Racists All Over The World Are Going Crazy Over The ‘Cheddar Man’

የብሪታኒያ ነዋሪዎች ቆዳቸው ቡናማ–ጥቁር፣ ጥቅልል ፀጉር እና ሰማያዊ ዓይኖች ነበሯቸው

ተመራማሪዎች እንደሚሉትና እ.አ.አ በ 1903 ዓ.ም የተገኘው አጽም እንደሚያሳየው እንግሊዝ አገር ይኖሩ የነበሩ ጥንታውያን ሰዎች ቆዳቸው ቡናማ–ጥቁር፣ ጥቅልል ፀጉር እና ሰማያዊ ዓይኖች ነበሯቸው። መንጣት የጀመሩት የፀሀይ ቪታሚን የጎደላቸው የዔሳውና እስማኤል ዘሮች ከመካከለኛው ምስራቅ ተሰደው ከኢትዮጵያ ከሄዱት ሰዎች ጋር መደበላለቅ ከጀመሩ በኋላ ነበር።

Tests conducted on the skeleton of an ancient human ancestor who lived in England show he had “dark to black” skin, researchers said.

Racist all over the country are going crazy over this news. They are livid about it! I knew more truths would be coming….. i predict suicide rates may start to rise among the woods in Europe and beyond.

How Cheddar Man Shatters Accepted Views Of Immigration

---

The discovery that the 10,000-year-old original Briton is dark-skinned absolutely has bearing on contemporary debates on race and migration

You’ve got to confess it’s worthy of chuckles and cackles.

A made-for-Internet scientific discovery that at the same time strikes at the core of modern racial strife. An announcement Wednesday that DNA tests on the oldest complete skeleton in Britain, that heart and ancestral home of many white people around the world, suggest that the first modern Briton was blue-eyed, yes, but very dark-skinned and curly-haired.

 

The Cheddar Man, named thus for the English village of Cheddar where his skeleton was discovered in 1903, is about 10,000 years old.

To add salt to a supremacist’s wound, scientists said that the genes for lighter skin likely came from, you got it, immigrants from the Middle East.

Oh snap.

Dark-skinned native Britons and light-skinned immigrants.

It’s like reaching into the eye of a storm and fitting it with sunglasses.

Disorienting.

Those brave lads and fair maidens on glorious historical British dramas on TV — descendents of immigrants.

The image of God himself, majestic, kindly old white guy in white robes with flowing white beard — fashioned on immigrants.

Imagine being Nigel Farage, the former leader of the U.K. Independence Party, who proudly stood in front of a Nazi-era-like poster with the slogan, “Breaking point: the EU has failed us all,” and a photo of a winding lineup of migrants of colour.

Now he would have to change that slogan to “Breaking point: I come from them. I am them.” Such horror.

No wonder there were hopeful comments online about Cheddar Man such as, “Who’s to say the person’s not a foreign visitor” or a call to index this as “fake news,” or the insistence that this was a finding driven by a social justice agenda to force poor victimized British people into accepting mass migration.

The Cheddar Man, 10,000 years old though he may be, absolutely has bearing on contemporary debates on race and migration.

This discovery of a dark-skinned original Briton doesn’t put the race genie back into the bottle in an equalizing “we’re all immigrants” kind of way.

On the contrary, in exposing the racial fluidity of Britons, Cheddar Man delivers a sucker punch to toxic ideas that drive the white power mobs who in turn fuel xenophobic policies. It reveals the basis of their quick codes equating skin colour to valour or danger as nothing but fear-based fiction.

Scientists have long argued that race is not a biological concept. People of one race — or at least people who can be grouped together with similar physical traits — are not genetically homogenous.

The concept of races evolved as a way of justifying slavery and to maintain an economy founded on slave labour; it was easier to rationalize the brutalization of the “savage” than to face the unconscionable alternative.

From then on, it continues to be a favoured tool to demonize “the other.”

Around the world, oppressor groups have always found identity a useful tool with which to assert themselves as inherently superior, as “natural” holders of power, be it on the basis of race, gender, sexual identity, religious identity, tribal identity or caste.

That race isn’t real does not mean racism isn’t real.

Anti-Black racism is so widespread and global in scope, that I wish scientists would hurry up and create a bust out of the fossils of the 750,000-year old Peking Man, for instance, and in keeping with the Out of Africa theory, definitively establish Blackness as the root ancestry of Chinese people.

Such knowledge might have given the Hubei Provincial Museum in Wuhan pause before it displayed a photography exhibit that juxtaposed wild African animals with Black African people.

I wish they were able create a bust that would depict an original “Indian Man,” one who existed before the Aryans and Dravidians did 5,000 years ago, as black-skinned — darker the better. Such knowledge might inject a modicum of humility before privileged Indians wreak racist violence on African students and caste-related violence on Dalits.

When nations look to figure out where they’re going next, it makes sense sometimes to turn back and look at the past for clues.

Being reminded of a shared heritage with people they consider coming from “s—hole” countries, might give Western leaders, including a certain U.S. president, a few pointers as they ponder immigration policies.

These leaders might read data helpfully put forward by Arvind Magesan, associate professor of economics, University of Calgary, in The Conversation. That might help them discover that although their own policies play a part in making those countries “s—holes,” those immigrants continue to be better educated, better employed (although lower-paid) than those of, shall we say, “Norway-like” countries.

This is one way the discovery of Cheddar Man’s skin colour could have the power to force aside the ahistorical lens with which we view our fellow humans.

At least for a few days.

