Protect Democracy & Expose Western Liberal Democracy

Reviving Punt Federation - the Land of God

Time will come, and it must come, when Punt Federation (the Land of God) shall be celebrated; and coordinated deep historic revival, cooperation and development could be achieved.
Reviving Punt Federation – the Land of God

Time will come, and it must come, when Punt Federation (the Land of God) shall be celebrated; and coordinated deep historic revival, cooperation and development could be achieved.

The first step towards realizing this noble goal is the creation of a business-oriented organization for history revisionism and identity development similar to National Geographic


Fattovich found three distinct ceramic traditions in a part of Punt

Fattovich found three distinct ceramic traditions in a part of Punt

It came to my understanding as an idea and now a hypothesis that the Arabian Peninsula and Punt Land came under very strong Turkic Mongolian settlements and slavery since 1600 BC and became well-established around 1000 BC. This was part of a very wide Turkic Mongolian raids and expansions.

This transformation is what resulted, among other disasters, in the downfall and disappearance of ancient Arabs, Punt, and Kerma. It also led, with the involvement of Persians (who are also of Turkic Mongolian colonization of Iran) to the replacement of the genuine religious Law of Moses with a political Turkic Judaism in 530 BC.

The initial settlements in the Red Sea region created Saba’a of Yemen (which is totally different and centuries later from Sheba of Punt Land) and also D’mt. These two Turkic regimes assisted in the formation of Kush in Kerma (ancient Nubia) and all of them were slavery and gold based businesses.

The disintegration of Punt separated the Beja and formed secessionist identities which formed, with later Ottoman role, the present states.

The introduction of horses as military weapon; FGM; homosexuality; face and body tattoos; and the symbols of Moon, Sun, bull head, and cross of Tengrism are among the most common features of Turkic Mongolian settlements and they could be used to identify them.

I support my hypothesis with the following argument:

Excerpts from “Reconsidering Yeha, c. 800–400 BC”

Here are excerpts from an article, by late Professor Rodolfo Fattovich (Trieste 1945 – Rome March 23, 2018) in African Archaeological Review · December 2009. Published online: 28 January 2010
by Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010


Yeha, in Tigray, is the most impressive site with evidence for South Arabian influence dating to the first millennium BC in the northern Horn of Africa (Eritrea and northern Ethiopia). The evidence from this site was used to identify a ‘Pre-Aksumite’ or ‘Ethiopian-Sabean’ Period (mid-first millennium BC) when an
early Afro-Arabian state apparently arose in the region. A ‘Pre-Aksumite Culture’, characterised by South Arabian elements, was also suggested as a distinctive archaeological culture in northern Ethiopia and Eritrea. However, recent fieldwork in these countries suggests that a Pre-Aksumite culture actually did not exist and South Arabian features were restricted to a few sites, which were scattered in a mosaic of
different archaeological cultures in the first millennium BC. This hypothesis is tested through a comparison between the ceramics from Yeha and those from Matara and other sites of the first millennium BC in Tigray and Eritrea.]

[General Remarks

The archaeological evidence I have tentatively reviewed in the previous pages suggests the following:
First, indigenous sedentary people with at least three distinct ceramic traditions occupied central Tigray (Yeha I, Sefra Abun, Sefra Turkui and Aksum region), Agame and Akkele Guzay (Gulo Makeda, Sobea and Matara VIII–V) and Hamasien (‘Ancient Ona’), respectively, in the early first millennium BC. Cattle herders were also moving at the margins and across these regions at this time, and most likely contributed to the development in an exchange network among them, and between the communities on the highlands and those in the lowlands and coastal regions (see Finneran 2007: 92–8).

The culture historical meaning of these three main ceramic traditions is still unknown. They might represent either three variants in pottery manufacture by the same people with a common subsistence economy and settlement pattern (and perhaps language) or three separate populations (see also Curtis 2009). The ‘Ancient Ona Culture’ in the Greater Asmara region (Hamasien) might be ascribed to a separate population as this culture is characterised by some specific features, such as ritual stone bulls heads, which do not occur in the other regions (Schmidt 2009).

