible for me to do so - even if this may not have been his intention.

It seems to me that one or two of the BNP's arguments are being shown up for what they really are - a tissue of half-truths, lies, "fantasy" and frankly bullshit.

Congratulations Mr. Interested. Your arguments are utterly fair and balanced. The truth will out - eh.

Pakistan.

St. George mentions the fact that Interested posts information about "pots and pans" from the ancient world that no one will be interested in. Taken out of context a little I think St. George. You forgot to mention the architecture, irrigation, and written language of the people in question, as well as their pots and pans, that appear in Interested's post.

And Interested is quite correct when he says that for most of the information you give out in your arguments, you offer nothing substantial to back it all up - we only have your word for it.

St. George writes >>but I have to concede that there are large numbers of foreign doctors in this country, although personally, I would much rather go and see an English one every time. I'm pretty sure I heard once though, that over 50% of all doctors who get struck off are Asian. Don't quote me on that yet , I have to do a bit more research on that one. As for the point about curry being as popular as fish and chips, well, I agree with that one but let us not forget that curry was first made by the British out in India to try and disguise rotton meat that they were trying to feed to
the troops out there (and I sometimes wonder whether the same practice is still used in some of the curry houses over here today). I have to say though, I have my doubts whether it would remain as popular as fish
and chips, if that before the meal, the customer was invited to take a quick tour around the kichens where the succulent meal was being prepared. Third world immagration, in many cases, brings with it third
world hygene standards. For example, you can not deny that in Asia, many people use one hand for eating and the other hand for.... let's just say, cleaning certain bodyparts with.<<

I say opinion opinion opinion - with just a dash of unproven bullshit and hatred thrown in. Which hand do you use to wipe your arse St. George, and which hand do you use to eat your crisps - eh???? Muslims use their right for toilet duties only, while they use their left only for food. How many times have I seen a white man leave a toilet without washing his hands - Yuck. Muslims are required to wash their hands before and after meals and several times a day during prayers.

And "curry", in it's broadest term, was not invented by the British, it is Indian cuisine - but as you say the spices were used in the preservation of meat. But the people of India have practiced this for hundreds, if not thousands of years through necessity.


St. George writes >>Anyway, there were also thousands of Indians that actually joined Hitlers side and fought in the SS. It may sound unbelievable but look it up my friend.<<

No St.George, it is not for us to look up. You've made this statement, now come up with some documented proof of what you say. Otherwise I just don't believe it. And while you're at it, please provide documented proof of everything else that you've come up with in this thread. You've provided no proof whatsoever to back up any of your arguments with Interested - while on the other hand Interested has backed up his statements with plenty of documented proof.

There's plenty more I could pick up on, but I simply don't have the time tonight. But I don't think I really need to. Interested is doing such a great demolition job on you it's actually a real pleasure to sit back and watch for a change.

To win an argument you must provide proof to back up your statements - not try to talk your opposite number down.

I'm sure we'll be talking to each other again soon.

Pakistan.

That`s a very interesting thing you say there,is there anything else you get up to in public toilets apart from counting the amount of white people not washing their hands after going to the toilet.
I think thats discriminate against whites,are you classing us all this filthy or just a select few?
Regards

and I'm not using the broad brush as does St. George in his ridiculous comment.

And as for the other things I get up to in public toilets, well let me see - I usually either take a piss or have a shit. Nothing else.

LOL

Pakistan xx

Said with such eloquence

In the first part of this post I will respond to the interested gentleman and NOT to Pakistan. I will deal with Pakistan as he deserves to be dealt with (second place). I must add though that this has nothing to do with his racial makeup but more to do with his rather rude, indecent, ungentlemanly manner and his overall lack of intelligence.

If I may call you Malc, I would now like to get on with our own little disagreement. I notice that you have been busy again gathering miles of information from some of your history websites and duplicating them here especially for me. I kindly asked you yesterday if you would consider not doing this, as much for your own benefit as it is for anyone elses. I would like to say to you that this has absolutely nothing to with facts by the way, as I shall point out in a moment. Now my friend, how many people do you think there are that come on here and have time to sit down for an hour and read through that lot? Let alone visit these websites that you list. I have to admit, I havn't even read through much of it myself and I am your main opponent in this debate. What does that tell you? Do yourself a favour and save yourself a bit of time.

Now, I would like to say of your accusation of my lack of facts that it is completely unfounded. I have time and time again countered your arguments with good solid references to facts. The reader can quite easily see this for himself if he were to look back over at my previous posts. You time and time again, tried to come up with evidence that Britain had always been a country of mass imagration of people of different races. You refered to the medieval jews and later, the black slaves etc. I smashed your argument with solid references to literature from reputable authors on this subject. I must however admit that being a keen history buff, I sometimes am guilty of taking my own knowledge for granted. I will just naturally assume that the reader will automatically know for example, that hundreds of thousands more British troops died fighting for freedom in the second world war, than did the far inferior Indian troops (even though India's poulation was over ten times larger than Britains). This is something that I didn't infact provide a source for, but (if he's interested) the reader can discover these facts for himself if he were to obtain a copy of the rather excellent book "The rise and fall of the British Empire" by Lawrence James. Although most good informative books on Britains general contributions in the second world war, will give you a good idea of exactly how much was sacrificed by the British in defence of India etc. In fact it makes me sick to think of how ungrateful these people are.

Malc, as we are coming from exactly different points of view, we are going to provide conflicting sources. History is a minefield of different opinions and compromise. There are some things which are universally accepted and many that are not. Coming from my side of the argument, I am obviously going to produce evidence that further promotes my argument and vice versa. You yesterday happened to touch on the subject of the ancient Indus Valley Civilisation and produced paragraph after paragraph after paragraph of (to most people) meaningless nonesense that you had found on some website somewhere. O.K. that happened to fit your theory, so you used it. Now, I also knew quite a bit about this subject, because I have read various books contradicting this theory of yours about the people of that period being black and infact my sources have indicated that beyond all doubt that these people were white. There are many books out there proclaiming this little gem but a particular favourite of mine is "March of the Titans" by Arthur Kemp. Now this is a classic example of what I am talking about. Why do you assume that your sources are right and mine are wrong? Are you a renowned historian yourself? All I have done is this. I realise that there ARE conflicting theories out there but I then try to draw my own conclusions by using my own logic. I look around at the white race of today and see the enormous achievements that they have made and then I look at the great mass of non-achievers of the African and Asian races. Good god, the difference is astounding. It isn't just a case of the blacks or Asians being only a little bit behind, they are light years behind. So naturally, I have no choice other than to come to the conclusion that it was infact the white race that were responsible for the Indus Valley Civilisation as most historians agree and not infact like the obscure theory you unearthed dictates, mixed negro races were responsible for it. It absolutely staggers me how you cannot see this. I can understand why the likes of Pakistan want to promote this theory of non white supremacy, but why you? Pakistan and his kind have everything to gain from your viewpoint. You on the other hand, have everything to lose. What is wrong with you?


I have been putting my points across in the main part by as I said yesterday, using unshakeable logic. If for example I happen to say the Australian aboriginie is thousands and thousands of years behind the white man on the evolutionary scale, it isn't something that I have to back up, it's just a plain and simple fact that completely everybody knows. O.K. Pakistan isn't going to admit that is he? Of course not he is going to argue that black is white (excuse the pun) in this debate just the same as you are. I could do the same as you are doing and copy the contents of an entire book down on here but who's going to bother to read it? I would be wasting my time. So instead I use logic and sheer common sense. The reader doesn't need to see sources for my facts when I am stating things that are so obviously correct, he can see for himself and doesn't need a book to be able to decipher this. That is why I am striking a chord with these people and they are showing me respect for standing up for their rights as white people. My arguments are much easier to read and are far more obvious than yours. This is why I am winning in this debate and you can duplicate all the books you want but it's not going to get these people interested. You should debate me properly and stop being so hung up on trying to get facts for things that are blindingly bloody obvious. It's like Pakistan saying he wants sources for prooving that extremely large sums of tax payers money are spent accomodating asylum seekers every year. What? Thats like somebody asking for sources that Christmas day happens to fall on the 25th December every year. It's just something that everybody knows.

Now it's time to adress the Pakistani.

In my view sir, you are an extremely racist individual (as I have been reading some of your previous posts aimed at white people). I on the other hand, have never shown any hatred towards people of other races to my own. I am doing nothing more than telling the blatent truth. You seem to be getting rather hot under the collar old boy. Extremely predictable behaviour over the Asian doctor statement, which was entirely expected. I have no problem in debating with Malc, for at least he is sincere in believing what he believes. You are quite pathetic in comparison and I am not really that interested in the opinions of anti-white racists.

Regards Malc

St George

i understand what ur saying. but sometimes by putting stuff on the mesage board from history books and websites it at least shows that the information has been researched carefuly. and the opinions that are put forward are not necesarily just mine. im not just putting this stuff on here just for you, its for anyone who is interested and wants to see a different point of view. and to be fair some of the things you say that are really obvious, well im sorry but i just have to disagree with you. im not just trying to be awkward here but i think you are maybe just so set in your ways that these things seem obvious to you but i promise you they are not obvious to me or maybe one or two others who might be following our discusion.

your right when you say history is a mine field. but i tend to see whos writing waht and how many people agree with something and then try to make up my own mind.

you seem to rely quite heavily on one book by mr. kemp. having had a look round he seems to be just about the only one in print that comes across with these views, and i can seem to find no end of people who are prepared to disagree with him, and moreover most of these people are calling him a darn wright lyer with plenty of evidence to back him up.

i know if i put some of this stuff on here youll just say im wasting everybodys time again. but what ill do is when ive got time ill put a few of the criticisms of mr kemp up on here for everyone to see and im sure youll be able to counter these with logic. because at the end of the day if im not wrong more or less your whole argument and beliefs are based on his writings. not saying that your not thinking for yourself of course, but we all have to have a basis for our thoughts dont we.

theres no doubt people who live in cooler climbs having a faster technological spurt in recent times ahead of people who live in hotter unforgiving countries but i think that is the only difference between the human race that stands at the moment.

as for the british ending slavery in 1830 [i think,] which you mention in one of your previous posts. i saw a programme about indenchured labour in india last night where the british were shipping around 1.5 million people from india round the world in what amounts to slavery achieving this through a big con until 1912?? if this is the case then britain only really stopped the slave trade 90 years ago. not a very long time.

so later on when i have time i shall try to discredit kemps march of the titans, or at least cast some doubt on its reliability.

best for now

malc.

I am far more impressed by the most recent post that you have put on here today Malc. It is far better for you, me and the reader to be able to counter each others arguments on a more personal level instead of just copying down vasts amounts of literature from websites and posting them on here.

Now, because I have happened to have refered to the author Arthur Kemp's work on merely two occasions, you seem to be trying to convince the reader that this must be the only book I've ever read. I do not believe however that this is your real opinion, but merely just a con trick to gain the readers sympathy over (as you see it) you having done a lot more research than me. I have already pointed out on here that I happen to be a keen history buff and this will be quite apparent to the neutral reader, who I'm sure would have to concede that I happen to have a pretty decent knowledge of history in general and I am not afraid to state my opinions if I believe something happens to be correct in spite of how politically incorrect that opinion my be.

You have implied that Mr Kemps work happens to be the only material out there that supports my current argument that the Indus Valley Civilisation was infact a white Aryan civilisation. There are literally hundreds of books on this topic with contrasting opinions out there. I put to the reader that all he has to do is simply type into his search engine, "Aryan history" or "history of the Indian caste system" and he will be treated to a vast array of websites regaurding this topic. I have personally researched this topic on the web a long, long time before I started debating with you, which is why it pleased me somewhat when I saw that you were trying to use it as an argument for your "all races are equal theory".

I would have to honestly say though that the vast majourity of the material out there is rather inconclusive. Those on the political left assert that there was no Aryan invasion and those on the right say that there was. Most in the middle (I estimate about 60%) say that it's a much debated issue and at present, there isn't enough substantial evidence around to prove beyond all doubt that either side is an authoritive voice on the matter. However, you will see below that I have done exactly as you usually do and copied some text down that I have found from a rather interesting website that actually has nothing whatsoever to do with a certain Mr Kemp who you seem very keen to discredit. This makes fascinating reading as I'm sure you'll agree and I think (although I'm obviously biased) that it proves beyond all doubt that the Aryans DID actually invade India as I have maintained from the start. It is a report on a biological survey which involved testing genetic dna from Indian volunteers made up of entirely different castes. Please read it for yourself and feel free to discredit Mr Kemp as much as you like if thats what makes you happy.

You say to me that you were watching a program on tv about Indian indentured servitude (not slavery) up until 1912. I have no doubt that that was the case but can I just point out that I am not shouting for sources on this point you make (as you do to me) because I feel this behaviour detracts from the argument. If you say were watching a documentary on this subject, I will take your word for it as you seem like a sincere chap. End of point. Now indentured servitude was an entirely different thing to slavery. The servant had a choice. It was entirely up to the individual whether or not he wanted to begin a period as an indentured servant. With slavery there is no choice. You have no say as a slave. It is not your decision. So Indentured servitude IS NOT slavery. Therefore, I was right in one of my previous posts in saying that Britain abolished slavery in the early 1800's, with the rest of the white world following suit shortly afterwards. As I also stated that in the black world of Africa and Asia, slavery is still as strong as it ever was. Indentured servitude however, was a horrible thing and I am personally glad that it is long gone. What you probably didn't know though is that during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, hundreds of thousands of whites from Britain and Ireland were transported to America as indentured servants. Where many of them lived a pitiful existance.

You probably couldn't give a monkey's about them though could you Malc? They were only white after all weren't they. I often find with people such as yourself that you seem to be hell bent on sticking up for everybody else EXCEPT your kind. I'll give you an example. The white people of the anti nazi league/socialist workers party etc. never fail to turn out in force whenever there's a BNP meeting or election that they are involved in etc. but when there are anti-white, anti-christian, anti-western demonstations outside of a mosque for example, these people are never seen. Now, I put it to you that if these second rate people really are so keen on defending people against racism etc, why do they only show up and physically attack white people expressing their freedom of speech? Why arn't they there standing up for white people against extremist fundimental followers of Islam? Please tell me that.

