PDA

View Full Version : What I dont understand is this.


Big Risk
03-28-2006, 09:41 PM
I see people makes refrences to "Europeans" such as "They are uncivilized" and shit like that, but I was reading about the civil wars in Africa, and in one country, they got a department of rape. I dont understand how you fools on here can even act like black people are the civilized race when you got shit like this going down. Look at Africa, is it the white mans fault?

LORD NOSE
03-28-2006, 09:43 PM
is it the white mans fault?


YES !

Big Risk
03-28-2006, 09:45 PM
oh yeah, I know its the white mans fault about the borders, but is it their fault that there is a fuckin department of rape and brutal murders these africans do?

Sicka than aidZ
03-28-2006, 10:52 PM
nobody's perfect

LORD NOSE
03-28-2006, 11:02 PM
oh yeah, I know its the white mans fault about the borders, but is it their fault that there is a fuckin department of rape and brutal murders these africans do?



shell knows

LORD NOSE
03-28-2006, 11:08 PM
alot of the civil wars that are going on in africa is due to europeans setting the divide and conquer tactics in place - study it -

european and american missionaries over there spreading their religions

europeans and americans over there using africans to mine diamonds,gold and whatever else - got the people over there killing each other for these things


world history will tell you that the europeans destroyed mad land over in africa making it unfertile


during the slave tradeS, the strong and healthy were taken out of africa - later, kings and queens and their children were kidnapped out of africa - leaving the old and to too young behind -


those primitive looking wooden african statues of women with big bellies and breast hanging were carved by those babies who craved to have their mothers back -

so to answer your question, YES - its white peoples fault

Visionz
03-28-2006, 11:32 PM
^true indeed, the genocide between the Hutu and the Tuitsi's in Rwanda was due to Europeans introducing them to the concept of superiority. The idea isn't native to their own beliefs.

whitey
03-29-2006, 02:40 AM
alot of the civil wars that are going on in africa is due to europeans setting the divide and conquer tactics in place - study it -

european and american missionaries over there spreading their religions

europeans and americans over there using africans to mine diamonds,gold and whatever else - got the people over there killing each other for these things


world history will tell you that the europeans destroyed mad land over in africa making it unfertile


during the slave tradeS, the strong and healthy were taken out of africa - later, kings and queens and their children were kidnapped out of africa - leaving the old and to too young behind -


those primitive looking wooden african statues of women with big bellies and breast hanging were carved by those babies who craved to have their mothers back -

so to answer your question, YES - its white peoples fault

agree with a lot of that but...


there were wars and acts of savagery before any white man ever stepped foot into africa though.

what is to be said about that?

Aqua Luna
03-29-2006, 03:14 AM
agree with a lot of that but...


there were wars and acts of savagery before any white man ever stepped foot into africa though.

what is to be said about that?
The white man doesn't know what took place in Africa before his exsitence.

The White man was in the caves of Europe before he set foot in Africa and he went completely savage in the caves away from the Sun.

galt john galt
03-29-2006, 03:55 AM
by introducing the concept of pride which is false in the appropriating of material objects to oneself and envy for lack of said objects, a schism was introduced that was felt and not seen. along with the introduction of said fasle pride came false knowledge that was passed to further spread the schism like fan to flames. such internal conflicts from pride than knowledge can leave one unawares to what's happening unprotected to the reason/logic that was put upon them in first place.

what happened in afrika is that false hoods were interjected which corrupted the minds of a people that haven't fully healed from such a crime. you can speak of the borders the tribes - the politics that were used in such an undertaking are still in use today. for it became a system upon which the western world has gotten in the position it's in and has to keep to stay put.

it's like the white man has had to wipe the slate turn the leaf and change stripes but you can always tell the spot by what he's thinking from what he says.

LORD NOSE
03-29-2006, 04:02 AM
agree with a lot of that but...


there were wars and acts of savagery before any white man ever stepped foot into africa though.

what is to be said about that?


who told you that ?

whitey
03-29-2006, 11:05 AM
who told you that ?


books.

