Obama Wouldn't Be First Black President

page: 3
2
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 11:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by wakeupcall1111
He is only 6.25% black, 43.75% Arab and 50% Caucasian.


You are making an incredible claim. It calls for you to provide sources. Interestingly, when I looked it up, the writer of THAT article also provided no sources, but told the reader to "research it for yourself".

So, I did. Here is what I found. Obama's father, grandfather, great-grandfather and great-great-grandfather were all born in Kenya.

Also, here's where the Arab names came from. On Barack's grandfather:



Before settling down to work as a cook for missionaries in Nairobi he was a traveler. Recruited to fight for colonial power England in World War I, he visited Europe and India, and afterward lived for a time in Zanzibar, where he converted from Christianity to Islam, family members said.


So, Barack's family were Christian before his grandfather converted to Islam and changed his name to "Hussein".



If elected, he will be our first Arab president! Kinda puts a different spin on it, don't ya think?


Yes. A different spin, indeed. I wonder who would benefit from putting such a "spin" on this...



Blessings and truth to you!


Truth? Are you sure that's what you meant to write?

[edit on 23-6-2008 by Benevolent Heretic]




posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 11:23 AM
link   
I of course have no issue with past american presidents having biracial DNA and have no doubt that many have Black DNA..as I suspect myself as having some. It was common back then for slave owners to either have affairs or outright rape their slaves and whether the offsping entered white society or the slave culture depended mostly on the resultant color of the offsping.

My immediate thought is that folks like Thomas Jefferson, John Adams etc were born within a few of generations of the establishment of the colonies and the begining of the slave trade here... For example Thomas Jefferson's four grandparents were born between 1670 and 1690. Relatvely early in the American slave trade. And it would seem more likely to be public knowledge if there was black DNA...the contempory people knew who Jefferson's grandparents were.

It's not impossible...possibly one of his grandmothers or great grandmothers hooked up with a black man and had a child that was of a white enough color were the husband was unaware or just plain forgiving.

But from my genealogical research....most of the behind the scenes DNA mixing, and there was a whole lot of it, took place during the mid to late 1700's and first half of the 1800's. Mostly between slave holders and slaves, often by physical force or circumstance. Jefferson appears to have just had an "affair" with "Sally Hammings" and had offspring, but I would be very suprised if there was hard evidence that Jefferson himself was of black descent. The timeline of slavery doesn't favor it.

*It's possible, but I would be suprised given the timeline.

By the way...Jefferson himself was a bit of a contradiction. He favored freeing the slaves, but owned them himself and had a long hidden affair with one of his slaves. Most historians think it was a financial need. He was a man of strong faith and conviction that "all men" were created equal, but at the same time dependant on the evil of slavery for his own financial survival. He must of been a very troubled soul.

Jefferson qoutes w/r to slavery:
"The mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs,
nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately,
by the grace of God."

"Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that his justice cannot sleep forever. Commerce between slave and master is despotism. Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate that these people are to be free."






[edit on 23-6-2008 by maybereal11]

[edit on 23-6-2008 by maybereal11]



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 11:47 AM
link   
reply to post by LLoyd45
 


Hmm .. false.

It appears to be a researcher desperately trying to give credit to blacks.

For instance, stating that Jefferson was actually of mixed heritage, even though he had pale skin and red hair.

He claims his mother was Irish and his father was black. However, males carry dominate genetic genes when interracially mixing .. it would be nearly impossible for Jefferson to have red hair OR pale skin if his mother had been white (Obama for instance is unmistakably black) ..

Also the racially charged attitude of America would have prevented any interracial man from being President. Under US Law any person of mixed blood was deemed to be black. It also would have been impossible for them to own slaves. And in no portrait of any of these men do they exhibit "black" characteristics...

There where blacks who passed as being white, but I don't believe any of them ever became President.



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 11:59 AM
link   
what people fail to realize.

is america is full of all race's...

if you look hard enough ..you have a white or black ancestor .

dang near every person in the united states does.