Source

______

The Prophet Moses Was Amongst The Greatest Fighters Against Racism

The prophet Moses is amongst the greatest combatants against racism to have ever lived. The Egyptians, filled with nationalism, wanted to purge and and enslave all of the Hebrews in their land. And we learn of some more details on this from an ancient historian named Diodorus Siculus, who lived in the first century before Christ. Diodorus spent decades investigating antiquity for his many volumes of history books. During his inquiry he journeyed to Egypt where he found the Egyptian account of Moses and the enslavement of the Hebrews, and he used this information for his history. Diodorus learned this account from the works of the Egyptian historian, Manetho, and although his work is not based on the Bible, we can still learn from it because it is indeed the Egyptian point of view, and from this we can further our understanding on their biases and prejudices. More than this, we can further our knowledge on the history of eugenics, that it is not modern, that it goes all the way back to antiquity, that the Egyptians saw Hebrews and people with ailments as physically deformed or infirm who were worthy of death and enslavement. As we read in Diodorus’ history:

“In ancient times a great plague occurred in Egypt, and many ascribed the cause of it to the gods, who were offended with them. For since the multitudes of strangers of different nationalities, who lived there, made use of their foreign rites in religious ceremonies and sacrifices, the ancient manner of worshipping the gods, practised by the ancestors of the Egyptians, had been quite lost and forgotten. Therefore the native inhabitants concluded that, unless all the foreigners were driven out, they would never be free from their miseries. All the foreigners were forthwith expelled, and the most valiant and noble among them, under some notable leaders, were brought to Greece and other places, as some relate; the most famous of their leaders were Danaus and Cadmus. But the majority of the people descended into a country not far from Egypt, which is now called Judaea and at that time was altogether uninhabited.” (Diod. Sic. Hist. 40.3)

From this we learn of the nationalism of the Egyptians, and we learn more from the words of another ancient historian named Lysimachus, who based his work off Manetho. Josephus quotes Lysimachus:

“The people of the Jews being leprous, and scabby, and subject to certain other kinds of distempers, in the days of Bocchoris King of Egypt, they fled to the temples; and got their food there by begging. And as the numbers were very great that were fallen under these diseases, there arose a scarcity in Egypt. Hereupon Bocchoris, the King of Egypt, sent some to consult the oracle of [Jupiter] Hammon about this scarcity. The god’s answer was this; that he must purge his temples of impure and impious men, by expelling them out of those temples into desert places: but as to the scabby and leprous people, he must drown them, and purge his temples: the sun having an indignation at these men’s being suffered to live. And by this means the land will bring forth its fruits.”

Upon Bocchoris’s having received these oracles, he called for their priests, and the attendants upon their altars; and ordered them to make a collection of the impure people; and to deliver them to the soldiers, to carry them away into the desert: but to take the leprous people, and wrap them in sheets of lead, and let them down into the sea. Hereupon the scabby and leprous people were drowned: and the rest were gotten together, and sent into desert places; in order to be exposed to destruction. In this case they assembled themselves together; and took counsel what they should do: and determined, that as the night was coming on, they should kindle fires, and lamps, and keep watch: that they also should fast the next night, and propitiate the gods, in order to obtain deliverance from them.

That on the next day there was one Moses who advised them, that they should venture upon a journey; and go along one road; till they should come to places fit for habitation: that he charged them to have no kind regards for any man; nor give good counsel to any; but always to advise them for the worst: and to overturn all those temples and altars of the gods they should meet with: that the rest commended what he had said, with one consent; and did what they had resolved on: and so travelled over the desert:

but that the difficulties of the journey being over, they came to a country inhabited: and that there they abused the men, and plundered and burnt their temples; and then came into that land which is called Judea: and there they built a city, and dwelt therein; and that their city was named Hierosyla, from this their robbing of the temples; but that still, upon the success they had afterwards, they, in time, changed its denomination; that it might not be a reproach to them: and called the city Hierosolyma, and themselves Hierosolymites.” (Josephus, Against Apion, 1. 24)

Here the Hebrews are described as having all sorts of ailments and deformities, they are referred to as a sickly and disfigured race. The ancient Egyptians saw the Jews as the Nazis saw the Jews: a contorted eyesore that needed to be destroyed for the good of the nation. You could imagine what propaganda was being produced in ancient Egypt; you can picture in your mind the Egyptians describing the Jews as criminals and diseased, worthy of being forced into work camps, just as the Nazis did. The description of the pagan Egyptian historian, Manetho, is a reflection of how the Egyptians saw the Hebrews in the time of Moses: as inferior to the Egyptians, and worthy of enslavement. The Nazis would depict the Jews as being short people with hooked noses, unlike the Aryan Germans who were tall and blond (an inaccurate generalization, of course). The Egyptians, filled with nationalist craze and fervor about how they were descendants of the gods, no doubt saw the Hebrews as an inferior and mismatched race of people.

The Scripture says, “the Egyptians hated the children of Israel, and afflicted them and mocked them” (Exodus 1:13). Now, you can imagine what they said when mocking the Hebrews: words horrific enough to anger God, and I can imagine that much of it was out of nationalist and racialist pride.   

The ancient fragment quoted above says that the Pharaoh ordered that those with ailments and disfigurements be drowned, and this is no different from the Pharaoh ordering that the male babies of Hebrew women be drowned in the Nile river. The Scripture says:

“And the king of Egypt spoke to the midwives of the Hebrews: of whom one was called Sephora, the other Phua,

Commanding them: When you shall do the office of midwives to the Hebrew women, and the time of delivery is come: if it be a man child, kill it: if a woman, keep it alive.

But the midwives feared God, and did not do as the king of Egypt had commanded, but saved the men children.

And the king called for them and said: What is that you meant to do, that you would save the men children?

They answered: The Hebrew women are not as the Egyptian women: for they themselves are skillful in the office of a midwife; and they are delivered before we come to them.

Therefore God dealt well with the midwives: and the people multiplied and grew exceedingly strong.

And because the midwives feared God, he built them houses.

Pharao therefore charged all his people, saying: Whatsoever shall be born of the male sex, ye shall cast into the river: whatsoever of the female, ye shall save alive.” (Exodus 1:15-22)

Now why does the Pharaoh order the male children to be killed but the female children to be spared? Because he wanted to destroy the male seed of the Hebrews, so that only Egyptian men could impregnate the Hebrew women, and by this, destroying the male line. In other words, the Pharaoh wanted to make the Hebrews into Egyptians. It was a nationalism similar to that of the Ottomans who, in the early 20th century, wanted to force the Christian Armenians, Greeks and Assyrians to adopt the Ottoman identity and become embedded into what they described as an ‘Ottoman soul.’