LORD NOSE
03-29-2006, 01:15 PM
books.


give us a name of one of these "books" so we also can be educated

whitey
03-29-2006, 01:41 PM
heres an article....


Culture/Society Opinion (Published) Keywords: CONSTITUTION PARTY, VICE PRESIDENT, DECADENCE, ABORTION, ORGY, CANNIBALISM, HUMAN LIFE
Source: Constitution Party
Published: 2/17/00 Author: Joseph Sobran


Advancing Towards Savagery
Some thoughts concerning what road our country's on
By Joseph Sobran
Constitution Party Campaign 2000 Vice-Presidential Nominee
January 25, 2000
During the early nineteenth century, a slave trader named Theophilus Conneau kept a journal of his experiences in Africa. On one occasion he witnessed a cannibal orgy, in which one tribe performed acts of torture and mutilation, including castration and decapitation, on another tribe which they had subdued.
Conneau was particularly struck by the ferocity of the women of the conquering tribe, who, their naked bodies decorated with chalk and red paint, gleefully led the gruesome festivities. The chief matron “bore an infant babe torn from its mother’s womb ... which she tossed high in the air, receiving it on the point of her knife” before eating it. During the ritual this same woman was “adorned with a string of men’s genital parts” while “collecting into a gourd the brains of the decapitated bodies.”
Such practices may not justify European colonialism, but they do help explain why the Europeans thought they were bringing civilization to savage places. As G.K. Chesterton pointed out, regretting the white man’s arrogance need not mean idealizing the conquered natives. Chesterton also observed that cannibalism wasn’t a primitive practice but a highly decadent one. The cannibals weren’t satisfying physical appetites, like carnivorous animals, but indulging a specifically human — or diabolical — malice. The historian Francis Parkman describes Iroquois Indians, having captured a party of Algonquins, roasting and devouring their infants “before the eyes of the agonized mothers, whose shrieks, supplications, and frantic efforts to break the cords that bound them were met with mockery and laughter.”

.........the rest is basically comparing the first part of the article to abortion and is not really relavent to what i was trying to prove. although it is a totally different topic of important discussion.

but the point more so is the "white man" didnt make anyone do these acts.

Prince Rai
03-29-2006, 01:46 PM
Studying Europeans will show u that many of their buidling blocks were very uncivilised.
Their actions across the world infected civilistaions with many philsophies which are not suitable for that terrain and for those societies.

of course not ALLL is the fault of the men called Europeans, but true history stands as proof of certain things which indicate that many inconsistencies in soceity are owed to the actions of europeans.

just have a thorough read through

Aqua Luna
03-29-2006, 01:51 PM
agree with a lot of that but...


there were wars and acts of savagery before any white man ever stepped foot into africa though.

what is to be said about that?

Theophilus Conneau (the white man) could not know what took place in Africa before he stepped foot there.

As a matter of fact, the article says he was a slave trader, obviously there to oppress and use the Africans for his own benefit...A person like that would say anything to justify his sick behaviour.

That article amounts to slander and speculative lies.

LORD NOSE
03-29-2006, 01:53 PM
heres an article....


Culture/Society Opinion (Published) Keywords: CONSTITUTION PARTY, VICE PRESIDENT, DECADENCE, ABORTION, ORGY, CANNIBALISM, HUMAN LIFE
Source: Constitution Party
Published: 2/17/00 Author: Joseph Sobran


