That brings me to another point. You claim that just about 15,000 kypchaks entered Hungary, and a few thousand Tatars settled in Poland-Lithuania, so it’s no big deal. Yet I bet if 15,000 Africans emigrate to any European country, you’d hit the roof.

Even for a make-believe Merovingian, your grasp of written English is pretty shaky. Not only can you not spell your own pseudonym consistently, you misread a piece of writing even when you’ve got it right in front of you.

For example, you went to the trouble to copy and paste part of my comment: “As real scientists are aware nowadays, language and other cultural markers do not correlate very reliably with race …”

Your response: “… was I talking about the language and genetics of ‘nowadays’ though? Read carefully, I was discussing about the ancient white genetics and populations.”

Well, if you will “read carefully,” you’ll see that I wasn’t “talking about the language and genetics of ‘nowadays,’” I was referring to real scientists and the fact that their research into the ancient world debunks your imaginary Aryan race and “Aryan conquest” mythology. And in fact, you were “talking about the language and genetics of ‘nowadays,’” inasmuch as you want to claim that today’s “Europeans” are the genetic and cultural heirs of your imaginary Aryans. So not only are you advocating obsolete, flawed science, you’re doing so in a mentally disorganized way.

Karl — speaking of imaginary, your claim that Egyptians killed “all the occupants of the Israeli Embassy in Cairo” is totally spurious and ridiculous. No such thing happened. There was an attack on the embassy by a mob last month, but no one was killed, thanks in part to quick action by Egyptian army commandos. You already knew this, no doubt, but why let reality get in the way of what you apparently see as a useful lie?

Then as I alluded to earlier, Ivan IV needed the help of Tatar allies including the Crimean Khanate to defeat Kazan.

And then of course your “Europeans” didn’t do such a good job of driving the invaders out of Central Asia and Anatolia, did they?

Anyway, it’s laughable how you keep referring to “the Europeans” as though they were some unified group. I’m guessing you’re American or Canadian, because few Europeans are that dense about these issues.

I like how you say “the Europeans” as though it’s just one big group. Wrong. Also, many of these invaders assimilated, or at least left their mark on the populations they controlled. You seem to be implying that they were all eliminated, which is ridiculous.

” Yes, everyone knows how the Huns invaded many parts of Europe. But is anyone aware of how almost immediately after Attila’s death, all the Slavic, Germanic and Iranic tribes that were previously conquered and brutally subjugated by the Huns rose up, took up their swords and proceeded to process their Hunnish overlords into minced meat?”

That didn’t reverse the effects of breeding with these Turks, which undoubtedly happened. Also you’d best leave out Iranic tribes. It is a well established fact that nomadic Steppe peoples, be they Iranian, Turkic, or Mongolic, commonly entered into confederations regardless of language or ethnicity. This accounts for Iranian influence on the Bulgars and other Turkic tribes.

“Everywhere, in every corner of Europe that was under the Huns’ yoke, the Huns (including their wives and children) were put to death, and usually in the very same barbaric fashion that they themselves used against their victims. According to the estimations of Lev Gumilev, the late Russian historian and an expert on all things Turkic and Central Asian, at least 60 000 Huns were butchered in the Danube region alone within a few weeks of Attila dropping dead. And in the end, only few thousand remaining Huns that survived such post-Attila massacres managed to make their escape across the Eurasian steppes and back to Central Asia where they came from. On an interesting side note, in the folklore of the Bashkirs, (or perhaps Chuvashes, or some other Turks) they actually claim to be descended from those Hunnish survivors.”

I would highly doubt Lev Gumilev’s opinion on the matter. But if you support his unorthodox views so much, maybe you’ll take his word on these matters:

“Gumilev regarded Russians as a “super-ethnos” which is kindred to Turkic peoples of the Eurasian steppe.”

