The Ancient Egyptians were black! Fin...

Sinajuavi
Level 6

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#1172 Jun 1, 2013
I think it is reasonable to say that Egypt was once all black, but that was a LONG time ago, long before civilization arose in the Nile Valley. By the time of Narmer, Egypt was mixed.

The evidence indicates that Upper Egypt in the pre-civilization Badarian Neolithic phase was “black”. Lower Egypt, on the other hand, has had Eurasians (Mideasterners) present for at least 30,000 years.

I find no reason to get emotional about this. Facts are facts. Anyone trying to deny black origins of much of ancient Egyptian culture is in denial. Likewise anyone pretending Egypt was “pure black”.

“Try harder :)”

Level 8

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

#1173 Jun 2, 2013
LMAO!!!! Again with this cr*p...Seriously GTFO my thread with this nonsense...
Sinajuavi wrote:
I think it is reasonable to say that Egypt was once all black, but that was a LONG time ago, long before civilization arose in the Nile Valley. By the time of Narmer, Egypt was mixed.
But weren't the Romans, Greeks and MOORS mixed??? Ancient Egypt was a AFRICAN civilization by AFRICAN people! END! No Ancient Kemet was not mixed in the way you're thinking. Yes it was mixed with different African groups from that area. But not EURASIANS! LMAO! How did Ancient Kemet become mixed when it was united???

You keep describing to this "melting-pot" theory. Sorry, but anthropology and archaeology doesn't show this. The Egyptians as a population by and large if not all stem from an indigenous *African* stock. There has been little if any evidence of any migrations from Asia or the Mediterranean during pre-Dynastic times. On the contrary, we have evidence of the *opposite*-- Africans migrating out of the Nile Delta and INTO Asia and the Meditteranean:
'The Levant versus the Horn of Africa: Evidence for Bidirectional Corridors of Human Migrations'
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1...

So FAIL!
Sinajuavi wrote:
The evidence indicates that Upper Egypt in the pre-civilization Badarian Neolithic phase was “black”. Lower Egypt, on the other hand, has had Eurasians (Mideasterners) present for at least 30,000 years.
I find no reason to get emotional about this. Facts are facts. Anyone trying to deny black origins of much of ancient Egyptian culture is in denial. Likewise anyone pretending Egypt was “pure black”.
LMAO!!!! You're saying no one should be denial of black origins of Ancient Egyptian culture, yet you say the most ID*T thing like Eurasians being in Lower Egypt 30k years. LMAO!!! I already got on you with this nonsense.

1. I told you this many times...The Nazlet Khaterman is the oldest remains found around 30k years. The Nazleyt Khaterman showed CLOSE AFFRINITY WITH AFRICANS and its culture even extended into LEVANT!!! There were no Eurasians.
http://bigmikemanthropologyshow.webs.com/apps...
2. Saying the Ancient Egyptians ancestors go back as farther than the Holocene is just nonsense. The Ancient Egyptian ancestors only go as far back when the Sahara was wet. Again what you are saying is just nonsense.
3. During the pre-dynastic times it was the OPPOSITE. Africans were migrating out of Africa and into Levant!
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1...

And STOP using the term 'black' when the Ancient Egyptians didn't even use that term. We know they weren't black but biologically AFRICAN!

“Try harder :)”

Level 8

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

#1174 Jun 2, 2013
Mike wrote:
Lol @ "It behooves me to think otherwise..."
And the Egyptians, the ancient Egyptian civilization as we know it (the builders of pyramids, etc.), weren't white but they weren't sub-Saharan African either. They were a Middle Eastern people, and they still are today. The population of Egypt is consistent with the population of Egypt's past. To think it was once all "black" people and is now all Middle-Eastern people because of "white slaves" is absolutely absurd and makes no sense genetically or historically. If they were Sub-Saharan African why on Earth would they have depicted themselves as distinct from Sub Saharan Africans (Nubians)??
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons...
Yet the Ancient Egyptians group more with other Africans than with "Middle Eastern people" and European people, in not only genetic but body proportion.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-y962OyaKpYA/TuwpoZW...
^^^Note even Northern(lower) Egyptians too.

