US Department of Justice Asked to Regulate AIPAC as a Foreign Agent of the Israeli Government
tdny
coaste...@yahoo.com
US Department of Justice Asked to Regulate AIPAC as a Foreign Agent of
the Israeli Government
PR Newswire
WASHINGTON, March 17
WASHINGTON, March 17 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The US Department of
Justice has been formally asked to begin regulating the American
Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) as the foreign agent of the
Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs. A 392 page legal filing
presented by a four person IRmep delegation in a two hour meeting with
top officials of the Internal Security Section substantiated the
following case for AIPAC's immediate registration:
AIPAC is a spinoff of an organization already ordered by the DOJ to
register as an Israeli foreign agent. In November of 1962 the
American Zionist Council was ordered by the Attorney General to begin
filing disclosures as an Israeli foreign agent under the 1938 Foreign
Agents Registration Act.
http://www.IRmep.org/1962Order.pdf Six weeks later, former AZC
employees incorporated the American Israel Public Affairs Committee in
Washington, DC, taking over the AZC's lobbying activities.
http://www.IRmep.org/AIPAC.pdf AIPAC did not register as a foreign
agent.
AIPAC's founder Isaiah L. Kenen was the chief information officer for
the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs in New York and for a time
duly registered in that role. http://www.IRmep.org/Kenen.pdf The
Justice Department ordered Kenen to personally re-register after he
formally left the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs to head up
private lobbying and publicity for the Israeli government at the
nonprofit American Zionist Council. Kenen never complied with the
order. http://www.IRmep.org/order.pdf
Espionage related FBI investigations in 1984 and 2005 reveal AIPAC's
ongoing stealth foreign agency activities. Declassified FBI files
released on the Internet last week reveal that in 1984 AIPAC and the
Israeli Ministry of Economics were investigated for jointly obtaining
and circulating classified US economic data to obtain favorable trade
benefits for Israel. http://www.irmep.org/ila/economy In 2005
Pentagon Colonel Lawrence Franklin pled guilty and two AIPAC employees
were indicted for obtaining and circulating classified US national
defense information to Israeli government officials allegedly in the
interest of fomenting US action against Iran.
AIPAC's executive committee consists of the original member
organizations of the AZC in addition to newer members. The Conference
of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, the umbrella group of
AIPAC's executive committee, is housed in the same New York office as
the World Zionist Organization – American Section, a registered
foreign agent that is heavily involved in illegal settlement expansion
according to Israeli prosecutor Thalia Sasson.
According to Grant F. Smith, director of IRmep, the case for
reregulating AIPAC as a foreign agent immediately is compelling.
"AIPAC was designed to supplant the American Zionist Council as the
arm of the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs in the United States
after the DOJ ordered the AZC to register as a foreign agent. As
such, Americans should have full public access to biannual FARA
registrations detailing AIPAC's publicity campaigns, lobbying
expenditures, funding flows, activities of its offices in Israel and
internal consultations with its foreign principals - particularly over
such controversial issues as illegal settlements and US foreign aid."
Concerned organizations and individuals who wish to supplement the
Department of Justice filing or participate in future negotiations
with law enforcement officials should contact the Institute for
Research: Middle Eastern Policy, Inc. at in...@IRmep.org or
202-342-7325. IRmep is a private nonprofit that studies how warranted
law enforcement and civil action can improve U.S. Middle East policy.
SOURCE Institute for Research: Middle Eastern Policy
coaste...@yahoo.com
wrote:
> US Department of Justice Asked to Regulate AIPAC as a Foreign Agent of
> the Israeli Government
> PR Newswire
>
> WASHINGTON, March 17
>
> WASHINGTON, March 17 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The US Department of
> Justice has been formally asked to begin regulating the American
> Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) as the foreign agent of the
> Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs. A 392 page legal filing
> presented by a four person IRmep delegation in a two hour meeting with
> top officials of the Internal Security Section substantiated the
> following case for AIPAC's immediate registration:
>
> AIPAC is a spinoff of an organization already ordered by the DOJ to
> register as an Israeli foreign agent. In November of 1962 the
> American Zionist Council was ordered by the Attorney General to begin
> filing disclosures as an Israeli foreign agent under the 1938 Foreign
> Agents Registration Act.
>
> http://www.IRmep.org/1962Order.pdf Six weeks later, former AZC
> employees incorporated the American Israel Public Affairs Committee in
> agent.
