Midjis wrote:
> Azure <tain@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote :
>
> > -----> this form of government is
> >> advanced because it is the form on which America is founded?
> >
> > Yes!
>
> An enthusiastic reply founded on the preexisting assumption that America
> can truly be called 'advanced'. Rome long assumed the same thing.
Gaelic's, Huns and the Hoard in general disagreed with Rome.
>
>
> > Prick.
>
> Your puerile abuse is a sign of your weakness.
Hey the term is "PURIEL, House of the Badb are the unfortunate suckers
who's
destiny is to review the souls of man to determine who has obtained the
right to proceed.
>
>
> > What lies are you sup****ting with the Dishonest Snippage You Pull?
> > You take the context out of a thread and post what?
> > EH?
> > What is your point?
> > You cut there thread so what is the point?
>
> My point? My point is that the claim you made:
>
> > > Barbarians are not stupid cavemen.
> > > They actually had a very advanced form of Government.
>
> ... has no rational basis, since 'barbarian' did not and does not
> describe a single cultural system. 'Barbarian' was a word used by those
> who considered themselves 'advanced' (and just as you consider America
> advanced, perhaps) to describe those they didn't consider so.
Yeah well if you want semantics over vernacular then understand the topic
before you go cutting your nose off to spite your face.
>
>
> You then said that Thrace and the Huns specifically had a 'very
> advanced' form of government. This was not the case according to the
> Greeks, who,
Considered the "Barbarians" Cave Men Illiterate Fools who did not deserve
mention.
> while recording some of their artistic and cultural
> achievements, described the Thracians as being primitive, tribal and
> with no centralised form of government at all until Greek and later
> Roman influence began to mould them according to the standards of these
> two civilisations.
Not what actual History say's regardless of Greek or Roman Bigotry over
people who were not "Citizens".
> Of course, it may be that the Thracians thought they
> were advanced (after all, it's common to view one's own culture as the
> best one) - although from what I know of them I suspect they didn't
> really think about it all that much.
Greeks were like Romans Bigots who "HATED OUTSIDERS".
Barbarians is a Greek Term.
Used the same by Rome.
Sin is the same use.
Sin is CIN or KIN.
All are born of Sin, all are born of Kin.
Your Family is the evil.
>
>
> As for the Huns, they established a relatively successful (if rather
> short-lived) empire based primarily on their advanced military tactics -
> credit where it's due - but their form of government was very basic
> indeed: they did as their leader(s) told them.
You failed history didn't you?
>
>
>
> > I repeat:
>
> Then repeat, by all means. Two times zero is still zero.
And you are a total nothing on history.
>
>
>
> >> I last saw this tactic in a school playground. What next? "I know
> >> you are"? "Takes one to know one"?
> >
> > Seems to be your game yes.
>
> [Reverent silence for the Duke of Irony.]
You saw your game huh?
>
>
>
> > Yeah right so stop annoying me with your stupidity.
> > Magh is also MOGH, but Scoti use an A not an O.
> > Tribes of the MAGHO or MACHO not Mocho.
> > Mac not Moc, but I know nothing even though it is my Family Tree.
> > Rama was a Liar, their was no Lepoard/Lion King.
>
> This family tree is a tangled weed. Why not research your real one
IT is, goes back to circa 1500 BCE, Gaelic's are like that.
Especially the Tribes of the Mil Royal's, the House of the Conn Mac Art,
Mac Alpines, Mac Greagors, and Mac Donalds.
Very Factual History, consists of the likes of the Hyksus.
>
> instead of making one up out of dodgy fantasy stories?
I did not write the legends they are thousands of years old.
> I'm told
> genealogy can be very interesting.
Yeah, just don't be a descendant of the Royals of Tara.
Elves Brownies Pixies and the likes do not exist.
|