Not only that but 'Arab' Egyptians of the Delta, and specifically the capital of Cairo still show high frequencies of African 'E'.
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b383/shurik...

And this...
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons...

Was NOT painted by the ancients themselves! I don't understand why people always use that paintings. That painting was painted in the 1820's!

You say the Nubians are distant from Ancient Egyptians???? Well guess AGAIN! Because besides modern Egyptians, the Nubians were PROVEN to be the closest to the Ancients.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_70QeGoT_fmI/SvC4gXs...

Nubians were actually present IN Ancient Egypt/Kemet and they actually married Ancient Egyptians while in the Ancient Egypt. The Ancient Nubians(Kushites) LOOKED no different from the Ancient Egyptians and varied in looks.

Queen Qalhata(Nubian)
http://i43.tinypic.com/jsenau.jpg

And the term 'Sub Saharan African' is a flawed term itself.

“Maat's my principle”

Level 9

Since: Jan 12

bamako,mali

#1175 Jun 2, 2013
Sinajuavi wrote:
I think it is reasonable to say that Egypt was once all black, but that was a LONG time ago, long before civilization arose in the Nile Valley. By the time of Narmer, Egypt was mixed.
The evidence indicates that Upper Egypt in the pre-civilization Badarian Neolithic phase was “black”. Lower Egypt, on the other hand, has had Eurasians (Mideasterners) present for at least 30,000 years.
I find no reason to get emotional about this. Facts are facts. Anyone trying to deny black origins of much of ancient Egyptian culture is in denial. Likewise anyone pretending Egypt was “pure black”.
Show us some links about mixted peeps when Narmer was in command ,Go ahead fool we're all waiting .
hiii power

Sweden

#1176 Jun 6, 2013
Simon Legree 12 wrote:
<quoted text>
Then who cares about your stupid "opinion".
WE HAVE THE MUMMIFIED REMAINS OF THESE ANCIENT PEOPLE. THEY AIN'T NEGROES!
Hahahahaha "WE". Don't make me laugh you doorknob
ABC

Greenville, NH

#1177 Jun 6, 2013
big mike M wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet the Ancient Egyptians group more with other Africans than with "Middle Eastern people" and European people, in not only genetic but body proportion.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-y962OyaKpYA/TuwpoZW...
^^^Note even Northern(lower) Egyptians too.
Not only that but 'Arab' Egyptians of the Delta, and specifically the capital of Cairo still show high frequencies of African 'E'.
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b383/shurik...
And this...
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons...
Was NOT painted by the ancients themselves! I don't understand why people always use that paintings. That painting was painted in the 1820's!
You say the Nubians are distant from Ancient Egyptians???? Well guess AGAIN! Because besides modern Egyptians, the Nubians were PROVEN to be the closest to the Ancients.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_70QeGoT_fmI/SvC4gXs...
Nubians were actually present IN Ancient Egypt/Kemet and they actually married Ancient Egyptians while in the Ancient Egypt. The Ancient Nubians(Kushites) LOOKED no different from the Ancient Egyptians and varied in looks.
Queen Qalhata(Nubian)
http://i43.tinypic.com/jsenau.jpg
And the term 'Sub Saharan African' is a flawed term itself.
Wrong, and all of the most recent data directly contradicts that.
For example, just this year, using the latest sampling techniques, it was determined that the DNA of several samples of Ancient Egyptian mummies was in fact Eurasian / Middle Eastern and most closely resembles that of modern day Egyptians:
http://www.nature.com/news/egyptian-mummies-y...
And that mural is an artist's copy from the tomb of Seti I, it was not "invented" 100 years ago. The mural was largely intact and that is precisely what it depicted; if Ancient Egyptians were the same race as Nubians they wouldn't have made themselves a completely distinct group - that is a fact. Much of the data and quotes you've compiled in those pictures are woefully outdated, some of it from the 1920's - 1970's! That is absurd!
More current evidence (from a dental study from 2005):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_histo...

