It’s time for people to learn the truth and know the truth: all British people are descended from blacks, and that means that black people have as much right to Britain as the people that live there.

Blacks have a right to return to their sacred homeland: Britain.

The Telegraph:

The “very first Britons were Black”, an exhibition on the diverse history of Britain has claimed.

The Brilliant Black British History exhibition held at Black Cultural Archives in Brixton, south London, makes a range of contentious claims about British history.

Visitors are informed that “the very first Britons were Black” and that “Britain was black for 7,000 years before” white people arrived.

The assertions appear to be based on a genetic study of the 12,000-year-old remains of Cheddar Man which suggested that ancient Britons had dark skin, but the study and these claims have since been contested by academics.

The exhibition at the Black Cultural Archives, which receives funding from Lambeth council and Arts Council England, is based on the Bloomsbury children’s book Brilliant Black British History, by Atinuke, the Nigerian-born poet and author.

The first display panel in the exhibition states: “By testing DNA, scientists made an amazon discovery – the first migrants to Britain around 12,000 years ago had black skin. Yes, that’s right, the very first Britons were black!”

By scanning a QR code, visitors can listen to audio which expands on this, claiming that “the white first Britons migrated 4,500 BC years ago. Britain was Black for 7,000 years before that”.

In 2018, it was announced that a genetic study of Cheddar Man, the oldest set of human remains to have been found in Briton, suggested that “giveaway” genes meant he likely had blue eyes and a range of possible skin pigmentations from “dark to black”.

A model created to represent Cheddar Man, which featured in Channel 4 documentary at the time, depicted the Mesolithic hunter-gatherers with a very dark skin pigmentation.

But the leader of the genetic study, Susan Walsh, clarified that Cheddar Man’s appearance was uncertain, while a separate 2017 study from geneticist Sarah Tishkoff found that predicting likely pigmentation based on “giveaway” genes was inaccurate.

The Brilliant Black British History exhibition, which runs until January 28, covers the racial makeup of Britain from per-history to the modern-day, and claims that the 3rd century AD Roman Emperor Septimius Severus was “a Black Roman ruler”.

Not just kangz, but also emporarz

Severus, who died in what would become York, was born in north Africa, but was of Italian and Middle Eastern descent.

The exhibit claims that 11 per cent of Roman York was “Black”, possibly based on a 2009 study, which suggested 11 per cent of one set of human remains may have been migrants who “mainly originated from northern Africa (modern Egypt, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, and Libya)”.

The exhibit in Brixton contains a panel with acknowledgements from Bloomsbury, who published the book on which the displays are based, which thanks the research of librarians, scientists and historians who made the exhibition possible.

Its historical and scientific claims, while toned down from the book which claims black people built Stonehenge, have nevertheless caused concern.

Cambridge historian Professor David Abulafia said: “The Brixton expo is new to me but the tendentious tone seems to be exactly what I would expect. I am totally nonplussed by the obsession with the skin colour of people in Britain’s remote past.”

This might be getting a bit out of hand…

The Black Culture Archives hosts all sorts of important art’n shieet

It’s time for people to know the truth: all British people are descended from blacks, and that means that black people have as much right to Britain as the people that live there.

Blacks have a right to return to their sacred homeland: Britain.

The Telegraph:

The “very first Britons were Black”, an exhibition on the diverse history of Britain has claimed.

The Brilliant Black British History exhibition held at Black Cultural Archives in Brixton, south London, makes a range of contentious claims about British history.

Visitors are informed that “the very first Britons were Black” and that “Britain was black for 7,000 years before” white people arrived.

The assertions appear to be based on a genetic study of the 12,000-year-old remains of Cheddar Man which suggested that ancient Britons had dark skin, but the study and these claims have since been contested by academics.

The exhibition at the Black Cultural Archives, which receives funding from Lambeth council and Arts Council England, is based on the Bloomsbury children’s book Brilliant Black British History, by Atinuke, the Nigerian-born poet and author.

The first display panel in the exhibition states: “By testing DNA, scientists made an amazon discovery – the first migrants to Britain around 12,000 years ago had black skin. Yes, that’s right, the very first Britons were black!”

By scanning a QR code, visitors can listen to audio which expands on this, claiming that “the white first Britons migrated 4,500 BC years ago. Britain was Black for 7,000 years before that”.

In 2018, it was announced that a genetic study of Cheddar Man, the oldest set of human remains to have been found in Briton, suggested that “giveaway” genes meant he likely had blue eyes and a range of possible skin pigmentations from “dark to black”.

