[usaFtw]

Im not sure how much people know about this here, but I thought I might share this with everyone, seen as I only knew about it so recently.

I only found out recently that the English language is associated with indi, becuase its a Indo-European language. Im white-semetic (in the blue zone) , incase some might not like this post or whatever.



Im not sure about race, but Iv always seen a connection between Indians and British people, apart from the skin colour, the same 'conservative' minds are in both Indians and British, like they derive from the same genetics, for example look at how England plays football compared to portugal? but I was thinking It could be possible if north europeans were "Albino Indians":-



the word "aryan" derives from India any way, and there are a mojority of white people that are close to Desi people (Pakistani, Indian, Bangladesh) such as Afganistan, who can be considered more "Whiter" than Italian people. If you research into images of Afgani people youll see. And also Iran, were the majority of them are white people with other colour eyes.

Also, I saw this video on Youtube of a albino chinese girl with "green eyes" chinese people dont have green eyes, and green eyes or other color eyes were always said to be a genetical mutation. But would this mean that North Europeans are hindu albinos with other color eyes like this chinese woman?:-

Youtube video

Iv always noticed how some british people hate Indians specifically differently, for example the Shilpa shetty incident was clearly racism but I remember how BB would interview the public and passers by, were they would say no it wasnt racism... theres something between the two groups of people that im not part of which makes it harder to read. but i dont know, im not trying to offend anyone in any way whats so ever.

what are your opinions?

Im semetic white, by the way so I know some white aryan people might be abit "shocked" about this post:

Syrian President and his syrian wife


Queen of Jordan




iranian boy:-


Iraqi Women:


Afgan People

Youtube video

afgan girl:-


afgan man:-


iran revolutionary creator and sean connery:-


Afgan man during a British Raid:-

[usaFtw]

didnt mean to post this twice, but something's wrong with thisisbigbrother.com

also the poll was meant to have another option saying "i didnt know this"

[AngRemembered]

So which is it to be for you personally?, you say you recently came to know this, I assume that being the point of your thread, but later say your not sure of race, and base the origins of British people to Indians on some things in common like 'consevative' minds.

Well as a nation Britain has developed from the Roman empire then the viking invaders hence the Anglo Saxon roots, our religion and culture is derived from Roman spread christianity and paganism from the Anglo Saxons (basically put)
Britain then spread its empire to incorporate India and its bordering nations, traditional culture, religious beliefs and genetic looks were all then completely alien to the British people.
Having a conservative view isn't a genetic condition exclusive to any ethnic group nor to is a religious belief, or any one singular cultural choice, but the differences between Indians and British at the start of Britains reign was HUGE.
Indians have a completely differing culture and religious beliefs, Indians dress differently, have a caste system of rich down to poor, food, language, music, dance, and politics are all almost opposites of what is considered historically British.
Sure we once shared status under the same empire, but Indians then (in the bad old days) were despised and usually came way down the list of value when it came to people in general, most were treated as slaves in there own country.

Its fair to say some people in Britain do hate Indians, a very small minority thankfully and when compared with the two respective populations you'll probably find its a smaller group in numbers than that of Indians that hate British people for the very same ignorant reasons.
I think British people are considerably different in almost every aspect of culture and living, and I aslo think thats another reason why British people have so much respect for people of Asia as a whole, more respect I'd say than the majority of Indians in India who still adhere to the incredibly predudicial caste system which would be dspised of in a fair and free country like Britain is.

*edit* btw the caste system is based on a persons background if your from a rich family and traditions you stay in that caste, if your unlucky in a poor caste your in trouble.
A bit like the heaven and hell scenario on BB at the moment but in Idia its for real.

[usaFtw]

Im talking about a time before the Roman empire, the "aryan" people.

please re-read the post the point im talking about is genetical make-up.

nothing to do with social make-up.... and no the caste system may be based on the background of a person, but that background of the person im talking about is generally darker... please re-read the post and you'll realise im not attacking any 'race'

[Matt10k]

Originally posted by usaFtw
I only found out recently that the English language is associated with indi, becuase its a Indo-European language. Im white-semetic (in the blue zone) , incase some might not like this post or whatever.