Indian Spanish..Irish..polish..Russian....we all mixed up here

it is the fact obama and his campaign use the race card...so he get's the sympathy vote for the poor black boy....first black president nominee ect...

skin color maybe lol about it

watch my right hand young voter's as i pull this white guy out of my butt....obama says to Bullwinkle


but i will say im 40 +years old and ive always heard Jefferson was and Lincoln. had some black in them.
this isnt some new rumor its allways been said long as i remember..
so it isnt a stunt to to turn some trick on obama..ive always heard this rumor..no idea if it is true lol

[edit on 23-6-2008 by beforetime]



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by OhZone
Jefferson had red hair.

In and of itself, this doesn't really mean anything. All that matters is which genes dominate. In Jefferson's case, if he does have black ancestry, the European genes dominated.

Never judge a book by its cover.



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
Hmm .. false.

It appears to be a researcher desperately trying to give credit to blacks.

For instance, stating that Jefferson was actually of mixed heritage, even though he had pale skin and red hair.

He claims his mother was Irish and his father was black. However, males carry dominate genetic genes when interracially mixing .. it would be nearly impossible for Jefferson to have red hair OR pale skin if his mother had been white (Obama for instance is unmistakably black) ..

I'm not a geneticist, but I have a pair of cousins that are fraternal twins that tend to discredit the dominant gene theory. One is as black as coal, with kinky, black hair, and brown eyes. The other has a pale complection, freckles, red, somewhat course hair, and blue eyes.

Their attitudes are as different night and day too! The darker one identifies with only blacks, while the paler one identifies with only whites. The father is black and Mom is white. They're a truly mixed up bunch!


Also the racially charged attitude of America would have prevented any interracial man from being President. Under US Law any person of mixed blood was deemed to be black. It also would have been impossible for them to own slaves. And in no portrait of any of these men do they exhibit "black" characteristics...
Lincoln was constantly challenged about his ethnicity, and was called by some of the media "Abraham Africanus I."

Free blacks could also own slaves, and were some of the largest slaveholders known near the end of the civil war.

Can you honestly tell me Abe don't look a bit black to you? Or here's Dwight D. Eisenhower's mother..


[edit on 6/23/08 by LLoyd45]



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 03:43 PM
link   
reply to post by LLoyd45
 

LLoyd45 wrote: Lincoln was constantly challenged about his ethnicity, and was called by some of the media "Abraham Africanus I."


Well if they said that about Abraham Lincoln then it must have been true. LOL

Are you actually citing this as evidence? Even a hundred years ago they had racially charged smear campaigns. Of course they called him that and much worse...he was despised by most of the south. He freed the slaves!

Whether honest abe had african american DNA ...I don't know and don't care, but I am pretty darn sure that was a politicaly motivated smear back then and not based in fact.



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by LLoyd45
 


In fact the first president of the USA was a dark brown, African descendant! hallelujah! Check out this link to see what I am talking about.

www.dickgregory.com...

LOL I posted this at 11:11 a.m.

[edit on 23-6-2008 by unite_life]

[edit on 23-6-2008 by unite_life]



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 04:28 PM
link   
reply to post by maybereal11
 
I'm not saying it's true or not true, but I think there is considerable room for doubt.

If he were part black, what's so terrible about that? Does it make him any less of a great man?




posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 04:34 PM
link   
reply to post by LLoyd45
 





No. Actually he does not look black at all. Nor in any picture/painting I have ever seen.

I have seen biracial people with redish/orange hair .. always course and wirey and a darker skin complexion .. someone that you can look at and know right away they are not white .. not black .. but something inbetween.



Looks like your typical whitey to me as well ...



Big ol' White family.. The Eisenhower Family Portrait..

(Notice how this supposed "dr" used grainy black and white photos to make his claims?..... )


I am yet to see any REAL evidence that a past President has been black/half black or remotely black.



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 04:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by unite_life
In fact the first president of the USA was a dark brown, African descendant! hallelujah! Check out this link to see what I am talking about.

Nope.

Two factual errors here, either you're trying to mislead us or you're really ignorant and gullible.