And remember what Diodorus said, that “since the multitudes of strangers of different nationalities, who lived there, made use of their foreign rites in religious ceremonies and sacrifices, the ancient manner of worshipping the gods, practised by the ancestors of the Egyptians, had been quite lost and forgotten.” The Egyptians wanted the Hebrews to be forcefully integrated not only into the Egyptian race, but into the Egyptian religion, much like how the Ottomans wanted the Christians to convert to Islam. Josephus describes the rise of Egyptian racism towards the Hebrews as beginning with the Egyptians becoming lazy and then jealous of the work ethic and success of the children of Israel:

“NOW it happened that the Egyptians grew delicate and lazy, as to pains-taking, and gave themselves up to other pleasures, and in particular to the love of gain. They also became very ill-affected towards the Hebrews, as touched with envy at their prosperity; for when they saw how the nation of the Israelites flourished, and were become eminent already in plenty of wealth, which they had acquired by their virtue and natural love of labor, they thought their increase was to their own detriment. And having, in length of time, forgotten the benefits they had received from Joseph, particularly the crown being now come into another family, they became very abusive to the Israelites, and contrived many ways of afflicting them; for they enjoined them to cut a great number of channels for the river, and to build walls for their cities and ramparts, that they might restrain the river, and hinder its waters from stagnating, upon its running over its own banks: they set them also to build pyramids, (17) and by all this wore them out; and forced them to learn all sorts of mechanical arts, and to accustom themselves to hard labor. And four hundred years did they spend under these afflictions; for they strove one against the other which should get the mastery, the Egyptians desiring to destroy the Israelites by these labors, and the Israelites desiring to hold out to the end under them.” (Josephus, Antiquities, 2.9)

The Egyptians grew lazy, and seeing the success of foreigners, they were wroth. Racism, much of the time, is actually an insatiable hatred for foreigners when they become more successful than the indigenous population. Josephus goes on to say that a pagan priest told the Pharaoh that a Hebrew would one day rise and make the Hebrews over the Egyptians:

“One of those sacred scribes, who are very sagacious in foretelling future events truly, told the king, that about this time there would a child be born to the Israelites, who, if he were reared, would bring the Egyptian dominion low, and would raise the Israelites; that he would excel all men in virtue, and obtain a glory that would be remembered through all ages.” (Ibid)

In other words, the Egyptians wanted to be the dominant and superior race, and did not want the Jews to be above them in success. They wanted to keep the Hebrews in a servile position, to maintain Egyptian domination. The Egyptians wanted to kill those they deemed as undesirables, and Moses was their savior. Moses’ liberation of the Hebrews was a foreshadowing of Christ and His redemption of humanity. As Moses came for the undesirables, so Christ came for the undesirables. Christ declared the parable of the great banquet, which is a direct strike against the evil ideology of eugenics:

“When you give a dinner or a banquet, do not invite your friends or your brothers or your relatives or rich neighbors, lest they also invite you in return and you be repaid. But when you give a feast, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind, and you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you. For you will be repaid at the resurrection of the just.” (Luke 14:12-14)

World War One and Two started because one race wanted to dominate the world. When world war three commences, it will be because one people will want to dominate the earth. The violent thirst for dominance, is the cause of all war.

Source

______

Obama’s New US Census Category for Arabs Modeled After Eritrea’s Rashaida Arabs?

Obama Administration Moves To Create New Census Category For People With ‘Middle East And North Africa’ Origin

President Obama doesn’t see himself as a “lame duck” president, and you can expect him to be transforming America until the day he leaves office. Now the administration is trying to change the census so Middle Eastern people have their own category.

As it stands now, whites of European ancestry and people of Middle Eastern ancestry are classed together as “Whites.” This change would remove the Middle Eastern ancestry people from the White category and create the new MENA category – that is, Middle East and North Africa.

According to the USA Today article “White House wants to add new racial category for Middle Eastern people” (Gregory Korte, Oct. 1, 2016), “[t]he White House is putting forward a proposal to add a new racial category for people from the Middle East and North Africa under what would be the biggest realignment of federal racial definitions in decades. If approved, the new designation could appear on census forms in 2020 and could have far-reaching implications for racial identity, anti-discrimination laws and health research.”

So what’s going on here? According to the article, “… scholars and community leaders say more and more people with their roots in the Middle East find themselves caught between white, black and Asian classifications that don’t fully reflect their identities.”

So it’s about their “identities,” not the well-being of our nation.

Plus they’d be eligible for government goodies and would have preference over European-origin whites in affirmative action. No wonder it sounds so popular.

Back in the old segregation days, immigrants from the Middle East wanted to identify as white. Now that our nation discriminates against whites (in affirmative action programs and disparate impact rulings), it appears that many Middle Eastern origin people want off the white train and on to the Gravy Train.

Helan Samhan of the Arab American Institute said that the change “… helps these communities feel less invisible. It’s a good step, a positive step.”

Feelings, feelings, feelings. And power. Yes, it’s about feelings and power.

The White House Office of Management and Budget has placed a notice of the proposal in the Federal Register, where you can comment on it if you like.

Here’s how the article describes the proposed new category: “Under the proposal, the new Middle East and North African designation – or MENA, as it’s called by population scholars – is broader in concept than Arab (an ethnicity) or Muslim (a religion). It would include anyone from a region of the world stretching from Morocco to Iran, and including Syrian and Coptic Christians, Israeli Jews and other religious minorities.”

Wait a minute – if Israeli Jews are included in the MENA category, what about American-born Jews? Will they be considered MENA?

How about people of Turkish, Sudanese, and Somali origin? There’s been debate about these groups. Where do they fit in?

According to the USA Today article, “[a]dding a box on the census form could have implications beyond racial identity. According to the White House notice, the new data could be used for a wide range of political and policy purposes, including …” and then it lists five areas in which the category would be relevant. Let’s look at each one and cut through the rhetoric:

1. “Enforcing the Voting Rights Act and drawing congressional and state legislative district boundaries.”
   TRANSLATION: More federal meddling in local politics.
2. “Establishing federal affirmative action plans and evaluating claims of employment discrimination in employment in the private sector.”
   TRANSLATION: More discrimination against European-origin white people who remain in the White category.
3. “Monitoring discrimination in housing, mortgage lending and credit.”
   TRANSLATION: More meddling and social engineering.
4. “Enforcing school desegregation policies.”
   TRANSLATION: More federal meddling in local education.
5. “Helping minority-owned small businesses get federal grants and loans.”
   TRANSLATION: Allowing MENA-origin people to get goodies from the government they can’t get now by being classified as lowly whites.

