The Term African American

[DSTRen13]

Originally Posted by Ch2tf

Since you apparently know that the majority of your "blood" is predominantly African, I ask HOW do you know that. I ask this because A LOT of African-Americans seem to "know" that they are predominantly of African descent, and in fact that may not be the case. I think back to the PBS special that ran February 2006 where Henry Louis Gates Jr. did a DNA/bloodline trace of some African-American celebrities (Oprah, Chris Tucker, Quincy Jones, Whoopi Goldberg, and so forth) and while some of them did have a DNA connection to some peoples of Africa, others like Quincy Jones and Whoopi Goldberg (YES Whoopi!) did not have a predominant "African" Heritage as read through their DNA.

I did not see this particular special. So I don't know exactly what it claimed. But the problem with many things of this nature is simply that it isn't good science to claim that you can tell racial heritage through DNA testing. Good TV, maybe, but not good science. "Race" is not science - it's sociology. When the two start getting too mixed together (not that I believe they are ever truly separated, but it should at least be a goal), then things turn out very, very badly. JMO.

[Sista]

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

I disagree with your tactics, but you are asking some poignant questions, something I had neglected to think about and I had forgotten.

My dear sister Monet, there are people who don't mind my tactics and there are people who can't stand my tactics. I have been to many discussion forums where I am hated and the ones who do not like me make it known for all to see. Funny thing, those who absolutely love me always make it a point to contact me by email or Instant message to let me know that they absolutely love my tactics. It is not a difficult thing to analyze why it is that the ones who like my tactics want to keep it a secret. This is nothing directed towards you, I was just voicing in text my observations. I guess I observe to much and then I have the audacity to voice what I have observed. I am somewhat of a rebelious type. Some people don't like a big mouth Sista who interupts everything. People like to live in comfort zones and comfort zones to me don't make us as black people work hard enough, especially when it comes to each other. We seem as though we can not tolerate each other, yet we have for a long time and still to this day tolerate anyone who is not black. What this say's about us I can only imagine but what it say's to you, I will leave that up to you. Any way, enough said on that...please excuse me.

Moving right along...

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

In my opinion, for us, we are defined by our actions and educational accomplishments. With good works and higher advanced degrees sometimes those things will yield a small and minor self-definition. It is constant work because it is self-evolving..

For us, I get that you are speaking of decendants of African slaves right? If so, what exactly does our accomplishments define us as? From what I know, or from what I have witnessed, observational wise is this, Black people who are educated and who have achieved something, higher advanced degrees and so forth, they are looked at as to be different from the so called disadvantaged or disenfranchised blacks also, they have been trreated so called better by whites. In other words, they are the so called lucky blacks, in other words, Tokens.

It is just like how it was on the plantation after slavery during share cropping times, all though all blacks came from a family full of African and mullato slaves of African and white origin, if one of the family members got a scholarship to go to a college, most likely the mullato, that black person was treated as if he was a token amongst the whites who accepted him or her due to the fact that he or she was a college student, mind you, during that time, the Universities were white establishments with white educational values, nothing but negativity in those places were being taught about blacks, if anything about blacks was being taught at all.

This is the catch, those same whites did not accept those blacks who did not go to college and aspire a higher education, degrees and so forth.

Question: Just because some blacks got the opportunity to aspire a higher education and so forth etcetera, etcetera, did that make them any different from the other blacks, less? Did that make them altogether a different definition of black? How does education classify black people from other black people? Or how does education classify one to be African American verses Black, Negro or Colored? How did Africans in America go African slaves to Colored, Black, Negro and African American and how does education play a role in the scheme of this all?

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

Now, that won't stop ignant blonded weave wearing fat "gwirlfriend" up in the broke down with Black biracial badass "Bebe's Kids" working temporarily at Walmart who will still ask a "powerhouse sista" for her i-d-e-n-t-i-f-c-a-t-i-o-n on her $50,000 credit limited debit VISA card...

So, you have to take those things in stride, keep breathing...

Hmmm, that was funny!

[Sista]

Originally Posted by Ch2tf

Since you apparently know that the majority of your "blood" is predominantly African, I ask HOW do you know that.

