>i didn't say that influence made indians into arabs, i said
>that your protestations that there was nothing in common was
>absurd.

this is getting into petty words. but basically, to me there are similarities with persians and arabs and afrikans. there are influences brought by invaders.

BUT, while there may (or may not) be a common origin of indo/arab/persian/european peoples, there is no common i/a/p/e cultural roots, commonalities, or i/a/p/e "way of thinking."

>wherever is convenient. which is why your protestations
>that a) indians have nothing to with arabs and b) you have a
>great deal in common with poor african families or whatever
>it was, are no more or less motivated than people who think
>otherwise.

ture. both are convenient/arbitrary. but one can serve a practical function. the other is ...i must say weak.

>they aren't in the least bit interested in your history or
>your struggle. now what?

then to you your way, and to me mine...

it is shameful to me....but whatever...

>i think you're wrong about sanskrit and european languages,
>btw, but i won't pursue it.

*shrugs* not like it would matter anyway.