“In accordance with his pan-Asiatic theories, he supported the national movements of Tatars, Kazakhs, and other Turkic peoples, in addition to those of the Mongolians and other East Asians. Unsurprisingly, Gumilev’s teachings have enjoyed immense popularity in Central Asian countries. In Kazan, for example, a monument to him was opened in August 2005.”

Hmm..I can agree with that at least!

“But wait, why stop with the Huns? We’ve also got the utter decimation of Mongol-Tatars over the years that followed in the wake of Kulikovo battle in Russia, and culminating with Ivan the Terrible’s military campaigns wiping entire several major Tatar cities off the face of the Earth along with their whole population. Thus reducing the Tatars to a comfortably tiny minority that would never pose a significant threat to Russians ever again.”

You are apparently quite confused. Do you know what happened in the wake of Kulikovo? Moscow was burned. The Russians did not throw off “the yoke” until the battle of the river Ugra, and how the hell do you think Moscow rose to power in the first place? Quite simple- the Moscow princes served as loyal vassals to the Khans. Also while Ivan IV did indeed sack two major Tatar capitals, he did so WITH THE HELP OF THE CRIMEAN KHANATE, which would not be eliminated until the time of Catherine the Great. He also managed to start his campaign against Kazan by backing a rival to the throne and his faction.

And as for this: ” wiping entire several major Tatar cities off the face of the Earth along with their whole population. ”

What the HELL are you talking about you ignorant moron? While Kazan and Astrakhan were sacked with heavy casualties, neither populations were entirely wiped out, nor were they razed to the ground. In fact, Tatars are Russia’s largest minority today, and they have positive birthrates, unlike the Russians. So looks like the “yoke” is coming back.

Also, Ivan IV had to frequently wage war against Poland-Lithuania. So much for Euro-Solidarity!

” Then there’s the mass annihilation of Moors in the aftermath of Reconquista in Spain, followed by mass expulsion to North Africa of the few surviving remnants.”

None of this can undo the genetic influence they had on the Spaniards. I know how you racists bemoan that all the time on your forums.

” And of course, let us not forget the fate of ethnic Ottoman Turks in the Balkans and Greece, after the natives of those lands overthrew the Ottoman savages’ tyranny.”

While your tales of ethnic cleansing are true, they were motivated by the same romantic nonsense you preach here about “Ottoman savagery.” In their early conquests the Ottomans allowed other religious communities self-administration, and allowed lords the right to keep their military titles. This is why the early Ottoman army eventually had more Christians fighting on its side than Muslims, and that is not speaking of Jannisaries, as this institution was not well established during that time. Many Greeks were fed up with Byzantine taxes and felt they had been abandoned by the empire.

“Now, if you are any capable of abstract thought, you will finally start to notice this weird little pattern there. Europeans ALWAYS purged their lands of non-white invaders, whenever given a first chance, or when the despotic elements that had forced them into a coexistence with these invaders in the first place and maintained such coexistences were finally shattered (deaths of Attila and his sons, the fall of Golden Horde and its little khanates and the destruction of Cordoba Caliphate and its successor taifas)”

I would notice a pattern if your claims had any historical validity. Too bad they don’t.

“First of all, this “large group” of Kypchaqs consisted of no more than 10-15 thousand, at most. In other words, their numbers never posed a demographic threat for the Hungarians. Secondly, just what point exactly are you trying to prove here? Inviting Kypchaqs into Hungary was one of the worst mistakes that king Bela had probably made during his tenure, as this move put his country right into the Mongols’ radar.”

But again, the Magyars weren’t originally European either.

“Again, let’s knock this another one of oft-repeated drivel of yours. Take a closer look at the circumstances under which this Tatar settlement happened, and you might see why Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth was comfortable enough to let them in. First of all, the number of those Tatars in Poland numbered no more than a few thousand. Secondly, their settlements were dispersed”

Earlier you claim that Europeans always expelled foreign invaders as if to the last man, woman or child, but now you talk about a few ten thousand or so not being a threat at all. Interesting.