Sinajuavi
Level 6

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#1178 Jun 6, 2013
dcool wrote:
<quoted text>
Show us some links about mixted peeps when Narmer was in command ,Go ahead fool we're all waiting .
Predynastic Lower Egypt was mixed, Africans with Eurasians. One of your own Afronazi noodniks posted the study which indicated this.

Try to keep up, Muzboy.
trollslayer

Hammond, IN

#1179 Jun 6, 2013
Lets hear the TRUTH about whats going on from a African historian....and anybody who calls him a
"black militant"....I mean "afrocentric", cuz he tells the TRUTH...... can kiss my azz.

_______
"Some African historians, including the Professor of Anthropology at the University of Nairobi, Simiyu Wandibba, believe that European writers developed such theories to discredit Africa and make it easier for the continent to be colonised.

"In the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries there were theories that Africa was inhabited much later than Asia and that the people occupying Africa today were the result of waves of migration from western Asia, the Middle East and the Far East.

I want to say that this is not true. But if you want to rule a people, you don't want to give them credit."

-Professor Simiyu Wandibba, University of Nairobi.

“Try harder :)”

Level 8

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

#1181 Jun 8, 2013
ABC wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong, and all of the most recent data directly contradicts that.
Um....No it doesn't. Almost ALL remains of Ancient Egyptians of the dynastic period show they have more affinities with their neighboring Africans.
ABC wrote:
For example, just this year, using the latest sampling techniques, it was determined that the DNA of several samples of Ancient Egyptian mummies was in fact Eurasian / Middle Eastern and most closely resembles that of modern day Egyptians:
http://www.nature.com/news/egyptian-mummies-y...
I already seen that article and you should actually READ IT. It was just ONE sampled mummy. Not only that, the date of the mummy was Graeco-Roman Egyptian period(806 BC–124AD) and NOT the early dynastic periods! Read here!
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s133...

That mummy was not even from the New Kingdom, so OBVIOUS that mummy would carry haplogroup I2, since Asiatics invaded Egypt well before the Graeco-Roman Egyptian period. Speaking of recent genetic testing. Try to explain King Ramses III E1b1a which is mostly found in West Africa. And that study was done by Hawass!
http://img42.imageshack.us/img42/1899/rameses...

^^^That was just ONE mummy too. See how easy it is?
ABC wrote:
And that mural is an artist's copy from the tomb of Seti I, it was not "invented" 100 years ago. The mural was largely intact and that is precisely what it depicted; if Ancient Egyptians were the same race as Nubians they wouldn't have made themselves a completely distinct group - that is a fact.
1. Again that painting was done in the 1800's NOT by the Ancients. Here is how the Ancients actually depicted themselves.
http://i43.tinypic.com/104g7z6.jpg
2. In one of my post, I ALREADY proved how the Ancient Egyptians and Nubians were close and didn't see themselves as different. I'm not going to even bother explaining that again, because modern science already tell us that the Nubians and modern Egyptians(upper Egyptians) are the CLOSEST related to the Ancients.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_70QeGoT_fmI/SvC4gXs...
ABC wrote:
Much of the data and quotes you've compiled in those pictures are woefully outdated, some of it from the 1920's - 1970's! That is absurd!
LMAO!!! Don't try to twist things, most of the studies cited in the pictures are from different times, and still you didn't even refute any of them. All you showed is a mummy carrying haplogroup I2 from the Graeco-Roman Egyptian period!!! Again all Egyptians from the early dynastic periods SHOW AFRICAN AFFINITY. You have yet to even debunk that...
ABC wrote:
More current evidence (from a dental study from 2005):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_histo...
LOL!!! Seriously? Dental study??? It doesn't even matter, because all Ancient Egyptian mummies group with OTHER Northeast Africans and NOT Near easterns or Europeans. And your own link uses outdated terms such as 'Caucasoid'. What is that suppose to prove? Again the Ancient Egyptians group more with OTHER AFRICAN FIRST.
http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/3571/kemp200...

And also Autosomal DNA!
http://i40.tinypic.com/14jthj5.jpg

^^^So are you going to tell me those studies are dated?