Advancing Towards Savagery
Some thoughts concerning what road our country's on
By Joseph Sobran
Constitution Party Campaign 2000 Vice-Presidential Nominee
January 25, 2000
During the early nineteenth century, a slave trader named Theophilus Conneau kept a journal of his experiences in Africa. On one occasion he witnessed a cannibal orgy, in which one tribe performed acts of torture and mutilation, including castration and decapitation, on another tribe which they had subdued.
Conneau was particularly struck by the ferocity of the women of the conquering tribe, who, their naked bodies decorated with chalk and red paint, gleefully led the gruesome festivities. The chief matron “bore an infant babe torn from its mother’s womb ... which she tossed high in the air, receiving it on the point of her knife” before eating it. During the ritual this same woman was “adorned with a string of men’s genital parts” while “collecting into a gourd the brains of the decapitated bodies.”
Such practices may not justify European colonialism, but they do help explain why the Europeans thought they were bringing civilization to savage places. As G.K. Chesterton pointed out, regretting the white man’s arrogance need not mean idealizing the conquered natives. Chesterton also observed that cannibalism wasn’t a primitive practice but a highly decadent one. The cannibals weren’t satisfying physical appetites, like carnivorous animals, but indulging a specifically human — or diabolical — malice. The historian Francis Parkman describes Iroquois Indians, having captured a party of Algonquins, roasting and devouring their infants “before the eyes of the agonized mothers, whose shrieks, supplications, and frantic efforts to break the cords that bound them were met with mockery and laughter.”

.........the rest is basically comparing the first part of the article to abortion and is not really relavent to what i was trying to prove. although it is a totally different topic of important discussion.

but the point more so is the "white man" didnt make anyone do these acts.


people tell many lies about africa that people believe to be true -

did you just google something about africa and copy paste the firstt thing you found ?


is it too much to ask for ONE name of the many books you claim says this about africa ?

LORD NOSE
03-29-2006, 02:00 PM
the current direction of everything pretty much can be, but the fact that it keeps going that one and the people don't use their collective concious to change the negative direction the world is taking is our fault.


how is it our fault when we are being oppressed and bound by linear time ?

we spend most of our time preparing for work, going to work, coming home and getting prepared to go to work the next day

paying bills, or many of us are in this systems institutions learning how to get an even bigger work scedule -

there is no time to collect conscious and change the negative direction - we would all have to throw away everything that the system feed us to accomplish this, and not too many people are really ready to be that free

Prince Rai
03-29-2006, 02:03 PM
the current direction of everything pretty much can be, but the fact that it keeps going that one and the people don't use their collective concious to change the negative direction the world is taking is our fault.

what i gathered was that, we can make a change which is absolutely correct!

whether the european man did what he did can always be disputed,
but what is truth is that,
societies which have been left rotten can be improved by exactly what you said..

collective consciousness which connects all humans.

its called holonistics

LORD NOSE
03-29-2006, 02:14 PM
what i gathered was that, we can make a change which is absolutely correct!

whether the european man did what he did can always be disputed,
but what is truth is that,
societies which have been left rotten can be improved by exactly what you said..

collective consciousness which connects all humans.

its called holonistics


and what i'm saying is, if you wanna change the system to something the collective agrees is postive, you have to unplug yourself from his system collectively and stop eating off of his plate

Prolifical ENG
03-29-2006, 02:32 PM
Yes it is Europeans "white people's" fault.

African history is very hard to learn about.....during the last few decades more and more of the truth is known.

For pretty much any problem that Africa has, it goes back to white europeans.

Prince Rai
03-29-2006, 02:53 PM
and what i'm saying is, if you wanna change the system to something the collective agrees is postive, you have to unplug yourself from his system collectively and stop eating off of his plate

true, we must connect with a positive system to uphold righteousness.
and delete a negative virus carefully.

deleing the virus must be doen also carefully not 2 upset the balance.


the time will come

whitey
03-29-2006, 02:55 PM
Theophilus Conneau (the white man) could not know what took place in Africa before he stepped foot there.

As a matter of fact, the article says he was a slave trader, obviously there to oppress and use the Africans for his own benefit...A person like that would say anything to justify his sick behaviour.

That article amounts to slander and speculative lies.


you saw slave trader and automatically dissmissed it. you know there were black slave traders.

