Suge Says, "Call Me a Ni**a, Not An African American" TMZ puts up a poll guess the results
Options
Comments
-
@SWAMPGOD I find it funny that you would ? on west indians and consider southern black to be different and to be indigenous to america when the person who created the theory that black people existed in the americas before colonization,( IVAN VAN sertima) was from guyana.
i was just trollin yo ass about west indian ? last night but i do think yall ? have bigger self hate issues than blacks in the us, mostly because of the ? i hear about dominicans, but i could be wrong and guilty of the same pre-judgin ? that crackas do
and van sertima didnt come up with that theory, in van sertimas own words columbus was the first to suggest it, and his own words van sertima was not the first to write about it neither, a ? was
most of the ? i read suggest that southeastern blacks are indigenous but i feel that most blacks from south america are indigenous too, i dont think we all came here on slave ships but a good amount certainly did after they seen how profitable slavery was they sent back to the source africa for more, esp after they found out that the indians werent as capable for slavery as the africans were
did you read that article i posted
dominicans are latino not west indian culturally they are different. All black people came over here on ships if we did not there would be proofs. Tombs, bones and linguistics. our presence would also be reflected in the genetics of so called american indian.
The article you posted proves nothing
but van sertima suggests that there are african ties to those things found in america, by way of egypt, or do you think ancient egyptians were arabs
The ancient egyptians were not arabs and van sertima made up ? and by doing so he discredited real
african history.
Where the ? are the tombs, the bones and the boats the africans crossed the atlantic or pacific oceans on, they don't exist
so what did the crackas do?
why are you accepting cracka lies, but fight to the death to discredit black so-called "lies"?
There exist concepts called objective thinking and objective information, logic and common sense.
I don't need white people to use THOSE concepts and using those concepts it is easy to conclude that there was no black people in the americas before colonization .
which were all created by the great white man, there were no brains on earth until the ice age was over and the age of discovery in europe came about, did you know walking didnt exist until the white man designed the template, africans were subhuman until slavery when the white man created brains for our bodies that only moved at half the speed of his
marster will be pleased
So for you the white man created objectivity. Have you gone back to trolling ? DO YOU even know what the meaning of the word objective is? do you know what logic is ? it existed before white people wrote about it. -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »What exactly did Van Sertima make up? The only people I've ever heard make claims like that were racist white scholars trying to uphold their interpretation of history.
His whole ? premise that there existed black/african civilazation in america is baseless and there is no real proof. Where are the boats the tombs the ancient records and most importantly the genetic proof.
Have you actually read "They Came Before Columbus?" He provided a bunch of proof. He used records from Columbus and others to show that plants, metals, and other artifacts indigenous to Africa were present in the Americas before whites came. He showed that their were linguistic similarities between some of the languages in the Americas and Africa that would be very unlikely if there was no connection. I'm not saying the case was 100% airtight, but to say there is no real proof is incorrect.
Hell, Thor Heyerdahl already proved that the trip from Africa to America was possible using the exact materials and methodology that was proposed in the legends. -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »What exactly did Van Sertima make up? The only people I've ever heard make claims like that were racist white scholars trying to uphold their interpretation of history.
His whole ? premise that there existed black/african civilazation in america is baseless and there is no real proof. Where are the boats the tombs the ancient records and most importantly the genetic proof.
Have you actually read "They Came Before Columbus?" He provided a bunch of proof. He used records from Columbus and others to show that plants, metals, and other artifacts indigenous to Africa were present in the Americas before whites came. He showed that their were linguistic similarities between some of the languages in the Americas and Africa that would be very unlikely if there was no connection. I'm not saying the case was 100% airtight, but to say there is no real proof is incorrect.
Hell, Thor Heyerdahl already proved that the trip from Africa to America was possible using the exact materials and methodology that was proposed in the legends.
his proof is ? and really proves nothing unless there are bones tombs boats you have no proof there is no real physical evidence and even worse there is no genetic evidence. -
Just think about it for a second, the native people were destroyed by european sickness, blacks had a better survival rate because we had a greater level of immunity. If blackS had had contact with native people and indeed did build a civilization in the america we would have passed on that immunity to the native people.