True. But I heard, it was Europe that was colonised first and so in fact, it is Indian that is influenced by European languages- not the other way around.

Originally posted by usaFtw
Im not sure about race, but Iv always seen a connection between Indians and British people, apart from the skin colour, the same 'conservative' minds are in both Indians and British

So, in your opinion we both have conservative minds? I think it depends on the person. Anyway- this hardly means anything does it?

Originally posted by usaFtw
they derive from the same genetics, for example look at how England plays football compared to portugal?

eh?

Originally posted by usaFtw
but I was thinking It could be possible if north europeans were "Albino Indians":-

I can assure you were are not albino Indians

Brush up on your history, it has the answers!!

For a start, you make it sound like Indians moved over here and colonised- and we are white so we must be albino when it is actually thought that Europe was colonised first, when the first nomadic people moved up from Africa- who later moved on to colonise India. So india is derived from Europe.

And they had pale skin because of the colder climate- nothing to do with albinism. Anyway, albinism is incredibly rare and has other things associated with it such as poor eyesight.

[usaFtw]

Originally posted by Matt10k
True. But I heard, it was Europe that was colonised first and so in fact, it is Indian that is influenced by European languages- not the other way around.

By saying true, i guess you agree to the fact that English is an Indo-European language. But you say that becuase india was colonised by Britain, India is influened.... ?

....i dont understand what your saying people in India still speak the dozens of languages that they already had.

and that has to be wrong otherwise, the languages of Aboriginal Australians are now Indo-European, just becuase british people colonised them, even tho they still speak there aboriginal languages ...

Originally posted by Matt10k
So, in your opinion we both have conservative minds? I think it depends on the person. Anyway- this hardly means anything does it?

your probably right there, but i did use the way people play football as the nearest comparison, rather than plain out generalise.

Originally posted by Matt10k
I can assure you were are not albino Indians

For a start, you make it sound like Indians moved over here and colonised- and we are white so we must be albino when it is actually thought that Europe was colonised first, when the first nomadic people moved up from Africa- who later moved on to colonise India. So india is derived from Europe.

And they had pale skin because of the colder climate- nothing to do with albinism. Anyway, albinism is incredibly rare and has other things associated with it such as poor eyesight.

i dont know why you keep using the term colonised, im obviously talking about pre-civilisation here...

look at the distance between afganistan and india, and look at the common faces but different colors...

Please look at the first picture i posted.

im obviously not saying north europeans are out right albinos but Im saying they progressed GENETICALLY FROM ALBANISM.

secondly its common statistics that north european people are more prone to cancer and eyesite problems. (IM NOT BEING RACIST) becuase i acknowledge that everyone can get cancer and so on....

[usaFtw]

Ps - just edited the title to - North Europeans, im north african and im full white and arabic, i thought some people might have some confusion there.

[usaFtw]

also:-

Please look at the distance between Afganistan and India,

Afganistan - white

India/Pakistan - dark brown

Afganistan and India are closer than Europe and Africa, geo-logically that makes more sense.






hindu sign:-
please explain to me the term aryan and where it comes from?

[Matt10k]

Originally posted by usaFtw
By saying true, i guess you agree to the fact that English is an Indo-European language. But you say that becuase india was colonised by Britain, India is influened.... ?

....i dont understand what your saying people in India still speak the dozens of languages that they already had.

If our language is like their language (or has influences) then their language is like ours- (or has influences!) and i was just pointing out that as Europe was settled in first- it is likely that India derived from Europe and not vice versa.

Originally posted by usaFtw
and that has to be wrong otherwise, the languages of Aboriginal Australians are now Indo-European, just becuase british people colonised them, even tho they still speak there aboriginal languages ...

Why would that make it wrong? Languages develop- some faster than others- especially those further away from the source.

Originally posted by usaFtw
i dont know why you keep using the term colonised, Im obviously talking about pre-civilisation here...

Ok, I shouldn't have used that word. I meant that Europe was the first place nomads from Africa traveled to (pre-civilisation)- and this is generally accepted by historians- meaning India would be derived from Europe.

