Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Soccer' started by f3dor, Apr 13, 2010.
Hes one of my fav players either way, he looks paler than me. But hes from africa isnt he???
He was born in France, but his parents are from Algeria. So he's not French. He is a Berber according to wiki. I don't think they are white. The Dutch team members who are Berber are not considered white.
The theory is that Berbers immigrated back to northern Africa from Spain several thousand years ago. Whilst in Africa some of them intermarried with Arabs and occasionally black Africans particularly during the race mixing period of the Moorish conquests. Most Berbers are still of mostly Caucasian stock though.
I have studied out of Africa human migration based on Mitochondrial DNA and Y chromosomal DNA. Non Euro groups who are genetically similar to Europeans are Russians, Semites, any of the former Soviet (Borat like lol) "istan" states (some of these are white Muslim countries). The people of north India, the Perian regions and also Native Americans are also closely related to Europeans and have generally shared common ancestors with many Europeans in the last 30,000-50,000 years. East Asians are next at around 40,000-50,000 years. Any groups that have shared common ancestors in the last 30,000 to 50,000 years seem to be more compatible for mating than those of 60,000-75,000 year groups. I'm not huge on Eugenics, but I think culturally and genetically certain "interracial" matchings don't work well, primarily black-white. I also believe some Pacific Islander groups and whites and also Aborignal Australians and whites aren't great matches either.
The groups who migrated north east and north west had to use lots of strategy and working together to survive in harsh dangerous climates. There is even a theory that Homo Sapiens in Europe hunted Neanderthal (Homo Neanderthalis) to extinction due to territory and resource competition. Neanderthals were incapable of the complex thought, emotions and social interacting that Homo Sapien/Cro Magnon man have. Neanderthals were stronger than humans, but humans were quicker, smarter and more elusive.
There were primarily three waves of migration into Europe. I believe the first wave was the Celtic migration that reached Europe about 40,000-35,000 years ago. Celts migrated to Europe from the north western India region. I haven't read up on this for a while, but I think the second and third waves of migration into Europe came soon after from the Persian region and Middle East and those were the Latin and Slavic migrations into Europe. Slavs are closer related to Middle Easterners and Latins like Celts are closer related to Persians or East Indians. All three of these "tribes" were supposedly cut off from each other about 35,000-32,000 years ago by ice shelves during an ice age. This is why there are 3 different European language groups which are Celtic, Latin and Slavic languages. Ice ages come about every 10,000-12,000 years and come on pretty quickly. We are actually a little overdue for an ice age at this exact moment in history. Sorry I didn't want to scare you guys lol.
75,000-70,000 years ago ALL humans were either in Africa near Kenya or had just reached the Middle East. Then about 65,000-60,000 years ago humans had reached south India. The first wave of migration into east Asia left India around 60,000 years ago and moved east along the coast of the Indian Ocean. Some of them reached New Guinea and then Australia by 30,000 years ago. The second wave of migration migrated north through India and then split either north east or north west about 50,000-45,000 years ago. There are cases of Native Americans sharing common ancestors with Europeans (mostly Latin Euros) about 30,000 years ago. Supposedly it happened in Russia in the western Siberia region. Two groups diverged one going East and across the Bering Strait and the other west to Europe.
The exact listed years in this information might not be 100% correct b/c I haven't read up on this for a while, but the big picture/theme of this info is correct.
Where white becomes not white is a grey area, but coming from africa does not mean that a person cannot possible be white. As the last comprehensive post discussed, Zidane can defintely be considered as white.
Interestingly, in countries like Algeria and Syria, there are quite a few red headed people and a surprising about of people with blue and green eyes.
by the way - we are not overdue for an ice age - every metorologist will say something different on this. and anyhow, when it does come it wont happen over night but over a period of centuries.
Not overnight, but as man who just turned 30- if I live to 100 I could see PART of the onset of an ice age and a significant temperature drop in the next 70 years. So, it could effect currently living people. That's quickly when you talk about history time lines.
