Lebanon has no Arab genes. Very few speak Arabic in Lebanon

chill man

I'm chill

I'm chill

I'm chill

I'm chill

אימבעציל

Imbecile.

Lebanese are White East-meds, ARABIST IMBECILES need not apply.

Attached: 1560540312215.jpg (512x621, 69K)

Just shut the fuck up and stop shitposting about your stupid lebanon

Imbecile

Imbecile

Imbecile

¡Detrás de tí, imbécil!

Imbecile

I M B E C I L E

Attached: 1561402649730.jpg (700x700, 106K)

>tfw I just black swanned my sister
She needed my TI-84 for the ACT. Before I gave it to her I deleted the subtraction and division functions from the calculator's memory and downloaded a program which freezes the screen whenever she multiplies anything by less than two digits

I hope she learns something about antifragility today

Attached: smug puffy.png (800x689, 220K)

When will Lebanon reclaim Carthage?

i m b e c i l e

I had my doubt, but after seeing the face of this fellow aryan man, I completely changed my mind.

shit post shit meme

>Canaanite religion refers to the group of ancient Semities

They are semites tho same shit as arabs

No, Arab dog, you were not Phoenicians, Mesopotamians, Egyptians

Pheoniciana spome a semitic language ao they were semite niggers simple as

Very based man. Would love to meet him in real life.

Is the average lebanese as based as him?

Spoke*

They were whiter than you, mutt

The PHOENICIAN BVLL is the epitome of male dominance and masculinity.

Attached: 1556833755938.jpg (1949x2793, 542K)

Take that back, imbecile, or else I will take your women

Attached: MILITARIZED IMBECILE.jpg (289x500, 153K)

IMBECIL

Imbecile.

Attached: IMG_20190528_182033.jpg (1080x1083, 301K)

"Phoenicians", a name given to them by Greeks, no CAnaanite called themselves such, were a Semitic speaking peoples with major basal Eurasian admixture. Basically take the proto-Semites who were likely very similar to Natufians, i.e look like Bedouins, mixed them with Caucasians from the Bronze Age and you get Northern Semites.
At most, Lebanese are as far from the darkest native Saudi as they are from south Europeans. They're closer to the average Saudi than they are to South Europeans, Iranians, Turks and other non-Semitic groups.

Imbecile.

Even if it was an exonym, that doesn't matter. "Egypt" is an exonym, they call it "Masr" in Arabic. Same with "Phoenician" in English and "Canaani" in Arabic. Or even "Fini'i" (Phoenician) works in Arabic, because we're trying to be inclusive to all of Lebanon, and not the wider Palestinian/Israeli Canaanite people.

Chadder than the average swediod

Egyptians saw themselves as a single group belong to a single land (Kemet). The same cannot be said to Phoenicians who were a bunch of city states. There's no evidence those city states saw themselves as one people equivalent to Northern Canaan.
The equivalent to Phoenicia is Northern Canaan and not Canaanite. On top of it, there's no evidence Canaanites thought of themselves as being part of a group.

el imbécil...

>and not Canaan as a whole
Fixed.

your post can be applied to the greeks too though
also when hannibal was exiled from carthage where did he go?
to Tyre

>your post can be applied to the greeks too though
Not really.

yea
if athens and sparta belonged to the same people so did tyre and sidon

>your post can be applied to the greeks too though
Greeks saw themselves as one people. Aristotle described what made greeks as a group of people. Greeks even got together to play Olympic games. To be part of them, you had to convince other Greeks that you shared common ancestry. This is key evidence as to why Macedonians were Hellenic, though they were the weird bunch.

Is there evidence that some dweller of "Phoenicia" claimed that peoples of Tyre, Sidon or any grouping of city states in that region were part of a unique people?

Northern Canaanites were the people dubbed as Phoenicians by the greeks. They called themselves "Kan‘ani" like the Southern Canaanites even tho they were all split into city states (which they also identified with). "Phoenician" can be used interchangeably with "Northern Canaanite". Using "Phoenician" is more appropriate considering that Israel/Palestine isn't named Southern Canaan and it'd be ridiculous to have a Northern Canaan without a southern one. If we're heading to unifying Lebanon with Israel/Palestine then be my guest and call it Canaan, that'd be more appropriate. But since what we're actually heading to is unifying the Lebanese people in an inclusive manner to the Lebanese only then Phoenicia it is.

>There's no evidence those city states saw themselves as one people equivalent to Northern Canaan.
This is what the leaf said and this cannot be applied to the Greeks.

The Canaanites saw themselves as one people. They identified as "Canaani".

>The Canaanites saw themselves as one people. They identified as "Canaani".
Sources? The closest there is no grouping Canaanites as one people is the Bible. Maybe that's good enough if writers can be considered to be Canaanites (Israelites are Canaanites), but they'd have to see themselves as Canaanite.
It's unlikely Canaanites saw themselves as Northern Canaanites, though possible if they called themselves "Northerners". But we can argue about possibilities all day, I'd rather see evidence.
Though Egyptians did mention Canaanites in the Amarna letters. And client kings like the king of Byblos, Rib-Hadda, did mention "kings of Canaan" to his Egyptian overlords.

The Greek example makes this difficult because the Greeks, though divided in city states, did things which undeniably made them a single people.

>Canaani
I think it's safer to say the correct terminology would be Canaanite and not Phoenician to describe coastal Levantines, minus Gaza and Latakia.

I've seen "kan'ani" = 𐤊𐤍𐤏𐤍 being used as "Canaanites" in dozens of inscriptions. I'll look for them and send them.

The northerners didn't identify differently than the southerners (excluding Jews later on, and Philistines). The correct terminology is indeed Canaanite, but why use it if we're identifying as northern canaanite? I think it'd be better to say Phoenicians, a subgroup of the Canaanites whom are Levantine. We're just trying to be specific to Northern Canaan. That's it. Phoenicianists who want to use it as an excuse to be unique and different from the rest of Canaan are simply false. Most of the differences were political.

Meant for you too.

Phoenicians (or Northern Canaanites) can't be a group that Lebanese use as an identity that existed in the past, if it's never been used by Canaanites as an identity.

Arabist imbecile, Get off Phoenician property.

Attached: 1560794098223.jpg (1024x768, 125K)

Yeah I'm tired of repeating myself.

no, صahyuuni dog, you get off our Phoenician property, Shebaa farms

Attached: Adobe_20190124_160343.png (642x645, 231K)

Lebanese is influenced by Arabic (as well as other languages, such as Aramaic and Canaanite/Phoenician, plus its own local evolution), but it is not a version of Arabic. Much of the linguistics classifications establishing “descendance” are unsound statistically.

Attached: 5bce53f89dca7a81e48cc9ff7c338b4c.png (800x702, 703K)

I got your point. I didn't say northern canaanites or pheonicians should be done away with. It's just not something the "phoenicianists" can appeal to when they're trying to replace arabness.

You're an imbecile. gabish?

>you will never be as smart as Nassim

Attached: priorities.png (745x184, 25K)

How is it not? It's literally who we are. We're literally Phoenicians that speak arabic and worship different gods. The continuity and culture has remained intact. We're northern canaanites, with Phoenicians as an exonym. That simple.