I see a similar pattern here with you. I came onto this website and happened to see that there was a character going by the name of Pakistan. Although he was doing it in a rather clever and sneaky way, he was exaulting his pro Asian racialist views against white people. I admit that he has been abused also by white people on here, but that doesn't give him the right to make racist remarks and make pathetic generalisations about white people. Some of the white people on here had done him no harm whatsoever, but they still had to read his vile ravings. It was because of this reason that I thought that I would have a crack at him and put him in his place (which didn't take much doing, I can tell you). Then when you began writing on here, instead of trying to treat us both as racists, you just seemed to single out me and me alone. I put to you that it is purely because I'm white that you are attempting this. As it happens, I personally feel that I have done rather well anyway and you can continue to try and prove me wrong as much as you like but I will just keep getting more and more determined every time. Why do you not attempt to disagree with Pakistan with some of his behaviour? I do not understand how you can be a white man and support the views of these foul Asian racists who are attempting to destroy our people and our culture to promote their own rediculous ways of life. Help me out here. Why do you do this?

Anyway, here is some undeniable, documentary proof that the white Aryan race was responsible for the Indus Valley Civilisation (and it ISN'T Mr Arthur Kemp).

Cheers Malc

St George


http://www.panix.com/~clp/news/general/Genetic_study_of_Indian_caste_system.html





History of Ancient Indian Conquest Told in Modern Genes, Experts Say

Robert Cooke, Newsday Wednesday, May 26, 1999



Like an indelible signature enduring through a hundred generations,
genes that entered India when conquering hordes swooped down from the
north thousands of years ago are still there, and remain entrenched at
the top of the caste system, scientists report. Analyses of the male Y
chromosome, plus genes hidden in small cellular bodies called
mitochondria, show that today's genetic patterns agree with accounts of
ancient Indo-European warriors'
conquering the Indian subcontinent.

The invaders apparently shoved the local men aside, took their women
and set up the rigid caste system that exists today. Their descendants
are still the elite within Hindu society.

INVADING CAUCASOIDS

Thus today's genetic patterns, the researchers explained, vividly
reflect a historic event, or events, that occurred 3,000 or 4,000 years
ago. The gene patterns ``are consistent with a historical scenario in
which invading Caucasoids -- primarily males -- established the caste
system and occupied the highest positions, placing the indigenous
population, who were more similar to Asians, in lower caste
positions.''

The researchers, from the University of Utah and Andhra Pradesh
University in India, used two sets of genes in their analyses.

One set, from the mitochondria, are only passed maternally and can be
used to track female inheritance. The other, on the male-determining Y
chromosome, can only be passed along paternally and thus track male
inheritance.

The data imply, then, ``that there was a group of males with European
affinities who were largely responsible for this invasion 3,000 or
4,000 years ago,'' said geneticist Lynn Jorde of the University of
Utah.

If women had accompanied the invaders, he said, the evidence should be
seen in the mitochondrial genes, but it is not evident.

According to geneticist Douglas Wallace of Emory University in Atlanta,
the work reported by Jorde and his colleagues ``is very interesting,
and is certainly worth further study.''

Along with Jorde, the research team included Michael Bamshad, W.S.
Watkins and M.E. Dixon from Utah and B.B. Rao, B.V.R. Prasad and J.M.
Naidu, from Andhra Pradesh University.

UPWARDLY MOBILE WOMEN

By studying both sets of genetic markers, the research team found clear
evidence echoing what is still seen socially, that women can be
upwardly mobile, in terms of caste, if they marry higher-caste men. In
contrast, men generally do not move higher, because women rarely marry
men from lower castes, the researchers said.

``Our expectations in this natural experiment are borne out when we
look at the genes,'' said Jorde. ``It's one of the few cases where we
know the mating situation in a population for 150 generations. So it's
kind of a test for how well the genes reflect a population's history.''

The ancient story holds that invaders known as Indo-Europeans, or true
Aryans, came from Eastern Europe or western Asia and conquered the
Indian subcontinent. The people they subdued descended from the
original inhabitants who had arrived far earlier from Africa and from
other parts of Asia.

During the genetic studies, in 1996 and 1997, researchers took blood
samples from hundreds of people in southern India. The analyses
compared the genes from 316 caste members and 330 members of tribal
populations, looking for signs of Asian, European and African ancestry.

In the mitochondrial genes passed along by females, Jorde said, they
could see the clear background of Asian genes. ``All of the caste
groups were similar to Asians, the underlying population'' that had
originally been subdued.

But, he added, ``when we look at the Y chromosome DNA, we see a very
different pattern. The lower castes are most similar to Asians, and the
upper castes are more European than Asian.''

Further, ``when we look at the different components within the upper
caste, the group with the greatest European similarity of all is the
warrior class, the Kshatriya, who are still at the top of the Hindu
castes, with the Brahmins,'' Jorde said.

``But the Brahmins, in terms of their Y chromosomes, are a little bit
more Asian.''

So the genetic results are ``consistent with historical accounts that
women sometimes marry into higher caste, resulting in female gene flow
between adjacent castes. In contrast, males seldom change castes, so Y
chromosome'' variation occurs only as a result of natural mutations,
Jorde said.

CASTE SYSTEM STILL ALIVE

He added that even though India's ancient caste system was abolished
legally in the 1960s, it is still entrenched socially.

``People are very well aware of their caste membership,'' he said,
noting that in some cities the housing is still arranged along caste
lines. So ``one might argue, unfortunately so, that it (the caste
system) does exist in people's minds.''

In terms of who marries whom, the researchers described the Hindu caste
system as ``governing the mating practices of nearly one-sixth of the
world's population.''

The blood samples taken from tribal people in southern India are still
being analyzed, Jorde added.

But so far, ``the tribal populations are more similar to the lower
castes than to anyone else, similar to the original residents of
India,'' he said.

yes, i know about the genetic study you are talking about. but what you forgot to mention was the tiny scale upon whch this study was done, and in what a tiny area. it was done using 265 people out of 800 million, with the smallest test of one particular caste, the Kshatriyas, being just 10 people. the researchers say "The caste society according to experts on the subject is a very elastic society and a caste name in one area of the country may have very different origins in another part of the country." and according to the same researchers "the authors do recognise this limitation in their paper and emphasise the need for carrying out similar analysis in other regions of the country". and a statement put out by one of the team says "replicating the study in other areas is, in fact, imperative before general conclusions about origins of Indian caste populations can be drawn." in other words, in other places in india there may well be, and probably are people of completely different genetic imprints in the upper castes of the country to what they are in the north. They also go on to say "It is also reasonable to assume that northern societies are more likely to reflect more truly the real origins of caste than societies down south where Dravidic features are likely to be reflected in the genetics of the populations. Also, several social forces may have interfered to result in the stratification as is evident today."


agianst all the historic evidence that i have put out this study of 265 people living in one tiny area out of 800 million seems very inconclusive. what will happen to your theory if when they eventually get the test results at the other end of the country all the upper caste people come from the people more indigeneous to that part of the land than the north. your therory will be blown sky high, thats what. theres no doubt about it, the closer to europe you get then the more similarities to the european people there will be in india, but this doesnt prove that there was any sort of invasion and take over. it just proves that some people over time have stayed put while some have moved on. big deal

malc.

i forgot to answer your question at the end. you seem so keen to let me and everyone know how well youve done. you can say this as many times as you like and maybe a few might believe you if you shout loud enough. all i have tried to do is to put the facts on here, weather it is in my own words or in someone elses who the readers might respect more than me and believe more than me. you have only tried to do this once with the paper on dna. i have rebutted this but i notice you have not tried to rebutt any of the facts or arguments that i have posted from eminent people against yours and mr kemps theories. shame.

why do i do it. its because i believe it is propper to get the truth known and let people make up their own minds with the truth in front of them rather than half truths and misconseptions that lead to an untruth as a whole.

i am not against the white man or my own kind, and i am not against you, just your ideas. i have not argued with pakistan who appears on here because i happen to agree with most of what his ideas are on the whole. any profanity that he utters on here has as you say been provoked. i do not agree with lashing back with that sort of thing, but that is up to him. i believe in ignoring provokasion and winning an argument with fact, and not hot air, bluster and pure opinion. i dont believe that the black or asian people are destroying what we already have in this country. i believe that this is being kept very nicely and even enhanced by what is being introduced since the 50s and 60s. im quite happy with the way things are at the moment with the topic in question and that is why i argue with you and try to stop you from leading people away from the real truth as i see it with your, frankly, half truths and opinion, as convincing as they may be to those who cant be bothered to look for reality.

malc.

this is a very interesting article that has a lovely quote from the leader of the team prof Bamshad who conducted this experiment. he says that this study could be misused as you are doing on here to shore up white supremicy theories but that it would not be a very good argument. then the article goes on to explain why. sorry to put stuff up from the internet again but it has to be done to show up the holes in your arguments. if the team leader of the writers of the original paper can say this, then where does this leave your argument? the whole article is important but this i think is the most important of all, he says

"Our results should facilitate the deconstruction of racist barriers," said Bamshad. "However, racism is a much more complex issue than simply noting whether there are biological differences between groups of people."

The researchers said their study had simply reinforced abundant historical and archaeological evidence of the linkage between Europeans and Indians.

"It is possible that European migrants who reached India during or after the Indus Valley civilisation, mingled with the local people and eventually established their superiority over land and labour thus forming the higher castes," said B.V. Ravi Prasad, another member of the research team.

"They could have been warriors or traders," he added.

According to the published report, another fact re-established after this research is that India could have been inhabited by two successive migrations in the late Pleistocene period (100,000 years ago).

"It also adds to the growing evidence that the sub-continent of India has been a major corridor for the migration of people between Africa, Western Asia and Southeast Asia,"

so according to bamshad all this study proves is that there are heavy links between indians and europeans, which is what i have been saying all along, and you have been trying to argue against.

checkmate??

malc




taken from http://phi-files.philo.at/pipermail/phi-files/2001-July/000542.html

lower castes like Asians: study (fwd)
Herbert Schmid phi-files@phi-files.philo.at
Wed, 11 Jul 2001 13:54:18 +0200 (MEST)

Previous message: Fwd: Re: [Phi-files] studiengebuehren rsp. deren boykott
Next message: [Phi-files] Fw: Upper-caste Indians like Europeans, lower castes like Asians: study (fwd)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi,

ein Text zur Diskussion.

Vor allem der Satz
"We don't say that caste system is wrong or right. We have only concluded
..."
mit denen sich die Forscher jeder Verantwortung entziehen.

Was ist daran falsch oder dürfen sie das?

Grüße,
Herbert S.


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2001 16:13:02 +0200
To: vyavahara <vyavaharah@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [vyavaharah] Fw: Upper-caste Indians like Europeans,
lower castes like Asians: study

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: AFP / Palash Kumar <C-afp@clari.net>
Newsgroups: clari.web.world.asia.india,clari.web.world.asia+oceania
Datum: Donnerstag, 05. Juli 2001 16:10
Betreff: Upper-caste Indians like Europeans, lower castes like Asians: study


ClariNet story INDIA-GENETICS from AFP / Palash Kumar

Upper-caste Indians like Europeans, lower castes like Asians: study
Copyright 2001 by Agence France-Presse (via ClariNet) / Thu, 5 Jul 2001 7:10:43 PDT

NEW DELHI, July 5 (AFP) - A team of leading US and Indian genome scientists have stumbled upon a strain of genes common to Europeans and upper-caste Hindus of the Indian subcontinent.

Published in a recent edition of the US-based Genome Research Journal, the pathbreaking research paper concludes that higher-caste Hindus are closer to Europeans, particularly East Europeans, while lower-caste Hindus are more similar to Asians.

Titled "Genetic Evidence on the Origins of Indian Caste Populations," the study was conducted by a joint team of genome researchers and anthropologists from the University of Utah, and Andhra University, India.

The team was headed by Professor Michael Bamshad of the University of Utah.

According to ancient Sanskrit texts, the rigid Indian caste system governing the Hindu population in India is divided into four broad categories: Brahmins (priests), Kshatriyas (warriors), Vaishyas (traders) and Shudras (servants).

The Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaishyas are regarded as higher castes as they are considered to be "twice-born" while Shudras belong to the lower caste, born only once.

Five different kind of genetic methods were used by the Indian and American scientists, including DNA sequencing and Y-chromosome analysis.

The research, conducted largely in the south Indian state of Andhra Pradesh, involved collecting blood samples and five plucked scalp hair samples from 265 Telugu-speaking males of different castes.

These samples were then genetically compared in India and the United States to samples taken from 400 other Indians from the tribal and Hindi-speaking population and also to 350 Africans, Asians and Europeans.

"Collectively, all the five datasets show a trend toward upper castes being more similar to Europeans, whereas lower castes are more similar to Asians," said the final report of the joint study.

After a detailed scientific analysis, the experts concluded that the "genetic distance" between Brahmins and Europeans was smaller as compared to the distance between Kshatriyas and Europeans.

On the other hand, the "genetic distance" between Europeans and Shudras (the lower caste) was far greater.

The research team has moved swiftly to pre-empt any attempt to use their findings as a means of shoring up the caste system.

"These caste divisions were man-made," said anthropologist Bhaskara B. Rao who was a member of the team.

"We don't say that caste system is wrong or right. We have only concluded the genetic affinities between the Europeans and upper-caste Indians."

Team leader Bamshad said any sort of research data had "the potential" to be misused.

"Could this research be used to support notions of superiority? It could, but it would not a very good argument," Bamshad said.

Caste tensions are still a source of violent clashes in India, particularly in the northern states of Bihar and Uttar Pradesh.

Brahmins continue to dominate the upper echelons of society and the issue of caste plays a crucial role in the world of politics, with lower castes representing a huge vote bank.