LMAO!!!! Again show me Ancient Egyptians BEFORE the Graeco-Roman Egyptian period grouping with NON Africans. I'll be waiting

“Try harder :)”

Level 8

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

#1182 Jun 8, 2013
ABC wrote:
<quoted text>
More current evidence (from a dental study from 2005):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_histo...
Oh yeah...Mister ABC. Why did you ignore these from your link!!??????

Trikhanus (1981) found Egyptians to plot closest to tropical Africans and not Mediterranean Europeans residing in a roughly similar climatic area.[59] A more recent study compared ancient Egyptian osteology to that of African-Americans and White Americans, and found that the stature of the Ancient Egyptians was more similar to the stature of African-Americans, although it was not identical:[60]

"Our results confirm that, although ancient Egyptians are closer in body proportion to modern American Blacks than they are to American Whites, proportions in Blacks and Egyptians are not identical."
From your SAME link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_histo...

Also this...

A survey cited by Kemp (2005) of pooled ancient Egyptian crania spanning all time periods found that the Egyptian population as a whole clusters more closely to modern Egyptians than to other groups, but apart from modern Egyptians, they cluster closest to Nubian and "Ethiopic" populations than they do to Middle Easterners or Europeans. In Kemp's unpooled dendrogram it details that the Pre-Dynastic Egyptians (El Bardi and Naqada) samples cluster closest to ancient Nubians and modern Ethiopic populations, and conversely that Late Kingdom and modern Egyptians cluster with Middle Eastern and modern European populations. Kemp also noted that Egypt conquered and settled Nubia beginning in the 1st Dynasty.[48]
Anthropologist Nancy Lovell states the following:
“ "There is now a sufficient body of evidence from modern studies of skeletal remains to indicate that the ancient Egyptians, especially southern Egyptians, exhibited physical characteristics that are within the range of variation for ancient and modern indigenous peoples of the Sub Sahara and tropical Africa.. In general, the inhabitants of Upper Egypt and Nubia had the greatest biological affinity to people of the Sahara and more southerly areas."
"must be placed in the context of hypotheses informed by archaeological, linguistic, geographic and other data. In such contexts, the physical anthropological evidence indicates that early Nile Valley populations can be identified as part of an African lineage, but exhibiting local variation. This variation represents the short and long term effects of evolutionary forces, such as gene flow, genetic drift, and natural selection, influenced by culture and geography."[49]
Again from your link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_histo...

AGAIN FROM YOUR SAME LINK!!!! ROFLMFAO!!!!

You see this is why more intelligent people rarely use Wikipedia, because anyone with a agenda can use it!

Epic FAIL!

“Try harder :)”

Level 8

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

#1183 Jun 8, 2013
Sinajuavi wrote:
<quoted text>
Predynastic Lower Egypt was mixed, Africans with Eurasians. One of your own Afronazi noodniks posted the study which indicated this.
Try to keep up, Muzboy.
Oh..I see you decided to ignore this post by me to you debunking that claim...-__-
http://www.topix.com/forum/afam/TF2UGEI0UJU1N...

But I was expecting that anyways.
Almoravid

Rotterdam, Netherlands

#1184 Jun 8, 2013
big mike M wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh..I see you decided to ignore this post by me to you debunking that claim...-__-
http://www.topix.com/forum/afam/TF2UGEI0UJU1N...
But I was expecting that anyways.
You are right on all accounts,

And here is some additional info on Nortwest Africa and the South of the Sahara:

Craniometric data from seven human groups (Tables 3, 4) were subjected to principal components analysis, which allies the early Holocene population at Gobero (Gob-e) with mid-Holocene “Mechtoids” from Mali and Mauritania [18],[26],[27] and with Late Pleistocene Iberomaurusians and early Holocene Capsians from across the Maghreb

http://www.plosone.org/article/fetchObject.ac...

Figure 6. Principal components analysis of craniofacial dimensions among Late Pleistocene to mid-Holocene populations from the Maghreb and southern Sahara.

http://www.plosone.org/article/fetchObject.ac...