Originally posted by usaFtw
Im obviously not saying north europeans are out right albinos but Im saying they progressed GENETICALLY FROM ALBANISM.

This isn't true. Skin pigmentation was a process that would have developed gradually over thousands of years. Albinos are born white- it is a freak condition and incredibly rare. A black albino is still genetically black for example, even though they look white- so your theory falls flat.

Originally posted by usaFtw
secondly its common statistics that north european people are more prone to cancer and eyesite problems. (Im NOT BEING RACIST) becuase i acknowledge that everyone can get cancer and so on....

This has nothing to do with albinism. Just because you can find correlation between two sets of data doesn't mean there is a link.

Ever heard the joke on correlation statistics? There is correlation between a dcrease in pirates and an increase in global warming- CLEAR correlation! But that doesn't mean there's a link between the two

[usaFtw]

I think ill have to post a few of the things above, again.... and to mention i think your proving my point more and more lol

Please look at the distance between Afganistan and India,

Afganistan - white / India/Pakistan - dark brown

Afganistan and India are closer than Europe and Africa, geo-logically that makes more sense.




hindu sign:-


If your talking about a time line in travel, man would have walked out througg Saudi Arabia.

India had civilization first, you have the cheek to tell me to read history lol. The number system of counting was first invented there, so if your talking about timeline progression then your theory falls flat dead.

look at the world map

[AngRemembered]

Originally posted by usaFtw
Im talking about a time before the Roman empire, the "aryan" people.

please re-read the post the point Im talking about is genetical make-up.

nothing to do with social make-up.... and no the caste system may be based on the background of a person, but that background of the person Im talking about is generally darker... please re-read the post and you'll realise Im not attacking any 'race'

Ive re-read your post and to answer your 'question' then NO
There is no link between North Europeans and Indians, and the reasons you suggest that may be are completely absurd.

[usaFtw]

Originally posted by Angiebabe

Ive re-read your post and to answer your 'question' then NO
There is no link between North Europeans and Indians, and the reasons you suggest that may be are completely absurd.

nice to see you have a keen interest, with out agressivly saying "NO" , why dont you explain a more persuasive link between africans STRAIGHT to north Europe.

[Matt10k]

Originally posted by usaFtw
nice to see you have a keen interest, with out agressivly saying "NO" , why dont you explain a more persuasive link between africans STRAIGHT to north Europe.

It is you that is making all the silly assumptions!

Things like: how we play football or that you think we both share 'conservative minds' prove absolutely naff all!

And putting a word in all capitals for emphasis does not mean someone is being aggressive

[usaFtw]

hahaha mercy? india is not such a bad place..

also would you kindly define the term "Aryan", wikipedia it if you want

?


Aryan is an English word derived from the Sanskrit meaning "noble" or "honorable".

Now sanskrit means: -

Sanskrit is a classical language of the Indian Subcontinent


Source= wikipedia...

[Matt10k]

Originally posted by usaFtw
also would you kindly define the term "Aryan", wikipedia it if you want

?


Aryan is an English word derived from the Sanskrit meaning "noble" or "honorable".

Now sanskrit means: -

Sanskrit is a classical language of the Indian Subcontinent


Source= wikipedia...

Wasn't Aryan just the word Hitler became obsessed with to define his perfect race? How is that relevant?

Originally posted by usaFtw
hahaha mercy? india is not such a bad place..

What are you talking about?!

[AngRemembered]

Originally posted by usaFtw


nice to see you have a keen interest, with out agressivly saying "NO" , why dont you explain a more persuasive link between africans STRAIGHT to north Europe.

I dont know if its a language barrier for you but your getting very mixed up here.
First of all saying no, I dont agree with your is it a quetion or statement? is not aggresive, its simply saying no.