"Our results should facilitate the deconstruction of racist barriers," said Bamshad. "However, racism is a much more complex issue than simply noting whether there are biological differences between groups of people."

The researchers said their study had simply reinforced abundant historical and archaeological evidence of the linkage between Europeans and Indians.

"It is possible that European migrants who reached India during or after the Indus Valley civilisation, mingled with the local people and eventually established their superiority over land and labour thus forming the higher castes," said B.V. Ravi Prasad, another member of the research team.

"They could have been warriors or traders," he added.

According to the published report, another fact re-established after this research is that India could have been inhabited by two successive migrations in the late Pleistocene period (100,000 years ago).

"It also adds to the growing evidence that the sub-continent of India has been a major corridor for the migration of people between Africa, Western Asia and Southeast Asia," the report said.

Prasad said the study would not only shed light on the origins of the caste system, but "also help us understand why some diseases are peculiar to Indians as well as Europeans".

According to Bamshad, the next step will be to try and understand the origins of the populations that have migrated to and from India, "and to find what model of demographic history is most consistent with our results".

You can shout and scream and throw your dummy on the floor as much as you like matey, but ol' Malc has undoubtedly and comprehensively conquered every argument that you've been kind enough to put forward, with little in return but your self-rightious opinion and inane ramblings.

On the few occasions you have decided to put forward a piece of real evidence, he has painstakingly ground it into the dust with hard counter-evidence and not just his opinion. What moves have you got left now eh? I don't think, from reading everything that has been put up on this message board 'till now, Malc need even bother trying to take Kemp's already discredited book apart - do you? That is if most of it hasn't lost it's credibility already with everything that's been posted on here by friend Malc. But I'm sure there's plenty left if needed.

History is against you and science is against you. In fact, the only thing that isn't against you - well it's you.

Your theories have been openly discredited and proved to be made up of, at best, half truths - and the evidence that you use to back these theories has been proved beyond doubt to be, if not baseless, then terribly floored.

Time to throw in the towel I think oh facist one!!!!!!

LOL

Pakistan.


To Malc.

Regardless of whether or not you approve of me or my ways, I cannot thank you enough for what you have done here and continue to do - and that's point out the truth.

Enormous respect from your friend,

Pakistan.

thats kind of you pakistan, but at the end of the day, all im trying to do is to show that there are no real differences between white people, asian people black people and chinese people. its just the colour of their skin that protects them from the sun or not, depending on where they live in the world. thats plain enough for me to see, but some people like to hide prejudices behind bent history or science. when that happens its wrong. and if your willing to look hard enough or talk to the right people, you can always eventually get to the truth, no matter how technical it gets. at the end of the day the historians and scientists that do the discovering are all pretty normal people who just want to discover the truth, and they dont like their version of things being turned around and misused any more than you or i would. this is why guys like st. george always start resorting to a bit of agressive name calling instead of putting evidence up, because their evidence is always a slant on what someone has said and then taken out of context. if you look hard enough you can always find the unslanted version, which knocks their theories over the boundry.

malc.

As you never replied to the post I put to you over a week ago, you revealed to everyone, what a silly little twat you really are. You seem to have no ability whatsover, which proves my theory. You are a walking advertisment for people to vote British National Party.

England forever,

St George

LOL. Oh, you bad loser you.

I haven't felt this good since your grandma caught her left tit in the mangle - eh!!

It's a beautiful daaaaaayyyyyyyyy.....


Pakistan xx

I seem to remember you saying, way back when, that you would appreciate it if we could have a civil conversation without any name calling.

LOL

Pakistan xx

Talk about denial. Bloody hell, actual scientific eveidence and you still refuse to accept it? You dismiss it by using an argument of.... uhhhh, ummmm, well they didn't test all 800 million Indians did they? There is no way you can deny solid dna evidence. I feel I am wasting my time with you Malc. You are obviously so keen on black and Asian people that you just point blankly refuse to believe the truth, even when it is staring you right in the face.

Anyhow, I believe my work here is almost done. I believe I have educated the white men on here well enough that they will be sure of what they already know (their supremacy). I have done far more damage to the likes of the Pakistani and his cause here than he could have ever dreamed. No matter how much of a smart arse he tries to act on here, he has undoubtably in private, cried into his koran.

I will be off now to visit many, many more websites and spread my gospel to fellow white men out there who need to know the truth. I will pop back here every now and then to put the likes of the Pakistani in his place and to tell the truth to the readers about your left wing liberal lies. If I only reach one reader on every site, then that is good enough. If I reach fifty, then that is exellent. Nationalist parties are gaining vast amounts of political ground all over Europe because people are fed up with enforced race mixing. Britains nationalist movement is small by comparison, but is growing considerably all the time.

I hope that one day, you will be able to look into a mirror and feel comfortable about seeing a white face in there instead of wishing there was a brown one.

White England for ever,

St George

You've just WON by a huge knock-out. And 'ol St. George's post up there titled "interesting Malc, but quite pathetic," well that's his towel being thrown in - with a few of his toys following closely after.

Well done my friend. And I tell you what, I think there's quite a few people that are going to look at this whole argument and all the evidence that has been lodged on here and make up their own minds on this particular subject. It is a subject that goes to the very roots of racism, and your victory through common sense, sheer logic and the use of historical and scientific fact has done this country and the world a power of good. Anybody who taps in BNP on a search engine will eventually end up here, so sir, I believe you have made a real difference.

Now, if you will allow me to make a few points about St. Georges final post. I just have the feeling that you're far too nice to really lay the boot in while this chump is down.

St. George writes >>Talk about denial. Bloody hell, actual scientific eveidence and you still refuse to accept it? You dismiss it by using an argument of.... uhhhh, ummmm, well they didn't test all 800 million Indians did they?<<

It is the scientific evidence and the words of the scientists who carried out the experiment - about the results of the experiment - that has defeated your argument. It is you who insist on denying the scientific evidence. And my friend Malc did not say that it was a case of not testing 800 million people, he said that it was ONLY 265 that were tested. And in any case, the comments of the head of that research far outweigh this argument.

>>There is no way you can deny solid dna evidence.>>

You're correct, this is why the comments of the research team who have backed up this scientific evidence have completely sunk you theories to the bottom of the ocean (and which is why you are now having to run off with your tail between your legs). It is you who are denying the interpretation of the DNA evidence by those who sourced it, and who are collecting more evidence to further confound your disgusting theories. You and your type have tried to TWIST this evidence to your own advantage and FAILED. The undeniable proof of this is staring us all in the face on this thread.

>>Anyhow, I believe my work here is almost done. I believe I have educated the white men on here well enough that they will be sure of what they already know (their supremacy). I have done far more damage to the likes of the Pakistani and his cause here than he could have ever dreamed. No matter how much of a smart arse he tries to act on here, he has undoubtably in private, cried into his koran.<<

Now you are flying right in the face of common sense. You are of course trying to save face and hide behind a fantasy reversal of the situation. Well I can tell you that many of the people will have a look at the facts on here and make up their own minds, and unfortunately for you and your horrible cause they will be intelligent enough to see the absolute truth when it is staring them in the face. All you have left to spread after this discussion, pal, is "hot air". And I don't have a Koran, but if I did I wouldn't be crying into it, I'd be shouting YES into it, nearly as loud as I did when Beckham scored 'that goal' against Greece.

>>I will be off now to visit many, many more websites and spread my gospel to fellow white men out there who need to know the truth. I will pop back here every now and then to put the likes of the Pakistani in his place and to tell the truth to the readers about your left wing liberal lies. If I only reach one reader on every site, then that is good enough. If I reach fifty, then that is exellent. Nationalist parties are gaining vast amounts of political ground all over Europe because people are fed up with enforced race mixing. Britains nationalist movement is small by comparison, but is growing considerably all the time.<<

'Bye then - and please, save us the bullshit on the way out!!

>>I hope that one day, you will be able to look into a mirror and feel comfortable about seeing a white face in there instead of wishing there was a brown one.>>

Yaaaawwwnnnnnnnnn!!!!!

>>White England for ever<<

Just make it England forever and we'd all be a lot happier - pathetic St. George, but then again I expected no more.

Well Malc, I hope you didn't mind me stepping in there. I'm sure you'd have done a better job of it than me, and there's still nothing to stop you from doing so. But you've done so much already - I just wanted to kick him up the back-side on the way out.

Once again you have my sincerest thanks and best wishes at all times.

The guy who calls himself (on here anyway) Pakistan!!

From what I can see, there are two articles about the gene study here. One that St. George put up to try to prove his theories, which has a definite slant towards the Aryan invasion theory, entitled History of Ancient Indian Conquest Told in Modern Genes, Experts Say, written by Robert Cooke of Newsday on Wednesday, May 26, 1999. And another posted by Malc, which was written two years later entitled Upper-Caste Indians Like Europeans - Lower Castes Like Asians by Agence France Presse.

The first article that St. George put up simply jumps on an excited bandwagon at the time about the Aryan invasion theory, at a very early stage after the experiment, using quote and comment from the writers of the original paper that looks totally out of context. This of course makes the article very exciting and readable at the time and causes a stir.

But the second article that Malc puts up has proper quotes and comment (in context) from the leader and other team members of the experiment totally refuting the ideas of the first article and, quite frankly, putting the record straight in favour of Malc's arguments. They even go so far as to say that the Europeans who may have entered the region may well have done so after the Indus Valley civilisation was already set up (making the Asians the first ever real civilisation builders). But the article leans far more heavily on the fact that India was always a migration corridor between Africa, South East Asia and Western Asia, which of course all have links with Europe. Therefore the strongest theory of all that this gene study provides is that the people of India, Africa and the people of Europe are heavily linked historically and genetically mixed, which is what I have always believed.

We have to remember that this is not my slant on things, but the own words of the authors of the original study paper and the experimenters themselves. They refute the white supremacy theories and conclude that their study re-enforces the genetic and historic links between Asians and Europeans.

Well-done Malc.

Bye Bye St. George.

Pakistan.

I don't think so. What I was refering to was your banal drivle concerning >>Third world immagration, in many cases, brings with it third
world hygene standards. For example, you can not deny that in Asia, many people use one hand for eating and the other hand for.... let's just say, cleaning certain bodyparts with.<<

I'm not getting hot under the collar, I'm just pointing out a completely stupid and silly remark.

Pakistan.

You claim you are white and English, yet you say there is no such thing as English..so can you tell me again just for the record you are white and......
please if it`s going to be more than just a few sentences just give me the web page i will find it out for myself.

i supose you mean me when u ask if im white and english. i see where your going but all i can say is that im an english national by birth in the modern age. my skin color is white. i never said there was no such thing as english. today there is a nation called england. im just puttign my points across about who we all are, black and or white living in england and where we all come from. its the facts that count, not what we want to believe. real strength is knowing the truth and making the most of it. not covering it up and hiding behind lies. that is weakness.

you have my best wishes.

malc.

I`m white and english but all you can feel is sympathy for this st george bloke who honestly feels he is superior to everyone who has dark skin when the chances are he`s just a fat sweating mound of blubber who spends his hours of his life trying to right something thats totally out of his hands,not really what I call superior

I love the fact that people like you hate our white supremacy theory. What do you love? Let me guess, large, black and asian well endowed men. Why don't you ask for Pakistani's number? Oh bollocks I forgot. They have to be well endowed don't they.

LOL

St George

but then again this is just you showing your true colours eh - what are we down to now eh, is it Naaaa Naa Na Na Naaaaaaaaaa....


LOL

Pakistan!!!!!!!!!

This thread will be appearing at the top end of the message board for some time to come - believe me!!

Pakistan.

It seems to me pakistan that you are just jumping on the band wagon of mr interested theories pasted from numerous sources and as st george says his arguments are not being challenged. I have a suggestion as you seem to not like the white race or indeed live with them how about go back to pakistan and live in the slum mudhuts that your race seem so comfortable in.

lets get behind the BNP to rid filth like pakistan from our country.

I'm not saying that I could have done half as good a demolition job as Malc with ol' St. George's theories, but I've gotta say that I was there first. And if I want to back an argument up on this board, then I bloody will.

The rest of what you say is just the usual old BNP rubbish (get rid get rid get rid), so I'll just skim over that as a waste of time. But one thing does interest me - why do you say about St. Georges arguments, that they "are not to be challenged"???? Hmmmmm..... Is it because when they are challenged properly by someone who obviously knows what the hell they're doing, these arguments are always proved wrong????? And you and your kind just don't like it??

Why don't you go back to watching football and making a right pain of yourself around the grounds and leave the intellectual discussions to the big boys eh....


Pakistan!!!!!!!!

You're quite wrong about me not liking white people. I have as many white friends as I do brown or black. I take everyone as individuals, regardless of the colour of their skin. It's just individuals like yourself and St. George that I can't stand, and abysmal organisations like the BNP who I will always stand up against. White people are just fine. You and your kind, well, you can just go and stick it where the sun don't shine sonny!!!!!!!!!!

Pakistan.

Paki just stick to sucking the c0ck of big (dick) ed and "malc" your immigrant scum who bring this country down.

your never going to win you will always be a dirty smelly paki.

is THAT all you've got Chesterfield forever - LOL. When you blow off like that, then I know I've gotcha.

I'm laughing so loud, you must be able to here me in your stinking sweaty little council flat... eh!!!


Pakistan xxxx

you probably still live with your Mum - eh CFC,

and remember, too much French polishing can give you a permanent squint...

LOL

Pakistan!!!!! xx

im sorry but i think i have challenged st. georges arguments, either with my own words backed up by documented evidence, or more importantly by supplying information from documented evidence that directly conflicts with st.georges theories. st george has on the other hand supplied very little documented evidence to back up his words, and what he has managed to supply i have managed to rebutt to good effect. if there are any of st.georges arguments or theories that you can point to that i havent argued in this way then please point them out and i will be pleased to try to recify. and im sorry that st. george has decided to end the argument in the way he has done, because it has now all become a bit undignified. shame.

best wishes,

Malc

THE BNP HATE OTHERS WHO ARE DIFFERENT BECAUSE THEY FEAR THEM.REGARDLESS OF ORIGIN eg ASIAN OR IRISH...............