I had the gene test done and I am of Ghanaian decent. My daughter is of Ghanaian and Benin decent. She looks just like her dad so maybe he is of Benin decent. Not that the test go far back enough because they don't. However, there are other clues. For instance, going back 4 generations in my family on both sides, my maternal ancestors all married other African decent people but who knows? Some native American blood or white blood and perhaps Asian blood may have been lurking in their veins. My point is this, I am of the majority of African decent more than I am of anything else and I relate very much so to my African brothers and sisters on the continent as well as I do my brothers and sisters here in America.

Originally Posted by Ch2tf

I ask this because A LOT of African-Americans seem to "know" that they are predominantly of African descent, and in fact that may not be the case. I think back to the PBS special that ran February 2006 where Henry Louis Gates Jr. did a DNA/bloodline trace of some African-American celebrities (Oprah, Chris Tucker, Quincy Jones, Whoopi Goldberg, and so forth) and while some of them did have a DNA connection to some peoples of Africa, others like Quincy Jones and Whoopi Goldberg (YES Whoopi!) did not have a predominant "African" Heritage as read through their DNA.

I saw that show and I don't remember Whoopi 's situation but I am sure if her situation is what you say it was, I would have remembered.

Any how, if one is to test for African Ancestry, that test is different from any Native American or European DNA test, they are all separate so if Whoopi asked to be tested for her European ancestry, that is the test she would have been given. Another thing is this, depending on the test center they used, different testing centers have more or less African DNA. The test center they used just may have been one of those places that didn't yet acquire blood results from the Africans whoopi came from.

Any way, this is just something to think about, those kinds of shows are rigged and one has to be very careful not to believe everything they see on Television. It is not a secret that Whoopi only dates and marries white men, that part of the show could have been fixed in order to promote some type of propaganda. Who knows? Not that looks really say anything but I know this though, Whoopi look mo' African than me

[AKA_Monet]

Originally Posted by Sista

My dear sister Monet, there are people who don't mind my tactics and there are people who can't stand my tactics. I have been to many discussion forums where I am hated and the ones who do not like me make it known for all to see. Funny thing, those who absolutely love me always make it a point to contact me by email or Instant message to let me know that they absolutely love my tactics. It is not a difficult thing to analyze why it is that the ones who like my tactics want to keep it a secret. This is nothing directed towards you, I was just voicing in text my observations. I guess I observe to much and then I have the audacity to voice what I have observed. I am somewhat of a rebelious type. Some people don't like a big mouth Sista who interupts everything. People like to live in comfort zones and comfort zones to me don't make us as black people work hard enough, especially when it comes to each other. We seem as though we can not tolerate each other, yet we have for a long time and still to this day tolerate anyone who is not black. What this say's about us I can only imagine but what it say's to you, I will leave that up to you. Any way, enough said on that...please excuse me.

Moving right along...



For us, I get that you are speaking of decendants of African slaves right? If so, what exactly does our accomplishments define us as? From what I know, or from what I have witnessed, observational wise is this, Black people who are educated and who have achieved something, higher advanced degrees and so forth, they are looked at as to be different from the so called disadvantaged or disenfranchised blacks also, they have been trreated so called better by whites. In other words, they are the so called lucky blacks, in other words, Tokens.

It is just like how it was on the plantation after slavery during share cropping times, all though all blacks came from a family full of African and mullato slaves of African and white origin, if one of the family members got a scholarship to go to a college, most likely the mullato, that black person was treated as if he was a token amongst the whites who accepted him or her due to the fact that he or she was a college student, mind you, during that time, the Universities were white establishments with white educational values, nothing but negativity in those places were being taught about blacks, if anything about blacks was being taught at all.

This is the catch, those same whites did not accept those blacks who did not go to college and aspire a higher education, degrees and so forth.

Question: Just because some blacks got the opportunity to aspire a higher education and so forth etcetera, etcetera, did that make them any different from the other blacks, less? Did that make them altogether a different definition of black? How does education classify black people from other black people? Or how does education classify one to be African American verses Black, Negro or Colored? How did Africans in America go African slaves to Colored, Black, Negro and African American and how does education play a role in the scheme of this all?




Hmmm, that was funny!

First as an elder I am telling you DO A SEARCH. When find my posts, you will realize who I am and what I am about.