1)
The first President of the United States in Congress Assembled was.... (drumroll)

Samuel Huntington!

2)
The third President of the United States in Congress Assembled was...
John Hanson!

But not that John Hanson! This John Hanson!


Wow! What a difference! Pretty white too, eh?


Not to be mistaken with your John Hanson:


He was a Liberian Senator. As in, the country, Liberia. Not even the United States. And the 19th century, not the 18th.

[edit on 23-6-2008 by Johnmike]



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 05:16 PM
link   
Well, Did any of you look up some of the history on this topic. Didn't think so.

Get over your whiteness and read a book or two. History is filled with interesting facts....that's right ....RECORDED FACTS.

In fact, there are several books written on mixed blood U.S. Presidents.

Try Amazon.com and look up the books.

cya



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 05:20 PM
link   
reply to post by merky
 


Wow. What studious research you did.

Guess I just need to get over my whiteness.


Come back when you can put up an argument.



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 06:11 PM
link   
I - in fact - put up plenty of links to Historians, anthropologists and scientists (and well documented research) on the first page of this post but clearly none of you geniuses bothered to click or read or take a look...so whats the point of backing up an argument when nobody takes the time or has inclination to deny ignorance? If its a serial killer thread "oooo we're excited lets read all the links"...if its NWO - "wow lets dig in"...but if its about anything Black the naysayers are there to put their stamp of 'couldn't possibly be true" without checking the back up materials...okies - spew away....I'll take the meticulously researched work of some greatest historians in the world over ATS BS any day of the week...
TA
realshanti



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by merky
 




Guess I just need to get over my whiteness.


Come back when you can put up an argument.


Read my previous post and yes you do need to get over it....



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 06:30 PM
link   
It's funny how one drop of "Black" in your ancestry makes you Black, regardless of how much "White" you have in you...and how do you take into account all of those "Native American" protons and neutrons that are floating around in the DNA? How do you reconcile that?

What a ridiculous post. We deserve to go down the toilet.



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 06:30 PM
link   
It's funny how one drop of "Black" in your ancestry makes you Black, regardless of how much "White" you have in you...and how do you take into account all of those "Native American" protons and neutrons that are floating around in the DNA? How do you reconcile that?

What a ridiculous post. We deserve to go down the toilet.



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 08:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Johnmike
 


Lets just remember that history is controlled by the elite that wants us to believe in what they want us to believe in.... In fact we should just live in the now and who care about what is, what was, and just focus on the now... and in my opinion, it doesnt matter who is going to be our next president because they are all apart of the hidden agenda.



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 08:05 PM
link   
reply to post by LLoyd45
 


HaHaHa, Good One....it's true to say that most of the past presidents of America had black blood pumped into them, in the corn and cotton fields. Nobody can deny this reality, it's a fact.



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 08:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by windwaker
It's funny how one drop of "Black" in your ancestry makes you Black, regardless of how much "White" you have in you...and how do you take into account all of those "Native American" protons and neutrons that are floating around in the DNA? How do you reconcile that?

What a ridiculous post. We deserve to go down the toilet.


Well in fact that was and still is the law of the land - funny but the Nazis had the same law regarding Jews.....hmmmm...but feel free to check the facts....what is ridiculous is the failure of folk on this thread to delve into history but instead cling to "opinions". wonder why that is??? Does raise my eyebrow...makes me think thou dost protest too much...
as someone who has Native American blood as well as Chinese, European and African it isn't a question of reconciling but of understanding and learning my own history.....and realizing that RACE is mainly a social construct of European colonization of Africa and Asia....that certain distortions of history are maintained TO THIS DAY by the conquerers...because people without a sense of their own history are much easier to control....

en.wikipedia.org...
[qouote]During Reconstruction, increasing numbers of Americans began to consider anyone with "one drop" of "Black blood" to be Black.3 By the early 20th century, this notion of invisible blackness was made statutory in many states and widely adopted nationwide.

And has yet to be stricken from the law books...now that is f#kin ridiculous but this is the land of the "free to be ridiculous".....





new topics
top topics
 
2
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join