PS. IRA NO 1

St George has won that debate easy.All his opponents have done is given there own opinions the same as he has. He has backed his up with evidence when he has needed to and I think he is an extremely intelligent man same as a lot of others on here probably do. He took on more than one opponent and came off far better than those two did. Cheers St George keep up the good work an come back here soon as possible to show these 2 up again.

White Man's Land???? Can you show me where St. George has backed his opinions up with evidence please. And can you please explain to us all exactly why you think St. George has won this particular argument. And can you explain to me exactly what Malc's web page postings are if they not evidence to back up his arguments. I'm sure we'd all be most interested to hear your reasonings.

I look forward to it - sigh - and then again, maybe I don't.

Pakistan.

i might not know about historical stuff like St George does but i can tell when someone is telling the truth and when someone is just trying to baffle people with lists of stuff that no one is goin to bother to read. St George put his points across in a much better and more clever way than interested did. interested never even challenged St George which is why i recon he has won his point and stopped wasting his time with interested.ibet we havnt heard the last of St George though he will persuade loads of people to vote bnp.

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.

Fly in the face of proof and common sense if you wish, I but I would imagine that the mojority of the people who read the argument on this thread will have the nonce to realise what is right and what is wrong.

We'll leave it up to others to judge for themselves shall we. Personally I'm quite happy with the way things have gone on here. But....


See you,

Pakistan.

Pakistan.

so all may see and make up their own minds about the truth.

P.

i am scottish.......
but however, these so called scots are not for real,
and only represent???? 20% of our country. i talk about the "UP THE RA SCUM".

THEY ONLY POISON MY HOME LAND BCAUSE THEY COULDNT
GROW FUCKIN POTATOES FOR CHRIST SAKE........
" ENOUGH SAID MY ENGLISH FRIEND "

to keep a reality check on this forum and bring into focus the lies and half-truths of St. George.

Shout as loud as you want, and go into complete denial as you always do. Fly in the face of commonsense if you wish, but here it is - the unchangable truth in black and white for people to see for themselves.

No matter what slant you try to put on things, the truth is on here for people to see and make up their own minds.

Pakistan xx (kiss-off - NOT KISSES LOL)

You can build your castles of insults to throw at me as high as you like - it really doesn't bother me in the slightest. What does bother me is that this remains at the top of the castle for all to see.

Bring it on girls - but rest assured that I'll keep bringing this on - @:>))

LOL

Pakistan!!!!!

P.S. Do keep debating children won't you - en mass of course... LOL

I love the fact that you seem so keen to keep putting this one at the top. After reading through it all again, I am over the moon with it. I love the final outcome that the dna experiment proved. This is an excellent victory for the white lads on this site.

Read it with pride boys, I do.

The one and only,

St George

and you must be just as delighted as I then at the leader of the DNA experiment (Prof. Bamshad's)comments that his findings completely disagree with your out-of-date fairy-tale theory - he calls it a miss-use I think, and then reading on, to find one of his collegues' comments completely agree with Malc's - proving India to be a corridor for migration between Africa, western and South-East Asia at that time - if I remember correctly. Blowing your argument right out of the water. Still, if you're pleased, then who am I to argue.

Nevertheless, your wish is my command.

Therefore, up she goes once again.

Pakistan.

You're only half correct when you say this is an excellent victory for the white boys. I would say that this is an excellent victory for us all - that is all but you of course.... LOL

But I do agree with you that we should read it with pride. We should ALL read it with PRIDE.

Pakistan!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It is obvious from the evidence provided, that St George has won this discussion easily, althouth intrested, did give him a run for his money. Well Done St George!! Good effort intrested....

Pakistan, you should leave the others to finish a great debate in future, without dragging in your personal bias and childish rantings, you made yourself look like a prat and weakened Intresteds adult argument.

Good One.

by a massive checkmate by Malc against St. George.

I do not carry on the debate, I simply lift it to where it can be clearly seen - which I will carry on doing for some considerable time to come.

If you truely believe that St. George won this debate, then you should not mind me moving it into view as many times as I like. But whether you mind or not pal, move it up I will.

P.

LOL LOL

Pakistan...

Pakistan

Although I do not condone whoever it was who used your login, I must admit that it gave me quite a laugh (especially Notty's reaction to the first post LOL). I have already told you that it was nothing to do with me and I expect whoever it was, was just trying to have a bit of a giggle, albeit at your expense.

However, seeing as though you still refuse to accept that I have sufficently argued that there ARE great differences between the races, I am therefor prepared to continue to debate with you or anyone else that my theories are very accurate and in accordance with factual evidence.

I have already pointed out that I am as pleased as you are with the outcome of the DNA experiment. You say I have taken it out of context and misrepresented it, as I say you have. I will say one final thing on the subject of the Indus Valley civilisation though and that is that the billion or so Indians who actually still live in India (not quite all of them have moved to the U.K. yet lol), actually believe the exact same theory as I do. In fact it is one of their religious beliefs that the conquering Aryan tribes formed the Indian caste system. So, as you are arguing to the contrary, you are in effect disrespecting the sacred religious rights of the entire Indian population.

Now then Pakistan, onto a more broad subject. Do you honestly believe that there are really no differences between all the races of the world except skin colour? You have argued that the colour difference is due to the difference in climate. Fair enough, but what about other characteristics such as facial features etc? I don't think I am speaking out of term here if I mention that the pure blooded negro race of Africa, has a lot more in common with say certain other primates such as apes. No, I am not trying to take the micky here, but they are much closer to our primate ancesters on the evolutionary scale than white men are. The facial features in some cases are remarkably similar. Negroes have longer arms in proportion to their body size than do whites, which also happens to be obviously apparent in apes. This is why blacks tend to make better boxers than whites (but not streetfighters because of superior upper body strength inherant to whites). To have a much longer reach than your opponent in boxing is a hell of a big advantage, hence blacks dominate the sport. If you do believe that the reason people are black is simply because they have had more exposure to the sun, then please explain these other differences to me which obviously have nothing whatsoever to do with climate. Also, how do you account for the physical differences posessed by the members of the oriental races? How did they come to aquire their distinct facial features and physical presence? From the sun again? No, I don't think so either.

This is put to you Pakistan, to start the ball rolling. I would appreciate it if you could address my argument point by point. Just to clarify again, I am not doing this to put other races down, I just want the truth to be out there in the open.

I look forward to your reply,

St George

P.S. I think you get the wrong idea about me Pakistan, I don't want, or have no intention of chasing you off of this site. As long as you are here with your opinions, it gives me a superb chance to enlighten some of my fellow countrymen to the facts.

As for the question of my disagreeing with your views being the same as disrespecting the religious beliefs of a whole population, this is certainly wrong. Do not forget the Caste system is now being outlawed in India as something that is wrong. You will find that my views are shared by the vast majority of the people of India. This is not disrespect. It is disagreement. As for the religious views of India, there are many I don't agree with, but this does not mean I disrespect the beliefs. Disrespect and disagreement are two very different things. I disagree with many things that the Christian church and the Muslim religion decree, but I do not disrespect these beliefs. Just because I do not believe, doesn't mean that I expect everyone else to share my view.

You have a point about the physiological differences between peoples who live in different parts of the world. Peoples of different regions have developed physical differences over the generations in order to best physically cope with and survive the environment in which they habit. But I would draw your attention to the fact that every country now has a broad spectrum within it's modern society of different skills and professions. India and Africa for instance have people at every level of society. I do not see white people dominating any particular part of society in today's modern world. All sectors of these societies are now filled by the indigineous people of these lands, from the very top and most skillful to the very bottom. And I would use the United States of America as a wonderful example of coloured people integrating at every level of a society that which they share with white people. It would not surprise me to see a black president of the U.S.A. during my lifetime. From the space programme down, you will find black people in some of the most senior positions. This has been achieved on level terms with white people.

The SLIGHT physical differences of people of different lands makes as little difference to our argument as for instance the difference between the scandanavians being better throwers of the javelin or the Russians and Germans being better at putting the shot. Slight physical differences cause these characteristics between nations and people, but this has little bearing on these modern societies as a whole. Therefore, I suggest your argument - which takes in resemblence to apes and longer arms (resemblence does not mean the same as) - is floored and fails.

As for distinct facial features, may I point out that the people of Cornwall have different facial features to those of - amongst many others - Wales. I never see these differences being brought into question.

Pakistan.

You think that because something is weaved into a religious belief that it must be correct (I'm talking about the Caste system here).

I would ask you how many of the Christian churches religious beliefs have in this modern age been de-bunked and discarded.

Religion is useful for guidence - not proof. Proof should rely on historical and scientific fact.

P.

St. George,

You write

>>I have already pointed out that I am as pleased as you are with the outcome of the DNA experiment. You say I have taken it out of context and misrepresented it, as I say you have.<<

I would point out that it is not my humble self that say's you have taken the DNA experiment findings out of context, but it is the Leader of the experiment and author of the original scientific paper that say's this (using the broad brush here of course). But what I do say is that he says his findings look to confirm what I have been saying all along - that migration was rife during the period of time in question and India was not only accessable but was used as a corridor through which many people travelled.

A nice MIXTURE wouldn't you say????

Pakistan.

Pakistan

You seem to a little to quick to conclude that the dna experiment provided no evidence whatsoever of the Aryan invasion. Well let's just look at some of the scientists (who I'm sure are not racists) quotes again.

Geneticist Lynn Jorde of the University of Utah says "there was a group of males with European affinities who were largely responsible for this invasion 3,000 or 4,000 years ago." He added, "when we look at the Y chromosome DNA, we see the lower castes are most similar to Asians, and the upper castes are more European than Asian."

I put it to you Pakistan, if it was the case of European dna being found in these Indian biological volunteers because India was used as a corridor between Africa and Europe, then why is it that it is only the upper caste Indians who are most similar to Europeans? This fits perfectly with what I have maintained all along.

Jorde then goes on to say "when we look at the different components within the upper
caste, the group with the greatest European similarity of all is the warrior class, the Kshatriya, who are still at the top of the Hindu castes, with the Brahmins."

Replying to your point that the cast system was legally abolished in India in the 1960's Jorde adds,

"People are very well aware of their caste membership. Noting that in some cities the housing is still arranged along caste lines. So one might argue, unfortunately so, that it (the caste system) does exist in people's minds."

In terms of who marries whom, the researchers described the Hindu caste system as "governing the mating practices of nearly one-sixth of the world's population (India's population being just over the one billion mark)"

Now Pakistan, there is absolutely nothing I have produced there that has been "taken out of context". Jorde (one of the leading geneticists involved in the project) certainly made no bones about there being an actual Aryan invasion of the Indus Valley.

You seem quite stuck on one or two comments made by Professor Michael Bamshad who also took part in the experiment. I assume that these are the quotes by him that you think enhances your argument.

"Our results should facilitate the deconstruction of racist barriers," said Bamshad. "However, racism is a much more complex issue than simply noting whether there are biological differences between groups of people."

There it is Pakistan, the jewel in your crown. Now let's anylise it for a moment. Am I mistaken or does ol' Bamshad actually admit that there are biological differences between groups of people? Whether or not he thinks "racism is a much more complex issue" is utterly irrelevant. He is a scientist. His job is to do his scientific research. Which it appears he has done commendably. His opinions on racism mean absolutely nothing. As far as I can see, he is no more qualified to talk on that subject than you or I am.

There is another quote from a B.V. Ravi Prasad, another member of the research team.

"It is possible that European migrants who reached India during or after the Indus Valley civilisation, mingled with the local people and eventually established their superiority over land and labour thus forming the higher castes."

Again Pakistan, further analysis reveals that it is the first three words here which are the most important. "It is possible." Repeat "IT IS POSSIBLE". All this is my friend, is this mans opinion on a theory that MIGHT have been possible. It is by no means substancial evidence. Nowhere near as concrete as the actual scientific proof that the biological dna tests produced.

As far as I can see, these are about the best quotes you have from these people or at least, they are the two you seem to use in your argument. You are quite welcome to produce more however, as I enjoy taking them apart. So we will let the reader make up his own mind as to whoever has taken these quotes out of context. Fair enough?

Now to the rest of your post. You say that in the modern world, people from all societies seem to produce more or less the same kind of output as whites. This argument is totally flawed. What about the third world? Why is it that such a tiny country such as Belgium for example, with a population of merely eleven million, has a bigger Gross National Product (annual wealth of a country) than all of the African nations put together (with the exception of South Africa which up until reletively recently was governed by whites)? Let's also bear in mind here that Africa has an enormous wealth of yet untapped resources. Please tell me why this is. You also mention the U.S.A. in your argument. I have personally travelled to this particular country many, many times and as far as I can see, it is about as intergrated as any other western country is. What I mean by this is YES, there is a diverse mix of people inhabiting the U.S.A. but it certainly isn't what I'd call intergrated. It is about 70 percent white and the remaining 30 percent (in the most part) live within their own, inward looking communities just as many immagrants do here in Britain. There are African-American communities, Asian communities, Hispanic communities, Chinese communities, Jewish communities etc. etc. Minority people by their own choice, live amoung their own racial group. All perfectly natural of course but not when it threatens the very survival of the European-American population and their traditional heritage.

You seem to greatly overstate the achievements of these groups of people. I think for the most, they have contributed enormously to the drugs and crime culture of the U.S.A. You seem to think most highly of these people but I can tell you now, if someone happened to drop you off right in the middle of one of the black ghetto's in that country, I wouldn't give you very good odds of getting out of there in one piece.

After all the advantages that black people have over white people in America (affirmative action, cheap housing and so on), they never seem to take full advantage of it. They still seem to stay at the bottom of the heap. I'm not saying that there arn't a few exceptions to the rule, but on the whole thats the way it is.