LORD NOSE
03-29-2006, 02:55 PM
thats why it's our fault shit stays the way it does, because we have to power to turn shit into a new direction but our people continue to stay in the daily struggle that the white man put us into.


i hear you man - but not enough of us know - not enough are willing to sacrifice the lives of their children - and not enough of us view themselve as a part of this "us" - remember if we stop it, it all stops

as far as i see the a lot of people with the knowledge that help free the dumb use that knowledge not to free the dumb but to show how smart they are nuhmean, and thus thats makes the dumb even more reject knowledge.

yes some use knowledge for vain reasons - they want people to see them as the leader teacher and guide - they wanna be recognized as intelligent - when a baby first gets this knowledge of self he wants to show it off - we all go through that stage of self righteousness -

it's the fault of the black rich, because you have now adleast in my opinion children who grow into a higher thought, they know they are slaves to society, they know they are shackled, they know they need knowledge and their people to get free but at the end of the day what is freedom later when you can't eat right now? so they stay in the struggle of poverty,
black richness reaches the billions, if we took care of ourselves we could culture these young minds into the power needed to change the direction.


no amount of money will save black people - if rich black people began helping poor people they would cease to be rich - they are kept too busy and too sedated to even think about uplifting black folks - they have an image to maintain - don't expect black celebrities to save us

then you have the dumb, basically simple, the dumb help keep the machine going, some knowingly sum unknowingly. we all fall into this category in way one or another.

yes - we all keep the machine running - we were born into it - we started our training early - alot of people feel that by being homeless, they are defeating the beast - but they still depend on the beast knowingly or unknowingly

niggaz just need to step up and graduate from niggaz to kings from bitches to queens and get shit poppin.


thats why the lessons were/are so important - it restores us in many ways - and begins us in a process of waking up - eating to live plays the greatest role imo

whitey
03-29-2006, 02:55 PM
people tell many lies about africa that people believe to be true -

did you just google something about africa and copy paste the firstt thing you found ?


is it too much to ask for ONE name of the many books you claim says this about africa ?


not in the least. im just busy with some stuff today, but i will get some stuff out and see what i can do.

whitey
03-29-2006, 02:57 PM
how is it our fault when we are being oppressed and bound by linear time ?

we spend most of our time preparing for work, going to work, coming home and getting prepared to go to work the next day

paying bills, or many of us are in this systems institutions learning how to get an even bigger work scedule -

there is no time to collect conscious and change the negative direction - we would all have to throw away everything that the system feed us to accomplish this, and not too many people are really ready to be that free


thats some Marx. Man was not made for allienated labor. It restricts humans natural creativy so he says, and what i somewhat agree on.

LORD NOSE
03-29-2006, 02:58 PM
you saw slave trader and automatically dissmissed it. you know there were black slave traders.

your covering your eyes and ears again

LORD NOSE
03-29-2006, 02:59 PM
not in the least. im just busy with some stuff today, but i will get some stuff out and see what i can do.

ahight thats peace - looking forward to reading a book that you have already read that states these facts about africa

Aqua Luna
03-29-2006, 03:00 PM
you saw slave trader and automatically dissmissed it. you know there were black slave traders.

No - I dismissed it because the white man doesn't know what happened in Africa before he set foot there - You were wrong about that.

So you used an article about a white slave trader who already had foot in Africa -

And, was trying to justify his actions with these slanderous accusations.

whitey
03-29-2006, 03:05 PM
No - I dismissed it because the white man doesn't know what happened in Africa before he set foot there - You were wrong about that.

So you used an article about a white slave trader who already had foot in Africa -

And, was trying to justify his actions with these slanderous accusations.


the article wasnt about justifying slavery it was about something totally different and i just took that part off because it had nothing to do with this discussion. and i base my ideas on science, and archeology falls in line with that.

Archeology: 1)The systematic study of past human life and culture by the recovery and examination of remaining material evidence, such as graves, buildings, tools, and pottery. 2)The branch of anthropology that studies prehistoric people and their cultures.

whitey
03-29-2006, 03:07 PM
your covering your eyes and ears again


or are you failing to open yours...