“I’m aware of that, thanks. And was I talking about the language and genetics of “nowadays” though? Read carefully, I was discussing about the ancient white genetics and populations.”

The problem is you have no qualifications to do so. You’re just another racist amateur geneticist who arbitrarily applies significance where you need it.

“Oh, and which leftist BS “scientist” did you get that from? Lewontin or Montagu?”

You prove my point. Sources which say things you don’t like become “leftists.” I see absolutely no reason why you are qualified to decide what is BS or not in the field of genetics.

By all means, keep lecturing me on Russian history, it’s really amusing.

Read above. And as for the Huns, they didn’t just “disappear” after Attila’s death all on their own and for no reason. It was Goths, Scirians, Alans and others that MADE it happen!! =)

But wait, why stop with the Huns? We’ve also got the utter decimation of Mongol-Tatars over the years that followed in the wake of Kulikovo battle in Russia, and culminating with Ivan the Terrible’s military campaigns wiping entire several major Tatar cities off the face of the Earth along with their whole population. Thus reducing the Tatars to a comfortably tiny minority that would never pose a significant threat to Russians ever again. Then there’s the mass annihilation of Moors in the aftermath of Reconquista in Spain, followed by mass expulsion to North Africa of the few surviving remnants. And of course, let us not forget the fate of ethnic Ottoman Turks in the Balkans and Greece, after the natives of those lands overthrew the Ottoman savages’ tyranny. Now, if you are any capable of abstract thought, you will finally start to notice this weird little pattern there. Europeans ALWAYS purged their lands of non-white invaders, whenever given a first chance, or when the despotic elements that had forced them into a coexistence with these invaders in the first place and maintained such coexistences were finally shattered (deaths of Attila and his sons, the fall of Golden Horde and its little khanates and the destruction of Cordoba Caliphate and its successor taifas)

“Magyars were non-European and settled in Hungary. Later on they invited a large group of Kypchak Turks into their territory.”

First of all, this “large group” of Kypchaqs consisted of no more than 10-15 thousand, at most. In other words, their numbers never posed a demographic threat for the Hungarians. Secondly, just what point exactly are you trying to prove here? Inviting Kypchaqs into Hungary was one of the worst mistakes that king Bela had probably made during his tenure, as this move put his country right into the Mongols’ radar.

“The Polish-Lithuanian kingdom invited Muslim Tatars into their territory as well.”

Again, let’s knock this another one of oft-repeated drivel of yours. Take a closer look at the circumstances under which this Tatar settlement happened, and you might see why Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth was comfortable enough to let them in. First of all, the number of those Tatars in Poland numbered no more than a few thousand. Secondly, their settlements were dispersed

“As real scientists are aware nowadays, language and other cultural markers do not correlate very reliably with race, or have you not noticed that people all over the world today speak English and watch “Desperate Housewives”?

I’m aware of that, thanks. And was I talking about the language and genetics of “nowadays” though? Read carefully, I was discussing about the ancient white genetics and populations.

“As for your genetic statistics, if you start by defining white according to some cherry-picked set of genetic markers, then obviously only what matches your definition will qualify as white. In other words, the process is circular and meaningless”

Oh, and which leftist BS “scientist” did you get that from? Lewontin or Montagu?

Lol

If that’s true then you’re just giving more argument for the pro-diversity crowd.

I mean, if Persians looked like you, why not have USA Persianized (hope this is the right term)

Why not remove English and make Persian the official language?

Why not remove Christianity and make Zoroastrianism your state religion? (oops, anti-secularism alert!!)

Why not change our American Culture to the Ancient Persian one (that is if you know what it was, which you don’t)

Won’t be a problem right? After all, they LOOKED like you….

@Ruslan
Lol right on man

Also basing your claims on contemporary depictions is an idiotic idea. It is well known that throughout different periods, and with different styles, people were often depicted FAR differently than they actually appeared. Hell this practice continues to this very day- just look at how many depictions of Jesus show a Nordic European man, or how Japanese cartoons always feature INCREDIBLY UN-JAPANESE looking people.