I again, look forward to your reply but could you please tell me how you stand on the principle of affirmative action or as we call it over here, positive discrimination.

Regards,

St George

You have done very well my friend,i was wondering when you would find this out,as complex as this is you have proven a point on which i can not disagree,no matter what i put across,you will find something to equal or better it, and vice versa,i will have to admit defeat on this subject,the resources that i have done do not lie to what you have printed making you to be correct,i am not for or against any race or colour,i am just trying to show the truth,but this time i have to admit defeat but gracefully unlike you.
Sorry Pakistan if you can find anything to argue this ,then please print,but i have looked and failed.
best wishes to you both
Malc

Cheers Malc for a great debate. You certainly know your stuff but I'm afraid we are probably always going to differ in our opinions.

All the best,

St George

i thought i couldnt remember posting this one. thanks for the honesty st geroge. its bad when someones got to resort to imitating someone in order to win an argument, but at least you were man enough to come out and admit it. that shows strength.

all the best

malc

THE WHITE MAN WINS AGAIN KEEP IT AT THE TOP PAKISTAN

To Pakistan, Na na na naaaaa, na na na naaaa, aaaaaaa, ohhhhhh!!!! You also know the truth!!!

St George that was a brilliant post you just put up.even interested has admited defeat.good one mate if i ever meet you it would be a privalige to buy you a beer.you are doing your nation proud we could do with a lot more like you.keep up the exellent work mate.BNP all the way.

I'm afraid to have to announce that I have been a two-faced schemeing liar in the past who has had to resort to putting words in peoples mouths in order to win my argument and bury other peoples views.

I realised some time ago that Malc had in effect won the argument, but I couldnt face up to the fact on here without losing one hell of a lot of face with the lads who read this site. That's why I have immitated the posts of Pakistan and Malc to try and cover up my mistakes. I realise now that I have let myself down and shown that I can't win an argument without completely breaking the rules of common decency.

Now about my last post on here to do with the DNA experiment. I realise that Lynn Jorde has said that there could have been an invasion 3,000 or 4,000 years ago but I failed to disclose that the comments of Mike Bamshad that put this theory in jepeordy were spoken quite sometime after Jorde made these comments. In other words the team has had a re evaluation of the evidence and decided to come out with comments that conflict with my theory. I also forgot to mention that the DNA evidence might even predate any supposed invasion as Mike Bamshad has pointed out. And I forgot to point out that the team of experimentors have expressed their extreme doubts that any white supremacy theory can be linked to their data.

When I pointed out that the DNA experiment points to only the upper caste members of societys DNA being similar to that of Europeans, I forgot to point out that this is only so for the area that has been tested so far, which is a very small area, and also that the team said they thought the caste system was elastic and would probably differ over the whole of India, depending on where the testing is done. In other words, upper caste results will probably be different and point to Asian like DNA if you test in another area further south.

Of course there is a huge amount of archiological evidence that points away from my theories aswell, but I chose to avoid pointing this out in order to try and hide the truth to help win my argument. But I know now that the truth is far more important and profound than me shallowly trying to save face. This is why I have decided to admit everything.


As for the rest of my post, it's just a whole load of inflamitory rubbish that I used as a smokescreen to enable me to hide my prejudices behind.

I ask everyone for forgivness and state that I have changed my views somewhat and that I now see no harm in a multi-racial society in Great Britain.

We should all be proud to be English. White or Black. There is no fundamental differneces between what I used to class as different sectors of the human race.

Once again I apologise to you all, especially Malc and Pakistan and congratulate them both on winning a fine argument.

Standing up for England.

St George.

SHIT. ITS A BIT OF A SHOCK TO FIND OUT THAT PAKI AND MALC WERE RITE ALL ALONG. STILL IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE TO ME. IV JUST LEARNED THAT YOU SHUDNT BELIEVE EVERYTHING PEOPLE TELL YOU.

CAFC 4EVA

wot the fuck dya think ya doin admittin this shit. you let the paki win ya smelly twat.

I hate the fuckin bnp now. shit ill even have to be nice to that black twat at work

thats ok mate. i understand. sometimes you can get so lost in an argument that you forget that the truth is the most important thing. and this can make you do some silly things. if its any comfort to you there was one stage i thought you had me. youre a good apponant and gave me a real run for my money. its just that your facts were wrong. anyway im glad youve learned something. i think we all have. dont feel to bad about it and theres no need for you to banish yourself from the message board like i think some are going to call for you to do. i think your a pretty fair guy with a good concience really and can contribute a lot on here especially now youve come round to the right way of thinking. and pakistan if your listening, dont be to hard on him. at least hes done the decent thing now.

take care

malc.

That's generous of you.

From now on I will be fighting for the country I love in the right way. I don't care if someone's black or white any more. That's not going to be an issue with me.

Proud to be English.

St George

wat the hell, u'm all sad bastards

im very disapointed to see that my name has been fraudulently used on this message board. this defeated gracefully post has not been put here by me. i have not been on here for quite a while and thought the debate was over. i can see quite a lot has gone on here without me and it will take me a while to catch up but from what i can see there are two conflicting views coming from within the scientists camp with the dna experiment. one is a headline grabber which appeared when the results were first published which said there was an influx of white hordes into india and the other view is that of Bamshad who says that there has been steady migration over the millinia diluting all the genes, with some areas showing at the moment with the limited results they have with a higher european likeness than asian. The results seem to me to be unproven and conflicting but the present day opinion from the team is that it's probably all very elastic depending on where you take your samples from in the country, a bit like the tests showed in britain - making the white supremicy argument "not a very good one" said bamshad. But as I say, the messages coming from the scientists seem to be very conflicting. i have therefore taken the liberty of writing to the university of utah, explaining the argument on here and asking for a statement from the team on this very subject to do with their experiment. i suspect we will have to wait a while, but i will keep trying. lets see what they have to say when asked the direct question. i hope the truth from the horses mouth will end the argument one way or the other on here soon.

i hope that nobody else will try to use my name on here again. this only adds confusion which is a shame and is extremely childish. ive looked at the times as compared with st. georges last post and it looks very suspicious to me that he has done this to try to end the argument in his favour by saying that i admit defeat. this is a wrong thing to do and only goes to weaken his arguments and shows him up for a win at all costs type of guy. i dont see who else it could have been, but whoever it is, ive logged in now as malcm, and i hope people can recognise the real me when they see me now.

malc

That tosser St. George has been rumbled, exposed, and publicly humiliated for the cheating, race-hating, win the race war at all costs - never mind if my arguments are floored, prat that he is.

We should feel sorry for him I suppose (he must have been bullied at school by a black lad to have this much hatred in him - get over it). In his hurry and overeagerness to win and save face in a lost argument he left himself and his underhand antics exposed to discovery. I knew it would only be a matter of time before Malc (welcome back by the way) would be back and able to TALK FOR HIMSELF again.

I think it is you St. George that has dealt your cause (if there ever actually was one) a terrible blow. What has gone before shows that the only way you think you can argue against the truth is by shouting down your opponents. Well, the truth always has a way of coming out.

I eagerly await the response to Malcs communication with the scientific team from the University of Utah, who carried out the DNA research in India.

St. George the victorious???? No - St. George the Ludicrous - yes, or is it St. George the DISGRACED????

By the way St. G, are you really a fat steaming heap of B O smelling blubber who can hardly fit in front of his keyboard, as Red Book seems to think???? It's just that his words put such a wonderful mental picture of you in my brain - LOL

Gotcha

Pakistan!!

st geroge

I will go through a few of the more relevant points that you made to pakistan in your post to him after which my name was used fraudulently to admit defeat.

“Geneticist Lynn Jorde of the University of Utah says "there was a group of males with European affinities who were largely responsible for this invasion 3,000 or 4,000 years ago." He added, "when we look at the Y chromosome DNA, we see the lower castes are most similar to Asians, and the upper castes are more European than Asian."

This is because this experiment was done is a very small area on a very small amount of people. Members of the scientific team have since said that they believe that if you go to another part of the country the dna results will probably show that the higher castes have more asian resemblence to them as distinct from the results they already have from the area that they tested. In other words depending on where you take your blood samples from in the country for the higher caste members depends on which type of dna they will have. So higher castes in one part of India will probably have different dna from another. This would prove your white supremecy theory groundless. They also go on to say that they will be doing more experimenting for this and also they will take dna samples “to try and understand the origins of the populations that have migrated to and from India, "and to find what model of demographic history is most consistent with our results". And we musnt forget that the team also said “It also adds to the growing evidence that the sub-continent of India has been a major corridor for the migration of people between Africa, Western Asia and Southeast Asia," the report said.

”I put it to you Pakistan, if it was the case of European dna being found in these Indian biological volunteers because India was used as a corridor between Africa and Europe, then why is it that it is only the upper caste Indians who are most similar to Europeans? This fits perfectly with what I have maintained all along.”

As above. Probably asian dna in a higher caste from a different part of the country. elastic results.

”Jorde then goes on to say "when we look at the different components within the upper
caste, the group with the greatest European similarity of all is the warrior class, the Kshatriya, who are still at the top of the Hindu castes, with the Brahmins."

As above.

”Replying to your point that the cast system was legally abolished in India in the 1960's Jorde adds,

"People are very well aware of their caste membership. Noting that in some cities the housing is still arranged along caste lines. So one might argue, unfortunately so, that it (the caste system) does exist in people's minds."”

If the further experiments show that the dna from higher casts shows the dna to be more asian like than European like as the team seems to expect, then the caste system is irrelivent in this argument anyway.



”In terms of who marries whom, the researchers described the Hindu caste system as "governing the mating practices of nearly one-sixth of the world's population (India's population being just over the one billion mark)"”

Of whom only 265 from a very small area have been tested so far. Which is why the team are now so loath for white supremicests to use the arguments that you are using. Because the evidence just hasnt been gathered together properly yet to give conclusive results.



”Now Pakistan, there is absolutely nothing I have produced there that has been "taken out of context". Jorde (one of the leading geneticists involved in the project) certainly made no bones about there being an actual Aryan invasion of the Indus Valley.”

This is just one interpretation that has come out of the camp, and it was a real headline grabber. There are other of the scientists who seem to disagree. hopefully a statement from the team about this will clarify everything for us.

”You seem quite stuck on one or two comments made by Professor Michael Bamshad who also took part in the experiment. I assume that these are the quotes by him that you think enhances your argument.”

"Our results should facilitate the deconstruction of racist barriers," said Bamshad. "However, racism is a much more complex issue than simply noting whether there are biological differences between groups of people."

”There it is Pakistan, the jewel in your crown. Now let's anylise it for a moment. Am I mistaken or does ol' Bamshad actually admit that there are biological differences between groups of people? Whether or not he thinks "racism is a much more complex issue" is utterly irrelevant. He is a scientist. His job is to do his scientific research. Which it appears he has done commendably. His opinions on racism mean absolutely nothing. As far as I can see, he is no more qualified to talk on that subject than you or I am.”

Of course he thinks there are biological differences between people. There are biological differences between you and me, two white men. There are biological differences between you and your father. There are biological differences between everyone, even twins. If one twin has a mole and another doesn’t, that is a biological difference. What Bamshad is saying I think is that racism is a far more complex issue than things like this.

”There is another quote from a B.V. Ravi Prasad, another member of the research team.”

"It is possible that European migrants who reached India during or after the Indus Valley civilisation, mingled with the local people and eventually established their superiority over land and labour thus forming the higher castes."

Again Pakistan, further analysis reveals that it is the first three words here which are the most important. "It is possible." Repeat "IT IS POSSIBLE". All this is my friend, is this mans opinion on a theory that MIGHT have been possible. It is by no means substancial evidence. Nowhere near as concrete as the actual scientific proof that the biological dna tests produced.”

The reason that he says its possible is because it is. In other words we should not just look at the one theory that there was an ayrian invasion but look at all the possibilities. And lets not forget the other possibility “According to the published report, another fact re-established after this research is that India could have been inhabited by two successive migrations in the late Pleistocene period (100,000 years ago).”

”As far as I can see, these are about the best quotes you have from these people or at least, they are the two you seem to use in your argument. You are quite welcome to produce more however, as I enjoy taking them apart. So we will let the reader make up his own mind as to whoever has taken these quotes out of context. Fair enough?”

Why so aggressive, and why do you enjoy taking them apart. I don’t enjoy taking you apart, I just want to get to the truth. You seem to have a lot of hate driving your arguments. Iv had a look at a few of your other posts on here and it seems that you despise people of different colour or ethnic background to yourself, and this is what seems to drive your arguments on this thread. as for letting the reader make up his own mind, i agree.

”Now to the rest of your post. You say that in the modern world, people from all societies seem to produce more or less the same kind of output as whites. This argument is totally flawed. What about the third world? Why is it that such a tiny country such as Belgium for example, with a population of merely eleven million, has a bigger Gross National Product (annual wealth of a country) than all of the African nations put together (with the exception of South Africa which up until reletively recently was governed by whites)? Let's also bear in mind here that Africa has an enormous wealth of yet untapped resources. Please tell me why this is. You also mention the U.S.A. in your argument. I have personally travelled to this particular country many, many times and as far as I can see, it is about as intergrated as any other western country is. What I mean by this is YES, there is a diverse mix of people inhabiting the U.S.A. but it certainly isn't what I'd call intergrated. It is about 70 percent white and the remaining 30 percent (in the most part) live within their own, inward looking communities just as many immagrants do here in Britain. There are African-American communities, Asian communities, Hispanic communities, Chinese communities, Jewish communities etc. etc. Minority people by their own choice, live amoung their own racial group. All perfectly natural of course but not when it threatens the very survival of the European-American population and their traditional heritage.”

