FOR ALL OF YOU WHO BELIEVE THE BULLSHIT THAT SO-CALLED “COLOURED” ONLY CAME INTO EXISTENCE AFTER 1652 – FOR ALL THOSE SO-CALLED “COLOURED” WHO BELIEVE THAT THE GROUP IS THE PROGENY OF EUROPEANS AND AFRICANS - FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO FIND THE NANDOS DIVERSITY TV COMMERCIAL SO WOW – THING AGAIN BECAUSE YOU HAVE BEEN LIED TO. Let me tell you to think again, this time just far more carefully. That ad is so cleverly mischievous in that it forwards Pieter Mulders argument but takes it to a more subliminal level where you buy into the comic element of it and not the truth of the matter. They smartly depict a San male in this ad knowing two things well: 1) The San tribe is virtually extinct in SA and has little or no claim to anything as a corollary of this fact 2) The ad cleverly dodges depicting a Khoe-Khoe person whom history will inform you, were the dominant tribe indigenous to the whole of South Africa long before anyone came here. Remember the San guy says in the commercial that ... you found us here? Clever isnt it? But we ALL KNOW that both the Portuguese and the Dutch only met Khoe-Khoe (in fact the Horinghaicona clan) whom they referred to as Strandlopers and then Hottentots. Do I now have your attention? Every South African who attended a school in this country knows this fact so how did it conveniently slip from everyones minds so easily? Let me answer that for you; because they constructed it so. Constructed it so that you can say, look, theres no San guys running around with bows and arrows anymore so the land then belongs to all of us anyways. The lie and BS perpetrated here is simple and is the subliminal removal out of existence of the descendants of the Khoe-Khoe who are the legal, rightful, lawful, emotional, historic, anthropological and genetic owners of the entire land mass of South Africa, being so-called coloureds. Here is the emphatic proof: (I wrote this in 2010) The American Journal of Human Genetics, Volume 86, Issue 4, 611-620, 25 March 2010 published a “scientific paper” under the following heading: Strong Maternal Khoisan Contribution to the South African Coloured Population: A Case of Gender-Biased Admixture, which states inter alia that through detailed phylogeographic analyses of mitochondrial DNA and Y-chromosome variation in a large sample of South African Coloured individuals, that this population derives from at least five different parental populations (Khoi-San, Bantus, Europeans, Indians and Southeast Asians), who have differently contributed to the foundation of the South African Coloured. In addition, our analyses reveal extraordinarily unbalanced gender-specific contributions of the various population genetic components, the most striking being the massive maternal contribution of Khoi-San peoples (more than 60%) and the almost negligible maternal contribution of Europeans with respect to their paternal counterparts. Further, Mr. Razib Khan, a biologist and biochemist based in the US, extrapolates the findings in his piece (blogs.discovermagazine/gnxp/2010/04/cape-coloureds-an-instance-of-a-generality/) and states in conclusion that “The overall picture of gender-biased admixture depicted in this study indicates that the modern South African Coloured population results mainly from the early encounter of European and African males with autochthonous Khoisan females of the Cape of Good Hope around 350 years ago.” I will categorically prove that this so-called study is scientifically unsound (to a large degree) in addition to being misleading and brutally racist even by their own glaring admission. Razib Khan submits three graphs of the findings of this genome study (the picture which I’ve attached to this) where you find (if you study Graph C) and it shows the genetic source and origin of so-called “Coloured” people from South Africa. Notice firstly that the synopsis of both the AJHG and Mr. Khan states that the mtDNA component from Khoisan lineage is “more than 60%” and NOT what is shown on the graph!! (mtDNA is inherited only from the mother as all mitochondria are descended from those in our mother’s egg cells. This means that Mitochondrial DNA is passed from a mother to her children, which also makes it useful for tracing individual’s maternal lineage. So, that while both sons and daughters inherit mtDNA from their mothers, only daughters can pass their mtDNA to their children). The graph clearly shows the percentage of maternal Khoi-San origins to be MORE THAN 70%!!! Now why do both the AJHG and Khan want to hide such a huge percentage difference of Khoi-San mtDNA origin which, in fact it looks more like 72% to me? My hypothesis of this apparent “omission” is that the 72% origin is far more KHOI-SAN than white/European as this so-called study would subliminally suggest. The position that so-called “Coloured” people are mixed is what as the overwhelming majorityof so-called “Coloured” people have been led to believe through the years. Secondly, the information on Graph C again indicates theNRY origins. NRY is nonrecombinant Y microbial cells which are ONLY passed on by males and the supposition of both AJHG and Mr. Khan in this instant state that this is a direct result of “European and African” males and “AUTOCHTHONOUS” Khoisan females The word Autochthonous means that Khoisan women in this case where the earliest known inhabitants of a particular region (the Cape). Their admission (findings/discovery) here PROVES categorically that Khoisan people were the original and indigenous inhabitants of the Cape region. Having said that, more in this statement is made of the European males’ 40% NRY contribution and of course other African males (approximately 5%). But the GLARING OMISSION is the 40% Khoisan MALE NRY contribution on this very same graph. Is this the case of the missing Khoi-San male or am I imagining myself? Their graph CLEARLY and GLARINGLY illustrates (under the Khoisan column) the Khoi-San Males EQUAL NRY contribution of 40% (as European males) to so-called “coloured” genetic origins and make-up. Now why hide such a fundamental and significant NRY contribution from Khoi-San Males but yet loudly trumpet the European (white) males NRY contribution? This mischievous omission completely destroys the statement that ”the modern South African Coloured population results mainly from the early encounter of European and African males with autochthonous Khoi-San females of the Cape of Good Hope around 350 years ago.” It simply is and may I say, a grossly misleading and fallacious statement which should in fact read: “The overwhelming majority of modern SA Coloured population results from MAINLY the natural encounters between indigenous Khoi-San Males and Females and only a small proportion of this group is a result of the obvious rape of Khoi-San females by European (white) males which commenced around 350 years ago” Another issue which I find seriously problematic is their (AJHG) claimed 1000 source subjects for this study. If they only sourced people from the Cape metro areas without sourcing peri-urban and rural areas, the findings/discovery will be biased toward progeny of raped Khoi-San women. I believe that if a full and in-depth study equally covering diverse subjects from all areas of the Western Cape is undertaken, we will be more surprised at the results I am sure. Let me go even further, the self same American Journal of Human Genetics published this report in May 2008 entitled: “Ethiopians and Khoi-San Share the Deepest Clades of the Human Y-Chromosome Phylogeny” and this can found here: ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC384897/ and a synopsis be found here: mathildasanthropologyblog.wordpress/2008/05/23/ethiopian-and-khoisan-y-chromosome-studies/. This study proves that Khoi-San people share paternal ancestry or NRY which is of the oldest genetics uncovered by genetic scientists to date. What all this information means in the big scheme of things, is that Khoi-San people are ORIGINAL Africans and the INDIGENOUS and ORIGINAL inhabitants of both the Western Cape/South Africa as well as Africa. It also categorically dispels the RACIST agenda that so-called “Coloured” people were only invented when whites arrived here as colonialists 350 years ago. This as a corollary leads to the MOST burning issues at play in South African mainstream politics being the legitimate ownership and claim of dispossessed land and the virtual and almost total exclusion of so-called “Coloureds” in most areas of mainstream society due the perpetual fallacious and malicious disinformation perpetuated by both whites and blacks. So-called “Coloured” people are in fact African in every sense of the word and are also the rightful owners of the majority of the Western Cape now in the possession of the descendants of the very colonialists who perpetuated and continue to perpetuate this malicious fallacy and non-existence of the Khoi-San Male.
Posted on: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 07:56:25 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015