>
> AIPAC's founder Isaiah L. Kenen was the chief information officer for
> the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs in New York and for a time
> duly registered in that role. http://www.IRmep.org/Kenen.pdfThe
> Justice Department ordered Kenen to personally re-register after he
> formally left the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs to head up
> private lobbying and publicity for the Israeli government at the
> nonprofit American Zionist Council. Kenen never complied with the
>
> Espionage related FBI investigations in 1984 and 2005 reveal AIPAC's
> ongoing stealth foreign agency activities. Declassified FBI files
> released on the Internet last week reveal that in 1984 AIPAC and the
> Israeli Ministry of Economics were investigated for jointly obtaining
> and circulating classified US economic data to obtain favorable trade
> Pentagon Colonel Lawrence Franklin pled guilty and two AIPAC employees
> were indicted for obtaining and circulating classified US national
> defense information to Israeli government officials allegedly in the
> interest of fomenting US action against Iran.
>
> AIPAC's executive committee consists of the original member
> organizations of the AZC in addition to newer members. The Conference
> of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, the umbrella group of
> AIPAC's executive committee, is housed in the same New York office as
> the World Zionist Organization – American Section, a registered
> foreign agent that is heavily involved in illegal settlement expansion
> according to Israeli prosecutor Thalia Sasson.
>
> According to Grant F. Smith, director of IRmep, the case for
> reregulating AIPAC as a foreign agent immediately is compelling.
> "AIPAC was designed to supplant the American Zionist Council as the
> arm of the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs in the United States
> after the DOJ ordered the AZC to register as a foreign agent. As
> such, Americans should have full public access to biannual FARA
> registrations detailing AIPAC's publicity campaigns, lobbying
> expenditures, funding flows, activities of its offices in Israel and
> internal consultations with its foreign principals - particularly over
> such controversial issues as illegal settlements and US foreign aid."
>
> Concerned organizations and individuals who wish to supplement the
> Department of Justice filing or participate in future negotiations
> with law enforcement officials should contact the Institute for
> 202-342-7325. IRmep is a private nonprofit that studies how warranted
> law enforcement and civil action can improve U.S. Middle East policy.
>
> SOURCE Institute for Research: Middle Eastern Policy
Thinking out loud:
"Look at the timing of this! IRmep's brief on AIPAC arrived at
Justice on the 17th. Attorney General Holder will have to take it
seriously; his sworn obligation is to enforce the law impartially and
his staff has certainly researched the issue.
Netanyahu just announced a stone wall policy on East Jerusalem and
therefore he must repeat it today before AIPAC's power brokers at it's
annual celebration. Clinton also addresses the convention. What she
says will necessarily foreshadow what Obama will tell Netanyu Tuesday
after Bibi (also of necessity--if only for the sake of consistency)
repeats the stonewalling at the White House.
Presuming for the sake of the argument that the result at Justice is
"AIPAC must Register", this White House will simply follow the law of
the land and let it happen.
The law of the land provides fine political cover. Netanyahu goes
home to face the the Israeli public having lost this critical round
too. In fact he will have been humiliated but far worse than Biden was
in Jerusalem. Haaretz will hot-up the criticism and other media will
see handwriting on the wall, i.e., will have to take it seriously. If
the drumbeat continues, as it must, Israel's parliamentary system will
have to decide whether it's in her interest to have peace destroyed at
the risk of fundamental alienation of an American President and the
ever watchful American intelligentsia. This is international politics
on the grand scale.
Don't forget Obama's obligations which also provide political cover.
For example, four star General Petraeus has spoken on the negative
effect of our grossly biased relationship with Israel. Accordingly to
fail to deal with Israeli intransigence constitutes a betrayal not
only of our national interests but of our troops in the field. That's
pure Republican politics. Cover, indeed.
Life is sweet when light appears at the end of the tunnel after a long
struggle.
drahcir
> http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/us-department-of-justice-aske...
The first paragraph of your post, bigot:
WASHINGTON, March 17 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The US Department of
Justice has been formally asked to begin regulating the American
Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) as the foreign agent of the
Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs. A 392 page legal filing
presented by a four person IRmep delegation in a two hour meeting with
top officials of the Internal Security Section substantiated the
following case for AIPAC's immediate registration:
So, let's see what we have here. Wikipedia says:
"Today, PR Newswire is hired by corporations, public relations firms
and non-governmental organizations to deliver news and multimedia
content."