Of course this is all POINTLESS because even if ancient Persians actually all looked the way you claim, it doesn’t mean they are “your people” or that you share anything cultural or practical with them. Can you speak modern Persian? Are you Zoastrian? It’s idiocy, and it’s arbitrary. Why draw the line at precisely the moment when certain people evolved features to supposedly look somewhat like you? After all, we evolved in Africa from the same ancestors. There’s really no reason for you to identify with ancient Persians any more than you should identify with Kyrgyz if your hair is red and your eyes green.

“But of course, being a Islamic/Communist fanatasizer that you are, you fail to even see the evidence in front your beady eyes and keep on blabbering your “And-what-exactly-is-”white”?” question every_single time. ”

Cry, WN, CRY! Islamic/Communist fantasizer, that’s the best you can shout while the world laughs at your arbitrary selection of your historical “brothers.”

“No,but while people may try (or be forced into) organizing racially diverse societies, such societies are prone to bloody inter-ethnic and civil wars. With Sudan and post-Gaddafi Libya being just the most two recent examples.”

Wow that’s brilliant! So you’re saying that these people are genetically predisposed to that behavior, meaning you MUST have discovered the genes which have this function!!! Did it ever occur to you that when European nations were less developed, THEY were prone to civil war and tribal warfare? Since you have not a spec of evidence to show some kind of genetic predisposition of these people to fight, maybe we should consider some other, MATERIAL factors which make some countries unstable and other ones more stable?

Naw…It must because they have dark skin. That’ll fly.

What a loon.

Just the light skin? No, as virtually existing contemporary visual representation of ancient Iranic peoples shows, it was also their hair and eye color, as well as the overall facial physiognomy.

http://www.parsig.org/uploads/.....73.jpg?174

And even the Chinese have acknowledged that, as the depiction of a Europoid white, red haired and blue eyed Bactrian man on the left shows

http://www.starshipnivan.com/b....._Monks.jpg

And then there’s the genetic evidence, of pre-Mongoloid Central Asian population

http://www.springerlink.com/co.....&pi=0

http://www.spiegel.de/internat.....00,00.html

http://books.google.com/books?.....38;f=false

But of course, being a Islamic/Communist fanatasizer that you are, you fail to even see the evidence in front your beady eyes and keep on blabbering your “And-what-exactly-is-”white”?” question every_single time. Congratulations, you have proven yourself an egregious tool.

“Yet another amateur geneticist who fails to realize that mankind does not organize society based on genetic markers.”

No,but while people may try (or be forced into) organizing racially diverse societies, such societies are prone to bloody inter-ethnic and civil wars. With Sudan and post-Gaddafi Libya being just the most two recent examples.

I probably shouldn’t ignore Fields’ advice, but before you go spouting “Europeanism,” you might want to reflect on the fact that Europe was repeatedly “invaded” by a variety of peoples from Asia, so the idea of a pure European race at this point in time is fantasy.

As I mentioned in passing in my first comment, “Aryan” is mostly a linguistic term, referring to one line of the “Indo-Aryan” branch of the Indo-European language group. As real scientists are aware nowadays, language and other cultural markers do not correlate very reliably with race, or have you not noticed that people all over the world today speak English and watch “Desperate Housewives”?

As for your genetic statistics, if you start by defining white according to some cherry-picked set of genetic markers, then obviously only what matches your definition will qualify as white. In other words, the process is circular and meaningless.

I sometimes think there must be a genetic flaw in some white people that causes brain deterioration, fanciful thinking and loss of logic.

“Just for the record, Iran is not in Europe.””

Sorry but there is no proof that ancient Aryans or Persians matched Europeans in phenotype, other than the fact that they had light skin. Persians to Romans? You really are an idiot.

Yet another amateur geneticist who fails to realize that mankind does not organize society based on genetic markers.