Also, says the article, the new category “would help the government and independent scholars understand more about trends in health, employment and education.”

Well, we no longer have religious questions on the census, but scholars can still research religious demography. Why does the government have to be involved in everything?

This proposed change would mean more government expense, more intrusive Big Government, and more discrimination against European-origin white Americans.

Michigan congresswoman Debbie Dingell thinks it’s great, because then a lot of her constituents would be enabled to “accurately identify themselves and access the employment, health, education and representation services that are based on census data.” TRANSLATION: More goodies from the government, subsidized by non-MENA taxpayers.

And think about this: if Hillary is elected, you can expect a lot more “refugees” from the Middle East, thus increasing the MENA population.

Source

Now read the following sad story — written by the wonderful Meron Estifanos — to learn what Arabs will do to Americans in the near future.

Bedouin Rashaida

Attention! The video contains very strong graphic images

The Rashaida ethnic group is one of the nine ethnic groups in Eritrea. Originally they came to Eritrea fleeing tribal wars and starvation in Arabia about 140 years ago.

The Rashaida as a distinct Arabic ethnic group live in scattered areas in western and northern Eritrea, parts of Egypt, bordering the Sinai desert and Eastern Sudan. These people do not have a permanent residence and settled life. In fact, they are the most favored ethnic group according to the Eritrean political structure. These are the same people whose youth are exempted from any forced conscription and whose members are free of any national duties. And now, they have moved too far, acting as de facto administrators of the western borders of Eritrea and Eastern Sudan. They set their mobile tents across the scorching deserts of Eastern Sudan, waiting for new preys to come. There are three main ways by which the Rashaida hunt their victims. Most of the time, they hijack the victims when they cross the border all by themselves. At times, they kidnap them from the refugee camps and there are times too, when some human smugglers hand over the refugees for certain amount of money (in other words, the Bedouin Rasahida buy the refugees from other smugglers at a certain price and use them to gain more money)

Kidnapping Refugees At The Borders

Before the refugees arrive at the refugee camps, they (Rashaida bandits) kidnap the clueless youth and take them as hostages. They keep them under a tight control, their hands and legs tied with chains so that they could do no harm to them. And they search every part of their bodies, asking them if they have a mobile phone or an address book that shows they have relatives abroad. They force them to call their family members abroad and ask them to send money. To do so, the Bedouin Rashaida took the refugees to their scattered and remote houses. Usually, the Rashaida ethnic group whether they live in Eritrea, Sudan, or Egypt, they are not integrated with other tribes or groups of people – and they live in tents at family level. This is one of their conducive environments to do their evil deeds. Their houses are often tents and originally they were nomads, but these days they are abandoning to drive camels or herd goats – instead they are engaged in kidnapping Eritreans using guns and pick-up cars. Their daily work is to drive to the Sudanese-Eritrean border and to look if there are Eritrean immigrants coming. Once they kidnap an Eritrean, they will put shackles both in his legs and hands. Then the victim will be asked to talk to his relatives abroad to transfer ransom money to the kidnappers’ account in order to be released. If there is any delay in transferring the money, the victim will be physically abused and/or raped. If the victim has no relatives abroad, he/she will be forced to call to Eritrea and to tell his/her family to transfer the ransom money. The more the money transfer is delayed, the more the victim is abused, tortured, raped…etc.

Once the kidnapper gets the money, he will not let the victim to go to the refugee camp – instead he tells to other friends to come and to take the victims. The later will also do the same. In other words the kidnapper is selling the refugees to other kidnappers.

Kidnapping Refugees From Refugee Camp

Starting from the last two years, the Rashaida bandits have devised another mechanism to cause maximum suffering on Eritrean emigrants in Eastern Sudan. They search new Eritrean emigrants in the agricultural fields near the UNHCR refugee camp, kidnap them and take them directly to Egyptian Sinai – the headquarters of Bedouin Rashaida where the greatest human rights violation takes place. In Sinai, every hostage is asked to pay around US$8000 to US$20000. For someone from Eritrea, with less than $ 500 per capita, it is highly unlikely to afford to pay such money. Then the hostage’s life will end there, if he/she does not get financial support from relatives or friends abroad. Those who pay the money will face another threat to their lives in their attempt to cross to Israel – Egyptian police could shoot them to death. Only the lucky ones will arrive in Israel.

Recently, with the new anti-emigrants policy of Israel, the number of Eritreans who willingly go to Israel has declined. This means, the Rasahida Bedouin’s business is severely hit. As an alternative, the Rashaida are engaged to hijack Eritrean refugees from the UNHCR’s refugee camp in Eastern Sudan. Most of the victims were kidnapped from the agricultural fields near the camp. As the UNHCR’s camp does not provide the basic necessities for refugees, some of the refugees especially those who have no relatives abroad, work in the nearby agricultural fields. The ration of UNHCR per refugee for two weeks’ time is: a half kilo of lentils, a half-liter of oil and six kilos of sorghum or wheat – nothing more. It could be easily understood how the Eritrean refugees are suffering. Therefore, refugees have to work in the nearby agricultural fields – although with scanty wages, often with less than US$ 4 per day. Most of the recent victims who were kidnapped and taken to Egyptian Sinai were taken from the agricultural fields. However, there are also several Eritrean refugees high jacked from the Camp of UNHCR itself.

Kidnapping Refugees From Other Smugglers

There are also a few Eritreans who are actively participating and collaborating in this inhumane act of high jacking. These are the same people who have in many ways suffered from the repressive regime in Asmara and now amassing a huge sum of money by brokering people between different Bedouin Rashaida. They pretend to help the youth out of Eritrea by arranging the journey. And they charge thousands of US dollars from their subjects. At times, these people sell Eritrean refugees to the Rashaida as commodities and in return they get money. They get their fair share for that matter and the victim faces a life threatening situation.

The Bedouin Rashaida – who consider Eritrean refugees/emigrants as commodities – have no respect for Eritrean life nor do they have a little sympathy for humanity.