What I would say here is that Africa was heavily colonised right the way through the crucial period of development that the western world enjoyed, and was deprived, through the ignorance of the times, the opportunities to progress as those who colonised her did. This to might be said of India. Your opinion of America is just opinion. For me America is a wonderfully racially integrated society that has pushed on to be one of the most advanced nations in the world (more so than Britain today I think). You mention jewish communities here as well. Einstien was a jew. the chinese have just gone on to launch their own space programme and launch their first man into space. Britain has not (not pulling down britain here, just making a point)

”You seem to greatly overstate the achievements of these groups of people. I think for the most, they have contributed enormously to the drugs and crime culture of the U.S.A. You seem to think most highly of these people but I can tell you now, if someone happened to drop you off right in the middle of one of the black ghetto's in that country, I wouldn't give you very good odds of getting out of there in one piece.”

This is just racist rubbish. Sorry but that’s what I think.

”After all the advantages that black people have over white people in America (affirmative action, cheap housing and so on), they never seem to take full advantage of it. They still seem to stay at the bottom of the heap. I'm not saying that there arn't a few exceptions to the rule, but on the whole thats the way it is.”

You say this without offering any facts or figures. There are rich and poor within all communities in the USA. You generalise to much. what about the poor italian communities and the poor white communities. you just want to generalise.

I look forward to your reply. Please try to keep it to the facts.

Malc.

LOL - but surely this is just another example of how white and black can mix perfectly well together...

P.

hello st george and everyone,

you might remember in my last post i mentioned that id written to the university of utah in the hope of getting a statement out of them about the dna experiment in india and its implications on the theory about the ayrian invasion in india and the white supremacy theory in general.

im delighted to be able to tell you that i have had a reply. i have edited out my name and the name of the sender of the email from the university for obvious reasons. please read.

Dear Mr. .............

I have forwarded your message to Mike Bamshad. I do not know if he will choose to reply or not. But in case he does not, you may want to see his cover article, "Does Race Exist? Genetic Results May Surprise You" in the new (December 2003) issue of Scientific American magazine.

...............
University of Utah Public Relations


i wait for mike bamshads reply with interest, if he decides to send one, but i have a funny feeling, and my hope is that his article in scientific american magazine might just put a stop to all this white supremacy stuff and stop one particular skin colour or nationality from feeling superiour to another.

the december 2003 issue of scientific american has not been published yet. i rung wh smiths today and have been told that it will hit the shelves on december 4th. as soon as i have a copy i shall put some of the more relevent points up on this site. i somehow feel it in my water that by the looks of the title of the article st georges arguments wont have a leg to stand on after this article comes out, but you never know. we will have to wait and see.

malc

Hi gang just letting you know i have binned the interesting letter that Malcolm Snubbs wrote to me,i being a member of the master race am disgusted that he is dismissing the white race as the more superior of all races.
Due to extensive fundamental conclusions i have deduced that we the white race are the far more greater race,and are believed also to have bigger penis`s and are better lovers it is also common knowledge that we have a bigger brain,smell better and have better manners,so there you have it my little gathering of splendids
the truth was out their and i have brought it to you,now all runalong and spread the news...............till the next time, be good, be lucky be WHITE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

or whoever you are - LOL

at least you said it with tongue in cheek, and not with cock in cheek like Georgeie usually does.

Seriously though, I believe there's a ticking time-bomb on here now for St. George's arguments and 'beliefs'. And I don't just mean the DNA experiment in India. I just can't wait to see if these ridiculous white supremacist theories are going to be sunk to the bottom of the sespool - and with them any hope of the BNP convincing us that a certain skin colour, personal features or place of birth makes a difference to a persons ability or usefulness. And isn't St. G going to look pathetic and silly if this happens. I've dug my money out of the piggy bank ready to buy my copy of Scientific American when it's published on Dec 4th. Make sure you do too.

For me, it's a bit like waiting for the execution date to arrive for someone you really hate.

St. George - Dec 4th - be here you muppet.

Malc - deep respect.

Pakistan.

so lifted to maintain profile.

where HAVE you been. You've missed all the fun - big time.

Have a read through some of the threads - especially the one There's No Such Thing As English and see one of the big BNP 'hotshots' get shot down in flames and then pissed on to put the fire out - it's absolutely brill.

Can't talk now - got a taxi coming, going out for a bite to eat. We'll catch up soon.

Nice to see you back.

Enjoy the Rugby tomorrow.

Pakistan.

And I've never been prouder of my country or my flag of St. George than I am today.

Thank you!!!! England's World Cup winning Rugby team.

Pakistan.

This thread is good!

YOU ARE TELLING US YOU ACTULLY READ THIS YOU LYING PIECE OF SHIT,MOST OF THIS IS WAY BEYOND YOU,IS YOUR FIVE YEAR OLD SAT THERE READING IT WITH YOU OR IS YOU BEING BREAST FED BY YOU MOTHER LOL

And to remind people that St. George might be "seriously thinking of standing in the European elections" on behalf of the BNP - LOL.

Would you vote for this stroker????

LOL

P.

Roll on December 4th...

P.

LOL

Pakistan!

so - LIFT

Mike Bamshad's article in December's Scientific American magazine - out tomorrow - will make this thread - no matter how damming it may be to the white supremacist theory - totally irrelevant. Is there any such thing as 'race'? the article will ask - and hopefully answer. Maybe tomorrow - through ground-breaking human gene study - we will have an answer.

I'm sure St. G is looking forward to this as much as I - LOL

Pakistan.

The December 2003 issue of Scientific American magazine didn't make the shelves today - it's running a bit late (an extra long print run due to a higher demand than normal maybe eh - LOL). It's now expected anytime from tomorrow, probably the weekend. I'll keep you all posted.

Pakistan.

Up she goes again LOL.

back to the top we go. Let's have a free society for everyone. And that includes gay and lesbian people Bacon Botty and Bulldog Breath lol.

P.

Upward bound yet again Georgie Porgie lol.

White Foreigner, you've got a lot to answer for...

LOL

Pakistan.

up

hide!!!

just in case he is under the misaprehension that a man's skin colour actually makes a difference!!! (Wellll.. it's a good excuse to give one of my favourite little threads another front page airing anyway - LOL)

Pakistan.

P.

Sir,

You are only being 'accused' by me of starting the most interesting and pointed debated ever to hit this site; the result of which has done irrepairable damage to the BNP, the extreme right wing and the notion of racial inequality (in biological terms or otherwise), and strengthened the just reality of racial equality (hopefully not just in this country but worldwide - slowly but surely).

Whatever political persuasion you may be, I personally thank you for offering us the opportunity of bringing to light the truth concerning these emotive matters on this forum.

Pakistan.

in other words aload of crap,he has not proven a thing,what proof that is there would easily be cast to one side if the need be,

Once again the only form of attack the extreme right wing has to offer on this subject is to fly in the face of common sense with a silly nonsense broad brush comment.

St. George thought the "need be" and tried to prove the white supremacy theory - and failed. It is all here on this thread and on the "Does Race Exist" thread for anyone to read if they wish. If the "ever victorious" lol St. George had anything left to throw into the argument he would have done so by now - he knows as well as I - and everybody who has an ounce of common sense - that the notion of white supremacy (or the supremacy of any one group of people over another) is lost.

If it would be so easy Bulldog Breed to cast to one side this proof - that is so obvious to everybody else but which you so candidly do not have the intelligence to accept - then do so; or put a muzzle on it lol.

Pakistan

show me the proof,showing me there is no such thing as race

St. George recently asked me to do the same thing. I will give you the same answer (more or less) as I gave to him.

This has already been done in both this thread and in the "Does Race Exist" thread - as well as in the December issue of Scientific American. If you can not understand plain English, then please ask somebody who can to explain it all to you. I've already done my bit - now it is up to you!

Pakistan.

St GEORGE YOU ARE A STAR MATE,THE EARLIER THEORY I MUST ADMIT JUST BLOWN AWAY EVERYTHING THAT PAKISTAN MAN SAID.TOP QUALITY AND THANKYOU FOR SHOWING THAT POOR EXCUSE OF A MAN THE TRUTH.NO DISRESPECT TO HIM THOUGH HES GOT A RIGHT TO LIVE HEAR BUT HOPEFULLY ANYMORE IMMIGRANTS WILL BE STOPPED.PAKISTAN BEHAVE AND RESPECT THIS COUNTRYS CULTURE YOU RASCIST BIGGIT.

You do not know what you are talking about. This thread is nothing to do with immigration. It is to do with race and who we are. Have a propper read of it and then talk to me again. Why do you call me a racist Biggot?????? Where do you get this idea from????

P.

GO AWAY

sooo, please grow up!!!!

P.

your missing the point paki,where exactually does it say there is no such thing as race!

you need to look at the "Does Race Exist" thread, where you will find a fairly detailed explanation in my opening salvo. For further detail, I strongly suggest you read the whole article in Scientific American from start to finish. As I said, I have already answered this question. Please read the article. It clearly states that Bamshad and Co. have proved that there can be more similarities at a genetic level between two people of different colours and geographical origin than might exist between two people of the same colour and geographical origin. And likewise there can be more differences between two people of the same colour and geographical origin than between two people of different colour and geographical origin. For me, this negates the issue of 'race'. Please read the article and stop asking me to repeat myself.

P.

that still dosn`t answer my question WHERE DOES IT ACTUALLY SAY WE ARE ALL THE SAME RACE!!!!!!

"DOES RACE EXIST - If races are defined as Genetically Discrete Groups - NO."

I don't think it can be much clearer than that.

Now, Redcom has kindly put up the URL for the whole article on the Scientific American website. In case you didn't spot it, here it is:

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&colID=1&articleID=00055DC8-3BAA-1FA8-BBAA83414B7F0000

If you have so far been a miserly penny pincher and haven't read it - which is probably why you have been annoying me with these irritating questions - it is now on the internet for all to see, without paying!!!.

So please please please read through it before discussing it with me again. It answers all the simple questions, which will save both you and I a great deal of time and energy.

P.

there is nothing in that article that actually says"there is no such thing as race"a few chosen "near" words does not prove a thing,so i ask you again "WHER DEOS IT SAY THER IS NO SUCH THING AS RACE"i have read the article twice,it does not prove nothing,just tip toeing round it,but because there is not enough proof,they can not say the formentioned,if i am wrong show me

If that is your opinion Bulldog, then you stick to it son. But you are flying in the face of common sense. Because the author didn't put it into that exact combination of words, does not mean the combination of words he used has any less meaning. Read the words, take in their meaning and you have your answer. It's as clear as your piss after you've just drunk 9 pints of Carling son. Please don't split any more hairs with me. It aint working.

P.

because you know i am right all that shit means nothing,it would be front page news if it was true,not in some jumped up magazine from the states,it doesn`t say it because the proof is not all there,so get of your high horse and face reality you prick

No, you are wrong. It has not made front page news because it was already mainstream thinking. The study only reinforces and proves what was already believed. If the study had however had proved the white supremacist theory to be correct, now, that would have been front page news. Do not forget that it is you who are in the minority and not me.

P.

why are we in the minority if you say we are all the same,i don`t understand,are you on about the amount of your people in our country or what, please explain sir

It is people WITH THE SAME IDEAS AS YOU who are in the minority. Let us call you a group of minority thinkers. This means that you are outweighed by opposite opinion - nothing else. You are now either grasping at straws BB, or you are extremely sensitive. Goodness me, you wouldn't last 5 minutes if your skin were to suddenly turn black overnight - LOL.

P.

i would do the world a favour and kill myself lol

time for another handful of salt me thinks!!

LOL

P.

Here is a little something that I found whilst doing a little bit of research on the "there's no such thing as race debate". I'm sorry it's a bit long lads but there is enough scrutinisation of Bamshads article here to put Pakistan back in his place.

The article can be found at http://www.nationalvanguard.org./story.php?id=1449

Read it and weep Pakistan lol.

The scientific study of race is at a crossroads. With the mapping of the human genome, scientists know more about race and racial differences than ever before. But as society invests more and more in the lie of racial equality, it becomes harder and harder for scientists to speak these truths. Furthermore, in a desperate attempt to stave off the dire political consequences of racial truth, egalitarian spin-doctors have spread a great deal of disinformation about recent genetic discoveries.

We are told, for instance, that from a genetic point of view the differences between the races are negligible, a matter of just a few genes. Therefore, we are asked to conclude, racial differences are negligible, period. Racial differences, we are told, should have no practical implications at all.

But this is as absurd as arguing that, since from the point a view of subatomic physics, solid objects are mostly empty space, it is a matter of pure prejudice that we prefer to drive on the road and not off a cliff.

The truth is: from small genetic differences, great physical, spiritual, cultural, and political differences grow. If geneticists can’t see these differences, maybe they are looking in the wrong place.

We are also told routinely that there is more genetic variation within races than between them. There might be 100 IQ points difference between an extremely smart and an extremely stupid White person. But there is only 30 points difference between Whites and Blacks on the average. Therefore, we are asked to conclude, we should deal only with individuals and ignore the group averages.

The trouble with this argument is that societies do not consist of isolated individuals, for individuals are parts and products of breeding populations. Breeding populations that have become geographically isolated and subjected to different environmental conditions over a long period of time become different races.

And if the average intelligence—or any other important characteristic—of two breeding populations sharing the same geographical area differs dramatically, there is bound to be conflict. The superior group will inevitably resent the retarding effect of the inferior, and the inferior groups will resent the impossible standards imposed by the superior.

But the practical implications of racial truth are hard to deny, and the truth is seeping out, sometimes in unlikely places. A case in point is the cover article of the December 2003 issue of Scientific American, which despite its title is usually as politically correct as any news or entertainment magazine. The cover depicts six female faces appearing to belong to different races, along with the caption, “Does Race Exist? Science Has the Answer: Genetic Results May Surprise You.” In the table of contents, we read: “Does Race Exist? From a purely genetic standpoint, no. Nevertheless, genetic information about individuals’ ancestral origins can sometimes have medical relevance.”

This got my attention. If race is medically relevant, then why is it not psychologically relevant, culturally relevant, morally relevant, and politically relevant as well? And if genetic science regards such pressingly relevant distinctions as unreal or miniscule, then isn’t there something wrong with genetic science or with our interpretation and application of its findings?