In other words, it's advertisement - it should be called PRAdwire -
has NOTHING to do with news, except for news about people who hire
them, of course. Well, let's move on. What in heaven's name is
"IRmep"? Well, how silly! It's the "Institute for Research Middle
Eastern Policy", according to the "About IRmep" page of the website.
Someone should instruct the authors as to proper usage of prepositions
in English. Unusual for an "About" page, there is not even one
person's name mentioned. I wonder why? Finally, if you notice from
above, the 392 page "filing" (doesn't say where or with whom these 392
pages were filed) was presented by four unnamed people from IRmep in a
2 hour meeting with again unnamed "top officials of the Internal
Security Section". Wow, sounds very official! Problem is, Internal
Security Section of WHAT? The US Department of Justice? Well, turns
out there WAS something called the Internal Security Section of the
Criminal Division of the D of J. Problem is, that appellation has not
existed since 2002.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_pjus/is_200301/ai_763810740/
Thanks, bigot, for your enlightening post.
Count 1
"drahcir" <justrich...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:866afbe7-f672-41de...@30g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_pjus/is_200301/ai_763810740/
***
I dismissed this story when I first saw it on the news.google.ca site. Just
another bunch of kooks submitting a sure-to-be-doomed proposal. My guess is
they're funded by that other kook Gates, as he's referenced this submission
as well.
tdny
drahcir
> http://www.healthanddna.com/ancestry-dna-testing/jewish-dna.html
Hey bigot, do you have anything resembling an idea in that thing
perched on top of your neck, or is it all you can handle just to surf
the net all day desperately trying to find ridiculous antijew
propaganda? Are you on disability or some other sort of dole?
drahcir
> "drahcir" <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote in message
I think you give them too much credit. Based on the fact that an
agency with that name has not existed since 2002, I don't think
anything was submitted anywhere - I think the whole thing is just a
silly story.
tdny
"drahcir" <justrich...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:010fe680-bc7b-42b2...@z35g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
You tested yourself yet?
Is there something "antijew propaganda" about DNA testing to confirm Jewish
heritage.
Afraid of the test?
Are you bigoted against people on disability or the dole, unless they are
Haredim?
tdny
"drahcir" <justrich...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:010fe680-bc7b-42b2...@z35g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
Talk about being on the dole, Lol!
tdny
> "drahcir" <justrich...@gmail.com> wrote in message
http://www.healthanddna.com/ancestry-dna-testing/jewish-dna.html
>> Hey bigot,
Speaking of bigots, here is a prime example of the light unto all nations,
shared values, with the USA.
Jewish couple lose court battle to help Bedouin friends
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article25047.htm
But Natalie and Weisman Zakai say the past three years --
since the Jewish couple offered to rent their home to
Bedouin friends, Ahmed and Khalas Tarabin -- have been a living hell.
"I have always loved Israel," said Mrs Zakai, 43.
"But to see the depth of the racism of our neighbours
has made me question why we live in this country."
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article25047.htm
Jewish couple lose court battle to help Bedouin friends
By Jonathan Cook in Nevatim
March 22, 2010 "Information Clearing House" --
The Zakai and Tarabin families should be a picture of
happy coexistence across the ethnic divide, a model
for others to emulate in Israel.
But Natalie and Weisman Zakai say the past three years --
since the Jewish couple offered to rent their home to
Bedouin friends, Ahmed and Khalas Tarabin -- have been a living hell.
"I have always loved Israel," said Mrs Zakai, 43.
"But to see the depth of the racism of our neighbours
has made me question why we live in this country."
Three of the couple's six dogs have been mysteriously poisoned;
Mrs Zakai's car has been sprayed with the words
"Arab lover" and the windows smashed;
her three children in school are regularly
taunted and bullied by other pupils;
and a collection of vintage cars in the family's
yard has been set on fire in what police say was
an arson attack.
To add to these indignities,
the Zakais have spent three years and thousands of
dollars battling through the courts against the elected
officials of their community of Nevatim,
in Israel's southern Negev desert,
who have said they are determined
to keep the Tarabins from moving in.
Last week the Zakais' legal struggle looked like it had run out of steam.
The supreme court told the two families the Tarabins should submit
to a vetting committee of local officials to assess their suitability -
a requirement that has never been made before by the Negev
community in the case of a family seeking to rent a home.
"The decision of the committee is a foregone conclusion," Mr Tarabin said.