-
Huh? Are you saying that no archaelogical or historical data holds any weight but genetic evidence? That's pretty silly and not in line with scientific convention at all.
And I'm not sure what you mean by there is no physical evidence. He provided physical evidence in the form of materials and plants found in the Americas that unquestionably came from Africa. -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »Huh? Are you saying that no archaelogical or historical data holds any weight but genetic evidence? That's pretty silly and not in line with scientific convention at all.
And I'm not sure what you mean by there is no physical evidence. He provided physical evidence in the form of materials and plants found in the Americas that unquestionably came from Africa.
Those materials could have originated in africa but that does not mean that black people brought them there and you cannot respect the words of columbus to prove anything he did not know his ass from his elbow HE THOUGHT HE WAS in india.
-
it is possible that the americas had contact somehow with differnt groups of people but if you say that blacks created a civilization there you are going to have to bring me very specific proof, otherwise you are just talking.
-
Well who do you suggest brought them there? If the materials existed in the Americas before the Europeans made the trip who do you think brought them?
And Columbus wasn't the only one to report that there were blacks in the Americas when he got there. Portugese sailors that came after him reported the same thing.
I'm not saying that Van Sertima is 100% correct, but you can't dismiss all of his evidence because it's not DNA. Hell, DNA has been used for a relatively short amount of time for this type of thing, so the bulk of our archaelogical knowledge has rested on evidence other than genetic testing. It's also out of line to say the man made stuff up just because you don't agree with his interpretation of the data at hand. If you think there is another plausible explanation for his complete argument, fine. Present that, but don't call him a liar\fraud because you disagree with his conclusions. -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »Well who do you suggest brought them there? If the materials existed in the Americas before the Europeans made the trip who do you think brought them?
And Columbus wasn't the only one to report that there were blacks in the Americas when he got there. Portugese sailors that came after him reported the same thing.
I'm not saying that Van Sertima is 100% correct, but you can't dismiss all of his evidence because it's not DNA. Hell, DNA has been used for a relatively short amount of time for this type of thing, so the bulk of our archaelogical knowledge has rested on evidence other than genetic testing. It's also out of line to say the man made stuff up just because you don't agree with his interpretation of the data at hand. If you think there is another plausible explanation for his complete argument, fine. Present that, but don't call him a liar\fraud because you disagree with his conclusions.
For the plants they could have gotten to the americans naturally as for the writing systems we don't understand olmec script and most of the other native tribes had no written word. ivan van sertam tried to link the olmecs with the mande people but he has no proof because the mande never wrote anything about contact with people over the oceans. -
if anything the people like the polynesians, and people who looked like the aniu of japan maybe even people who looked like aborigines came to america but not africans not the mande people like ivan van sertima would have us believe.
-
The Lonious Monk wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »What exactly did Van Sertima make up? The only people I've ever heard make claims like that were racist white scholars trying to uphold their interpretation of history.
His whole ? premise that there existed black/african civilazation in america is baseless and there is no real proof. Where are the boats the tombs the ancient records and most importantly the genetic proof.
Have you actually read "They Came Before Columbus?" He provided a bunch of proof. He used records from Columbus and others to show that plants, metals, and other artifacts indigenous to Africa were present in the Americas before whites came. He showed that their were linguistic similarities between some of the languages in the Americas and Africa that would be very unlikely if there was no connection. I'm not saying the case was 100% airtight, but to say there is no real proof is incorrect.
Hell, Thor Heyerdahl already proved that the trip from Africa to America was possible using the exact materials and methodology that was proposed in the legends.
first thang came to my mind when i read that ? posts, have this ? even watched the man speeches, talkin all that pie ? but aint on his deen
"all on yo deem but i aint on mine, stop that acky, for i put shots in ya body, make em feel hell on earth before the lord drop em"
-
The Lonious Monk wrote: »Well who do you suggest brought them there? If the materials existed in the Americas before the Europeans made the trip who do you think brought them?
And Columbus wasn't the only one to report that there were blacks in the Americas when he got there. Portugese sailors that came after him reported the same thing.