BTW, most of global warming is a meteorological trend mostly due to sun activity rather than man caused. A hot trend can reach it's climax if methane ice at the bottom of the ocean melts and spews up methane gas bubbles, which can raise the global temperature even quicker. We have had some minor effects on temperature, but the biggest issue is pollution, dirty water, acid rain, smog and natural habitat loss when you talk crucial environmental issues.
The Berbers were in North Africa before the Arabs, who colonised north africa relatively recently.
See my post in this thread http://www.castefootball.us/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=6265&KW=berber&PID=76838&title=is-frances-mehdi-baala-white#76838
To see just how European they can appear in some cases.
getting dangerously off topic now, and dont mean to be argumentative, but actually, the sun activity us now decreasing, and will do for a century or so more (it goes in cycles of a couple of hundered years), and this is thought to be responsible for localized cooling in some parts of the world (ie - winters in northern europe).
The proportion of CO2 in our atmosphere is raising every year, and this undoubtadly could start (be starting) some self-reinforcing feedback loops that could mean that this factor alone could cause global tempuratures to soar out of control.
Anyway, Zidane, like almost all of the worlds best players, past and present, is white.
For what it's worth, during the NSDAP reign in Germany, The Berbers (especially the Kabyles...which Zidane is) were considered "Aryans"...
"The Berbers, among whom even today one finds light skins and blue eyes, do not go back to the Vandal invasions of the fifth century A.D., but to the prehistoric Atlantic Nordic human wave. The Kabyle huntsmen, for example, are to no small degree still wholly Nordic (thus the blond Berbers in the region of Constantine form 10 % of the population; at Djebel Sheshor they are even more numerous)." Alfred Rosenberg, The Myth of the Twentieth Century, 1930
"Among the Berbers, particularly the Kabyles in the Riff and in the Aures range, a Nordic strain shows itself clearly", Hans F.K. GÃƒÆ’Ã‚Â¼nther, The racial elements of European History, 1927
Edited by: DixieDestroyer
Interesting...Anyhow, CO2 can cause global warming & there is now too much of it in the atmosphere for even all the trees to balance out. However, methane is about 20 times a more potent greenhouse gas than CO2. There isn't even close to as much methane in the atmosphere as CO2 (it's poisonous), but if the methane ice at the bottom of the ocean melts it could cause temperatures to rise fast.
Interesting thread and a lesson in history
Is Zidane white? Well, as he's an AlgerianBerber the answer is glaringly obvious - NO. His uglyboat has "North Africa" written all over it:
Forget the various theories regarding Berber ancestry - they are North African Muslims, which means that they have nothing in common with White Europeans. Just ask aSpaniard, Portuguese, or Frenchman - people who have to deal with such dross on a daily basis - if Berbers are White and You'll have Your answer.
I remember one of my friends commenting on the "whiteness" of Turkey's Abdullah Ercan back in the Euro 96 tournament:
Ercan may appear rather European, but he's still a Turk and a Muslim, therefore he's not White. A few Turks/Arabs et ceteramay occassionallylook somewhat white, but they certainly aren't White nor do they feel White - their culture, mindset and religion mark them as non-Europeans. Chances are that Ercan's offspring are typically dark and repulsive Anatolian specimens. I'm sure that none of You would wish these twogarlic-breathed t**sers to marry Your sisters or daughters...Edited by: Rebajlo
Ya if someone looks white, they usually are. The other stuff usually shows moreso; when a person is phenotypically white, then genotypically they must be at least as white as they look.
Many Turks, Syrians, and Lebanese actually have Light colored hair and eyes. Many look whiter than some Armenians, Georgians, Greeks, Serbs, Italians, and Spaniards. But, because their vastly Muslim, it's almost unacceptable to consider them white.
well its seems a split, some have thrown in this "cutural" baloney. hes not gone wih a black girl for my knowledge. Although i hate islam, i cannot say cat stevens is not white, just because he converted to the death cult of islam. Hes a traitor, but hes still white.
Im going to say he is, as he looks whiter than me...