Table 3. Nine human populations sampled for craniometric analysis ranging in age from the Late Pleistocene (ca. 80,000 BP, Aterian) to the mid-Holocene (ca. 4000 BP) and in geographic distribution across the Maghreb to the southern Sahara [18],[19],[26],[27],[54].
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.00029 95.t003

http://www.plosone.org/article/fetchObject.ac...

--Lakeside Cemeteries in the Sahara: 5000 Years of Holocene Population and Environmental Change

As you can see early crania shows similar to those African remains from the South. So does the tropical body portions.

And you are right on the Nazlet Khater.

"The morphometric affinities of the 33,000 year old skeleton from Nazlet Khater, Upper Egypt are examined using multivariate statistical procedures..

The results indicate a strong association between some of the sub-Saharan Middle Stone Age (MSA) specimens, and the Nazlet Khater mandible. Furthermore, the results suggest that variability between African populations during the Neolithic and
Protohistoric periods was more pronounced than the range of variability observed among recent African and Levantine populations." (PINHASI Ron, SEMAL Patrick (2000).

The position of the Nazlet Khater specimen among prehistoric and modern African and Levantine populations. Journal of human evolution. 2000, vol. 39, no3, pp. 269-288 )
The Upper Palaeolithic Lithic Industry of Nazlet Khater 4 (Egypt): Implications for the Stone Age/Palaeolithic of Northeastern Africa

Authors: Leplongeon, Alice1; Pleurdeau, David2
Source: African Archaeological Review, Volume 28, Number 3, September 2011, pp. 213-236(24)


Abstract:

Between Marine Isotope Stage (MIS) 4 and 2, Northeast Africa witnessed migrations of Homo sapiens into Eurasia. Within the context of the aridification of the Sahara, the Nile Valley probably offered a very attractive corridor into Eurasia. This region and this period are therefore central for the (pre)history of the out-of-Africa peopling of modern humans. However, there are very few sites from the beginning of the Upper Palaeolithic that document these migration events. In Egypt, the site of Nazlet Khater 4 (NK4), which is related to ancient H. sapiens quarrying activities, is one of them. Its lithic assemblage shows an important laminar component, and this, associated with its chronological position (ca. 33 ka), means that the site is the most ancient Upper Palaeolithic sites of this region. The detailed study of the Nazlet Khater 4 lithic material shows that blade production (volumetric reduction) is also associated with flake production (surface reduction). This technological duality addresses the issue of direct attribution of NK4 to the Upper Palaeolithic.

And as we know by now, Eurasians are cold adapted in limb ratio.

“Try harder :)”

Level 8

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

#1185 Jun 8, 2013
@Almoravid

Awesome post man! Glad to see you back. I been saying what you posted for like the longest!
trollslayer

Midlothian, IL

#1186 Jun 8, 2013
big mike M wrote:
@Almoravid
Awesome post man! Glad to see you back. I been saying what you posted for like the longest!
Be sure to drop some of ur links here.
http://www.topix.com/forum/afam/TU2NNLIM00PLJ...

Sinajuavi
Level 6

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#1187 Jun 9, 2013
big mike M wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh..I see you decided to ignore this post by me to you debunking that claim...-__-
http://www.topix.com/forum/afam/TF2UGEI0UJU1N...
But I was expecting that anyways.
Your posts debunk nothing, boy.

You babble and lie, post articles you don't understand, and end up shooting yourself in the foot every time.

Moron.

Afronazi.

Racist.

Pendejo.

“Try harder :)”

Level 8

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

#1188 Jun 9, 2013
Lol How could my post not debunk anything when YOU didn't even bother to address anything.

Please explain how my own links "shot me in the foot". Please explain how I am lying. Please do tell...Enlighten me. No I understand EVERY from the links I posted, so mo I didn't shot myself in the foot. You clearly have no argument which is why you couldn't address any of my points all...

Your post basically shows you have no argument and lost confidence by saying random things and calling me a racist while not even directly addressing my points or even explaining how my own links I posted shot me in the foot.