— Muslim Beheads Woman In Oklahoma USA. This is Terrifying

— NY Deli Owner Ahmed Alshami Charged with Food Stamps Fraud, Wife Yells F*ck America

__

I Taught My Black Kids That Their Elite Upbringing Would Protect Them From Discrimination – I was Wrong

No matter how many degrees you have, no matter how nicely you dress, no matter how “articulate” you are, Whites will still see you as a “nigger”

“ሮም አገር ስትሆን እንደ ሮማውያን አድርግ” የሚለውን አባባል በከፊል እስማማበታለሁ፤ አሁን ከረባት የምንለው ጨርቅ (ኽርቫቲ = ክሮኤሺያ – ከሚለው ቃል የፈለሰ ነው) ታሪካዊ አመጣጡ ከአውሮፓውያን ጋር የተያያዘ በመሆኑና ቀስበቀስም እንደ መለዮ ስለተወሰደና ከሌላው የተሻልን መሆናችንን የምናሳይበት ምልክት ስለሆነ። በተለይ እኛ ኢትዮጵያውያን ከረባት ማሠራችንን አልደግፈውም፤ እኔ እራሴ አልፎ አልፎ ለማሠር ብገደድም። የባህል ልብሳችንን ላለመልበስ አዘውትረን የምንሰጠው ምክኒያት፡ “ለሥራ አያመችም!” በማለት ነው። እንዲያመቸን አድርገን ማሠራት/መሥራት አንችልምን? እኔ ከረባት ሳሥር በደንብ ለመስራትም ሆነ ዘና ለማለት ይከብደኛል፤ አንገት አንቆ ትንፋሽ ስለሚያሳጥር። በሌላ በኩል፡ ከረባት ስለታሠረ የሚኮሩ ብዙዎች አሉ፤ “የኛ” ባልሆነ ነገር፡ በተለይ እኛ ኢትዮጵያውያን ደረታችንን ለመንፋት ስንሞክር በጣም አሳፋሪ ሆኖ ነው የሚታየኝ፤ ታዲያ ፈረንጁ ይህን አይቶ ቢያሽሟጥጥብን ሊደንቀን ይገባልን? በራሱ ባህላዊ አለባበስ ሆነ ባጠቃላይ ማንነቱ የማይኮራ ሌሎች ሊያክብሩት ወይም ሊወዱት አይችሉም። ቀደም ሲል ለባርነት ተጋልጠው የነበሩትና በአውሮፓውያን ቅኝ አገዛዝ ሥር ወድቀው የነበሩት አፍሪቃውያን ወንድሞቻችን ለውስኪ እና ከረባት ሲሉ ወገኖቻቸውን ለባርነት አሳልፈው ሲሰጡ ነበር፤ አሁን ነፍሳቸውን መልሰው ለማግኘት በመሻት ባህላዊ የሆኑ ልብሶቻቸውን በየቦታው ሲያዘወትሩ ይታያሉ። እኛ ደግሞ፡ ነገሮች ሁሉ ግልጥ ብለው በሚታዩበት በዚህ ዘመን ለብዙ ዘመናት የጠበቅነውን ብርቅ ማንነታችንን በግድየለሽነት እየሸረሸርን መሆኑ፤ ወርቁን በፈቃዳችን ለማስረከብ ጠዋት ማታ ተግተን መሥራታችን አያሳዝምን? ‘ሠለጠነ‘ የሚባለው ዓለም ነዋሪ ሱፉን እና መርቸድሱን እያስቀመጠ ወደ ካኪውና ብስክሌቱ በመሸጋገርና ያጣውን ሰብዓዊነቱን መልሶ ለማግኘት በመታገል ላይ ይገኛል….እኛስ?…. ከረባት፡ ለእኔ፡ ዘንዶን – የሚያንቅ ዘንዶን – መስሎ ነው የሚታየኝ። የኦክስጅን እጥረት በሚታይባቸው ከተሞቻችንና ላብ በሚያስመርቱት ሞቃታም ቦታዎቻችን አንገትን በከረባት ማነቅ ጥሩ ሃሳብ መስሎ አይታየኝም፤ ስለዚህ፡ ኢትዮጵያዊው፡ ከትንሹ እስከትልቁ፡ ከረባት ማሠር ቢያቆም ጥሩ ነው እላለሁ።

I knew the day would come, but I didn’t know how it would happen, where I would be, or how I would respond. It is the moment that every black parent fears: the day their child is called a nigger.

My wife and I, both African Americans, constitute one of those Type A couples with Ivy League undergraduate and graduate degrees who, for many years, believed that if we worked hard and maintained great jobs, we could insulate our children from the blatant manifestations of bigotry that we experienced as children in the 1960s and ’70s.

We divided our lives between a house in a liberal New York suburb and an apartment on Park Avenue, sent our three kids to a diverse New York City private school, and outfitted them with the accouterments of success: preppy clothes, perfect diction and that air of quiet graciousness. We convinced ourselves that the economic privilege we bestowed on them could buffer these adolescents against what so many black and Latino children face while living in mostly white settings: being profiled by neighbors, followed in stores and stopped by police simply because their race makes them suspect.

But it happened nevertheless in July, when I was 100 miles away.

It was a Tuesday afternoon when my 15-year-old son called from his academic summer program at a leafy New England boarding school and told me that as he was walking across campus, a gray Acura with a broken rear taillight pulled up beside him. Two men leaned out of the car and glared at him.

“Are you the only nigger at Mellon Academy*?” one shouted.

Certain that he had not heard them correctly, my son moved closer to the curb, and asked politely, “I’m sorry; I didn’t hear you.”

But he had heard correctly. And this time the man spoke more clearly. “Only … nigger,” he said with added emphasis.

My son froze. He dropped his backpack in alarm and stepped back from the idling car. The men honked the horn loudly and drove off, their laughter echoing behind them.

By the time he recounted his experience a few minutes later, my son was back in his dorm room, ensconced on the third floor of a red-brick fortress. He tried to grasp the meaning of the story as he told it: why the men chose to stop him, why they did it in broad daylight, why they were so calm and deliberate. “Why would they do that — to me?” he whispered breathlessly into the phone. “Dad, they don’t know me. And they weren’t acting drunk. It’s just 3:30 in the afternoon. They could see me, and I could see them!”