Rebajlo, sorry to re-post, but to go into greater detail about races, sub races and Anatolians- here is what I know. Homo Sapiens is one species, Homo Sapiens-Sapiens is usually called the current sub species since homo Sapiens has supposedly been around for almost 250,000 years and we've all shared a Mitochondrial Eve common ancestor 150,000 years ago in Africa in our family trees. We've also all shared a Y Chromosomal Adam ancestor about 72,000 years ago soon before the out of Africa Migration. The largest difference ever found between two human beings nucleotide sequences is slightly over 0.1% (I remember clearly it was less than 0.14%) This is basically considered FACT from genetic and biological DNA evidence. Here is a Wikepedia article on this topic: Human Genetic Variation
After the sub-species listing there are- what I'd call- races and sub races. Black Africans have not shared common ancestors with pure blood Europeans for at least 70,000 years, for south east Asians, Pacific Islanders and Aboriginal Australians- it's been around 60,000 years when the migration eastward along the India coast happened.
All other groups have generally shared common ancestors with ALL Europeans somewhere in the last 50,000 years. This was before or during the Persian/Indian migrations (north East and some eventually on to China, Mongolia and across the Bering Strait to America which started around 50,000 years ago. Others went north west and eventually on to Europe. And there was the Middle Eastern migrations- mostly north and west to Antolia- and then some north to the Slavic regions. IMO any of these groups that have shared common ancestors in the last 50,000 years are different "sub-races" of each other and a better fit for intermarrying. These groups also needed similar survival strategies migrating north through these regions in the paleolithic era.
A Slavic, Latin or Celtic European may have not shared a common ancestor with each other since about 30,000 years ago (although with the global traveling world in the last 100 years this is becoming rarer). At this point the strong theory is that there were 3 waves of migrations into Europe. Sometime soon after it is theorized these "tribes" were separated by ice shelves in Europe since they find different diverging genetic mutations with each group along with archeological discoveries (there are occasional cases in point that bring confusion b/c the archeology, genetic and migration theories don't seem to match). Even more evidence of this is that there are primarily 3 groups of European languages (Celtic, Latin and Slavic).
There have even been a few famous cases (one case in point was a Native American man and a Greek woman) where Native Americans have shared common ancestors with Europeans around 30,000 years ago in the Siberia region. Current theory is that there was more than one migration to the Americas and that Amero-Indians are mostly of South Central Asian and/or Mongoloid stock. You can research human migration for yourselves either on Wikipedia or from National Geographic where I read up on it. It's been a couple years since I've read this, so there may be a few details off- like the precise years, but the big picture is spot on!
"Just ask a Spaniard, Portuguese, or Frenchman - people who have to deal with such dross on a daily basis - if Berbers are White and You'll have Your answer"
That is why I put no. The people from the netherlands commenting on the Dutch team will put Berbers in a separate category. They certainly don't consider them Dutch. If you want to get down to the DNA maybe they are white. I don't know. But I'll bet, as REbajlo says, the Europeans consider them outsiders and invaders. Does a Frenchman really consider Zidane to be a Frenchman or a European?
Why should Zidane go with a black girl when he can get a stupid Frenchwoman because he's rich and famous? Or maybe she is smart to get his money. Does he even have a Muslim wife? He doesn't "practice" Islam according to wiki. I'll be a few black African "French" footballers have white women in France.
To me I would consider him white, but if you put a gun to my head I would place him in the catergory of "Other". And just because your a muslim does not automatically make you non white. Zidane is a great ball player. I remember when he kneed a Spaniard player in the world cup several years ago and cost his team. Sometimes he acts like a typical affelet.
Zidane "looks" White, but I don't consider Berbers "Aryans" (ala - folks with Northern/Western European bloodlines). Some Greeks (& most Turks) are on the "borderline" of Whiteness. The further southeast one goes from NW Europe, the less the true White bloodlines become (IMO). However, being from Africa isn't a litmus test for Whiteness...as the SA Boers & English (descent) folks are indeed White!
