Search This Blog

De Omnibus Dubitandum - Lux Veritas

Showing posts with label Black. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Black. Show all posts

Friday, April 21, 2023

Netflix’s Black Cleopatra Exposed

April 21, 2023 By Raymond Ibrahim

By depicting Cleopatra as a Black woman, Netflix’s “Queen Cleopatra” is creating a stir.  Now, because all four of my grandparents were Coptic, and because the Copts are “acknowledged as the remaining descendants of the civilisation of the Ancient Egyptians, with Pharaonic origins,” I cannot resist but offer my two cents. First, this business has been going on for a quite long time.  One of my very first college research papers (still in my possession, from 1993) was dedicated to debunking this widespread and entrenched claim that ancient Egyptians were Black -- as in sub-Saharan African Black. On the one hand, one can sympathize with the motive behind this claim: to give sub-Saharan Africans a source of pride, to present them as one of the first great civilizations. On the other hand, you cannot warp the truth -- that is, foist a lie -- without negative consequences.............But I digress; returning to Netflix’s “Queen Cleopatra,” here we point out what should be obvious:  not only are Egyptians not racially Black -- which I know from personal, familial, and travel experience -- but Cleopatra wasn’t even Egyptian.  She was Greek, specifically Macedonian, a descendant of Alexander the Great’s general, Ptolemy I. ..............To Read More....

My Take - This isn't a new argument, and one of the points made by those who studied ancient Egyptian history is the royals in Egypt practiced incest.  Egypt was conquered by Alexander the Great and when his empire broke up after his death his generals took over. General Ptolemy, a Greek, took over Egypt.  In Egypt royal brothers and sisters married, and that went on for the history of the Ptolemaic pharaohs, so it's unlikely Cleopatra has any ancestors from sub-Sahara regions.

Sunday, September 27, 2020

Arab Muslims are People of Color, Arab Christians are White

Daniel Greenfield September 27, 2020 @ Sultan Knish Blog 

 Maintaining its proud commitment to printing all the news that will divide Americans by race, sex, and creed, the New York Times published a list of what it claimed were the "922 of the most powerful people in America" while claiming that only 20% of them are people of color. 

 The term “people of color” is already ambiguous enough with white professors, grad students, and NAACP presidents claiming to be black. But the New York Times’ racial list, a thing reeking of Nuremberg and Goebbels, put the paper in charge of deciding who is a person of color by marking them with yellow. It’s a good thing no notorious racist ideology had the same idea.

(The Times had previously published a list of members of Congress who had voted against aiding Iran’s nuclear ambitions and terrorist regime by marking Jewish members in yellow.)

Like all racist Rohrsarch charts, the Times’ racial list says more about it than about America.




The Times claimed that only 112 of the 431 House of Representatives members are people of color. It lists Rep. Rashida Tlaib as a person of color, while listing Rep. Justin Amash as white.

Tlaib's parents and Amash's father came from Arab towns and neighborhoods in Israel. Amash's mother came from Syria. They both have traditional Arab names.

How is Tlaib a person of color while Amash is white?

The Amash and Tlaib clans both have a sizable presence in Israel. They’re both Arabs, but, aside from Tlaib being a militant leftist while Amash is an ex-GOP Never Trumper, the only obvious difference is that Amash’s family was Christian while Tlaib’s family is Muslim.

The New York Times’ message is that Muslims are “people of color” and Christians aren’t. It doesn’t matter if their families might have lived some 20 minutes away from each other.

Arab Christians are white while Arab Muslims are a minority group.

As Twitter observers of the New York Times racial list noted, the paper of racial record appears to invariably list Arab Christians as white, while Muslims are described as people of color.

"24 people lead the Trump administration. 3 are Asian, Black or Hispanic," the New York Times insisted. That doesn't include Alex Azar, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, whose grandparents came from Lebanon, and Mark Esper, the Secretary of Defense, whose grandfather emigrated from Lebanon. The Times likewise lists Governor Chris Sununu, of partial Lebanese and Arab Israeli descent, as white, and certainly not a person of color.

What makes an Arab immigrant from Israel, Lebanon, or Syria, white? Christianity.

Israeli Jews, like Lyor Cohen, YouTube's Global Head of Music, also don’t qualify. The New York Times lists Cohen, the son of Israeli immigrants, as yet another white non-person of color.

It’s not just Jews or Arabs who aren’t considered minorities unless they’re Muslim.

Rep. Anna Eshoo's father was an Assyrian Christian who, in her own words, "was driven from the Middle East." The New York Times still lists her as white. Assyrians and Armenians are not people of color. The difference isn’t, as we see in Amash and Tlaib’s case, racial, it’s religious.

It doesn't matter whether you come from Syrian, Lebanon, Iraq or even Iran: if you're not a practicing Muslim, you're white.

Take the case of Farnam Jahanian, the Iranian immigrant who became the president of Carnegie Mellon. Jahanian came to America before the Islamic Revolution and enrolled in a Catholic school. The New York Times however decided that Jahanian is not a person of color.

He’s just white.

While the New York Times has a very rigid standard for being a person of color from the Middle East, it has a very loose one for being a person of color as long as they have Spanish ancestry.