Moreover, an alignment of six collapsed monoliths with roughly rectangular crosssections at Keskese might suggest that this was an important ceremonial centre in the early first millennium BC, and may point to the emergence of a hierarchical society in Akkele Guzay at this time. These monoliths are in neither a South Arabian nor Aksumite style and may thus be ascribed to a local tradition (see also Curtis and Habtemichael 2008: 321–3).

The way the populations living in these three main regions interacted with each other is uncertain as well. At present, there is no sure evidence of any interaction between the populations living in Eritrea and Tigray in the early first millennium BC. A few fragments of red-orange coarse ware like that of Yeha I in central Tigray have been collected on the surface at Keskese in Akkele Guzay and might suggest some contacts between these regions (Fattovich 1980: 35), but this evidence is much too scarce to be conclusive. Red-orange coarse ware like that of central Tigray was also collected in sites of the lowlands near Kassala, and may suggest contacts between these regions in the early first millennium BC.

The occurrence of the same types of vessels at Matara (IV–III), Gulo Makeda, Yeha (Yeha II), Hawlti and Kidane Mehret suggests that a common ceramic tradition spread over Akkele Guzay, Agame and central Tigray in the mid-first millennium BC (Fattovich 1980: 50–4). This might indicate greater interaction between the populations inhabiting these regions, through either massive circulation of ceramics
within a more intense exchange network or movement of female potters in both directions as a consequence of marriages. Black-topped polished ware was a major component of the ceramics, suggesting a possible origin of this tradition in Akklele Guzay and Agame rather than in central Tigray, where red-orange ware most likely disappeared.

The ‘Ancient Ona’ people in Hamasien indisputably maintained their ceramic tradition (and thus perhaps a specific cultural identity) at this time. The occurrence of jars in the style of the ‘Ancient Ona Culture’ at sites in Akkele Guzay and central Tigray, as well as a geometric bronze filigree seal comparable to specimens from Yeha II, Hawlti and Sobea at Mai Chiot may point to some contacts with the regions
to south and east of Asmara (Schmidt et al. 2008: Fig. 6.42; Leclant and Miquel 1959: Pl. LVIII; de Contenson 1963b: Pls. XLII b, LIII a; Anfray 1963a: Pls. CLII hk, CLIV e-h). Moreover, a few fragments of storage jars from Sembel (Tringali 1978: Fig. 24c), which are similar to those of the Jebel Mokram group in the western Eritrean-Sudanese lowlands, as well as fragments of Ona jars from sites near Agordat (Brandt et al. 2008), and Ona-like small stone and clay bulls’ heads from Sabir near Aden (Buffa and Vogt 2001: fig. 3.3) may suggest contacts both with the western lowlands in Eritrea and Sudan and with the coastal regions of Yemen.

Finally on this point, the occurrence of different ceramics at Yeha III and the late ‘Pre-Aksumite’/early Aksumite (according to Anfray’s chronological sequence; Anfray 1967) occupation at Matara may suggest the re-emergence of two separate ceramic traditions in central Tigray and Akkele Guzay in the late first millennium BC.

Second, so far, ceramics in a South Arabian style occur only in sites of central Tigray, Agame and Akkele Guzay, and form a minor (almost insignificant) component of the pottery assemblages at these sites (Fattovich 1980). These ceramics thus do not support the presence of any consistent South Arabian community on the Ethiopian/Eritrean highlands in the first millennium BC. Most of them may also be local imitations of South Arabian prototypes, such as bowls with a ring-foot and possibly the so-called ‘amphorae’ (see Phillipson 2009).

In any case, these pots may suggest that both the people of central Tigray and those of Agame and Akkele Guzay had some contacts with the populations of southwestern Arabia beginning in the early first millennium BC. Ceramics in a South Arabian style occur in the earliest strata at Yeha (Yeha I), where they may be contemporary to the construction of a small temple probably in a South Arabian (Hadramawt?) style in the eighth century BC (Robin and de Maigret 1998; see also Manzo 2009). A few fragments of big jars similar in the style to those from Sabir (Aden) were collected in the lower strata at Matara (Anfray 1966; Fattovich 1980: 76, 84), and may point to contacts with the coastal regions of Yemen in the early first millennium BC. These contacts are also supported by rock inscriptions in the region of Qohaito recording the names of individuals (not ‘tribes’ or colonists) who penetrated from South Arabia into central Eritrea as early as the ninth or eighth centuries BC (Ricci 1994). So far, however, there is no archaeological evidence of their presence, suggesting they were completely amalgamated with the local population(s).