The authors of the article, Michael Bamshad and Steve Olson, argue that “people can be sorted broadly into groups using genetic data.” These groups, furthermore, appear to be geographically distinct—at least before the massive population shifts of the modern era. Now this is a huge admission, for the existence of genetically distinct human groups is certainly part of what is meant by “race,” and precisely what is denied by those who claim that race is merely a “social construct.”

The basis for the claim that “from a purely genetic standpoint” race does not exist is the conflict between genetic classifications and traditional racial categories. Such categories are based not on an analysis of genes (genotype) but on the visible expression of these genes (phenotype). This may well be true, but it does not prove that “race does not exist.” It merely proves that there is a conflict between genotypic and phenotypic definitions of race.

For example, the authors note that sub-Saharan Africans and Australian Aborigines look and behave similarly, but genetic markers indicate their ancestors separated long ago. But the conflict between classificatory schemes is more real than apparent, for Australoids and Negroids look alike only to an untrained eye. Anyone who compares members of the two groups will readily see the differences, and with sufficient experience it is virtually impossible to confuse between them.

The authors also note that social definitions of race vary from region to region: “someone classified as ‘black’ in the U.S. . . . might be considered ‘white’ in Brazil and ‘colored’ . . . in South Africa.” But this is also an attempt to discredit phenotypic differentiation by referring to only its crudest forms. However, in societies with a great deal of miscegenation, phenotypic classification schemes can be quite complex in order to precisely reflect the complexities of the underlying genotypes:

The early French colonists in Saint-Domingue identified 128 different racial types, defined quite precisely along a mathematical scale determined by simple calculations of ancestral contributions. They ranged from the “true” mulatto (half white, half black), through the spectrum of marabou, sacatra, quarterón, all the way to the sang-mêlé (mixed blood: 127 parts white and one part black. . . . The sociologist Micheline Labelle has counted 22 main racial categories and 98 subcategories (for varying hair types, facial structure, color and other distinguishing factors) used among Haiti’s middle class in Port-au-Prince in the 1970s. Within each category, the words are often as imaginative as they are descriptive: café au lait (“coffee with milk”), bonbon siro (“candy syrup”), ti canel (“little cinnamon”), ravet blanch (“white cockroach”), soley levan (“rising Sun”), banane mûre (“ripe banana”), brun pistache (“peanut brown”), mulâtre dix-huit carats (“18-carat mulatto”) . . . . (source, Barnes Review, Sept. 2003)
A deeper problem with the authors’ emphasis on genotype is that even though different genotypes can give rise to similar phenotypes—nature can use different means to achieve the same end—the forces of evolution didn’t give a damn about specific genotypes, they only “cared” about how those genotypes were expressed in an individual. Selection works directly on the phenotype, only indirectly on the genotype. Thus from a practical point of view, phenotype is more important than genotype.

The authors do, however, admit that phenotypic racial categories work well for dividing groups by propensity for certain diseases, such as sickle cell anemia (most common among Africans) and cystic fibrosis (most common among Europeans). The alleles for sickle cell anemia and cystic fibrosis rose in frequency because carriers (i.e., those with a copy from either their father or mother, two copies being needed for the disease) were resistant to parasitic microorganisms found in Africa and Europe, respectively. Another example is that the same polymorphism in the CCR5 gene is shown to retard AIDS progression in Whites but accelerate it in Blacks.

Because of the mounting genetic evidence of the medical relevance of race, the US Food and Drug Administration braved the inevitable controversy and recommended in January of 2003 that researchers collect racial data in clinical trials.

Hence the authors’ extremely cautious conclusion: “in cases where membership in a geographically or culturally defined group has been correlated with health-related genetic traits, knowing something about an individual’s group membership could be important.”

This is another huge admission. For if racial differences are medically relevant, why are they not culturally, socially, and politically relevant as well? For instance, the fact that Negroes produce higher testosterone on average than other races means that Black men are at higher risk for prostate cancer. But high testosterone production also means that Black men are more prone to aggressive behavior. So if doctors should racially profile Black men, why shouldn’t policemen?

Compared to Whites, Blacks also have lower IQs and levels of empathy, weaker senses of personal efficacy and responsibility, greater propensities to sociopathy and psychosis, fewer behavioral inhibitions, greater impulsiveness, higher sexual activity and lower parental investment, etc. Surely these racial differences have important practical implications as well.

When you pare away the authors’ nervous qualifications and cautious quibbles, “Does Race Exist?” admits that there is a genetic basis for race differences and that these differences have practical importance. This is an encouraging sign in today’s climate of ideological Race Denial™. Frankly, it is remarkable that it was published in Scientific American at all.

An explanation for its publication might be found in John Rennie and Ricki Rusting’s editorial “Racing to Conclusions.” They begin by recalling the failure of Proposition 54, the recent California ballot initiative that would have forbidden the government to collect racial data in many areas. Even though Proposition 54 explicitly allowed the collection of racial data for health purposes, many physicians and medical groups claimed the measure would impede efforts to track and treat diseases that afflict various races differently. The editors question these dire predictions, not because the Proposition addressed their concerns, but because they misconstrue the Bamshad/Olson article and falsely assert that its authors firmly oppose the use of racial classification in medicine. One wonders if the article would have seen print if the editors had understood it!

The editors cite the difficulties of racial classification, especially the classification of mixed-race individuals. Then they lament that “race is being used as a surrogate for genetic differences” in research, as if the correlation between the two were insignificant. They point out the FDA’s recommendation, and cite J. Craig Venter’s remark: “Using self-identified race as a surrogate for testing a person directly for a relevant trait is akin to recording the average weight of a group rather than weighing each individual.”

Of course Venter can be expected to oppose racial classification in medicine. By doing so, he’s not only being politically correct, he’s also taking a position he from which he could substantially profit, since his company Celera was the first to sequence the human genome and would likely be the first to mass-market individual genetic sequencing.

The editors omit any mention of the benefits of racial classification in medicine. Those who do not read the main article would incorrectly conclude that race has no use in medicine. Yet another example of how the media spins and distorts the truth. Fortunately, anyone reading the article can see through the spin. However, were a story like this to be covered by the major media, you can be sure that spin is all the viewer would get.

The cover art also reeks of politically correct Race Denial™. The images of six attractive female faces apparently of different races were created by Nancy Burson using a morphing program designed to simulate various racial characteristics. Only the blond, blue-eyed woman is real. The other images were created by altering hers. But one can see that the woman’s underlying bone structure, lips, and nose remain unchanged, even though these vary significantly among the races. Only skin color, eye color, and hair color seem to vary. The obvious message of the photos is that race is only skin deep. The world consists merely of White people of different tints. What harm could there be in that?

I’m reminded of a storybook image I saw as a child, where lions snuggle alongside lambs and wolves dance with sheep, where appearances alone differentiate animals that are otherwise, deep down, all the same and thus capable of living in bliss and harmony.

Apparently some adults still subscribe to such wishful thinking.


I couldn't have put it better myself LOL.

England's,

St George

St. George.

I wondered when you would produce this daft piece from the unashamedly white supremacist, right wing publication National Vanguard. I actually thought you might not even bother mentioning it because you would see that it is just so flawed as to verge on the embarrassing. If this is all the racists have in their armoury, then we can all breath a sigh of relief.

This is written by a second rate Canadian writer who just about managed to scrape through a second rate American University, who nobody really takes very seriously, and who's writings are confined to only openly racist publications and his own sorry website. What he has done here is simply embroider the whole worthwhile Sci-Am article by Bamshad and Co. with his own inane and ill-informed ramblings, which National Vanguard have been good enough to package nicely for him on a good looking web page. His writings are his own worthless opinion and not those of the eminent scientists who he trys, but fails, to emulate. I shall now take great pleasure in taking his article apart piece by piece.



>>Here is a little something that I found whilst doing a little bit of research on the "there's no such thing as race debate". I'm sorry it's a bit long lads but there is enough scrutinisation of Bamshads article here to put Pakistan back in his place.<<



Back in my place St. George. Is that how you see this whole discussion. What a sad little man you are!!!



>>The article can be found at http://www.nationalvanguard.org./story.php?id=1449

Read it and weep Pakistan lol.<<

I am not weeping St. George, just astounded that somebody such as yourself, who I took to be a fairly bright individual (in spite of your silly beliefs) should be taken in by such obvious rubish such as this.



>>The scientific study of race is at a crossroads. With the mapping of the human genome, scientists know more about race and racial differences than ever before. But as society invests more and more in the lie of racial equality, it becomes harder and harder for scientists to speak these truths. Furthermore, in a desperate attempt to stave off the dire political consequences of racial truth, egalitarian spin-doctors have spread a great deal of disinformation about recent genetic discoveries.<<

This little passage is nothing but this mans own personal opinion about imaginary lies about racial equality and about it being harder for scientists to speak the truth. Scientists have always spoken the truth, whether it is distasteful or not. Bamshad and Co are no exception to the rule. Egalitarian spin doctors - what an immature piece of writing aimed at the uneducated!!!




>>We are told, for instance, that from a genetic point of view the differences between the races are negligible, a matter of just a few genes. Therefore, we are asked to conclude, racial differences are negligible, period. Racial differences, we are told, should have no practical implications at all.<<

He states that we are told certain facts, but he intimates that they are somehow untrue - he does not say how - more ill informed opinion!!!




>>But this is as absurd as arguing that, since from the point a view of subatomic physics, solid objects are mostly empty space, it is a matter of pure prejudice that we prefer to drive on the road and not off a cliff.<<

This passage just makes no sense whatsoever, and is again just pure opinion. You or I can express opinions like this, but it doesn't make them correct. The author is simply throwing up a smokescreen with which he can hide behind later in the argument.




>>The truth is: from small genetic differences, great physical, spiritual, cultural, and political differences grow. If geneticists can’t see these differences, maybe they are looking in the wrong place.<<

He says "The truth is". In fact what he means is that this is his opinion. He hides his opinion behind the word truth and hopes that we will not notice. "If geneticists can't see these differences, maybe they are looking in the wrong place". In other words he is saying that the eminant scientists are looking in the wrong place because they are not coming up with the results that he thinks should be there. Who the hell does he think he is to say this. He is not eminent in this or any other field, so how can he possibly say that these great scientists are looking in the wrong place. This is for them to decide not him. Delusions of self grandure or another smokescreen???




>>We are also told routinely that there is more genetic variation within races than between them. There might be 100 IQ points difference between an extremely smart and an extremely stupid White person. But there is only 30 points difference between Whites and Blacks on the average. Therefore, we are asked to conclude, we should deal only with individuals and ignore the group averages.<<

"We are routinely told". I notice that he gives no sources here or any other proof. We are just supposed to believe him on this point. Any scientist worth his salt would have substantiated this remark with proof, or at least a source. More smokescreen.

>>The trouble with this argument is that societies do not consist of isolated individuals, for individuals are parts and products of breeding populations. Breeding populations that have become geographically isolated and subjected to different environmental conditions over a long period of time become different races.<<

Funny how if you read Bamshads other work, he seems to disagree with this. I know who I am more comfortable believeing. More opinion and smokescreen, this is not science, once again just this second rate writers opinion!!!



>>And if the average intelligence—or any other important characteristic—of two breeding populations sharing the same geographical area differs dramatically, there is bound to be conflict. The superior group will inevitably resent the retarding effect of the inferior, and the inferior groups will resent the impossible standards imposed by the superior.<<

Opinion and not science, and definately nothing out of the Sci-Am argument. OPINION OPINION OPINION!!! Where's the substance??? There isn't any!!!




>>But the practical implications of racial truth are hard to deny, and the truth is seeping out, sometimes in unlikely places. A case in point is the cover article of the December 2003 issue of Scientific American, which despite its title is usually as politically correct as any news or entertainment magazine. The cover depicts six female faces appearing to belong to different races, along with the caption, “Does Race Exist? Science Has the Answer: Genetic Results May Surprise You.” In the table of contents, we read: “Does Race Exist? From a purely genetic standpoint, no. Nevertheless, genetic information about individuals’ ancestral origins can sometimes have medical relevance.”<<

The authors opinion interwoven with a little quotation.





>>This got my attention. If race is medically relevant, then why is it not psychologically relevant, culturally relevant, morally relevant, and politically relevant as well? And if genetic science regards such pressingly relevant distinctions as unreal or miniscule, then isn’t there something wrong with genetic science or with our interpretation and application of its findings?<<

This man's opinion interwoven with his own unanswered questions. This really isn't very clever stuff.





>>The authors of the article, Michael Bamshad and Steve Olson, argue that “people can be sorted broadly into groups using genetic data.” These groups, furthermore, appear to be geographically distinct—at least before the massive population shifts of the modern era. Now this is a huge admission, for the existence of genetically distinct human groups is certainly part of what is meant by “race,” and precisely what is denied by those who claim that race is merely a “social construct.”<<

The author now goes on to pick and choose sentences and isolate them to his own advantage, whilst ignoring the context of the whole passage from which they come, and he also refuses to acknowledge Bamshad and Co's conclusions to which these sentences refer. Amature stuff.





>>The basis for the claim that “from a purely genetic standpoint” race does not exist is the conflict between genetic classifications and traditional racial categories. Such categories are based not on an analysis of genes (genotype) but on the visible expression of these genes (phenotype). This may well be true, but it does not prove that “race does not exist.” It merely proves that there is a conflict between genotypic and phenotypic definitions of race.<<

This is the authors opinion once again wrapped up as fact. If you read Bamshads conclusions on the whole study you will see that he concludes exactly the opposite. The author has simply hijacked a portion of the text as a vehicle to launch his own unproven opinion on his reader. This is just plain dishonest - but what do you expect I suppose!!!!





