Quote Originally Posted by Hax View Post
...no, it's not, and you have no idea what you're talking about.

The point I'm trying to make here is that there is no such thing as "the purest Arab", hell, there's not really anything such as an "Arab" anyway. Compare and contrast the province of Arabia Petraea back in Roman time with the southern-most tip of the Arabian peninsula (Yemen). Do you honestly believe the exact same people were living there? We only call it Arabia because the Greek and Roman writers referred to everything behind the ante-Lebanon as "Arabia". They don't speak the same language and they don't look like one another.
I know enough to know that you are trying to muddy the waters by deliberately using the most controversial examples. First Malta, and now you mention Yemen, where I am aware there is controversy over their ethnic origins because of their history as a more urbanised society in ancient times, and their connections to Ethiopia.

Yeah, I get that the geographic landmass of Arabia and the Arabs as a distinct ethnic group are two different things. Terminology changes. But when we are talking about Arabs in this thread, it is a reference to a collection of bedouin tribes from 6-7th century Arabian peninsula that spread their culture and to varying extents their gene pool across parts of North Africa and the Middle-East over the next few centuries, and in doing so created a cultural and genetic legacy that still exists today. For all the variations, the common langauge, cultural, and religious roots are evidence of this.