ToughJ. Riggins - You've made two great posts in this thread, but my approach to the discussion of "Whiteness" (for want of a better word) places much of the "scientific rationalism" which You presented to one side. Whether one leans towards Creationism or evolution, the arguments of common ancestors, migrations, interbreeding, subraces and the like are inevitable, butI look upon the definition of White as both an obvious physical / genetic description (which can, admittedly, be rather blurry at times) and a set of concomitant cultural / behavioural traits, the two being, quite naturally, innately entwined. In order to do this, a bit of Ockham's Razor is required to excise the common ancestry / DNA angles (otherwise, everyone is ultimately "the same" ) and to concentrate on analysing White Europeans as the distinct "finished product" which gave rise to "our" civilization and way of life, which all of us here wish to protect.
Westside - Of course one may be genetically white and be a Muslim. But ask Yourself why You support White athletes over non-White athletes. You wish (I assume) to support athletes that You can identify with, with whom You share not only physical traits such as skin colour, but also cultural traits, behavioural traits and values. We all know that blacks don't differ from us solely because they have black skin - it's the black mentality that causes the problems. It's the same with Muslims, be they Berbers, Arabs, Persians, et cetera. These peoples' entire worldview differs from ours profoundly and they have always generally been very antagonistic towards Europeans. What do we have in common with Muslims (apart from an antipathy towards Jews )? Our ancestors fought them for centuriesin order to defend European culture from Muslim aggression - I'll wager that our forebears didn't view the Muslims as White and would be disgusted at the mere suggestion. In my humble opinion, we cannot dilute the meaning of White - that's what I'm getting at. Muslims don't see themselves as being White, so why should we wish to confer that honour upon them?
As You mentioned, Zidane has displayed plenty of "affelete"-esque behaviour. Anyone who has seen their fair share of matches involving North African, Turkish, or Middle Eastern teams will be familiar with such demonstrations of thuggish, cheating comportment.
f3dor - The "cultural baloney" that You speak of comprises all of the non-cosmetic strands which together form "Western" identity. The universal European Christian / secular mores and traditions which link Whites around the world are the basis of White civilization - these common cultural characteristics mean that a somewhat swarthy Italian or Spanish Catholic and a pale blond Norwegian Lutheran or South African Boer Calvinist share both an understanding of, for instance, the meaning of Christmas and Easter, and a natural abhorrence of polygamy, child brides, arranged marriages, casual violence against women and the cruelty of ritual slaughter of livestock.
Sure, Cat Stevens didn't magically cease to be genetically white following his conversion to Islam but, by embracing that religion, he ceased to be White - note the capitalization. By his act of conversion, the benighted idiot who now called himself Yusuf Islam rejected his White heritage and identity and, just like a "miscegenist", voluntarily "opted out" of the White race. He sure as hell didn't see himself as one of "us". Stevens / Yusuf became what Zidane was born as - a Muslim. So if the former "traitor" doesn't belong, then the latter "original" Muslim by extension doesn't belong either. If France fielded an all-Berber team, would You consider that team as White as, let's say, the Italian national team?
One thing is certain - as I pointed out in my last post, the Whites who actually have to deal with Muslims (regardless of whether those Muslims are Berbers, Arabs, Pakistanis, black Africans, Albanians, or Bosnians) are, funnily enough, unequivocal in regarding the said people as non-White. Most Bosnian Muslims may be largely genetically identical to Serbs, but the Serbs certainly don't view them as fellow Whites - they view them in the same way as they view Turks and Albanians. Just as importantly, the Bosnian Muslims don't see themselves as "Serbs who simply happen to be Muslims" - they are instead part of the wider Muslim world. I remember seeing footage of Bosnian Muslim units in the Balkan Wars of the early 90s posing for photographs wearing Arabic headdresses with green Islamic battle flags reminiscent of the Ottomans fluttering in the background. That is their preferred identity, so are they still White? Would You wish to see Your sister or daughter marry one of these "white men"? Why not - after all, if one removes the "cultural baloney" they are still white, correct? Ah, yes, but You hate Islam...