My son rambled on, describing the car and the men, asking questions that I couldn’t completely answer. One very clear and cogent query was why, in Connecticut in 2014, grown men would target a student who wasn’t bothering them to harass in broad daylight. The men intended to be menacing. “They got so close — like they were trying to ask directions. … They were definitely trying to scare me,” he said.

Continue reading…

__

What Surgery and Police Have in Common: Both Kill a Disproportionate Number of Black Men

We seldom think of medicine and law enforcement as professions with parallels. While many exist — both are predominantly white, male and fiercely loyal to their own — the most remarkable attribute they share is a unique brand of public trust that provides them license to cause harm: one with weapons, the other with scalpels.

Surprisingly, by certain counts, the damage is similar.

The FBI estimates that approximately 96 black men die each year in police homicides, deemed justifiable by circumstance. Black men undergoing heart bypass suffer approximately 95 fatalities statistically, after taking account of other factors affecting surgical survival.

In spite of the numbers, the public focuses laser-like on the former and pays minimal attention to the latter.

It’s too bad. Police and surgeons can help each other develop new tools to scrutinize these deaths and hold people accountable. Good data can help.

In the case of bypass surgeries, health researchers have amassed and analyzed mountains of data to understand what leads to fatalities. In a complex process, known as risk adjustment, they consider a vast array of patient-specific factors, such as insurance coverage, presence of other diseases, smoking status, weight, age and income, along with aspects of the surgery itself, such as number of complications, to determine what predicts death.

Identifying and investigating these factors have led to risk-reducing interventions, such that bypass fatalities have fallen substantially, but highly disparately. Over the last decade, the rate for white males declined by 33 percent, while that for black males remained stubbornly steady and fell by only 3 percent, a tenfold difference.

Researchers also use risk-adjustment when comparing mortality rates between groups to account for systematic differences between them. Advanced analyses find that the risk-adjusted mortality rate from bypass surgery for black men is 11 percent higher than that for white men of similar health status.

It’s possible, of course, that these current measures don’t adequately account for key differences in physiology or for the subtle, cumulative effects of differences in access to care. Refinements to the process, however, have yet to eliminate the persistent disparity. It is time to rethink our efforts.

A starting point is examining two key factors omitted from analyses to date: the characteristics of surgeons themselves, such as where and when they trained, and the specific settings in which they operate. Both warrant investigation, as data show that the impact of race on the risk of death is not constant across operating rooms.

Reluctance to delve into this area reflects understandable concerns about malpractice. However, it also reflects a social deference to this group, whose members, like the police, mostly police themselves. Both these factors must be overcome. Identifying whether physician and hospital features play a role in generating the racially disparate bypass outcomes is a step on the road to eliminating them.

Continue reading…

__

Ulster Sorry For ‘Ethiopia Photo’

Ulster Rugby has apologised over a photograph posted on Twitter which showed two of the team apparently dressed up as Olympians from Ethiopia – with black make-up on their faces and arms.

 

Ulster players and Irish internationals Chris Henry and Paddy Jackson are pictured alongside three other men, all wearing Ethiopia’s colours and carrying a flag of the African country.

 

While the picture has since been removed from Twitter, it was recently used as a banner image at the top of Jackson’s profile on the social networking site.

 

In a statement, Ulster Rugby said: “Ulster Rugby would like to apologise unreservedly for any offence caused by a photograph posted on Twitter of some players at an Olympic-themed fancy dress party held two years ago.

 

“It was not the intention of the players to cause upset and the photograph has since been removed.”

 

Source

 

• Students Accused of Racism For Blackening Their Faces

• Italian Club Rioveggio Paint Faces Black to Protest Racism

• History of Blackface 

__

 

5 of The Biggest Threats Facing Black People Today

1: Modern Arab Slave Trade

Africa has been devastated economically, socially, politically, and demographically from a combined 13 centuries of chattel slavery at the hands of Europeans and Arabs that involved the removal of 35 million people from their native land, according to some estimates.

Although slavery has been legally abolished, African people are still subjected to chattel slavery in 2013. Anti-slavery International reports that over 50,000 Africans have been sold and owned by Arabs in North Africa. An estimated 660,000 people are subjected to forced labor in sub-Saharan Africa.

In the northwestern African country of Mauritania, a system now exists by which Arab Muslims—called the Bidanes (masters) who disdain physical work—still hold Haratine (enslaved Africans) as property. An estimated 90,000 Mauritanians remain essentially enslaved.

Haratine mothers do not own their children; they are instead passed down through their masters’ estates. Captives are bought and sold, given as wedding gifts, and traded for camels, trucks, or guns. The enslaved Africans perform domestic work, haul water, and shepherd cattle.

Sudan has seen a resurgence of slavery since 1983. During the second Sudanese civil war, as many as 200,000 people had been taken into slavery. The indigenous ethnic groups in South Sudan are often attacked by North African Arabs, who kill men and imprison children and women as slaves. Physical maiming is not uncommon and is usually done to the captives to instill fear and prevent escape.

According to CBS News, slaves have been sold for $50 per person. Many of the perpetrators of these atrocities are mixed-race and Arabized Blacks who have completely rejected their African identities and murder and enslave in the interest of Arabs.

Slavery also occurs in a number of other African countries including Somalia, Mali, Niger, and Chad.

2. Neocolonialism in Africa by the US, European countries, Arab Nations and China

American, Chinese, Arab and European powers have embarked on a new scramble for Africa, targeting its natural resources.

The Chinese are traveling to Africa in large numbers, with over 1 million Chinese citizens on the continent already and more arriving daily. Angola alone has a Chinese population of over 350,000.

China’s direct investment in Africa today exceeds $50 billion, but most of the profits are returned to China and do not largely benefit the people of the African nations.

The presence of the United States is also expanding. The Pentagon’s Africa Command suggests there is one military base on the continent, but according to sources, the U.S. military is at work throughout Africa in base construction, security cooperation engagements, training exercises, advisory deployments, special operations missions, and a growing logistics network – all undeniable evidence of expansion to secure its interests there.

Arab expansionists in Sudan are currently killing native Africans in Darfur and Nubia to grab land and resources and make way for Arabs outside the continent to resettle there. Over the past 50 to 60 years, Arabs have killed or enslaved millions of Africans, seizing land from them and displacing them in their efforts.