GTFO my thread and STOP wasting my time. You obviously lost.
trollslayer

Midlothian, IL

#1189 Jun 9, 2013
Sinajuavi wrote:
<quoted text>
Your posts debunk nothing, boy.
You babble and lie, post articles you don't understand, and end up shooting yourself in the foot every time.
Moron.
Afronazi.
Racist.
Pendejo.
refocus on Mike's info. pretend you are a educated person who reviews and analyzes all the data. here it is again below. No meltdowns. please. Just address the data:

big mike M wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh..I see you decided to ignore this post by me to you debunking that claim...-__-
http://www.topix.com/forum/afam/TF2UGEI0UJU1N ...
But I was expecting that anyways.
http://www.topix.com/forum/afam/TF2UGEI0UJU1N...
trollslayer

Midlothian, IL

#1190 Jun 9, 2013
Tmack wrote:
man people are stupid today Egytians didnot come from a Eurasian and then mixed with blacks. First of all recent dna evidence links egypt to the greater lakes region. robert Baavaul links egypt to the Sudan as far as west Sudan and a little to the south near chad. Now most cases this is true and still remains fact that Egypt more than likely started off from the south weast near Chad moved to the grat lakes region also in the south and push northward into norther sudan. It is also said that these people had asiatic people with them wether slave or free born who knew but these asians were with them. I believe in the beginning egypt was 98% black with a few mixed people and asians wether slave or free no one knows. After awhile Egypt became mixed due to conquest and enslavement of other races. It behooves me to think otherwise and also if you know all the different races that were enslave in Egypt at it's peak it would also let you know how huge the egyptian empire really was. I should say kemet though for this was the original name.
Good points.

1)Blacks were here on earth b4 "euroasians"....this we know.
2)the migrational flow into Kemet was from south to north. Of course the Black originates from the south of Kemet.
_____

racist won't ya' tp believe that these "euroasians" were always here. Well that's a lie within itself. "euroasians" have to come from somewhere...they have to have ancestors. of course, there's only one ancestor we ALL have.

“Maat's my principle”

Level 9

Since: Jan 12

bamako,mali

#1191 Jun 9, 2013
Sinajuavi wrote:
<quoted text>
Predynastic Lower Egypt was mixed, Africans with Eurasians. One of your own Afronazi noodniks posted the study which indicated this.
Try to keep up, Muzboy.
We're still Waiting on you To bring up some links F**l ,Where are your links Barros ??

Sinajuavi
Level 6

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#1192 Jun 9, 2013
big mike M wrote:
Lol How could my post not debunk anything when YOU didn't even bother to address anything.
Please explain how my own links "shot me in the foot". Please explain how I am lying. Please do tell...Enlighten me. No I understand EVERY from the links I posted, so mo I didn't shot myself in the foot. You clearly have no argument which is why you couldn't address any of my points all...
Your post basically shows you have no argument and lost confidence by saying random things and calling me a racist while not even directly addressing my points or even explaining how my own links I posted shot me in the foot.
GTFO my thread and STOP wasting my time. You obviously lost.
Moron. How quickly you forget your posting data on Tunisian DNA from human remains, the article clearly stating that African DNA showed up 20,000 years ago, and then you claiming that it was the oldest DNA in the Maghreb, when Eurasian DNA was there 30,000 years ago! LOL!!! That was the most comical example of your lying crap, you racist turd.

Your evasive prattling is designed to defect from the many points on which your case has been demolished.

The Maghreb has been predominantly Eurasian for 30,000 years... your failure to even address the evidence confirming this is another clear indication of your status as a racist cultish dropout.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

African-American Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Are black people really the real jews? (Oct '12) 3 min Moses 1,219
Whites Trying to Cause Aging Problem by Injecti... 3 min SadButTruehd 3
Will Le Pen repatriate Muslims from france? 9 min Barros 55
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 14 min AmericaTRUMPEDign... 1,458,610
the moors were black africans not arabs!!! (Jun '08) 35 min Moses 50,653
Blacks Are Biologically Superior To Whites (Sep '12) 41 min SadButTruehd 691
The Foolish BM Maceo 46 min SadButTruehd 1
The reason black men desire white women 1 hr SadButTruehd 63
More from around the web