I'm not saying that Van Sertima is 100% correct, but you can't dismiss all of his evidence because it's not DNA. Hell, DNA has been used for a relatively short amount of time for this type of thing, so the bulk of our archaelogical knowledge has rested on evidence other than genetic testing. It's also out of line to say the man made stuff up just because you don't agree with his interpretation of the data at hand. If you think there is another plausible explanation for his complete argument, fine. Present that, but don't call him a liar\fraud because you disagree with his conclusions.
For the plants they could have gotten to the americans naturally as for the writing systems we don't understand olmec script and most of the other native tribes had no written word. ivan van sertam tried to link the olmecs with the mande people but he has no proof because the mande never wrote anything about contact with people over the oceans.
I agree the plants could have gotten there naturally. However, the gold could not have. As for the linguistic stuff, he does a pretty thorough break down of the similarities between those American languages and the African languages. So you're really going to have to do a better job of refuting that than saying the information doesn't exist when he presents it in his book. Lastly, the attempts by Africans to cross the Atlantic are documented. There are accounts of two different expeditions coming from the Malian and Songhai Empires. And as I said before, the proof of concept for those trips was proven when Thor Heyerdahl successfully recreated them. -
both yall ? ? . if a ? has nappy/beady hair he a ? but if s/he has the affinities and not the hair they aint ? then
-
The Lonious Monk wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »Well who do you suggest brought them there? If the materials existed in the Americas before the Europeans made the trip who do you think brought them?
And Columbus wasn't the only one to report that there were blacks in the Americas when he got there. Portugese sailors that came after him reported the same thing.
I'm not saying that Van Sertima is 100% correct, but you can't dismiss all of his evidence because it's not DNA. Hell, DNA has been used for a relatively short amount of time for this type of thing, so the bulk of our archaelogical knowledge has rested on evidence other than genetic testing. It's also out of line to say the man made stuff up just because you don't agree with his interpretation of the data at hand. If you think there is another plausible explanation for his complete argument, fine. Present that, but don't call him a liar\fraud because you disagree with his conclusions.
For the plants they could have gotten to the americans naturally as for the writing systems we don't understand olmec script and most of the other native tribes had no written word. ivan van sertam tried to link the olmecs with the mande people but he has no proof because the mande never wrote anything about contact with people over the oceans.
I agree the plants could have gotten there naturally. However, the gold could not have. As for the linguistic stuff, he does a pretty thorough break down of the similarities between those American languages and the African languages. So you're really going to have to do a better job of refuting that than saying the information doesn't exist when he presents it in his book. Lastly, the attempts by Africans to cross the Atlantic are documented. There are accounts of two different expeditions coming from the Malian and Songhai Empires. And as I said before, the proof of concept for those trips was proven when Thor Heyerdahl successfully recreated them.
There is gold all over the planet WE DON'T understand olmec script or there language his book is conjecture and is wrong logically . Attempts to do something do not equal accomplishments.
The ? are the boats ? languages can sound the same and be structured the same THAT by itself is not enough proof that their were black civilaztions in the americas. The malian and songhai empire existed hundreds of years after the olmec civilization collapsed. -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »Well who do you suggest brought them there? If the materials existed in the Americas before the Europeans made the trip who do you think brought them?
And Columbus wasn't the only one to report that there were blacks in the Americas when he got there. Portugese sailors that came after him reported the same thing.
I'm not saying that Van Sertima is 100% correct, but you can't dismiss all of his evidence because it's not DNA. Hell, DNA has been used for a relatively short amount of time for this type of thing, so the bulk of our archaelogical knowledge has rested on evidence other than genetic testing. It's also out of line to say the man made stuff up just because you don't agree with his interpretation of the data at hand. If you think there is another plausible explanation for his complete argument, fine. Present that, but don't call him a liar\fraud because you disagree with his conclusions.
For the plants they could have gotten to the americans naturally as for the writing systems we don't understand olmec script and most of the other native tribes had no written word. ivan van sertam tried to link the olmecs with the mande people but he has no proof because the mande never wrote anything about contact with people over the oceans.
I agree the plants could have gotten there naturally. However, the gold could not have. As for the linguistic stuff, he does a pretty thorough break down of the similarities between those American languages and the African languages. So you're really going to have to do a better job of refuting that than saying the information doesn't exist when he presents it in his book. Lastly, the attempts by Africans to cross the Atlantic are documented. There are accounts of two different expeditions coming from the Malian and Songhai Empires. And as I said before, the proof of concept for those trips was proven when Thor Heyerdahl successfully recreated them.