3. Black Tribalism (Lack of Solidarity)

The negative effects of tribalism permeate Black people in the Americas, Caribbean and within African nations. In Africa alone, there are over 3,000 distinct tribes and resulting conflicts have caused  millions of deaths, trauma and displacement. In 1994, an estimated 1 million Rwandans were killed in the battle between the Tutsi and the Hutu. In the Americas and in parts of the Caribbean, tribalism also plays out in the form of Black-on-Black gang violence.

The major issue stemming from tribalism among Black people is that it causes a lack of solidarity.  Europeans and Asians have all but eradicate thousands of years of tribalism and have been able to unify and achieve major advancements. They understood the importance of binding together for success.  Black people have been unable to accomplish this unity and so the Black world today is often divisive leading to  mediocre governments, poor military defense, weak economies and other issues.

Black tribalism is also part of the reason why Europeans and Asians have been able to take advantage of Blacks politically, economically and physically. For example, the colonial Belgian government began actively promoting tensions between the Hutu and Tutsi after World War I when it took control of Rwanda.

4. Falsification of African Consciousness

In his book, “Falsification of African Consciousness,” Dr. Amos Wilson offers an analysis of the current state of Black people’s collective consciousness and how it prevents them from developing solutions to their collective problems.

Wilson defines consciousness in terms of three elements:

Contents – beliefs, opinions, knowledge, perceived knowledge, self-perceptions, worldview, conditioned responses.

Instrumentalities – how we process the contents in our mind.

Directional Organization  – how we use our consciousness to pursue goals; the values we hold; and the reasons behind our thoughts.

Via his analysis, Wilson concludes that white supremacy has altered the consciousness of Black people by giving us fabricated contents: a false history, false knowledge and false fantasies. Therefore, our ability to think and act in our own interests has been impaired because we have become confused about what knowledge is, who it belongs to, and how it should be used.

Today, because of propaganda intended to influence our thinking, many Black people perceive racism only in terms of prejudice and discrimination. Therefore we are focused on the consumption of goods we think will get other people to like and respect us, while neglecting the acquisition of real power to dominate and control our own affairs.

5. Underdevelopment and Lack of Security

Twenty-five hundred years of invasion, conquest, slavery, and colonization have led to the severe underdevelopment of the African continent. Many economists argue that the physical infrastructure of African, Latin American and Caribbean nations are insufficient to maintain favorable economic development.

Physical infrastructure refers mainly to public transportation ( roads, highways, railroads, ports, airports, etc.), telecommunications, potable water and electric energy systems, sanitation, schools, and hospitals.

Adequate infrastructure is the foundation for economic development and the elimination of poverty. Its absence  places limitations on a region’s international competitiveness, trade opportunities, and foreign investment.

The African continent, the second largest on earth, is more immense than the United States, China, India and the European Union combined. Enormous distances combined with poor infrastructure hampers the intercommunication and the development of ties between African nations, which also consist of diverse ethnic groups.

Unity in Africa is challenging under these circumstances. This is unlike Europe, which is only one-third the size of Africa and whose population have been unified by Christianity for almost 2,00o years.

Economic, social, and political development in Africa and the Diaspora is essential to Black unity, which  is absolutely necessary if we are to effectively address major world forces that threaten the Black world.

It was a neglect of collective security that made it possible for other groups to divide, conquer, enslave, and colonize Black people repeatedly over the last 2,000 years. Building a Black world collective security system is, therefore, of vital importance for our dignity, self-respect and more importantly, our survival.

Source

__

Is The Term “Sub-Saharan Africa” Racist?

My note: A tragic news is reported today about the death of Six East African migrants off the Italian island of Sicily. The six emigrants who died are East Africans, and the 120 rescued migrants were Egyptians and Syrians. The official report states “the Six drowned were apparently unable to swim” Ethnic cleansing on the boat? Were the Six, so-called, ‘sub-Saharan Africans’ thrown overboard? Back in 2011, 47 Ethiopians, seven Nigerians, seven Eritreans, six Ghanians and five Sudanese migrants were left to die on a boat by NATO and European authorities who spotted their vessel drifting in the Mediterranean but made no effort to rescue them. They prefer rescuing tuxedos wearing penguins to fellow humans. They let those who terrorize them from the Middle East into their countries, and they are forced to close their embassies out of fear – but they give bad names, like ‘sub-Saharan Africa’, to those who don’t try to hurt them. Isn’t this map a perfect example of madness?

The following brilliant post is reblogged from

Sub-Saharan Africa (1955), or sSA for short, means Africa south of the Sahara. In practice it means all of Africa except for the countries in the very north – Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco and Western Sahara. It is a way to say “Black Africa” and talk about black Africans without sounding racist.

The term is beloved by the United Nations, the IMF, the World Bank, The Economist, CNN, American think tanks, anthropologists and others. It goes back to the 1950s but did not drive out “Black Africa” and “tropical Africa” and come into its own till the 1980s.

From what I have read sub-Saharan Africa is:

• A place of Aids – above all else.
• A place of dying mothers, economic outlooks and weak governments.
• A place of poverty – with most of the world’s reserves of gold, platinum, chromium and cobalt.
• A place of hunger – that grows flowers for India, wheat for South Korea, bad-tasting tea for Lipton and biofuels for machines in China.
• A place in constant need of foreign aid, American strategies, population control, sad comparisons with other parts of the world and endless statistics.
• A place where outsiders think they know best.

The term “sub-Saharan Africa” is Eurocentric and racist:

“Sub” means below the Sahara. But “below” from whose point of view? Like “Middle East” and “Far East” the word is Eurocentric.

“Sub” brings to mind “lesser than” – subhuman, subpar, substandard, etc. Maybe it is just my imagination, but given how heavily the word is used with the Broken Africa stereotype, probably not. Words catch on for a reason.

Mauritania: If it was truly about the Sahara and not race, Mauritania would never be counted as sub-Saharan: Its capital, like most of the country, is hardly south of the Sahara. A geographic Freudian slip.

It divides Africa according to white ideas of race – making North Africans white enough to count their achievements among the glories of white history but not white enough to, you know, respect the sovereignty of their nations.

