France: "Do as I say, not as I do..."

No one claimed what? That they were a "seperate and unique ethnicity?"

Let's see if I might highlight somebody who did say that:



Cypress said:
BB: after your long, illustrious career in "counter terrorism", how is it possible for you to not understand that Arabs are a distinct ethnic group from sub-saharan black africans? And that several countries in north-central africa are a mix of arab and black subsaharan ethnicities?
Click to expand...

I put in only the bold, not the Italics... Now what exact "distinct" ethnic group do Arabs hold?

Of course, my post didn't say anything about what others "claimed" but yours is simply off there Anyold....
 
Damo has this strange compulsion to ride to the rescue of BB.

The conflict in Darfur largely is between Arabs and blacks.


Trying to claim anything else, is semantics.


BBC: How did the conflict start?

The conflict began in the arid and impoverished region early in 2003 after a rebel group began attacking government targets, saying the region was being neglected by Khartoum.

The rebels say the government is oppressing black Africans in favour of Arabs.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/3496731.stm
 
Cypress said:
Damo has this strange compulsion to ride to the resuce of BB.

The conflict in Darfur largely is between Arabs and blacks.


Trying to claim anything else, is semantics.


BBC: How did the conflict start?

The conflict began in the arid and impoverished region early in 2003 after a rebel group began attacking government targets, saying the region was being neglected by Khartoum.

The rebels say the government is oppressing black Africans in favour of Arabs.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/3496731.stm
Click to expand...
What is this strange compulsion to assume that anytime I post a fact I am coming to the "rescue" of somebody?

Arabs are not a specific ethnicity. That is all. And I didn't really post it, I simply provided a link to information. If it makes you feel better when you are wrong to say that I am "rescuing" whomever it is, including yourself that I agreed with earlier in the thread.... Then whatever, it doesn't really matter to me. I will, however, continue to point out factual mistakes in people's posts if I see them.
 
Damo,

Simple yes or no question:

Is the conflict in Darfur, between arabs and blacks - which in the common english lexicon, are different ethnic groups?
 
Cypress said:
Damo,

Simple yes or no question:

Is the conflict in Darfur, between arabs and blacks - which in the common english lexicon, are different ethnic groups?
Click to expand...
No, that is why I posted that link. "Arab" is not a distinct Ethnicity and those in northern Africa specifically, though not black are not "Arabs"... At least read the fricking link.
 
Damocles said:
No, that is why I posted that link. "Arab" is not a distinct Ethnicity and those in northern Africa specifically, though not black are not "Arabs"... At least read the fricking link.
Click to expand...

Racism at Root of Sudan's Darfur Crisis

CSM:

BUFFALO, N.Y. – The visits by US Secretary of State Colin Powell and UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan to Sudan last week gave hope that the genocide in Darfur can be arrested before an entire people is obliterated.

But anyone - including Mr. Powell and Mr. Annan - interested in averting more tragedy there must understand that Darfur is not an accidental apocalypse of mass slaughters, enslavement, pillage, and ethnic cleansing. The Darfur pogrom is part of a historic continuum in which successive Arab governments have sought to entirely destroy black Africans in this biracial nation.


http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0714/p09s02-coop.html
 
Cypress said:
Racism at Root of Sudan's Darfur Crisis

CSM:

BUFFALO, N.Y. – The visits by US Secretary of State Colin Powell and UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan to Sudan last week gave hope that the genocide in Darfur can be arrested before an entire people is obliterated.

But anyone - including Mr. Powell and Mr. Annan - interested in averting more tragedy there must understand that Darfur is not an accidental apocalypse of mass slaughters, enslavement, pillage, and ethnic cleansing. The Darfur pogrom is part of a historic continuum in which successive Arab governments have sought to entirely destroy black Africans in this biracial nation.


http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0714/p09s02-coop.html
Click to expand...
Right... In any other circumstance you would decry the CSM as a right wing hacker dreamfest... But heck they say "Arab" so they must be right! Regardless of links to actual scholarly work... It's all good, they are journalists they must be right!
 
relax damo, you did your job: Like a knight in shining armour, you rode to the village idiots (BB) rescue, and valiantly tried to prove he was "technically" right that darfur wasn't a racial or ethnic conflict.


Its arabs versus blacks. Every common sense person on the planet knows its about race and ethnicity. Aside from scientific definintions of race or ethnicity. That's another topic, and of course from a genetic and scientific standpoint, race and ethnicity is a human (not biological) construct.

But, of course you knew what I was talking about. Nice try at diversion, and rescuing the village idiot.
 
Damo: "Right... In any other circumstance you would decry the CSM as a right wing hacker dreamfest... But heck they say "Arab" so they must be right!"


Tapdancing.
Would you accept the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency as a credible source?:


***CIA Website
World Factbook: Sudan

Ethnic groups:

black 52%, Arab 39%, Beja 6%, foreigners 2%, other 1%

https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/su.html
 
and I've nevr called CSM a rightwing hackfest.

They are a credilbe mainstream paper.


Is the CIA lying Damo, about the ethnic makeup of Sudan?
 
Cypress said:
Damo: "Right... In any other circumstance you would decry the CSM as a right wing hacker dreamfest... But heck they say "Arab" so they must be right!"