There is gold all over the planet WE DON'T understand olmec script or there language his book is conjecture and is wrong logically . Attempts to do something do not equal accomplishments.
The ? are the boats ? languages can sound the same and be structured the same THAT by itself is not enough proof that their were black civilaztions in the americas. The malian and songhai empire existed hundreds of years after the olmec civilization collapsed.
I don't think you actually read the book or understand any of the arguments he made. Your comment on the gold is proof of that. He wasn't talking about just regular gold plucked out of the ground. He was talking about gold that had already been processed and formed into jewelry, spear tips, etc... You can trace gold to its origins based on its properties after processing because that is different for every region. The gold they found was traced back to African stock.
You also keep talking about the Olmec civilization as if that's all he addressed, but it's not. He suggested there were multiple expeditions from Africa to the Americas. One involved the Egyptians sometime in the BC years. One was the the trip made by the group from the Songhai Empire. You keep trying to refute everything he came up with by disputing the Olmec claims, but most of the stuff I'm referring to has nothing to do with his claims about the Olmecs.
You also understand that the ships that supposedly made the trip were made out of wood and similar natural materials right? You keep asking "Where are the boats" as if we're not centuries removed from when these trips were supposedly made. Unless they put some specific effort into trying to preserve those boats, why would you even believe they'd still be around after all this time?
-
You pro-blacks done went to an all time low with this ? .
Blacks were in America before Whites???
LOL, I ? CAN'T. -
It ain't about being pro black. A scientist studied the topic and brought a variety of different factors together that he believed supported there being blacks in the Americas before Columbus arrived. I'm not suggesting he's correct, but he did build a case, and it's silly for cats to come in here and say he's wrong or making ? up without any real strong arguments to counter his.
And it's not just him that says that anyway. As already steady Columbus himself stated that there were blacks already in the Americas. How can't that not be enough information to at least suggest the theory is plausible? -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »Well who do you suggest brought them there? If the materials existed in the Americas before the Europeans made the trip who do you think brought them?
And Columbus wasn't the only one to report that there were blacks in the Americas when he got there. Portugese sailors that came after him reported the same thing.
I'm not saying that Van Sertima is 100% correct, but you can't dismiss all of his evidence because it's not DNA. Hell, DNA has been used for a relatively short amount of time for this type of thing, so the bulk of our archaelogical knowledge has rested on evidence other than genetic testing. It's also out of line to say the man made stuff up just because you don't agree with his interpretation of the data at hand. If you think there is another plausible explanation for his complete argument, fine. Present that, but don't call him a liar\fraud because you disagree with his conclusions.
For the plants they could have gotten to the americans naturally as for the writing systems we don't understand olmec script and most of the other native tribes had no written word. ivan van sertam tried to link the olmecs with the mande people but he has no proof because the mande never wrote anything about contact with people over the oceans.
I agree the plants could have gotten there naturally. However, the gold could not have. As for the linguistic stuff, he does a pretty thorough break down of the similarities between those American languages and the African languages. So you're really going to have to do a better job of refuting that than saying the information doesn't exist when he presents it in his book. Lastly, the attempts by Africans to cross the Atlantic are documented. There are accounts of two different expeditions coming from the Malian and Songhai Empires. And as I said before, the proof of concept for those trips was proven when Thor Heyerdahl successfully recreated them.
There is gold all over the planet WE DON'T understand olmec script or there language his book is conjecture and is wrong logically . Attempts to do something do not equal accomplishments.
The ? are the boats ? languages can sound the same and be structured the same THAT by itself is not enough proof that their were black civilaztions in the americas. The malian and songhai empire existed hundreds of years after the olmec civilization collapsed.
I don't think you actually read the book or understand any of the arguments he made. Your comment on the gold is proof of that. He wasn't talking about just regular gold plucked out of the ground. He was talking about gold that had already been processed and formed into jewelry, spear tips, etc... You can trace gold to its origins based on its properties after processing because that is different for every region. The gold they found was traced back to African stock.