You then make the point of using your oppinion as fact, like in the Shilpa Shetty incident.
You make the most bizzare analogy of how Portuagal and England play football and then somehow bizzarely link this to Indian skin pigmentation.
Yes there are dark skinned and light skinned people both north south east and west of Britain, India and any other country, province, state or Isand in the whole world.
Whats your point?
If your suggesting native North European Ayran people have a similar skin pigmentation to some parts of Asia you right there is similarities, how and why that happened is a matter of oppinion and faith.
Some would consider this stems right back to the sons of Noah and where they spread around the world, the Ark is said to have finally came to rest in and around North Africa also. But I wish you'd make your point of all this now or is it a question still?

[usaFtw]

Originally posted by Angiebabe

I dont know if its a language barrier for you but your getting very mixed up here.
First of all saying no, I dont agree with your is it a quetion or statement? is not aggresive, its simply saying no.

You then make the point of using your oppinion as fact, like in the Shilpa Shetty incident.
You make the most bizzare analogy of how Portuagal and England play football and then somehow bizzarely link this to Indian skin pigmentation.
Yes there are dark skinned and light skinned people both north south east and west of Britain, India and any other country, province, state or Isand in the whole world.
Whats your point?
If your suggesting native North European Ayran people have a similar skin pigmentation to some parts of Asia you right there is similarities, how and why that happened is a matter of oppinion and faith.
Some would consider this stems right back to the sons of Noah and where they spread around the world, the Ark is said to have finally came to rest in and around North Africa also. But I wish you'd make your point of all this now or is it a question still?

noah has nothing to do with science, and you have made no scientific responce to the facts above apart from some sort of agenda based picking, by pointing out the anologys i made, i dont wish to talk to you now.

also please read up on Semetic People and Indo-European people. before asking me "What my point is"

[usaFtw]

Originally posted by Matt10k
Wasn't Aryan just the word Hitler became obsessed with to define his perfect race? How is that relevant?

Earlier you told me to read my history books, and thats a question right,... so i guess you need to read the history books even tho i just gave you an excerpt that even Western historians agree that the term Aryan comes from India

unless your challenging the fact of the origins of the word Aryan, inturn challenging the fact of origin of Aryans.

[Matt10k]

Well I can't talk about this all day, my niece wants to go on the computer

[usaFtw]

Originally posted by Matt10k
Well I can't talk about this all day, my niece wants to go on the computer

ok, say hi to your niece.

i could too, feel free to come back and challenge some of the facts later some time.

ok takecare,

again IM NOT TRYING TO OFFEND ANYONE, i thought some people here seem as though theyv taken offence.

[FrenchAffair]

I'm Italian, God created us from the highest quality of ingredients on the 8th day. IDK about the rest of Europe.

[usaFtw]

i take it you got the point then.. which is why not many challened the point..

[Matt10k]

Originally posted by usaFtw
i take it you got the point then.. which is why not many challened the point..

I just couldn't be bothered to challenge the point. I think you and me are on different planets.

[andyman]

There is a small truth with the indian thing but it goes back much further. Central asia is where the roots of words like mother etc that goes into india, middle east, greek and into latin. There are many things we still dont know and are lost in time waiting to be found or may never be found but history has many many secrets. The colonization of land and movement has been going on for over 150,000 years and has never stopped but the last 3,000 years has seen the biggest changes with many empires that have raised and fallen and with that more movent of people with there ideas, gods, writing etc. But the point you have made is kind of true but its more complex and nothing great. But remember there is still history we dont know yet..

[andyman]

Aryans no big players in history, there nomadic indo-european speaking people who migrated into NW india some time after 1500 BC. Originally cattle pastoralists, they became sedentary farmers, and gradually spread eastward. They were divided into various tribes, often warring amongst themselves. The early aryan settlers of N india coalesced, by 600 bc, into sixteen distinct political units which dominated the ganges plain. Magadha one of the 16 mahajanapadas (great realms) which dominated the ganges plain from 600 bc. Gradually all the other kingdoms were absorbed into magadha, with its capital at pataliputra (patna), which dominated the lucrative ganges trade routes. Magadha became the nucleus of the first indian empire, the mauryan empire when its thrown was seized by chandragupta maurya in 327 bc. Magadha was the scene of many of the incidents in the life of gautama buddha. Later the center of the gupta dynasty.