Tapdancing.
Would you accept the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency as a credible source?:


***CIA Website
World Factbook: Sudan

Ethnic groups:

black 52%, Arab 39%, Beja 6%, foreigners 2%, other 1%

https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/su.html
Click to expand...
Over a PhD on the subject? No. They too can get it wrong... Just like long ago our teachers called the USSR "Russia"... Simply, regular usage of a word incorrectly doesn't make it better.
 
Cypress said:
relax damo, you did your job: Like a knight in shining armour, you rode to the village idiots (BB) rescue, and valiantly tried to prove he was "technically" right that darfur wasn't a racial or ethnic conflict.


Its arabs versus blacks. Every common sense person on the planet knows its about race and ethnicity. Aside from scientific definintions of race or ethnicity. That's another topic, and of course from a genetic and scientific standpoint, race and ethnicity is a human (not biological) construct.

But, of course you knew what I was talking about. Nice try at diversion, and rescuing the village idiot.
Click to expand...
LOL. Like I said... if it makes you feel better to say that I am working to "rescue" somebody that I clearly disagreed with in this very thread in your favor, then please go right ahead.... Accuse me of "rescuing" the needy...

I accuse myself of rescuing accuracy. I like to be very accurate when speaking of "ethnicity" specifically. Read the actual page that I linked to, you will see what I was talking about. People consistently get it wrong, but that doesn't magically make it all "right"... Arabized is not the same thing as Arab.
 
Damocles said:
LOL. Like I said... if it makes you feel better to say that I am working to "rescue" somebody that I clearly disagreed with in this very thread in your favor, then please go right ahead.... Accuse me of "rescuing" the needy...

I accuse myself of rescuing accuracy. I like to be very accurate when speaking of "ethnicity" specifically. Read the actual page that I linked to, you will see what I was talking about. People consistently get it wrong, but that doesn't magically make it all "right"... Arabized is not the same thing as Arab.
Click to expand...


The CIA, the Christian Science Monitor, me, and virtually all diplomats in the world call Sudan an ethnic or racial conflict between arabs and blacks.


Did you see my CIA link? Is the CIA lying?

:pke:
 
Cypress said:
The CIA, the Christian Science Monitor, me, and virtually all diplomats in the world call Sudan an ethnic or racial conflict between arabs and blacks.


Did you see my CIA link? Is the CIA lying?

:pke:
Click to expand...
Determining an entire group of mixed ethnicity to be of one ethnicity is simply incorrect. I gave a reason and a site written by somebody who specifically has studied that particular thing... So, yes. I believe that Intel people and journalists can phrase things incorrectly and be corrected for it...

You keep proving that you didn't even bother to read the site I linked to... This is inanity. I am not "rescuing" anybody, I agree it is lighter skinned Muslims attacking Darker skinned Muslims in Darfur, I was on your side. You are just too thick to actually read anything that disagrees with you regardless of the source.
 
Damo, I'm not the village idiot on the board that needs to be educated - that's Battleboob.

I told you ten posts ago that race and ethnicity are human constructs, that don't stand the scrutiny of science and biology. That's not even an issue. We were talking about the nature of the conflict - which EVERYONE (except for ill-informed boobs) classifies as an ethnic conflict.

But, you went on to challenge my Christian Science Monitor link, and you didn't raise the white flag until I showed you even the CIA itself recognizes ethnic distinctions in sudan.


:cool:
 
Cypress said:
Damo, I'm not the village idiot on the board that needs to be educated - that's Battleboob.

I told you ten posts ago that race and ethnicity are human constructs, that don't stand the scrutiny of science and biology. That's not even an issue. We were talking about the nature of the conflict - which EVERYONE (except for ill-informed boobs) classifies as an ethnic conflict.

But, you went on to challenge my Christian Science Monitor link, and you didn't raise the white flag until I showed you even the CIA itself recognizes ethnic distinctions in sudan.


:cool:
Click to expand...
So, you agree then that this "ethnicity" may not be accurately described by them? Good. Then move on, it clearly wasn't "rescuing" anybody to point out that Intel groups and Journalists sometimes can be vernacularly incorrect...
 
Cypress said:
... race and ethnicity are human constructs, that don't stand the scrutiny of science and biology. :cool:
Click to expand...

Cypress, I understand what you mean, but actually race is in fact a biological construct. It's been used to make social distinctions by ill-informed humans who don't understand the nature of the biological differences (e.g., that racial differences don't mean intellectual superiority or inferiority). Ethnicity, however, is an entirely social construct, as you said.
 
Thorn said:
Cypress, I understand what you mean, but actually race is in fact a biological construct. It's been used to make social distinctions by ill-informed humans who don't understand the nature of the biological differences (e.g., that racial differences don't mean intellectual superiority or inferiority). Ethnicity, however, is an entirely social construct, as you said.
Click to expand...



Cypress, I understand what you mean, but actually race is in fact a biological construct.

Not really Thorn.

Classifying people into a different group based on skin color is no more valid for biological reasons, than dividing them by hair color or eye color. Its all just tiny differences in pigment.

Overall, genetically there is no difference between someone with dark skin versus light skin, just as there's no overall genetic difference between someone with blonde hair versus red hair.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top