Who does land belong to?

[Malayamerican]

Originally posted by werner_za

They were all just as primitive at the time.On ethnicity: do you think that everyone in the Waffen SS were German...
No, people from all over Europe served and comitted attrocites, that these criminals were from France or Bavaria does not make much difference: the point is that there was genocide in South Africa before the Dutch arrived, or else where did all the Bushmen go??..Antarctica???

or maybe there were just that few of them? small numbers do not always = genocide. and the majority of the Nazis in Germany were Germans. I doubt that they had Russians and French in there because they looked down on Slavs and non Aryans/Germans intensly. and Russians are Slavs and French nonAryan. also, do you know how long the pygmies were being eaten? angain, do you know the ethnicity or tribe that did it? no? ok. I can garuntee you the ones in SA are not the same as the ones in the Congo. further, if you like to judge groups based the actions of other related groups, you would have a better case talking about the Dutch, because whites have done that everywhere they have settled. and why do you not answer my questions? dont make ignorant ASSumptions.

[werner_za]

[/b][/quote]

or maybe there were just that few of them? small numbers do not always = genocide. and the majority of the Nazis in Germany were Germans. I doubt that they had Russians and French in there because they looked down on Slavs and non Aryans/Germans intensly. and Russians are Slavs and French nonAryan. also, do you know how long the pygmies were being eaten? angain, do you know the ethnicity or tribe that did it? no? ok. I can garuntee you the ones in SA are not the same as the ones in the Congo. further, if you like to judge groups based the actions of other related groups, you would have a better case talking about the Dutch, because whites have done that everywhere they have settled. and why do you not answer my questions? dont make ignorant ASSumptions. [/b][/quote]

Is it so hard to beleive that the Bantu responded to the Bushmen in the same way as the Dutch.Friction between the Dutch and the San arose over the San hunting their cattle. The San know no concept of ownership and could not understand that they were in effect stealing. The result was that the Dutch massacred them. Now the Dutch could not have shot every San, the most successful massacre claimed about 500, the country at one time would have been teaming with these people but those the Dutch found were confined to the Cape.Could the Bantu have massacred them as well? Yes,I beleive that they did because they were more primitive and kill for the most ridiculous reasons i.e. witchcraft. Another similarity between Whites and Bantu. It does not matter what tribe they are from because tribe only specifies language and arbitary face painting differences...Everyone wants to paint a picture of a tranquil Africa that is and was destroyed by the Colonialists. Bantu came to South Africa as colonists as well but they are not targeted by anybody. The reason is that the mere presence of a non-Bantu making more progress in 352 years than they did in 2000 years demands answers to some questions.By the way not all Russians are Slavs:The Russian Empire was founded by Vikings who happen to be Scandinavians and there are Mongols in Russia. And the French are distant cousins of the Germans, they were once in the same kingdom under Charlemagne. Hitler had it wrong about Germans being pure Aryans.

[Malayamerican]

"It does not matter what tribe they are from because tribe only specifies language and arbitary face painting differences"

yes it does. because 1)the tribe would tell you their ethnicity and 2)tribe and ethnicity also will tell you culture and practices.

"By the way not all Russians are Slavs:The Russian Empire was founded by Vikings who happen to be Scandinavians and there are Mongols in Russia. And the French are distant cousins of the Germans, they were once in the same kingdom under Charlemagne. Hitler had it wrong about Germans being pure Aryans."

the vast majority of Russians are Slavic and the Russian language as well is Slavic. the Mongolids in Russia are not ethnic Russians, most are Kazakh or noth Asian. the main Russian ethnic group is overwhelmingly Slavic. Hitler did not see them as "Aryan". the French are very very distant cusins. very distant. the same kingdom does not mean the same ethnicity. most of Africa was under British rule but they are nto ethnicaly German. you are right in that he had it wrong, Germans are not even "Aryans" north Indians many Persians and Afgans and Pakistanis are "Aryan".

[werner_za]

Originally posted by Malayamerican
"It does not matter what tribe they are from because tribe only specifies language and arbitary face painting differences"

yes it does. because 1)the tribe would tell you their ethnicity and 2)tribe and ethnicity also will tell you culture and practices.

"By the way not all Russians are Slavs:The Russian Empire was founded by Vikings who happen to be Scandinavians and there are Mongols in Russia. And the French are distant cousins of the Germans, they were once in the same kingdom under Charlemagne. Hitler had it wrong about Germans being pure Aryans."

the vast majority of Russians are Slavic and the Russian language as well is Slavic. the Mongolids in Russia are not ethnic Russians, most are Kazakh or noth Asian. the main Russian ethnic group is overwhelmingly Slavic. Hitler did not see them as "Aryan". the French are very very distant cusins. very distant. the same kingdom does not mean the same ethnicity. most of Africa was under British rule but they are nto ethnicaly German. you are right in that he had it wrong, Germans are not even "Aryans" north Indians many Persians and Afgans and Pakistanis are "Aryan".

The Russians of note up until the October revolution were descended from Scandinavians. The word Slav has more in common with slave than you could imagine.If they would not work others would have been enslaved. There are no ethnic Russians, Rus was the word for the Scandinavians who founded Muschovy and Kiev, the foundation of the Russian state. The French are also a Germanic people, remember that Julius Caesar killed over a million Celts in Gaul, this vacuum was filled over the following centuries by German invaders or immigrants( the effect was much the same) resulting in the collapse of the Western Empire. The French are merely West Franks, Charlemagne's kingdom(First Reich, Kaiser Wilhelm had 2nd Reich, Hitler(PBUH) had the 3rd Reich) was divided after his death into East and West.

[Malayamerican]

"The Russians of note up until the October revolution were descended from Scandinavians. The word Slav has more in common with slave than you could imagine.If they would not work others would have been enslaved. There are no ethnic Russians, Rus was the word for the Scandinavians who founded Muschovy and Kiev, the foundation of the Russian state"

there are ethnic Russians. they are something like "Whtie Russians" I cannot remember the exact name. but they are considered a Slavic group. and Hitler and his Party were not fond of them. they are Slavic. and would not be in the Nazi party.


"The French are also a Germanic people, remember that Julius Caesar killed over a million Celts in Gaul, this vacuum was filled over the following centuries by German invaders or immigrants( the effect was much the same) resulting in the collapse of the Western Empire. The French are merely West Franks, Charlemagne's kingdom(First Reich, Kaiser Wilhelm had 2nd Reich, Hitler(PBUH) had the 3rd Reich) was divided after his death into East and West"

Germanic invafors does not make Germanic people. Hitler did not consider them such and most French are considered to be some form of Mediteranian white (like Italians, and Spaniards). they are not Germanic. by your logic, Italians, Spaniars, Portugese, and Romanians are all Germanic people. and they are not.

[nathouse]

werner za,

please could you give me the name of a history book where i could read up on this please, i am really interested to see if this is true, ie, what you say about canabilism. even if they were written by european writers who most of the time distorted the facts.

[Jiga]

Can a fertile imagination like the one of Werner be confined by historical sources? Probably not without extreme difficulty.