The last vocal person who stated their thoughts like these that was worth having a discussion was PHAShriner1906: Search his handle, and you may learn a little bit about this board. Eventually, he got banned. It was about depth.

You also must remember "who's world is it anyways"? What is the Cultural Asili and Utamaawazo behind alot of this?

The direct answer to your question about educational accomplishment lead to definition is "NO", in the "end game" we are NOT in control of our own definition. We take short bits of time 5 years or less, that makes our definition as long as we stay healthy... But when you get into your 40's+ (as I am), all of this discussion becomes irrelevant. I no longer can fight this young persons' fight. Then, if you have children, most of this kind of philosophy, becomes irrelevant if you choose to provide for your children.

Now, "society" honors those who have been classified as with conferring an educational advangtage or can make tons of money (like a prize race horse). On the side of educational advangtage this process is longer and tougher and there is a strong amount of "tokenism" that must take place to get those higher advance/professional degrees. Call it indoctrination or conditioning. If one chooses to speak out most of the time he or she is older and established in life without fear or risk of ostracism from anyone. But, if young, <35 y/o, the domination over these minds is perpetual. Most folks lose there minds in this process and remain tokens to be bartered. The ones who question, lose funding from the government, call it a shakedown.

Now the 'hood may see us "Negros in the Ivory Tower" as ass kissers. Then, there is those in Underground Movement... Knowing the price that would be paid if caught, manuevering like the Mamba or Cobra... When those in the 'hood realize those in the Underground, you hear a different story. About how the "Truth Shall Set You Free"...

Because these facades you see around here are the first line of defense. You may be ready to fight that fight. But "homies" are ready to go nuclear. "Massa" can be soothed enough to reconsider... But all of us are living on borrowed time.

This is how deep some of these ideas go...

[Ch2tf]

Originally Posted by DSTRen13

I did not see this particular special. So I don't know exactly what it claimed. But the problem with many things of this nature is simply that it isn't good science to claim that you can tell racial heritage through DNA testing. Good TV, maybe, but not good science. "Race" is not science - it's sociology. When the two start getting too mixed together (not that I believe they are ever truly separated, but it should at least be a goal), then things turn out very, very badly. JMO.

Originally Posted by Sista

I saw that show and I don't remember Whoopi 's situation but I am sure if her situation is what you say it was, I would have remembered.

Any how, if one is to test for African Ancestry, that test is different from any Native American or European DNA test, they are all separate so if Whoopi asked to be tested for her European ancestry, that is the test she would have been given. Another thing is this, depending on the test center they used, different testing centers have more or less African DNA. The test center they used just may have been one of those places that didn't yet acquire blood results from the Africans whoopi came from.

Any way, this is just something to think about, those kinds of shows are rigged and one has to be very careful not to believe everything they see on Television. It is not a secret that Whoopi only dates and marries white men, that part of the show could have been fixed in order to promote some type of propaganda. Who knows? Not that looks really say anything but I know this though, Whoopi look mo' African than me

I wasn't precluding that race is a "science" and I'm well aware that it is a sociological construction. I used the term race because it was the term floating around in the thread. So to clarify, according the the special, Henry Louis Gates Jr., a well known author and Harvard University professor, compared the DNA a group of well know celebrities against the DNA of a subsection of the WORLD'S population (the basis of the comparison is that currently there is a "file" of the DNA of the world's people that has been compiled since the advent of genetics/DNA testing). The DNA, or rather the portion of a person's DNA that has been shown to related to ethnicity/heritage was compared to the "samples" that were currently housed and given the volunteers as a possible window of their culturo-historical roots.

And Sista, I do remember the special-very well in fact-and Whoopi was indeed surprised/shocked/unprepared for the results of her comparison. And while I do recognize that no test is fail proof, motivations, etc. I do lend a measure of validity to research and "testing" completed by HLG, supported by Harvard University, and presented via PBS. But that's just me. If it was that great television, it would have been broadcasted on other stations besides PBS .

[DSTRen13]

Originally Posted by Ch2tf

I wasn't precluding that race is a "science" and I'm well aware that it is a sociological construction. I used the term race because it was the term floating around in the thread. So to clarify, according the the special, Henry Louis Gates Jr., a well known author and Harvard University professor, compared the DNA a group of well know celebrities against the DNA of a subsection of the WORLD'S population (the basis of the comparison is that currently there is a "file" of the DNA of the world's people that has been compiled since the advent of genetics/DNA testing). The DNA, or rather the portion of a person's DNA that has been shown to related to ethnicity/heritage was compared to the "samples" that were currently housed and given the volunteers as a possible window of their culturo-historical roots.