Returning to the original subject of the Berber Zidane, here's another photo. So, does he still look White?
Edited by: Rebajlo
When the discussion comes down to cultural traits, religion etc, clearly everyone is going to have there own opinion about what constitutes 'white' and what doesnt. Some peoples' definition is narrow whilst others is wider. However its not an 'argument' that has a solution, as this definition is so highly subjective.
What affrolete behaviour from zidane? Only the headbutt was out of place, but other than that, I cant remember another incident involving him.
Zidane was a great player, greater than the overhyped Pele. He displayed leadership on the field, no one could take the ball from him, he showed up in big games ( the world cup final 1998 when he scored the first 2 goals, the magnificent winner goal in CL final real vs bayer loserkusen). He led the french team to two world cup finals(one won) and one Euro tournament win.Thats as white behaviour as anyone can do.
And yes, everyone on that french team knew that zidane was the general. "When we don't know what to do, we just give the ball to Zizou and he works something out." ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬" <deadilnk ds_id="2222" entry_id="299921" tname="bixente-lizarazu">Bixente Lizarazu</deadilnk>
That pic posted looks very dubious. Here is another in which he clearly looks white.
Great smile btw.
And another pic in which he looks whiter than the italian players Gattuso
I would give my sister to Zidane, no question about it.
Edited by: alln
How many other wives would he have.The French team is kind of a joke with all the North African Muslims and black Africans on the team. Plus,players from the caribbean. Is this what France has become? Who wants to watch that?
Well, if You would "give" Your sister to Zidane, (I assume that You meant that You would have no problem with her marrying Zidane) it appears thatour interpretations of White are rather divergent...
Asfor evidence of Zidane's "affrolete" behaviour, here are a couple of quotes, accompanied by links to the sources. These weren't too difficult to find:
"His temper has been another matter.
Playing for Juventus five years ago, Zidane butted Jochen Kientz of Hamburger SV in a Champions League match, also earning a red card.
Eight years ago, Zidane was red-carded for stomping on an opponent while playing Saudi Arabia. At this World Cup he collected two yellow cards and was suspended for France's third group match against Togo."
"El Pais recalled that Zidane had been sent off 14 times in his career, including a five-match ban for headbutting SV Hamburg's Jochen Kientz in October 2000 and as recently as April 2005 for attempting to punch Villarreal defender Quique Alvarez."
Yes, an exemplary record indeed . Just for a bit of humorous comparison, notorious hard man Vinnie Jones was sent of 12 times in his career.
The question is not whether Zidane was a great football player (I agree with Your assessment of Zidane being better than the purposely overhyped Pele - who, incidentally, was a very violent player), but whether he is White.
There is nothing "dubious" about that last picture that I posted - do You think I altered it or something?In case You hadn't noticed, I had already posted the photoYou used to "prove" that Zidane "clearly looks white" and displays a "great smile"- as evidence of his North African facial features .
When I look at Gennaro Gattuso, I see an Italian with European features. When I look at Zidane, I simply see a North African. I guess that we'll have to disagree .Edited by: Rebajlo
A friend told me of this Philippine woman celebrity (Catholic) who married a Turkish businessman back in 2003. She had 2 daughters with him and lived in Istanbul for 4 years. In 2007, she filed for divorce claiming that she was physically tortured and abused by her Muslim husband in the years she stayed in Istanbul. Bottom line...
Does not matter if the person is racially white 'cause if he's a MUSLIM, he's not to be sided with, or trusted. White Muslims are enemies of all White people, especially Christians. I personally think White Jews are more trustworthy. I'd be more willing to give my daughter to a White Jew, than to a White Muslim. Edited by: j41181
He's racially White (IMO) but not culturally. The Muslim religion (IMO) is incompatible with White culture since it promotes violence against non-believers and race mixing. I have no problems with White Muslims that want to fight or support White Nationalism as long as they stay in Muslim nations fighting and or supporting and also not trying to convert White women into Islam.