>>For example, the authors note that sub-Saharan Africans and Australian Aborigines look and behave similarly, but genetic markers indicate their ancestors separated long ago. But the conflict between classificatory schemes is more real than apparent, for Australoids and Negroids look alike only to an untrained eye. Anyone who compares members of the two groups will readily see the differences, and with sufficient experience it is virtually impossible to confuse between them.<<

How much more opinion does this guy want us to believe without proof of research or study.
"But the conflict between classificatory schemes is more real than apparent, for Australoids and Negroids look alike only to an untrained eye. Anyone who compares members of the two groups will readily see the differences, and with sufficient experience it is virtually impossible to confuse between them". Really, and in who's opinion is that I WONDER!!!! What a load of old rubbish!!.






>>The authors also note that social definitions of race vary from region to region: “someone classified as ‘black’ in the U.S. . . . might be considered ‘white’ in Brazil and ‘colored’ . . . in South Africa.” But this is also an attempt to discredit phenotypic differentiation by referring to only its crudest forms. However, in societies with a great deal of miscegenation, phenotypic classification schemes can be quite complex in order to precisely reflect the complexities of the underlying genotypes:<<

For want of repeating myself - this is the authors own uncorroborated opinion. Where are the referances and case studys to prove this, as Bamshad gives to these details in his article or in the paper it is taken from. This is totally worthless opinion, not fact!!!






>>The early French colonists in Saint-Domingue identified 128 different racial types, defined quite precisely along a mathematical scale determined by simple calculations of ancestral contributions. They ranged from the “true” mulatto (half white, half black), through the spectrum of marabou, sacatra, quarterón, all the way to the sang-mêlé (mixed blood: 127 parts white and one part black. . . . The sociologist Micheline Labelle has counted 22 main racial categories and 98 subcategories (for varying hair types, facial structure, color and other distinguishing factors) used among Haiti’s middle class in Port-au-Prince in the 1970s. Within each category, the words are often as imaginative as they are descriptive: café au lait (“coffee with milk”), bonbon siro (“candy syrup”), ti canel (“little cinnamon”), ravet blanch (“white cockroach”), soley levan (“rising Sun”), banane mûre (“ripe banana”), brun pistache (“peanut brown”), mulâtre dix-huit carats (“18-carat mulatto”) . . . . (source, Barnes Review, Sept. 2003)<<

The author now looks to take writings and classification work done by "early French colonists" lol in St. Domingue as scientific proof of differences in race over and above the modern-day genetic work undertaken by Bamshad and other leading scentists of the 21st century. Oh dear - the depths that the desperate will sink to. This is the point that I thought you might bail out St. George, and be too embarrassed to put this up under your login. It's laughable!!! And of course it's my favourite passage from this author lol - and they are such colourful descriptions of peoples complexions LOL. But this is what they did hundreds of years ago - eh - incredible!





>>A deeper problem with the authors’ emphasis on genotype is that even though different genotypes can give rise to similar phenotypes—nature can use different means to achieve the same end—the forces of evolution didn’t give a damn about specific genotypes, they only “cared” about how those genotypes were expressed in an individual. Selection works directly on the phenotype, only indirectly on the genotype. Thus from a practical point of view, phenotype is more important than genotype.<<

And the author's point is???? This is a load of unsubstantiated old gobbldygook that frankly works out the jolly old authors opinion - AGAIN!!!






>>The authors do, however, admit that phenotypic racial categories work well for dividing groups by propensity for certain diseases, such as sickle cell anemia (most common among Africans) and cystic fibrosis (most common among Europeans). The alleles for sickle cell anemia and cystic fibrosis rose in frequency because carriers (i.e., those with a copy from either their father or mother, two copies being needed for the disease) were resistant to parasitic microorganisms found in Africa and Europe, respectively. Another example is that the same polymorphism in the CCR5 gene is shown to retard AIDS progression in Whites but accelerate it in Blacks.<<

And what this author forgets to mention is that even with this evidence, the study undertaken by Bamshad etc. concludes that race does not exist - as such. Bamshad specifically brings up this point to underline the various differences in the human species, work which itself underlines the negating of the notion of 'race' as we know it.





>>Because of the mounting genetic evidence of the medical relevance of race, the US Food and Drug Administration braved the inevitable controversy and recommended in January of 2003 that researchers collect racial data in clinical trials.

Hence the authors’ extremely cautious conclusion: “in cases where membership in a geographically or culturally defined group has been correlated with health-related genetic traits, knowing something about an individual’s group membership could be important.”

This is another huge admission. For if racial differences are medically relevant, why are they not culturally, socially, and politically relevant as well? For instance, the fact that Negroes produce higher testosterone on average than other races means that Black men are at higher risk for prostate cancer. But high testosterone production also means that Black men are more prone to aggressive behavior. So if doctors should racially profile Black men, why shouldn’t policemen?<<

This is yet another section of the article taken completely out of context. The article overview clearly states that "The medical implications of racial genetic differences are still under debate" and within the article it also states that some of the investigators of the trials that the author mentions "contend that the differences between groups are so small and teh historical abuses associated with categorizing people by race so extreme that group membership should play little if any role in genetic and medical studies. They assert that the FDA should abandon its recommendation and instead ask researchers conducting clinical trials to collect genomic data on each individual". The rest of the question that our Canadian author asks about why cultural, social and political issues should not be as relevent as medical is once again ill informed opinion being foisted on us that is out of context with the study. I would say that these issues have absolutely nothing to do with the gene study and would ask our Canadian writer to prove otherwise. Bamshad has been fair in his article and come to the fair conclusion, our Canadian writer has not.






>>Compared to Whites, Blacks also have lower IQs and levels of empathy, weaker senses of personal efficacy and responsibility, greater propensities to sociopathy and psychosis, fewer behavioral inhibitions, greater impulsiveness, higher sexual activity and lower parental investment, etc. Surely these racial differences have important practical implications as well.<<

Errr... exactly what gives this man the right to expect us to believe this. He provides no proof of what he says, no case study and absolutely no evidence. What he writes is complete fabrication without an ounce of fact or evidence to back it up. And what has this got to do with gene study. This sounds more like a case for reinvestment in housing, schools and facilities rather than what is in the our genes. Just have a look at the predominantly white area of Gorton in Manchester to see what I mean. Everything that this man states for deprived black people with his broad brush can be said about a large percentage of white people from this deprived area of Manchester. He has generalised his own opinion and stuck it on the end of the rest of his opinions that he wants us to take as a scientific rebuttal of Bamshad's conclusions of his fine work. IT WON'T WORK, WE ARE NOT ALL STUPID!!

>>When you pare away the authors’ nervous qualifications and cautious quibbles, “Does Race Exist?” admits that there is a genetic basis for race differences and that these differences have practical importance. This is an encouraging sign in today’s climate of ideological Race Denial™. Frankly, it is remarkable that it was published in Scientific American at all.<<

What nervous qualifications. Opinion again. What cautious quibbles - Bamshad is quite firm in his conclusions against the notion of 'race'. Opinion again."Does Race Exist?" does not admit that there is a genetic basis for race differences - it does the opposite. The Canadian writer puts words into the mouth of Bamshad and foists his own opinion on us unfairly using the Sci-Am article as a vehicle. "Frankly, it is remarkable that it was published in Scientific American at all" - what the hell is he on about. He just tries to cast doubt in our minds as to the direction of the article - and he has used his own opinion to do this, not Bamshads.





>>An explanation for its publication might be found in John Rennie and Ricki Rusting’s editorial “Racing to Conclusions.” They begin by recalling the failure of Proposition 54, the recent California ballot initiative that would have forbidden the government to collect racial data in many areas. Even though Proposition 54 explicitly allowed the collection of racial data for health purposes, many physicians and medical groups claimed the measure would impede efforts to track and treat diseases that afflict various races differently. The editors question these dire predictions, not because the Proposition addressed their concerns, but because they misconstrue the Bamshad/Olson article and falsely assert that its authors firmly oppose the use of racial classification in medicine. One wonders if the article would have seen print if the editors had understood it!<<

The editors understood all the implications very well. Who is this man to say that they may not have. The editors of this magazine are some of the finest in the world, and work on a far higher level than this silly second rate Canadian writer does. They understood everything very well I'm sure, and read the article as a whole, and drew the same conclusions as Bamshad and Co intended. Take the article as a whole and work it out for yourself St. George, and not piece by out of context piece interwoven with this idiots opinions ideas, and you will understand.




>>The editors cite the difficulties of racial classification, especially the classification of mixed-race individuals. Then they lament that “race is being used as a surrogate for genetic differences” in research, as if the correlation between the two were insignificant. They point out the FDA’s recommendation, and cite J. Craig Venter’s remark: “Using self-identified race as a surrogate for testing a person directly for a relevant trait is akin to recording the average weight of a group rather than weighing each individual.”

Of course Venter can be expected to oppose racial classification in medicine. By doing so, he’s not only being politically correct, he’s also taking a position he from which he could substantially profit, since his company Celera was the first to sequence the human genome and would likely be the first to mass-market individual genetic sequencing.<<

The far right will always say that somebody is either politically or money motivated if that somebody happens to write something they disagree with. Venter has worked for the good of human kind and his work and conclusions should be seen in that context, not some fantasy that our Canadian author decides it tag him with.





>>The editors omit any mention of the benefits of racial classification in medicine. Those who do not read the main article would incorrectly conclude that race has no use in medicine. Yet another example of how the media spins and distorts the truth. Fortunately, anyone reading the article can see through the spin. However, were a story like this to be covered by the major media, you can be sure that spin is all the viewer would get.<<

The Canadian writer talks of spin. There is no spin in the Sci-Am article, either in the conclusions or in the main meat of the article. The only spin going on here is in the article in National Vanguard!!!!! OPINION OPINION OPINION.





>>The cover art also reeks of politically correct Race Denial™. The images of six attractive female faces apparently of different races were created by Nancy Burson using a morphing program designed to simulate various racial characteristics. Only the blond, blue-eyed woman is real. The other images were created by altering hers. But one can see that the woman’s underlying bone structure, lips, and nose remain unchanged, even though these vary significantly among the races. Only skin color, eye color, and hair color seem to vary. The obvious message of the photos is that race is only skin deep. The world consists merely of White people of different tints. What harm could there be in that?<<

OPINION again - but even worse this time - IRRELEVENT OPINION!!! My opinion lol is that Nancy Bruson takes a wonderful piccy, in whichever skin colour she is depicted. Tsk tsk.

>>I’m reminded of a storybook image I saw as a child, where lions snuggle alongside lambs and wolves dance with sheep, where appearances alone differentiate animals that are otherwise, deep down, all the same and thus capable of living in bliss and harmony.<<

What a load of unscientific shit. WHAT MORE IS THERE TO SAY ABOUT THAT LAST PASSAGE????




>>Apparently some adults still subscribe to such wishful thinking.<<

The only wishful thinking here is on the part of our - by now - third rate Canadian writer. Oh dear.


>>I couldn't have put it better myself LOL.<<

Actually St. George, I think you probably could, but then, that isn't saying much - is it???

This article must be one of the most absurd reposts to a fine scientific work that I have ever seen in my life. You should contact your Canadian counterpart and let him know how badly he has let the far right down.

Happy New Year,

Pakistan.

do not forget the major conclusion that Bamshad comes to in his article in Sci-Am - one which our Canadian friend can never change, whichever way he tries to twist Bamshads words and the truth:

"Does Race Exist? - If races are defined as Genetically Discrete Groups, NO."!!!!!!!

Pakistan.

and prof bumshaft is let you down also pakistan,there is still no proof that all that shit bamshaft wrote is true is there,after all you are always going to deny whatever stgeorge writes,and we are not going to believe all the shit you write,so you may as well bang your head up a brick wall

If you choose to remain blind - or ignorant - that choice is yours. My writings are for people who have a mind of their own, which they can make up on their own.

Bamshad has not let us down, he has - and continues to - provide a wonderful service to the whole of humankind. The proof of what is true, and what is not, is there for all to see. Close your eyes if you wish, but you are the one who is losing out.

P.

YOU ARE FINISHED......

I GUESS YOU HAVE BEEN LEFT WANTING ONCE AGAIN YOU ARE THE,END OF THE END,

I CAN'T WAIT INTILL YOU POST USING ANOTHER NAME,BUT DON'T FORGET,THE BRITISH ARE STUBBORN.....AND WE WILL NEVER LET AWAY OUR CULTURE,MEMORIES AND HISTORY,BECAUSE WE ARE "BRITAIN" THAT'S WHAT MAKE'S US UNIQUE,BNP,BNP.

read em and weapt. Live with it Abdul???

P.

lol

asgashqw45d

woof woof lol

upwards

kaioufrj.;dl

Back to it's rightful place

Back to the top for you

First i am a free thinking person, my race colour and religion don`t meen a thing. i am not here to antagonise those who are intelegent enough to. 2000 + years of history doesnt meen anything if people dont learn from history. anything can be proved by looking in the right place to secure information to support arguments, but the one thing that remains is vitually all wars, conflicts, pain and sufferring in the world has been born from either religious difference, political difference or racial difference. The fact that there are elements of all races and religions that decide to use these differences to there own ends and harbor the pain the resulting conflicts bring, just shows that there are elements of racism in all walks of society wether black or white or anything in between. from working in various contries with people from various social and ethnic backgrounds, i have found through personal experience that people wherever they are suffer from simmilar personal, social, political and economical problems and the creation of hostility through racism only dilutes the true problems within a society and deflects the attention from those with the real agenda- those in goverment and in business who are obssesed on making money and holding positions of power for there own gain, completely oblivious or just ignoring the sufering of the masses. please stop the history lessons and just look to the future

smart words and clever writing doesnt hide the agenda of your arguments. why are indian and pakistani males who attend unisversity on average 85% more likely to pass there qualification than there white counterpart. race has nothing to do with inteligence, however social standing does. there is a distinct positive corralation between social standing and iq. while those living in areas below the national poverty have on average around 30 points less on there iq test than those in families with a joint income of over 40k a year. i found this to be true amongst all races in there relevant social standing and no difference between those of different ethnic backgrounds in each of the social levels i identified.