You also keep talking about the Olmec civilization as if that's all he addressed, but it's not. He suggested there were multiple expeditions from Africa to the Americas. One involved the Egyptians sometime in the BC years. One was the the trip made by the group from the Songhai Empire. You keep trying to refute everything he came up with by disputing the Olmec claims, but most of the stuff I'm referring to has nothing to do with his claims about the Olmecs.
You also understand that the ships that supposedly made the trip were made out of wood and similar natural materials right? You keep asking "Where are the boats" as if we're not centuries removed from when these trips were supposedly made. Unless they put some specific effort into trying to preserve those boats, why would you even believe they'd still be around after all this time?
I keep talking about the olmecs because they are always claimed by those who believe in this stupid theory and i read the book a long time ago. If there were multiple expeditions then where are the records. every civilization that traveled on the water had boats that survived and where preserved from the vikings to ancient china and egypt.
You mean to tell me the ancient egyptian went to america and they never wrote about it?? YOU ACTUALLY believe that ? . The same goes for songhai. As for the gold thing i don't believe it because the book has so many stretches of imagination and bad sources THAT it cannot be taken serious you might as well believe in atlantis or ancient aliens -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »It ain't about being pro black. A scientist studied the topic and brought a variety of different factors together that he believed supported there being blacks in the Americas before Columbus arrived. I'm not suggesting he's correct, but he did build a case, and it's silly for cats to come in here and say he's wrong or making ? up without any real strong arguments to counter his.
And it's not just him that says that anyway. As already steady Columbus himself stated that there were blacks already in the Americas. How can't that not be enough information to at least suggest the theory is plausible?
Scientist come up with crazy theories that are not taken serious all the time the case he made is weak to the point of it being ? . Columbus was a racist and a ? and who also thought cuba was japan and like i said before if the natives were black they would have had some immunity to white sickness they had none therefore their populations were not black.
His theory is not plausible.
-
The Lonious Monk wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »What exactly did Van Sertima make up? The only people I've ever heard make claims like that were racist white scholars trying to uphold their interpretation of history.
His whole ? premise that there existed black/african civilazation in america is baseless and there is no real proof. Where are the boats the tombs the ancient records and most importantly the genetic proof.
Have you actually read "They Came Before Columbus?" He provided a bunch of proof. He used records from Columbus and others to show that plants, metals, and other artifacts indigenous to Africa were present in the Americas before whites came. He showed that their were linguistic similarities between some of the languages in the Americas and Africa that would be very unlikely if there was no connection. I'm not saying the case was 100% airtight, but to say there is no real proof is incorrect.
Hell, Thor Heyerdahl already proved that the trip from Africa to America was possible using the exact materials and methodology that was proposed in the legends.
his proof is ? and really proves nothing unless there are bones tombs boats you have no proof there is no real physical evidence and even worse there is no genetic evidence.
Fam you know "they" distorted "our" HISTORY right?? -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »What exactly did Van Sertima make up? The only people I've ever heard make claims like that were racist white scholars trying to uphold their interpretation of history.
His whole ? premise that there existed black/african civilazation in america is baseless and there is no real proof. Where are the boats the tombs the ancient records and most importantly the genetic proof.
Have you actually read "They Came Before Columbus?" He provided a bunch of proof. He used records from Columbus and others to show that plants, metals, and other artifacts indigenous to Africa were present in the Americas before whites came. He showed that their were linguistic similarities between some of the languages in the Americas and Africa that would be very unlikely if there was no connection. I'm not saying the case was 100% airtight, but to say there is no real proof is incorrect.
Hell, Thor Heyerdahl already proved that the trip from Africa to America was possible using the exact materials and methodology that was proposed in the legends.
his proof is ? and really proves nothing unless there are bones tombs boats you have no proof there is no real physical evidence and even worse there is no genetic evidence.
Fam you know "they" distorted "our" HISTORY right??
No ? , but that does not mean that any made up fantasy is our history either. -
stop claiming other peoples civilization as your own it make us look pathetic the native americans both north and south had their own we had ours
? will look at the stautes of bhudda and say "see look at those lips he must be african" that's ?
and the same goes for the statues in angkor wat. -
I know that I am african I don't know about the rest of you ? .