LORD NOSE
03-29-2006, 03:11 PM
or are you failing to open yours...

mines stay open thats why i am able to see through your lies and slander

and your angry now because you have been proven as such

turning red ?

Aqua Luna
03-29-2006, 03:11 PM
the article wasnt about justifying slavery it was about something totally different and i just took that part off because it had nothing to do with this discussion. and i base my ideas on science, and archeology falls in line with that.

Archeology: 1)The systematic study of past human life and culture by the recovery and examination of remaining material evidence, such as graves, buildings, tools, and pottery. 2)The branch of anthropology that studies prehistoric people and their cultures.

Try to stay on topic...

The white man was a savage in the caves of Europe before he set foot in Africa - he doesn't know what took place there.

The Slave Traders statements are slanderous accusations - I have no incentive to give them merit when he was there to kill, rape, and enslave those same Africans he is attempting to slander.

whitey
03-29-2006, 03:16 PM
mines stay open thats why i am able to see through your lies and slander

and your angry now because you have been proven as such

turning red ?

not at all.

sunny this is where you start slandering me, words dont anger me.

you have to recognize that you are looking to try and provoke anger from me. i dont think thats needed.

kids try and pick fights like that, ive seen your a smart person, we just have different opinions.

whitey
03-29-2006, 03:17 PM
Try to stay on topic...

The white man was a savage in the caves of Europe before he set foot in Africa - he doesn't know what took place there.

The Slave Traders statements are slanderous accusations - I have no incentive to give them merit when he was there to kill, rape, and enslave those same Africans he is attempting to slander.


you ask me to prove something. i tell you how it is proved. and you tell me to stay on topic.

you claim whites were in caves, fair enough, what has lead you to believe this?

whitey
03-29-2006, 03:20 PM
be on the truth i do believe the first africans the white man came into the contact with were not "savage" but more "civilized"
white people had tried waring with africa on many occasion but failed.
eventually they decided to slowly intergrate into african society and destroy it from the inside, they took root at the banks of africa and intergrated themselves.


they took root at the banks of all water. it was/is the basis of life. why do you think egypt was centered on the nile? the craddle of civilization was on the tigreous and uphrates? costal cities was the life blood to states that had no quicker way of traveling then.

i never called all africans savage, or even most, but to say there was never acts of savagry before the white man came, and that he caused it all is just incorrect.

LORD NOSE
03-29-2006, 03:24 PM
not at all.

sunny this is where you start slandering me, words dont anger me.

you have to recognize that you are looking to try and provoke anger from me. i dont think thats needed.

kids try and pick fights like that, ive seen your a smart person, we just have different opinions.


i'll take you seriously when you give me a name to ONE of the many books you have claimed to read about africa - until then i see you as a lier,liar,lyer pants on fire - theres no need to lie about things like that - kids do that

whitey
03-29-2006, 03:26 PM
dude did i not say id get to it, im sure you have time on your hands, it wont kill you to wait a little. im not a reference dictionary...until then be easy.

LORD NOSE
03-29-2006, 03:26 PM
i never called all africans savage, or even most, but to say there was never acts of savagry before the white man came, and that he caused it all is just incorrect.


all i ask for is a title of one of the many books you have claimed to read on this subject - and you gave me some googled misinformation - and you did it quick also

whitey
03-29-2006, 03:31 PM
yea, i used that as a quick example. i never said i was done with that, i have more important things in my life that take president like watching the champions leauge than showing you some shit. so take it easy. youll get it when you get it.

Aqua Luna
03-29-2006, 03:45 PM
you ask me to prove something. i tell you how it is proved. and you tell me to stay on topic.

you claim whites were in caves, fair enough, what has lead you to believe this?

I didn't ask you to prove anything. I told you that the article was slanderous lies - from a white man who already had foot in Africa and was there to fullfill his savage desires.

The bible and quran and my own studies have shown me that whites lived in caves as savages.