And Sista, I do remember the special-very well in fact-and Whoopi was indeed surprised/shocked/unprepared for the results of her comparison. And while I do recognize that no test is fail proof, motivations, etc. I do lend a measure of validity to research and "testing" completed by HLG, supported by Harvard University, and presented via PBS. But that's just me. If it was that great television, it would have been broadcasted on other stations besides PBS .

I'll have to see if I can find a copy - do you know the name of the program? It sounds interesting.

[Ch2tf]

Originally Posted by DSTRen13

I'll have to see if I can find a copy - do you know the name of the program? It sounds interesting.

It was called "African-American Lives" and was a mini series that aired in February 2006. HLG didn't rely solely on the DNA testing, he also worked with the geneologies, oral histories, public documents, and his personal knowledge of Af-Am history and the slave trade to support or disprove each other/the DNA comparison.

[Honeykiss1974]

FYI (for everyone) - I saw the one with Oprah and it was great (and emotional). If memory serves me correctly, they are selling the DVD for each of the series. I seem to remember seeing that at the end of the show.

[Sista]

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

First as an elder I am telling you DO A SEARCH. When find my posts, you will realize who I am and what I am about.

The last vocal person who stated their thoughts like these that was worth having a discussion was PHAShriner1906: Search his handle, and you may learn a little bit about this board. Eventually, he got banned. It was about depth.

You also must remember "who's world is it anyways"? What is the Cultural Asili and Utamaawazo behind alot of this?

The direct answer to your question about educational accomplishment lead to definition is "NO", in the "end game" we are NOT in control of our own definition. We take short bits of time 5 years or less, that makes our definition as long as we stay healthy... But when you get into your 40's+ (as I am), all of this discussion becomes irrelevant. I no longer can fight this young persons' fight. Then, if you have children, most of this kind of philosophy, becomes irrelevant if you choose to provide for your children.

Now, "society" honors those who have been classified as with conferring an educational advangtage or can make tons of money (like a prize race horse). On the side of educational advangtage this process is longer and tougher and there is a strong amount of "tokenism" that must take place to get those higher advance/professional degrees. Call it indoctrination or conditioning. If one chooses to speak out most of the time he or she is older and established in life without fear or risk of ostracism from anyone. But, if young, <35 y/o, the domination over these minds is perpetual. Most folks lose there minds in this process and remain tokens to be bartered. The ones who question, lose funding from the government, call it a shakedown.

Now the 'hood may see us "Negros in the Ivory Tower" as ass kissers. Then, there is those in Underground Movement... Knowing the price that would be paid if caught, manuevering like the Mamba or Cobra... When those in the 'hood realize those in the Underground, you hear a different story. About how the "Truth Shall Set You Free"...

Because these facades you see around here are the first line of defense. You may be ready to fight that fight. But "homies" are ready to go nuclear. "Massa" can be soothed enough to reconsider... But all of us are living on borrowed time.

This is how deep some of these ideas go...

I feel ya' sis. I will do that search and check out what you referred me to check out. I really understand all that you have said even the code
stuff.

Should I have kept that a secret?

By the way, I guess I am in the young crew, I am 33

[Sista]

Originally Posted by Ch2tf

I wasn't precluding that race is a "science" and I'm well aware that it is a sociological construction..

Sociological construction, please break down what that means to you? I would like to make sure that I am comprehending at the same perception, frame of mind as you? I just want to be sure of what that means to you, sociological construction?

Originally Posted by Ch2tf

I used the term race because it was the term floating around in the thread. So to clarify, according the special, Henry Louis Gates Jr., a well known author and Harvard University professor, compared the DNA a group of well know celebrities against the DNA of a subsection of the WORLD'S population (the basis of the comparison is that currently there is a "file" of the DNA of the world's people that has been compiled since the advent of genetics/DNA testing). The DNA, or rather the portion of a person's DNA that has been shown to related to ethnicity/heritage was compared to the "samples" that were currently housed and given the volunteers as a possible window of their culturo-historical roots.