Wrong, you ignoramus. The tern “Aryan” was historically used for the ORIGINAL, ANCIENT people of Persia and the Iranian plateau in general, that existed there before the Turco-Mongoloid and Islamic Arab invasions of the said lands. As proven time and gain by both anthropologists and historians, they were white and they were much closer to Europeans in terms of their geno and phenotypes than 98% of present day inhabitants of Iran and Central Asia, Today, the modern Iranians have about as much relation with ancient Persians, as the Haitians do with ancient Romans.

“Just for the record, Iran is not in Europe.”

No, it’s not. But just for the record, historically whites used to live in vast expanses in Central Asia and Middle East, far beyond the European continent.

Yet another example of how racist fools still cling to the same old false ideas. Or as W.C. Fields said, you can’t smarten up a chump.

The teabaggers, the OathKeepers, and folks like Chuck Baldwin are the ones capable of political mischief here.

Additionally I’m concerned about the dynamics that underlie the names of 2 groups within 2 different articles as posted below. Their wealthy tricksters and and well – heeled subservient imposters’ groups” display their arrogance by pretending to close ranks with the rest of us.

“…now defunct group called United Citizens for Justice (UCJ)”… from the article “Randy Weaver Moves to Montana:
. . . . Returning to his racist roots?”

located here: http://www.mhrn.org/newsarchive/1096Weaver.html

AND

“Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission” located here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....05149.html
*************************************************

Home http://www.mhrn.org/newsarchive/1096Weaver.html
article from Montana Human Rights Network News, October 1996
Randy Weaver Moves to Montana:
. . . . Returning to his racist roots?

After being released from prison in December 1993, Randy Weaver appeared to want nothing more than to return to his home in Iowa and to be left alone. But Weaver seems now to be on the move. He has returned to the mountains, this time in Montana, and he has again begun to involve himself in right-wing causes.

Weaver bought property in the Lost Prairie area between Bitterroot McGregor Lakes, 30 miles southwest of Kalispell. He has moved there with his three daughters. The deed to the property is recorded under the name of his oldest daughter, Sara (20). Each of Weaver’s three daughters received $1 million in a settlement with the Federal Government. Weaver received $100,000.

Weaver also appears to be moving to renew his ties with the racist movement. In April he was a featured speaker at the Jubilation Conference. This conference is held every year and is sponsored by, Jubilee the largest Christian Identity newspaper in the country. Christian Identity is a racist theology which holds that white people are God’s chosen and Jews are Satan’s spawn.

One of the Montana correspondents for Jubilee is Chrism Temple. Temple and militia leader John Trochmann were among the founders of a now defunct group called United Citizens for Justice (UCJ). UCJ formed as a support group for Weaver and his family during their confrontation with federal law enforcement agencies. Temple now lives in Kila, just down the road from Weaver’s property.

In April Weaver traveled to Jordan with far right activist Bo Gritz and Jack McLamb. Weaver said he wanted to help- bring the standoff to an end. FBI officials on the scene refused to let Weaver meet with the freemen. After hanging around for a few days watching Bo Gritz tap dance for the media, Weaver returned to the Kalispell area.

The few public comments Weaver has made since the confrontation at Ruby Ridge have seemed to indicate an understanding that his beliefs and associations with the far right lead him to personal tragedy. It is surprising, and some what disappointing, to see him returning to the movement which caused him such loss.
*************************************************
“How the Citizens United ruling freed political speech” washingtonpost.com > Opinions
By David N. Bossie and Theodore B. Olson
Friday, January 21, 2011

http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....05149.html

“…Without question, Citizens United has enabled citizen organizations (curiously and disparagingly labeled “outside groups”) to assume a larger role in electoral politics. “…

As I said above, there’s a reason why Bossie and Olson used the words “curiously” and “disparagingly.”

Ironic they want to create an Aryan homeland in the Flathead Valley considering half of the lake is on the Flathead Indian reservation. Between that and the national forest, it’s gonna make expansion difficult