They are called Neanderthals.

baby jesus
03-29-2006, 04:27 PM
You Do Know That White People Arent Decendents Of Neanderthals. So How Does That Come Into The Equation?

Aqua Luna
03-29-2006, 04:31 PM
What??

Visionz
03-29-2006, 04:55 PM
^it is believed in the process of evolution that the Neathandral (sp) became extinct during the last great ice age. Their bodies where of much greater mass than modern man and because of such, their bodies required much more protein. The animals that they fed off of either died out or migrated to where they couldn''t travel, and so the Neathandrathal died out because of starvation.

Aqua Luna
03-29-2006, 04:57 PM
That's what they say - but, I have come to a different conclusion.

I know that it would be impossible for Whitey to say what the Africans were like before the White man ever set foot there.

Visionz
03-29-2006, 04:59 PM
you saw slave trader and automatically dissmissed it. you know there were black slave traders. When taking in information you have to consider the source. You wouldn't go round looking through nazi journals and archives trying to find information on european jews would you?

Visionz
03-29-2006, 05:07 PM
That's what they say - but, I have come to a different conclusion.

I know that it would be impossible for Whitey to say what the Africans were like before the White man ever set foot there. I was only restating what the common belief is in evolution theory, only one with infinite knowledge would be able to say absolutely one way or another.


As far as Africa's history, I think a lot of it is unfortunatly lost. I don't think it was a continent of savages that's for sure. It's been denied accurate accounts for the most part by european history, which of course means there wasn't a lot taught in schools here ever. I would like to learn more but it's hard to find a credible source of information about it. Would you be able to give me any leads for this persuit?

blackwisdom
03-29-2006, 07:10 PM
I have just a couple of things to state:

Man has been on the planet for millions of years.

Caucasians have been on the earth for no more than 50,000 years, and that's streatching it too far.

Like Nas said, "If you study Egypt you'll see the truth writtin by the masters."

Egypt was only invaded by the Hyksos due to internal strife and a 150 yr civil war. So yes, there was civil war and confusion in ancient societies, but their culture remained strong. Just a tidbit.

Here's some controversy to spice things up. Somone make a thread for it:)

http://panafrican.tv/video/kamaukambon_exwhites.wmv

HOTEP

Aqua Luna
03-29-2006, 07:23 PM
I have just a couple of things to state:

Man has been on the planet for millions of years.

Caucasians have been on the earth for no more than 50,000 years, and that's streatching it too far.

Like Nas said, "If you study Egypt you'll see the truth writtin by the masters."

Egypt was only invaded by the Hyksos due to internal strife and a 150 yr civil war. So yes, there was civil war and confusion in ancient societies, but their culture remained strong. Just a tidbit.

Here's some controversy to spice things up. Somone make a thread for it:)

http://panafrican.tv/video/kamaukambon_exwhites.wmv

HOTEP

Blackwisdom, were the Hyskos ethnically mixed or were they white?
I tried to look it up but, the information wasn't very clear.

Peace

hidden ninja
03-29-2006, 07:27 PM
You Do Know That White People Arent Decendents Of Neanderthals. So How Does That Come Into The Equation?It is Believed though that European Homosapiens breeded with the Neanderthal Man, so no doubt someone somewhere on Earth has common genes.

hidden ninja
03-29-2006, 07:28 PM
Where do Asians and Native Americans - "mongoloids" - fit into to all of this?

blackwisdom
03-29-2006, 07:28 PM
Blackwisdom, were the Hyskos ethnically mixed or were they white?
I tried to look it up but, the information wasn't very clear.

Peace
All of my information shows that they are Asia Minor people. I've had discussions about it but let me check that out and get back to you.

Peace

Aqua Luna
03-29-2006, 07:32 PM
Where do Asians and Native Americans - "mongoloids" - fit into to all of this?

Asian and Native Americans are Original People - They are a different shade of Black.

blackwisdom
03-29-2006, 08:38 PM
Blackwisdom, were the Hyskos ethnically mixed or were they white?
I tried to look it up but, the information wasn't very clear.