Am I to get from this that Whoopi had a higher percentage of European decent as oppose to African decent? Because when I saw the show, it said nothing about percentages, only decent.

I am going to have to ask you for the source for which genetic testing center did Henry Louis gates use because I have researched many DNA testing centers and none of them have the worlds population of DNA on file let alone a subsection. It is not an easy thing to approach foreign people and ask them for their blood, so you can store it in your bank.

Any way, that wouldn't be an easy thing to do even if you had an interpret present. Some people will give up their blood for such a cause but not all of them. This is why most DNA testing centers do not have certain blood types and therefore cannot tell you about your ancestry if they do not have A DNA match for you on file. DNA testing centers for genetics makes that very clear before they test you for your DNA match.

Any way, how could it on one hand be world's population and sub section at the same time? Doesn't sound to specific or clear. I detect a huge flaw. Is it worlds population or a sub section of the world?

I need a source to check this out for my self.
As I finish up this post, I am googling, trying to find that source for my self, have any suggestions on where to start?

Originally Posted by Ch2tf

And Sista, I do remember the special-very well in fact-and Whoopi was indeed surprised/shocked/unprepared for the results of her comparison.

What exactly was the comparison?

[DSTCHAOS]

The term is actually "social construction." It should mean to Ch2tf what it means to everyone, regardless of how the definition is worded:

Constructs like race are not biological but are instead social designations and result in certain social interactions and meanings. We create meaning in our observed differences between people and exaggerate whatever differences there are.

As Luther said "a chair is still a chair, even if there's no one sitting there" because we decided that there is a such thing as a "chair."

[Wolfman]

The following link will clear up what was done and how they did it on the series, "African American Lives," which has been alluded to several times. They were well aware of the false claims that can be made concerning the implication of genetic data. This is why,above the solid tests they used, they employed an archaeogeneticist and a biological anthropologist, both experts on the population groups of the continent, to try to correlate geography/tribal group to the genetic data of the participants in the series.

An interesting (and funny!) aside: On this program a prominent biological geneticist consulted, a white prof. at Penn State, informs Dr. Gates how he had this test done on himself. The results showed a genetically significant percentage of his ancestry was African. He told this to his mother who told him not to tell anyone about this. His mother had been keeping this family secret which he was in the dark about--although he had no problem with this "revelation." Genes don't lie; but we have to be careful to interpret the results responsibly. But, it seems to me, this discussion is about culture.

"African Americans" have been blessed with a horrific gift: a common cultural heritage forged out of the the experience of slavery and it's aftermath that's made disparate people/tribal groups into a basic identity, with various subgroups and identities. This has been the foundation of a political solidarity that made the Civil Rights Movement possible--something that has inspired peoples all over the world in their struggles for freedom. I remember talking with Palestinians in the Old City of Jerusalem and they commonly referring to me as "brother"--many of whom would, by phenotype, be considered "white" in this country. "African American" culture is grounded in Africa but is also of the American experience. "African Americans" only have to travel to find out how American they are culturally; and non-Americans understand better than whites in this country how African American culture is at the core of "Americaness."

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/aalives/profile_gates.html
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/aalives/about.html
http://www.bsos.umd.edu/ANTH/faculty/fjackson --a biological anthropologist consulted on the series.

[Ch2tf]

Originally Posted by Sista

Sociological construction, please break down what that means to you? I would like to make sure that I am comprehending at the same perception, frame of mind as you? I just want to be sure of what that means to you, sociological construction?

Meaning, there is no biological basis where one can distinguish different groups of people based on race. There is no single gene or set of genes that determines one as being white, black, asian, etc. The distinctions often alluded to when people speak of race or phenotypical, and at best they are far from perfect indicators of race. What one thinks of as being (racially) black, latino, asian, etc. was at one point prescribed.

Originally Posted by Sista

I am going to have to ask you for the source for which genetic testing center did Henry Louis gates use because I have researched many DNA testing centers and none of them have the worlds population of DNA on file let alone a subsection. It is not an easy thing to approach foreign people and ask them for their blood, so you can store it in your bank.