Or speak Spanish.

The New York Times' attempt at defining race leads to awkward absurdities. It lists MIT President Rafael Reif, the son of Eastern European Jewish immigrants to Venezuela, as a person of color, while next to him, Michigan University President Mark Schlissel, whose family came to America, without first going through Venezuela, is listed as plain old white.

Rep. Devin Nunes is listed as a person of color because his Portugese ancestors moved to America in the 19th century. Rep. Mike Levin, whose mother is Mexican qualifies, but Senator Pat Toomey, whose mother is of Portugese ancestry, doesn’t meet the Times’ racial test.

Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham, of the powerful Lujan family, which has dominated New Mexico politics, has her governorship treated as an accomplishment for the oppressed.

"Of the people in charge of the 25 highest-valued fashion companies, 3 are Asian or Hispanic," the Times huffs.

2 of the 3 are Pablo Isla, a successful Spanish businessman who runs a huge Spanish company, and Tadashi Yanai, who runs a huge Japanese company. Is celebrating the accomplishments of Spanish and Japanese tycoons in their own countries supposed to represent some sort of resistance to discrimination and racial inequity in America?

Why is a Spanish businessman listed as evidence of racial progress while Greek businessmen, including Netflix CEO Ted Sarandos, who was born to an electrician in Phoenix, are just white guys whose success demonstrates that America is a racist nation defined by its color lines?

And that cuts to the absurdity of defining someone whose family came from Spain as a person of color, while those immigrants whose families came from Italy and Greece are white guys. Why are Portugese and Basque immigrants people of color, and Greeks and Italians aren’t?

But if the New York Times appears to be vague on what makes someone a person of color if they speak Spanish, it’s quite firm on what it takes to be legitimately from the Middle East.

It’s no coincidence that the New York Times has adopted the same idea as ISIS, the Muslim Brotherhood, and Mohammed, that non-Muslims don’t have any place in the Middle East.

The Left barely polices the boundaries of Latino or Indian identity. Even black identity is so loosely policed that white leftists have been able to get away with pretending to be black. But when it comes to the Middle East, it recognizes only one group of people as legitimate.

Its conquerors.

Christians, Jews, and non-practicing Muslims need not apply. When it comes to other groups, the categories are drawn around race, ethnicity, and even immigration status. But in the Middle East, it doesn’t matter if your parents or grandparents emigrated from Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, or Syria. Their ethnic ancestry doesn’t matter either. Only one thing matters: religion. Islam.

This pernicious bigotry was used to cut off immigration for Christian refugees during the Obama administration while welcoming in Muslim migrants, a perverse reversal of oppression in a region whose Christian population is vanishing under the fire and fury of Muslim persecution.

The New York Times’ racial list is revealing when it comes to the prejudices and agendas of the allies of the Islamist movements and their organizations ethnically cleansing Christians.

The Left’s twisted ideas about race lead it to present the region’s persecuted Christian, Jewish, and non-Muslim minorities as white oppressors, while its Muslim supremacist majority are the oppressed people of color who need to be liberated from the oppression of their victims.

This isn’t just twisted. It’s an ideological argument for genocide.

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

Wednesday, July 8, 2020

America’s Castrated Generals and Cuckolded ‘Experts’

If Donald J. Trump is re-elected to a second term as president, will that victory finally be enough to break the back of a military and policy “elite” who have surrendered to the anti-American mobs and the Democratic Party who made them possible? 

By Sebastian Gorka June 22, 2020

Who does our military serve? Are they subordinated to some ineffable “conventional wisdom” about justice and racial harmony? Do they march to the beat of a “politically correct” agenda defined by the organizations like Black Lives Matter, Antifa, or to the nostrums of ivy league grandees? Are their concepts of operations inspected and approved for their “egalitarian” content by CNN and the New York Times? Or are they under the command of the citizen America elects to hold the rank of their commander-in-chief?

Do we still have civilian control over the military in America and are our services still loyal to the Constitution? Or have our generals and admirals decided to mutiny in favor of those who hate the “deplorables” and Donald Trump, the man Americans chose to lead our country and command our military?

Since scores of cities have seen violence in the wake of the killing of George Floyd, the actions of several active duty and retired senior officers indicate we have a real crisis within the most powerful military superstructure mankind has ever seen. Something must be done about that crisis now.
George Floyd should be alive today and there is no reasonable justification for how he was killed at the hands of the Minneapolis police. While he had an extensive and violent criminal record, the manner of his arrest and subsequent death rightly have led to criminal charges against the officers involved. But the violence that has erupted across scores of cities since his arrest have nothing to do with Floyd or how much black lives matter.


As sober observers of all pigmentations have noted again and again, exactly nine unarmed black men were shot and killed last year at the hands of American police. Nine out of a population of 330 million, in a nation with 17,000 police agencies and more than 600,000 sworn peace officers. Twice that number were killed in one day in Chicago recently, without one Black Lives Matter protest. At the same time, were there in fact “systemic racism” among our police forces, it seems that that racism is against caucasian suspects, who are twice as likely to be shot than black suspects........... To Read More.....