PeaceAight Bra. According to pg 84 of The Destruction of Black Civilization the Hyksos were semite Arabs "Children of Isreal."

HOTEP

tostones
03-30-2006, 01:52 AM
peace

if the evil manifested in a certain type, that came from the original..

wouldn't the evil have to be present (to some degree) in the original too?

or am I missing something?

LORD NOSE
03-30-2006, 02:44 AM
peace

if the evil manifested in a certain type, that came from the original..

wouldn't the evil have to be present (to some degree) in the original too?

or am I missing something?


yes - but it was kept in submission

MoT
03-30-2006, 11:10 AM
as nothing is one sided otherwise balance would have no meaning

HANZO
03-30-2006, 11:27 AM
let me get back to the point cause this blackman whiteman thing always comes into context on every thread in the know the ledge forum. back to the topic..
ok you can blame most civil wars in africa due to the fact that the europeans just thought well to get a ruler and draw a couple of borders. what happens is that nations get split, so you can have a group of people who are split into living in different countries. Civil wars happen to unite these peoples, this doesnt only happen in africa because look at the situation in the middle east. after the collapse of the ottoman empire the english and the french drew borders here to, they put the jews and created isreal. This is just asking for war, why would you put jewish people around angry arabs who hate them?? after world war 1 the new borders that were made were just ridiculous, Turkey never lost northern syria and northern iraq, also jerusalem was still under turkish rule. The english and french just saw it right to take control and illegally declare the land theirs. eversince the middle eastern countries wer granted independance how many wars have their been, too many this is the same with africa and with both situations their is a common denominator, the europeans.

peace.

Aqua Luna
03-30-2006, 12:50 PM
Aight Bra. According to pg 84 of The Destruction of Black Civilization the Hyksos were semite Arabs "Children of Isreal."

HOTEP
Thank you, Blackwisdom.

This tells me that the cavemen came after they mixed with the Original people but, before the Hyskos invaded Africa.

Because semite refers to their langauge or culture - and

Arabs are a mixed people - half original and half white.

This corresponds with what I have studied about Moses.

Peace.

MoT
03-30-2006, 01:48 PM
let me get back to the point cause this blackman whiteman thing always comes into context on every thread in the know the ledge forum. back to the topic..
ok you can blame most civil wars in africa due to the fact that the europeans just thought well to get a ruler and draw a couple of borders. what happens is that nations get split, so you can have a group of people who are split into living in different countries. Civil wars happen to unite these peoples, this doesnt only happen in africa because look at the situation in the middle east. after the collapse of the ottoman empire the english and the french drew borders here to, they put the jews and created isreal. This is just asking for war, why would you put jewish people around angry arabs who hate them?? after world war 1 the new borders that were made were just ridiculous, Turkey never lost northern syria and northern iraq, also jerusalem was still under turkish rule. The english and french just saw it right to take control and illegally declare the land theirs. eversince the middle eastern countries wer granted independance how many wars have their been, too many this is the same with africa and with both situations their is a common denominator, the europeans.

peace.

In a way you're right you could basically blame EUROPE for all the shit that happened in the past 1500-2000 years BUT and thats a big ass BUT its always been only the rulers from certain parts of europe..

its basically western europe from germany, france, italy, spain, portugal, england to holland, denmark, sweden and russia that is pretty much all the nations that wanted to rule over as many of the remaining and the above mentioned nations as possible.. so the citizens of those not really countries yet were slaves for the duke or king or whoeverthefuck was in power...

IN THE NAME OF GOD they invaded other nations so the church could seize power usually even over the local ruler (got all the way to the middle east) but many small eastern european nations from poland to the south and east fought against the vatican church to defend their belief and the righteous way of life by the holy bible... but to be independent from the vatican meant the same as to have been a muslim or anyone without belief and they got no money from them so that pissed them off and bla bla bla long story short ... the biggest and wealthiest criminals were mostly bishops and archbishops, many of them were in more recent times(16th-19th century) trialed for child rapes and even more bizzare stuff...