-
I keep talking about the olmecs because they are always claimed by those who believe in this stupid theory and i read the book a long time ago. If there were multiple expeditions then where are the records. every civilization that traveled on the water had boats that survived and where preserved from the vikings to ancient china and egypt.
You mean to tell me the ancient egyptian went to america and they never wrote about it?? YOU ACTUALLY believe that ? . The same goes for songhai. As for the gold thing i don't believe it because the book has so many stretches of imagination and bad sources THAT it cannot be taken serious you might as well believe in atlantis or ancient aliens
Fine, but as I said, the Olmecs weren't the only part of his argument, so harping on them in an effort to discredit him doesn't work.
And once again, you keep talking about records of the trips while ignoring that Songhai and Malians did keep references to the expeditions as part of their oral traditions. That's how Van Sertima knew about the possibility of travel between Africa and America.
I'm not sure what point you're trying to make about the boats. For instance, in the case of the expedition from the Songhai, it was a one way trip. There was no back and forth. It's not like they had a fleet of ships, so the expectation that a bunch of them would be left over is silly. They do have records of how the ships were built and the people in the area still build similar ships. How do you think Heyerdahl was able to replicate them for his voyage. Now if you're trying to say that the trip didn't happen because we don't have the specific ships used, well then please point me to the Nina, Santa Maria, Pinta, or Mayflower. I'd like to see them. Oh wait, you can't because none of those ships exist anymore. So since we don't have those ships are you going to claim that Columbus and the Pilgrims never made the trip either?
I'm not saying that Van Sertima is right, but there is merit to his argument. You can claim there isn't, but your stance is based on fluff. Do you believe the Ancient Egyptians were black? Because a lot of the evidence that people use to prove that they are really isn't any stronger than what Van Sertima uses to prove his case. Afrocentrists use linguistic patterns, images in artwork, and third party accounts of the Egyptians to prove they were black. That's some of the same info Van Sertima uses. -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »
I keep talking about the olmecs because they are always claimed by those who believe in this stupid theory and i read the book a long time ago. If there were multiple expeditions then where are the records. every civilization that traveled on the water had boats that survived and where preserved from the vikings to ancient china and egypt.
You mean to tell me the ancient egyptian went to america and they never wrote about it?? YOU ACTUALLY believe that ? . The same goes for songhai. As for the gold thing i don't believe it because the book has so many stretches of imagination and bad sources THAT it cannot be taken serious you might as well believe in atlantis or ancient aliens
Fine, but as I said, the Olmecs weren't the only part of his argument, so harping on them in an effort to discredit him doesn't work.
And once again, you keep talking about records of the trips while ignoring that Songhai and Malians did keep references to the expeditions as part of their oral traditions. That's how Van Sertima knew about the possibility of travel between Africa and America.
I'm not sure what point you're trying to make about the boats. For instance, in the case of the expedition from the Songhai, it was a one way trip. There was no back and forth. It's not like they had a fleet of ships, so the expectation that a bunch of them would be left over is silly. They do have records of how the ships were built and the people in the area still build similar ships. How do you think Heyerdahl was able to replicate them for his voyage. Now if you're trying to say that the trip didn't happen because we don't have the specific ships used, well then please point me to the Nina, Santa Maria, Pinta, or Mayflower. I'd like to see them. Oh wait, you can't because none of those ships exist anymore. So since we don't have those ships are you going to claim that Columbus and the Pilgrims never made the trip either?
I'm not saying that Van Sertima is right, but there is merit to his argument. You can claim there isn't, but your stance is based on fluff. Do you believe the Ancient Egyptians were black? Because a lot of the evidence that people use to prove that they are really isn't any stronger than what Van Sertima uses to prove his case. Afrocentrists use linguistic patterns, images in artwork, and third party accounts of the Egyptians to prove they were black. That's some of the same info Van Sertima uses.
The evidence that the egyptians were black is a million times stronger that van sertima stupid theory you can prove egyptians were black without using artwork. unless there are written records of the voyage there is no proof that a voyage to the americas happened. we know boats like the mayflower existed because we have proof physical and written proof on
Ok, they built boats but that does not mean they used them to go to america, they is no evidence of those boats in the americas and even if they did get there there would be no proof because they never came back. for all we know they could have left and died on the way, which is a logical conclusion because there is no written proof of them leaving of arriving.