A model created to represent Cheddar Man, which featured in Channel 4 documentary at the time, depicted the Mesolithic hunter-gatherers with a very dark skin pigmentation.

But the leader of the genetic study, Susan Walsh, clarified that Cheddar Man’s appearance was uncertain, while a separate 2017 study from geneticist Sarah Tishkoff found that predicting likely pigmentation based on “giveaway” genes was inaccurate.

The Brilliant Black British History exhibition, which runs until January 28, covers the racial makeup of Britain from per-history to the modern-day, and claims that the 3rd century AD Roman Emperor Septimius Severus was “a Black Roman ruler”.

Not just kangz, but also emporarz

Severus, who died in what would become York, was born in north Africa, but was of Italian and Middle Eastern descent.

The exhibit claims that 11 per cent of Roman York was “Black”, possibly based on a 2009 study, which suggested 11 per cent of one set of human remains may have been migrants who “mainly originated from northern Africa (modern Egypt, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, and Libya)”.

The exhibit in Brixton contains a panel with acknowledgements from Bloomsbury, who published the book on which the displays are based, which thanks the research of librarians, scientists and historians who made the exhibition possible.

Its historical and scientific claims, while toned down from the book which claims black people built Stonehenge, have nevertheless caused concern.

Cambridge historian Professor David Abulafia said: “The Brixton expo is new to me but the tendentious tone seems to be exactly what I would expect. I am totally nonplussed by the obsession with the skin colour of people in Britain’s remote past.”

This might be getting a bit out of hand…

The Black Culture Archives hosts all sorts of important art ‘n’ shieet

You might not want to admit it, but all of your “white history” was stolen from the blacks.

They did everything that mattered, from the dawn of time.

The Telegraph:

Stonehenge was built by black Britons, a new children’s history book has claimed.

The illustrated book entitled Brilliant Black British History, by the Nigerian-born British author Atinuke, says “every single British person comes from a migrant” but “the very first Britons were black”.

Readers of the newly-released book are told that Stonehenge was built while Britain was “a black country”.

The book, published by Bloomsbury and promoted by Arts Council-funded literacy charity The Book Trust, states that “Britain was a black country for more than 7,000 years before white people came, and during that time the most famous British monument was built, Stonehenge.”

The introduction says that “Britain has been a mostly white country for a lot less time than it has been a mostly black country”.

Atinuke’s book, for readers aged seven-plus, takes the reader through a chronological overview of black people’s presence in Britain, saying that Cheddar Man, the oldest human remains found in Britain, had skin “as dark as dark can be”.

‘A hodgepodge of people’

The claims made in the book have caused concern among some historians that children could be brought up reading “misinformation”.

The leaders of 2018 research into Cheddar Man’s DNA said it was impossible to know with certainty how this early inhabitant looked, and other researchers noted problems with attempting to predict skin tone from the genetic model used.

Recent genetic analysis has shown that the inhabitants of Britain in the period when Stonehenge was completed, around 2,500 BC, were pale-skinned early farmers whose ancestors had spread from Anatolia.

On a page featuring an image of a black Roman legionary fighting a white Celt, Atinuke’s book says Rome “turned back to Europe and pushed north” to conquer Britain after first being unable to take the African kingdom of Nubia.

The book states that the Roman historian Tacitus reported that the Silures people in Wales were “dark-skinned and curly-haired”. In Tacitus’ full account, he theorised that they may have been from Spain.

…

The book says that following the Second World War, “Britain needed help” and so the “government asked people from the colonies to come”. These included the Windrush generation, and others from counties that had been “left poor after slavery and colonisation”.

It also includes a page on Black Lives Matter, which states that although “race does not scientifically exist”, black people suffer “institutional racism”.

Atinuke’s book has caused concern among historians, with Dr Zareer Masani saying “seems typical of the kind of wokedom that’s been colonising our schools and universities”.

He claimed it was “evidence of brainwashing children with outright lies, confusion and misinformation”.

It doesn’t matter if it’s true.

It’s like the Holocaust.

It’s true even if it didn’t happen.

This is what they’re actually trying to hide

Some blacks can sing pretty well. This one ain’t one of them.

There is no evidence Cheddar Man was even black. They admitted that at the time. They just came up with that out of thin air, based on nothing.

In fact, the entire Cheddar Man thing could have been a hoax. It was all very sus.

Making everyone in British history black is offensive, I guess, but sort of hilarious.

GB News:

The BBC has sparked a furious race row after being accused of “rewriting history” following the release of a new song on children’s show Horrible Histories.

The TV series received a barrage of criticisms on social media over its song “Been Here From The Start”.