Bowls with a ring-foot and the so-called ‘amphorae’, which were typical of Yeha I, also occur in the ceramic assemblages of Yeha II and Matara IV–III suggesting that they were incorporated into the common ceramic tradition of central Tigray, Agame and Akkele Guzay in the mid-first millennium BC, but represent an insignificant component of this tradition (Fattovich 1980: 51–52).

Finally, these vessels completely disappear in the ceramic assemblages of Yeha III, suggesting they were no longer used in the late first millennium BC when a new (proto-Aksumite) ceramic tradition emerged in the region of Aksum (Fattovich 1990, 2004; Fattovich and Bard 2001).

Third and last, at present, only the ceramics of Yeha II and Matara IV–III, ascribable to a common tradition of central Tigray, Agame and Akkele Guzay, can be safely associated with monuments, votive altars, offering tables and inscriptions in a South Arabian style (Fattovich 1990).5 All other sculptures, inscriptions and votive altars in a South Arabian style, which are usually dated to the mid-first millennium BC on a comparison with possible prototypes in Yemen, have been recorded out of context, and thus cannot provide any firm cultural or historical information. We can tentatively assume they were associated with a few ceremonial centres scattered from central and eastern Tigray to central Eritrea (Fattovich 1990, 2004), and were possibly contemporary with the sites with ceramics similar to those of Yeha II and Matara IV–III. These artefacts suggest that a powerful elite emerged in the highlands, most likely in the mid-first millennium BC, and adopted some South Arabian symbols as a manifestation of their power (Fattovich 1990; Curtis 2008; Manzo 2009). A few votive altars with inscriptions apparently recording individuals from Yemen (Saba) may suggest that some South Arabians, maybe traders or craftsmen, were living in Tigray as well (Schneider 2003: 613).

An exhaustive synthesis of the cultural history and the social, economic and ideological transformations in the early- to mid-first millennium BC is still premature as most of the northern Horn of Africa is archaeologically unexplored and the collected evidence is mainly from surface surveys (see e.g., Fattovich 2005: 12–15; Curtis 2008).

The very scarce archaeological data we have may only suggest that two different ceramic traditions merged into one common tradition in the region from Aksum to Matara, and a major ceremonial centre with monumental buildings in a South Arabian style and an elite cemetery was located at Yeha in the mid-first millennium BC. Two separate ceramic traditions again emerged in the same region when Yeha
declined in the late first millennium BC (Yeha III).

This evidence might reflect the development of a hierarchical society, most likely at a state-level of complexity, which was characterised by the manufacture of similar ceramics and the use of symbols of power in a South Arabian style, in central Tigray, Agame and Akkele Guzay in the mid-first millennium BC. However, the identification of the Tigrean/Eritrean ceramic tradition of the mid-first millennium
BC with a specific polity, such as D‘MT, is questionable in the absence of a more detailed analysis of the rate of similarity between the ceramics in the single sites, which might support or reject the existence of a discrete archaeological culture, and a proper archaeological context for most buildings and artefacts in a South Arabian style in the region.]

To download the full article “Reconsidering Yeha, c. 800–400 BC” by late Professor Rodolfo Fattovich from click HERE

The Significance of the Presidential Seal of Turkey

The Significance of the Presidential Seal of Turkey

The Presidential Seal of Turkey points to only small part of the truth about the real history Turkic Mongolian groups.

Because if they tell the whole story it would tantamount to a declaration of war against all nations of the world.