It sees all black Africans as being somehow alike, even though:

• They speak a thousand different languages belonging to six different language families.
• They follow different religions – Islam, Christianity and countless smaller ones.
• They have more genetic diversity than an African offshoot known as “the rest of the world”.

The soft bigotry of the Saharan Barrier Thesis – the idea that, until white people came to save the day in the 1400s, the Sahara had cut off black people from the rest of the world, thus accounting for their sad-but-true “inferiority”. People believe this even though before the 1400s:

• Islam was found on both sides of the Sahara.
• Christianity was found on both sides.
• Female genital mutilation was found on both sides.
• Arabic and Afroasiatic languages were found on both sides.
• Type O blood was found equally on both sides.
• Trade and the Nile flowed right through the Sahara.

__

Italy’s First Black Minister Has a Banana Thrown at Her While Making a Speech

Italy’s first black government minister has endured racist insults and ridicule since taking office, but on Friday the harassment grew worse.

Integration minister Cecile Kyenge, who was born in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, was giving a speech when all over a sudden a spectator began hurling bananas at her. None of the bananas hit Kyenge, but news pundits expressed shame at how the far right was representing Italy.

“Another shameful and disgraceful gesture. Solidarity with the Minister Kyenge. Now let’s just isolate the idiots,” said Rome Mayor Gianni Alemanno.

Other Italians took to social media to express how ashamed they were to be living in a country where such racist views are held.

Italians on the far right hold anti-immigration views, especially toward Africans. And since Kyenge wants to make it easier for some immigrants to gain citizenship, she has become a lightening rod for racists.

In response to Kyenge’s proposal to allow anyone born in Italy to become a citizen, a far right group left fake mannequins covered in blo0d at the site of a rally in Cervia.

Ms Kyenge released a statement calling the banana throwing incident a “sad” waste of food.

“The courage and optimism to change things has to come above all from the bottom up to reach the institutions,” she continued.

It is not just random banana throwers who have been harassing Kyenge. A parliamentarian compared her to an orangutan earlier this month. Kyenge has remained dignified throughout the onslaught of racist ridicule.

Source

Milan Football Player Walks Off Over Racism

KEVIN CONSTANT is the latest AC Milan player to storm off the pitch in protest at racist abuse.

The Guinean kicked the ball into the crowd after suffering 34 minutes of taunts from the crowd during the Italians’ pre-season friendly with Sassuolo.

The referee confirmed after the match that Constant was not sent off and walked off due to racist chanting.

This is just the latest in a series of racist incidents involving Milan players.

Kevin-Prince Boateng and his team-mates were praised for leaving the pitch during in a friendly in January after abuse from Pro Patria fans.

And Mario Balotelli was hit with a barage of racist abuse from Inter fans during the Milan derby

Source

__

A Fascinating Map of The World’s Most and Least Racially Tolerant Countries

My Note: Woow! If this is the harvested fruit of academic excellence, the world is braced for more immense confusion and trouble. By qualifying Somalia artificially as less homogeneous than European countries they attempt to prove, Homogeneity = Prosperity. Mind you, every European country is heterogeneous. Next, they speak of Pakistan as more tolerant than India or Germany. Does this make sense at all?! Even, racially more divided South Africa is bluer than, probably, the most tolerant state in history, Ethiopia. Yes! The world’s 20 most diverse countries are all African, but in their diversity lies their richness. All these diverse countries in Africa are more tolerant, and have more stability and peace than such relatively homogeneous and intolerant nations like Somalia, Egypt, Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan.

The world knows which populations of the planet have refused to grow up, hence remained intolerant to their fellow human beings – yet, some of these “academicians” perform fraud representation – make superficial and dishonest studies to manipulate the obvious reality. Either they are blind or simply cynical!

Now back to the study…

When two Swedish economists set out to examine whether economic freedom made people any more or less racist, they knew how they would gauge economic freedom, but they needed to find a way to measure a country’s level of racial tolerance. So they turned to something called the World Values Survey, which has been measuring global attitudes and opinions for decades.

Among the dozens of questions that World Values asks, the Swedish economists found one that, they believe, could be a pretty good indicator of tolerance for other races. The survey asked respondents in more than 80 different countries to identify kinds of people they would not want as neighbors.

If we treat this data as indicative of racial tolerance, then we might conclude that people in the bluer countries are the least likely to express racist attitudes, while the people in red countries are the most likely.

Continue reading…

The Terrorism and Political Violence Map

The Aon 2013 Terrorism and Political Violence Map, released on Wednesday, looks at 200 countries and is used as a gauge for the overall intensity of the risk of terrorism and political violence to business in each country – based on three icons indicating the forms of political violence which are likely to be encountered:

• Terrorism and sabotage

• Strikes, riots, civil commotion and malicious damage

• Political insurrection, revolution, rebellion, mutiny, coup d’etat, war and civil war

Neil Henderson, head of Aon Risk Solutions’ Crisis Management Terrorism team, said, “Terrorism is having an increasing impact on today’s global organizations and terrorist attacks are now regarded as a foreseeable risk. An attack not only on, but near an organization’s premises can result in human casualties, property damage, business interruption, legal liability issues and long term damage to brand and reputation.”

On the terrorism front, 44% of countries measured have a real threat of on-going terrorism. Although the report did not specifically define terrorism as religious in motivation, as has been the case throughout major U.S. and European terrorist outbursts, emerging market giants Russia and India were high on the list. Russia had a risk rating of three. India was worse, ranked four out of five.

Overall, Europe had the most positive regional outlook, with 47% of the countries seeing a decline to their risk ratings this year. Limited incidents of terrorism outside of Greece and Northern Ireland also accounted for lowered risk scores.

Middle East most unstable

As expected, the Middle East and Africa are the most unstable by far when it comes to terrorist risk. A total of 64% of those countries are rated a severe political risk, while North Africa, Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan in particular faced the obvious bouts of extreme terrorism on a daily basis.

The Middle East is the most unstable region, according to the map, with 64% of countries assigned high or severe risk ratings. The risk of terrorism and sabotage was most prevalent in the Middle East and North Africa, with 85% of countries in that region at risk, according to the research.

Oil rich countries were the most risky. Nigeria was ranked a 5 on a scale of 1 to 5 for terrorist risk, while Tanzania and Mozambique were on par with the United States and Canada at a ranking of 2.

__