Any way, that wouldn't be an easy thing to do even if you had an interpret present. Some people will give up their blood for such a cause but not all of them. This is why most DNA testing centers do not have certain blood types and therefore cannot tell you about your ancestry if they do not have A DNA match for you on file. DNA testing centers for genetics makes that very clear before they test you for your DNA match.

Any way, how could it on one hand be world's population and sub section at the same time? Doesn't sound to specific or clear. I detect a huge flaw. Is it worlds population or a sub section of the world? When you had the test done, did you only test for African Ancestry or was it a much broader test like that done in the mini series?

I need a source to check this out for my self.
As I finish up this post, I am googling, trying to find that source for my self, have any suggestions on where to start?

I said a subsection of the world's population to indicate that not every single last person in the world has "donated" their DNA to be stored/tested, but that a representative sample of the DNA of the multitude peoples that populate the earth were used. As far as the name of the testing center that was used, I can't tell you with 100% accuracy, but if it is not mentioned in the mini-series, you can attempt to contact the various entities/individuals that worked on the project.

Originally Posted by Sista

What exactly was the comparison?

The comparison was the DNA of the individual participants to that of the samples on file.

[Sista]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

The term is actually "social construction." It should mean to Ch2tf what it means to everyone, regardless of how the definition is worded:

I interpret this as an indirect insult. Did I word that correctly, if so, you should know what I mean?

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

Constructs like race are not biological but are instead social designations and result in certain social interactions and meanings. We create meaning in our observed differences between people and exaggerate whatever differences there are.
As Luther said "a chair is still a chair, even if there's no one sitting there" because we decided that there is a such thing as a "chair."

Luther's song was a good analogy for what it seems like you are saying.
From your idea of Social designations/Social construction, this means a persons race can change randomly, even within a ten year period depending on other factors.

I do a lot of traveling and I am constantly learning things which gives me a different social outlook to life and the people I meet in this life. Is my race determined by my exaggerated differences in others? If so, I am very mixed up...LOL

Suppose I am an adaptable person who pretty much becomes, with no problems at all, a part of any culture I am in the company of for long periods of time. What if I am a Nomad who does not really have a place to call home? Home would be basically where I unpack my things at once I arrive and where ever I arrive, the people are always very much so different from me, yet I manage to blend in?

"a chair is still a chair, even if there's no one sitting there"
"a Negro is a Negroe, even when he has went to Harvard"


No matter what, he will never change because his physical characteristics tells a story about him.

If the chair is made of material lets say wood and no one is sitting in the chair, for what ever reason, the chair can be chopped up and used for firewood. Before it was a chair, it was a pile of cut up trees.

The Negro will be and was always a Negro.

[Sista]

Originally Posted by Wolfman

The following link will clear up what was done and how they did it on the series, "African American Lives," which has been alluded to several times. They were well aware of the false claims that can be made concerning the implication of genetic data. This is why,above the solid tests they used, they employed an archaeogeneticist and a biological anthropologist, both experts on the population groups of the continent, to try to correlate geography/tribal group to the genetic data of the participants in the series.

An interesting (and funny!) aside: On this program a prominent biological geneticist consulted, a white prof. at Penn State, tells Dr. Gates how he had had this test done on himself. The results showed a genetically significant percentage of his ancestry was African. He told this to his mother who told him not to tell anyone about this. His mother had been keeping this family secret which he was in the dark about--although he had no problem with this "revelation." Genes don't lie; but we have to be careful to interpret the results responsibly. But, it seems to me, this discussion is about culture.

"African Americans" have been blessed with a horrific gift: a common cultural heritage forged out of the the experience of slavery and it's aftermath that's made disparate people/tribal groups into a basic identity, with various subgroups and identities. This has been the foundation of a political solidarity that made the Civil Rights Movement possible--something that has inspired peoples all over the world in their struggles for freedom. I remember talking with Palestinians in the Old City of Jerusalem and they commonly referring to me as "brother"--many of whom would, by phenotype, would be considered "white" in this country. "African American" culture is grounded in Africa but is also of the American experience. "African Americans" only have to travel to find out how American they are culturally; and non-Americans understand better than whites in this country how African American culture is at the core of "Americaness."

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/aalives/profile_gates.html
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/aalives/about.html
http://www.bsos.umd.edu/ANTH/faculty/fjackson --a biological anthropologist consulted on the series.

Thanks for the links


by the way, good post.