The CBBC programme traced the history of black people from Cheddar Man to the 20th century.

GB News host and former Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage asked: “When will the BBC stop lying?”

Conservative commentator Anna McGovern added: “BBC’s children show Horrible Histories has released a song called Been Here From The Start which is about black people always being in Britain. BBC is rewriting history by teaching children that the original Britons were black.”

She added: “Facts the BBC got wrong: – It says that Septimius Severus was black.

“That’s false. – It says that the Aurelian moors were black.

“That’s false. – It says that Western Hunter Gatherers, the original people of Britain, were black. That’s false. It’s time to defund the BBC.”

Critics have also pointed out that whilst black people have resided in the United Kingdom in the last 2000 years it is unfair to imply medieval or early modern Britain was diverse.

Not all critics are going to agree that blacks have been in Britain for 2,000 years. All mainstream scientists don’t agree to that.

Cheddar man was established to be a hoax.

Around 20,000 black people lived in the United Kingdom in the 18th century.

The overall population started at around five million in 1700 and reached nearly nine million in 1801.

Depending on the period of the 18th century, the figure is either one-in-250 or one-in-450.

…

The song did not seem to spark much controversy when it was first released.

Honestly, I kinda like that black people have no history, so they insist on going back in white history and claiming everyone was black.

In itself, it’s harmless if blacks want to believe that. The problem is when Jews and white women take this and politicize it.

What an awful piece of shit this show is

The whole world of suburban-dwelling middle-class house mums is waiting on the edge of its seat to see what Meghan Markle is going to wear to the royal wedding.

BBC:

With Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s wedding a few days away, speculation about the bride’s dress – set to become one of the most iconic royal wedding outfits of all time – has reached peak fever pitch. And no wonder. On Saturday, when Meghan walks down the aisle at St George’s, Windsor, the fortunes of whichever fashion house she chooses will change forever.

If you’ve been muttering ‘nice enough girl,’ ‘what’s the fuss?’, you’re not alone. Many are finding the kerfuffle excessive. Others, however, would beg to differ. In six short months, Meghan has become one of fashion’s most significant influencers – bigger, according to global fashion search platform Lyst, than the Kardashians or the Hadid sisters, Gigi and Bella.

When Markle attended the Invictus Games with Harry last September, for example, wearing a pair of tortoiseshell ‘Percy’ sunglasses, sales at the British brand Finlay & Co shot up by more than 1,000 per cent. What Meghan wears counts. No wonder top British fashion brands have been staring at their phones for the past six months.

Lol. Women.

Every royal wedding attracts attention; this one is something else. Meghan Markle is a 36-year-old California native, a denizen of Hollywood, a former actress in a popular TV drama. She is also whip smart, big-hearted and as ferociously contemporary as supermodel Adwoa Aboah on the cover of Vogue. In choosing Markle to be his wife, Harry has, arguably, pulled the monarchy into the 21st Century. 

Can’t go a single article about Markle without mentioning this line, can we?

Ever since the engagement was announced in November, the couple have forged new paths, inviting youth charity workers and community leaders to the wedding instead of political leaders; asking for donations to small charities instead of gifts. In this context, the frenzy over ‘the dress’ – the concrete expression of everything Meghan and Harry stand for – makes more sense.

Seriously though, their whole marriage is one big virtue-signal.

Pundits have been scouring Meghan’s personal style for clues. Honed in LA and on the Canadian sets of TV legal drama Suits, Meghan offers a masterclass in blending Californian breeziness with showbiz glam. The result is a look many women aspire to: polished but not prim, sophisticated but not laboured, beautiful but not annoyingly so. Strength cloaked in style.

California breeziness eh? They must mean looking like a bum.

Tbh this whole marriage is a farce on too many levels to even count. But if the ginger prince wanted to go slumming, he should have just tapped this mulatto whore, gotten it out of his system and then married a decent woman to carry on his line.

I’m not an oil driller myself, and I don’t think I could ever be with a woman with even a drop of nigger blood – trust me, I’ve tested this – because of the smell, the visceral repulsion I feel and the risk of catching an STD. Get a test, by the way, Harry.

But I’m not a Puritan by any means. Some men like the exotic and different. Hell, even Jefferson had a dusky whore he enjoyed from time to time.

So whatever, I’m not here to judge what woman a White man sticks his dick into.

It’s really none of my business. 

It is, however, my business when the Royal Family goes out of their way to convince White people that race-mixing is okay and the future of their country and race.

That’s where I draw the line.