Read the writings of Turanists, the Turkic Mongolian extremists, including the Jews, and what they say about the history of the ancient Turkic Mongolians since before the building the Great Wall of China
Instead of repeating the outdated and wrong concepts that have been engraved in history and in mind for thousands of years, researching, thinking, and discovery must be done, not to deny the truthful facts that are presented to the world honestly and effortlessly.
Many Turkic Mongolian groups stretched from East in India and Iran to West in Rome and the Americas

Wake up peoples of the world! Your slumber does not hurt you separately, but hurts the entire world.

Presidential Seal of Turkey

Erdoğan and Abbas with actors representing the 16 Great Turkic Empires (2015)

Erdoğan and Abbas with actors representing the 16 Great Turkic Empires (2015)

History tells that Eritrea is not an old nation or a state; but it is only a new formation.

Eritrea is just the Turkified population and part of Abyssinia. Discovering and exposing the real collapse that happened shall bring back the coastal regions and its population to its Abyssinian origin and shall reunite Abyssinia.

I will try to research and write on this subject soon. I hope you could translate and post the following article written in Arabic “Explaining the contradiction between Ethiopia’s neutral position and Eritrea’s pro-coalition stance against Yemen” before I get the time to do it: تفسير التناقض بين موقف اثيوبيا المحايد و موقف اريتريا الموالي للتحالف ضد اليمن

It seems that this contradiction and difference is due to ethnic and historical political reasons implicated in the past.

Ethiopia represents Abyssinia and ancient Abyssinian relations with the original Arabs. While Eritrea is part of the history and the presence of the Turkic Mongolian groups, including the Jews, the Arabized Turkic Bedouins, and Sabaeans and they are in contrast to the original Arabs and the true history of Yemen

For sure the motives were trading posts, slaves, and gold. That is why Eritrea has very low population density, mineral deposits, and military bases.  Eritrea was depopulated by Turkic Mongolian slavery very long ago.

And it was used to tamper with the sensitive history and security of both Yemen and Abyssinia so as to conceal the true history of Israelite and their refuge in Africa in 1876 BC until their Exodus in 1446 BC.

This history if proved and revealed shall destroy the legitimacy of the Old Testament, the Jews, and the present state of Israel, plus the Judaeo-Christianity and Roman Catholicism.

The old and existing associates of Sabaeans (or Sabeans) and Ḥimyarite are descendants of a Turkic Mongolian gangster nicknamed Saba’a (means captor or slaver who claim to be Sun worshiper Saba’a ibn Yishgub bin Yarub bin Qahtan). They were and are the remnants of Turkic Mongolian looters and colonizers, together with their slaves and collaborators.

After their destruction and erasing the long ancient history of Yemen and Arabs which existed until their invasion of Yemen they invented and imposed fake history made up by Persians, Romans and Jews.

The new history gave them an Arab origin and claimed that the Arabs before them became extinct. The invented history is still hostile to genuine Arabs, Israelite, and Yemenis.

They are also malicious towards the civilizations of Abyssinia, Kemet (ancient Egypt), Kerma (ancient Nubia), and all other Africans.

One of the biggest frauds in history was made by confusing and blurring the history of the Abyssinian Queen Sheba and the Hebrew King Solomon with that criminal regimes of Sabaeans (or Sabeans) and Ḥimyarite.

Certainly, the Abyssinian Kingdom of Sheba is totally different from the regime of Turkic Mongolian Sabaeans.

The Old Testament does not mention the founding person of the Sabaeans (or Sabeans) and whether they were in Yemen or Abyssinia. It does not help in resolving the confusion between Saba’a and Sheba.


Nabta Playa the common origin of Kemet and Kerma

Nabta Playa the common origin of Kemet and Kerma

The people between the First and Sixth Cataract of the Nile, first created the African Kerma Civilization (2500 BC-1500 BC) which evolved from the indigenous Pre-Kerma (c. 3500–2500 BC)
then came the Early Kerma (c. 2500–2050 BC) or C-Group Phase Ia–Ib; then
the Middle Kerma (c. 2050–1750 BC) or C-Group Phase Ib–IIa; then
the Classic Kerma (c. 1750–1580 BC) or C-Group Phase IIb–III; then
the Final Kerma (c. 1580–1500 BC) C-Group Phase IIb–III.