HANZO
03-30-2006, 02:55 PM
^^i agree it was mainly western europe, all the crusades were launched by western european armies.

galt john galt
03-30-2006, 03:06 PM
that was when the church still had power. yes, there was a division between the east and west countries. look at istanbul formerly constainople. that's why the eastern are orthodox christians and west catholic and protestant. with the church in rome and it being the basis of power over kings. it used those kings as pawns to further its reign for it needed new converts per se. religion and guns and women - the three vices used to drive a wedge in a society to create the war strife and pestilence.

HANZO
03-30-2006, 03:18 PM
western catholics are the main cause of the crusades, when jerusalem was taken in the first crusade not only muslims were killed but also orthodox christians, this rises the question if there were no muslims would the crusades have happened?? the pope would have said they are bad christians lets go kill them, i think this is the main propoganda behind wars created by the west. they used the idea of they are a threat or they bad people lets attack them. the africans never actually threatened the west with war did they? if was pure greed for land and becuase that north africa was becoming under the heavy influence of the rising muslims the west acted and started to populate africa themselves. western europe were more agressive in the middle ages, then other races.

galt john galt
03-30-2006, 03:21 PM
no the afrikans never ventured to europe. with the exception of hannibal and the elephants from spain to the alps. he was a moor from the north east of afrika. but as a whole no they were invaded they never went out to conquer foreign lands.

HANZO
03-30-2006, 03:32 PM
hannibal of carthage invaded europe well before the coming of christiananity. he only posed the threat towards the romans; i dont think the europeans would have said in the 1400's lets invade afrika because hannibal invade 2000 years ago. they saw the afrikans being weak, they couldnt move east because the muslims were a growing powerful empire, moving to eastern europe the mongols would have cut you up, and invading the mongols would have provoked them to attack western europe. i think they invaded africa without a choice because they were weak. if africa was strong and had powerful empires i dont think western europeans would have expanded that far and they wouldnt become the powerful nations they are today.

galt john galt
03-30-2006, 03:42 PM
that's part of it. in afrika they had smaller kingdoms with less advanced weaponry to defend themselves. they were not into battlements but farming gathering and such. they did not have the luxury of castles fortified. they were more in tune with spiritual dissertations than a military industrial complex.

HANZO
03-30-2006, 03:49 PM
and the west took advantage, before the muslims could have lets remember at the time the europeans invaded the muslims were dealing with the mongols. the west took advantage of this and decided that their kingdoms needed more lands and soldiers.

MoT
03-30-2006, 05:01 PM
well im not sure but there might have been smaller retaliations from north african kingdoms into spain and france and i think there still is a smaller city in south eastern part of spain which has a majority of inhabitants from africa so they probably did hold a fort in europe but all in all the turkish invasions were the most efficient and thats why the balkan people are pretty mixed and that goes all the way up to poland

snapple
03-30-2006, 05:59 PM
ignorance and racism have taken over this site, hope this kid is just clowning everyone and tryin to start shit

Born Bitch
03-30-2006, 07:19 PM
^^^Yous must be some honky. Racism is the way of the world. Peep game son.

HANZO
03-31-2006, 11:43 AM
well im not sure but there might have been smaller retaliations from north african kingdoms into spain and france and i think there still is a smaller city in south eastern part of spain which has a majority of inhabitants from africa so they probably did hold a fort in europe but all in all the turkish invasions were the most efficient and thats why the balkan people are pretty mixed and that goes all the way up to poland

the turks were tempted into europe because of the crusades and the number of times the greeks provoked them. Constantinople was taken because the turks had told the greeks we wouldnt invade if you destroy all the walls of your cities. The greeks go and build more defences, this is what caused a turkish invasion of europe, and the sultan who conquered saw himself as a roman emperor so he wanted to unite constantinople and rome. A reason why the turks invaded europe was to take rome, they nearly did but the sultan died and they army returned home