And fuck, Harry, dude, why not just date a Portuguese girl like Shakespeare did if you’re so keen on having a “Dark Lady.” You’ll get the black hair, the smooth olive skin and the feisty southern temperament – why did it have to be a negress?

And the idea of having cheddar-babies is disgusting as well.

Thank God there’s at least one healthy royal family left.

So they’ve been pushing a completely insane narrative in the Jewish media and Jewish academia for over a decade now, which goes:

• Race does not exist
• White people are responsible for the oppression of all other races
• White people are the only race that does not have any culture
• White people need immigrants to give them culture
• White people deserve to be flooded with immigrants as punishment for slavery, colonialism, the Holocaust, etc.

With Cheddar Man, they literally decided to come out and say “actually, white people are really just niggers, lol.”

Of course, the skin of the model was colored arbitrarily, and over a week ago, geneticists who worked on the project have come out and said that they actually have no idea what color Cheddar Man’s skin was. But that wasn’t getting widely reported. Because the whole purpose of making the claim in the first place was to push a political agenda.

It was printed in New Scientist and was behind a paywall, and I thought they were just going to disappear it.

Now, however, we are getting mainstream coverage.

Daily Mail:

Cheddar man may not have been ‘dark to black skinned’ after all. 

Last month, researchers claimed that they had been able to accurately reconstruct the face of the ‘first Brit’ based on his DNA – and sensationally revealed he had black skin and blue eyes.

But now, one of the main scientists who helped create the reconstruction of his 10,000-year-old face says he may not have been black at all. 

Geneticist Susan Walsh at Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis, says we simply don’t know his skin colour.

While her computer model shows being black is his ‘probable profile’, DNA testing is not advanced enough to say for certain.

The 10,000-year-old bones of the ancient Briton were unearthed in Somerset in 1903, and have puzzled scientists ever since.

A team of experts, including Professor Walsh, recently created a computer model that tries to predict a person’s skin pigmentation, hair and eye colour, purely from their genes.

The test focused on 36 points of comparison in 16 genes, which are all linked to skin colour.

Dr Walsh and her colleagues analysed genetic data taken from more than 1,400 people.

They were mainly from Europe and the US, but also included people from Africa and Papua New Guinea.

Part of this data was used to train their model on how to recognise skin colour by looking at links with the 36 genetic markers.

The rest of the data was used to test how well the model could predict skin colour from DNA alone.

The model came up with ‘black’ or ‘dark black’ skin for Cheddar Man based on his DNA.

Some, particularly on the far-right, have questioned whether there was a political agenda behind the claims.

Dr Walsh believes that the tests can’t prove Cheddar Man’s skin colour and that his DNA may have degraded over the past 10,000 years. 

So, that’s how they get you.

They just make shit up, report it as fact.

Using biology for political purposes is not new. The entire issue of race was effectively removed from science itself following WWII, as it was argued by the Jews that even talking about race would lead to annodah shoah, so the official “race doesn’t exist” line became gospel.

Of course when they are hoaxing you that you are actually a nigger, race all of the sudden starts existing again.

The other interesting factoid that got rolled over in this whole thing is that Cheddar Man only shares 10% DNA with modern Brits. Furthermore, none of his features are negroid, and the study made a point to state that he wasn’t somehow African. So it was meaningless even in its original form, but the fact that they released the model with the skin coloring being virtually arbitrary – wow.

This is just psychological abuse of the goyim.

I think pretty much everyone sensed that the Cheddar Man thing was sort of a hoax on whatever level.

Firstly, they recreated him as black based on the fact that he didn’t have the genes associated with being white, which is sketchy.

Secondly, he had no relationship whatsoever to Negroes, at all, whatever his skin color.

Thirdly, the British population was replaced with people from mainland Europe after Cheddar Man, which means that he isn’t actually even an ancestor of the British people.

Forthly, the whole thing was so political, it just seemed like a hoax.

Well, now a mainstream science journal is admitting he probably wasn’t even black.

New Scientist:

A Briton who lived 10,000 years ago had dark brown skin and blue eyes. At least, that’s what dozens of news stories published this month – including our own – stated as fact. But one of the geneticists who performed the research says the conclusion is less certain, and according to others we are not even close to knowing the skin colour of any ancient human.

The skeleton of Cheddar Man was discovered in 1903 in a cave in south-east England where it had lain for 10,000 years.

The rest of that article is behind a paywall – conveniently – and I haven’t read it.

Neither had anyone in the 4chan thread.

But the lede says it all.

I imagine the rest of the article is just what Survive the Jive said before the model was even released.

 The politicization of science is not helpful to anyone.