Kerma was disintegrated by the actions of refugee nomadic Arab Yemeni Israelite coming via Abyssinia since 1876 BC. While north Kemet (Aka Delta of Egypt) was invaded and colonized by Turkic Mongolian Hyksos (1630-1523 BC) who are the forefathers of Persians, Jews, Turks, Romans, yellow Indians, Gypsies, and Arabized Turkic rulers and wealthy in Arabia and Africa.

Kemet and Kerma were liberated from the Turkic Hyksos in the north of Kemet; and from the Arab Israelite in the south of Kerma by King Ahmose I (Eighteenth Dynasty XVIII 1549–1292), who is from a family of kings and queens of mixed Kemet-Kerma origin. Almost all the kings of Kemet and Kerma looked a like and were relatives of indigenous origin.

Kush was a sad degeneration of Kerma based on slavery and looting. Nubia is a very late final collapse of Kerma. There are nothing indigenous called Nubian or Kushite civilization, these were feeble cultures built on top of the ruins of Kerma.
Kemet was not White, and Kerma was not Black because these two modern racist terms were invented by Turkic Mongolian groups to claim false European origin and despise and reject African great heritages.

Kemet and Kerma were very closely related sister nations share a common distant origin of “Nabta Playa”. By the 6th millennium BC, evidences of prehistoric organized advanced communities exist and prove the common origin of Kerma and Kemet. Logically the Kerma nation became more tanned than their brothers in the north.

The features of original Arabs are not much different from those of Abyssinian and Kerma. Pale-skin Arabs are actually not Arabs at all, they are Arabized Turkic Mongolians falsely claiming to be Arabs.

King Ahmose I (Eighteenth Dynasty XVIII 1549–1292)

King Ahmose I (Eighteenth Dynasty XVIII 1549–1292)

Sexual Incompatibility and Incompetence Cause Collapse and Loss of National Independence

Sexual Incompatibility and Incompetence Cause Collapse and Loss of National Independence

It is strange that relationship between sex, economy and politics has not been discovered while they are the most important human activities. There is no doubt that there is a very strong correlation between sexual satisfaction, balanced personality, good governance, fairness, productivity and creativity, as well as between sexual impotence, corruption, crime and mismanagement of the state.

The strength of normal family relationship depends on the compatibility between the mind, heart and body of husband and wife. In other words, the power in marital relationship and in family cohesion is the result of harmony in understanding, feelings and sex.

When incompatibility and incompetence occurs between spouses, the consequences of this are severe not only within the marital home and the family, but also in the society and the state. When the husband or wife fails to get sexual satisfaction their understanding and performance in various aspects of life become tense and dysfunctional. This will be reflected negatively on the raising of children; economic performance and work; and in public and private ethics.

Therefore, it is logical and likely to find strong relationships between sexual incompatibility and incompetence linking them with ethical corruption; poor productivity; and bad raising of children and immorality ​​of society. Thus, the basis of economic performance and political management of the societies and the state become flawed and corrupt. This exports stresses and family ills resulting from sexual dysfunction into various aspects of economy and politics. The results will be betrayal, crime, corruption, underdevelopment, and violence.

With the weakening of the foundations and the economic and political components of society and the state, national interests and national independence are exposed to the dangers of narcissism and the collapse of values ​​and principles.

Therefore, one of the priorities of protecting national independence, sovereignty, and economic development should be strengthening the marital relationships in the aspects of mental understanding, emotions, and sexual competence. Because of the importance and precedence of the role of sexual satisfaction in building marital and family relationships, the treatment of sexual incompatibility and incompetence must be treated with great seriousness, attention and rationality.

Inability to marry and difficulties of connection and understanding before and after marriage, and other problems that hinder the establishment of the institution of marriage on sound and healthy basis, also lead to underdevelopment; corruption; crime; and loss of independence.

In short, sexually satisfying wife and satisfying husband lead to mental understanding and emotional affection and all these strengthen family, society, and the state. The reverse is also true. Prevalence of sexual incompatibility and incompetence of spouses leads to loss and disruption of family and threatens to ruin the society and the state at large.

%d bloggers like this: