Response to Readers and Viewers Questions

1. Have you looked at the evidence I presented from the chinese researchers who say this? I suggest you do before calling me an afro-centric weirdo. And given that the focus of my topic here is not even africa, it makes little sense for you to accuse me of afro-centrism (a series of studies focused or centered on africa). Stop using words bigger than you. 

In fact if any of us is the afro-centric, it is use who insist all historical studies of black people be limited to africa and the rest be ignored and damned. 

Since when have the black race been limited to Africa. Did black people mysteriously turn white when stepping outside of Africa? By that logic non of you except the few still in africa could be black. Your arguments are based in black self hatred and are thoroughly debunked. I can't even say eurocentrism, as the text I quote showed the europeans generally accepted the ancient chaldeans were black. So it comes neither from euro nor afro centrism that they weren't just some self hating black folks.

Truly it is you who is racist. If I study england, no one would dare say, well you can't talk about american english or canadian english or australian english because that is a disservice to europe. That is eurocentrism. But when I study kush I must only speak of africa because countries outside of africa could not have been colonized or settled by black because black only entered other nations as slaves. Frankly you are an extreme racist who views blacks as perpetual victims of history. The reality is more complex. Blacks like the other races have been at times great conquerors and other times conquered and enslaved. And some black people only want to hear about being conquered and enslaved because its comfortable to be the victim.

Blacks never have to worry about the black equivalent of white guilt (not that they should in this day and age) but the prospect that blacks conquered others makes, some black people so uncomfortable that no logic, no studies, no proof, no evidence, no studies, will convince them otherwise because they want to be a victim of history.

Mitt Romney was right 47% of you are going to view yourselves as victims until the end of time.

2.

Fair enough, if you read the evidence and feel that way your entitled. If you have any question feel free to ask. I'm not forcing anyone to believe anything, this isn't jihad; i'm not going to chop your hands off because you don't believe something.

3.

Which is precisely my point. I destroy their eurocent... can't even call it eurocentric because they agree with me. I destroy their anti-black arguments left right and centre. They can't even muster up a single line other than classical logical flaws
-strawmen (like claiming modern iran/iraq is not black therefore the ancient weren't so I am delusional for thinking modern iranis or iraqis are black when I clearly made the distinction)
-personal attacks (you are a black power afro centrist weirdo abeebie; you think the whole world is black and 99% of the detractors have not even LOOKED at the evidence

And the reason for it is obvious:
They'd have to tell you your eyes are lying to you
Because if he ain't black


Then neither are they

or she


And if they ain't black, black doesn't exist.

4.

Valid question
Turkish
Tur=race
Kish=kish

African languages vowel not important for root of words and often kush appears as kish, qesh, qevs, cush because the root here is really ksh sound, it make no difference
Question mark = nothing 

Polish
Pol=polish 
ish=?

Span = ?
ish=?

Or 
Po=in/at/on/about.whe
lish=?

Spa=spa
nish=nish
That doesn't even make sense

Eng=?
lish= ?

i=in
rish=?

ger= ger 
man=to

la=?
tin= imposed

Greek=hellenic
χελλε = chelle
νικ=picnic

Do you see a pattern here, the languages inherently do not make sense when translated this way for any other language. Think of all the words in the turkish language the odds of them just happening to be lining up perfectly to english is an extremely low probability, but virtually every other language indecipherably jargon even ones in the same linguistic family.

But the evidence is much more compelling
-The first name given to istanbul was lygos which shares a root with several older ancient african cities called lagos. recall african languages and root words being formed, its the vowels who go
lygos
=lgs
lagos
=lgs
these are the same named cities, although there are attempts made to deny that there were places named l-g-s in africa for this very reasons dr campbell dunn from oxford universerty draws many links and demonstrates how the ancient greeks who named lygos spoke a west african mandig language anyways in his book the african origins of classical civilization. His work is supported by dr. clyde winters and numerous other professors and experts in africana studies. In fact there are some who now want to classify the indo-european language as and the niger-congo family languages in the same group for this reason. 

Ancient Istanbul was also called several other names that are quiet telling
-Black Roman Emperor Septimus Severus renamed the city after his son Augusta Antonina (Caracalla/Antoninus) and most mainstream european sources do recognize Septimus as black
-The Hebrews or jews would know the city as Kushtandina or Kushtandina Rabati. This is quiet significant because one of the few reason ancient hitties and hattie was unearth was from the bible. for whatever reason they were a civilization lost in history for a long time.

Kushtandina Rabati = Great Kushtandina
Kush>KSH
tan>give(s)/jackal/compartment
dina> dana>debate/argue/govern/judge/sentence/deduce/punish
Raba> great
ti/a> bow (in afro-asiatic languages which hebrew is one and I'll show another examples)1;2

Now as to exactly which interpretation is correct or best, I've read and spoken with numerous linguistic and they say it can have multiple meanings and it wasprobably purposely designed with multiple meanings.
1. Kush, gives governance through the great bow. As in the kusheeite rulers govern people through the strength or the power of the power as they were legendary archers known world wide for their bow
2. Kush gives judgement/sentences through the great bow. As in kush judges or sentences with bow. They tell me this is like the english saying walk with a big stick and speak softly or walk with a big gun and reign down justice.
3. Kush gives punishment with the great bow. As in kush punishes its enemies and concurs people through the bow. Sort of

1. ta-seti = land of the bow; egyptian name for the same kusheeite peoples
2. Aramaic (which the hebrews were obviously familiar with as this was the language of jesus and jews for a very long time; Eil Qushti which means "The God of the Bow." which refers to the city later known as Alqosh today which is a chaldean town in northern iraq also known as el kushtu. Alqoshtti= my god is my bow
3. To the Akkadians they knew alqosh as Eil-Kushtu which mean the god of righteousness/power
Eil = god
kush=ksh
tu=bow

Because of the power of the kusheeite rulers they were elevated to man god like status and kush-tu or the bow of kush was synonymous with power or righteousness and justice. Hence they simply became known as gods of power or gods of righteousness. 

This city was also known as the mother of all villages and it stands above Ninevah, a city that kush son and first great conqueror of the world in the bible nimrod built.

There are far too many coincidence for this just to be pure blind luck or chance given the huge vocabulary of multiple languages.
turkish
tur= race
kish=ksh

The capital city istanbul stays known as the hebrews as Kushtandina Rabati 
whose name means multiple things involving kush like kush governs or punishes through the great bow

the city region also seems to demonstrate the presence of africans
finally nearby cities in Iraq seem to support the possibility of a pan asian kusitic nation in early-history.

Further when you couple it all with the biblical hitties//hethites being a canaanite tribe and the canaanites were black, it seems to strengthen
the notion of an ancient black civilization in turkey along with other elements like the linguistic part I don't feel like typing out right now. But it suffice to say that the hittites only appeared until very recently in the bible and without the biblbical reference would not have been found most likely.

You also have the neo-hittite assyrian vassal state of qeve which is highly similar to the qevs of kush. Strange that I can only find 1 kmt or 1 greece but I can find ksh and qv everywhere..