Chances for Jews and Arabs to live together --
outside of a handful of cities --
are all but impossible because Israel's rural
communities are strictly segregated,
said Alaa Mahajneh, a lawyer representing the Zakais.
Israel has nationalised 93 per cent of the country's territory,
confining most of its 1.3 million Arab citizens,
one-fifth of the population, to 120 or so communities
that existed at the time of the state's creation in 1948.
Meanwhile, more than 700 rural communities, including Nevatim,
have remained exclusively Jewish by requiring that anyone who
wants to buy a home applies to local vetting committees,
which have been used to weed out Arab applicants.
But Mr Mahajneh, from the Adalah legal centre for the Arab minority,
noted that legal sanction for such segregation was supposed to have
ended a decade ago, when the supreme court backed an Arab couple,
the Kaadans, who had been barred by a committee from the community
of Katzir in northern Israel.
Although the Kaadans were eventually allowed
to move into Katzir, the case has had little wider effect.
In fact, Mr Mahajneh said, the decision in
the Zakais' case suggests "we're going backwards".
The Kaadans won the right to buy a home in a Jewish community,
whereas the Tarabin family were seeking only a short-term rental of the
Zakais' home.
The Zakais said they had been told by the officials of Nevatim,
a community of 650 Jews a few kilometres from the city of Beersheva,
that it would not be a problem to rent out their home.
Mrs Zakai brought the Tarabins' ID cards to
the community's offices for routine paperwork.
"When I handed in the IDs,
the staff looked at the card and said, 'But they're Muslims'."
Later, according to Mrs Zakai, the council head, Avraham Orr,
rang to say he Arabs would be accepted in Nevatim "over my dead body".
Several weeks later, Mrs Zakai said, two threatening men
came to their door and warned them off renting to Arabs.
Soon afterwards 36 cars belonging to Mr Zakai,
who has a used car business, were set on fire.
Then behind the Zakais' back, Nevatim went to a local
magistrate's court to get an order preventing them from
renting their home.
The couple have been battling the decision ever since.
Mr Mahajneh said the Tarabins had accommodated
a series of "extraordinary conditions" imposed by Nevatim
on the rental agreement, including certificates of good conduct
from the police, a commitment to leave after a year, and limited
access to the house's extensive grounds.
But still Nevatim officials were dissatisfied, insisting in
addition that the Tarabins submit to questioning by a
vetting committee to assess their suitability.
Although 40 other homes in Nevatim are rented,
Mr Mahajneh said testimonies from past members
of the vetting committee showed that this was the
first time such a demand had been made.
"It is true that anyone buying a property in Nevatim is supposed
to be vetted by the committee, but there is no reference in the
community's bylaws to this condition for renters," Mr Mahajneh said.
In 2008, a district court judge in Beersheva
overruled Nevatim's new condition, arguing
that the vetting requirement would be
"unreasonable and not objective".
The supreme court judges, however,
sided with Nevatim in their concluding
statements on March 10.
Mrs Zakai said they had offered to rent their home to the Tarabins
after the Bedouin couple's home burnt down in their village in
early 2007, killing one of their 10 children.
The Tarabins have been living with relatives ever since,
unable to afford a new home and keen to move away
from the site of the tragedy.
Mr Tarabin, 54, said:
"I want Khalas to rest and heal and this place would have been perfect for
her.
The house has large grounds and we could have kept to ourselves.
No one in Nevatim needs to have anything to do with us if they don't want."
A Nevatim resident who spoke anonymously to the Haaretz
newspaper last week suggested reasons for the community's
opposition:
"If tomorrow the entire Tarabin tribe wants to
live here and we don't agree, what will people say?
The problem will start after the first one comes
because then dozens more families will want to
move here."
The close friendship forged between the
Zakais and Tarabins is rare in Israel.
The privileged status of Jews legally and economically,
communal segregation and the hostility provoked by
a larger national conflict between Israel and the
Palestinians ensure that Jewish and Arab citizens
usually remain at arm's length.
But Mr Zakai, 53, whose parents emigrated from Iraq
and who speaks fluent Arabic, befriended Mr Tarabin in
the late 1960s when they were teenagers in Beersheva.
Later they served together in the Israeli army as mechanical engineers.
Mrs Zakai said: "If Jews were being denied
the right to live somewhere, it would be a
scandal, but because our friends are Arabs
no one cares."
Avraham Orr, the Nevatim council head,
denied that he was opposing the Tarabins'
admission because they are Arab.
"There are rules," he said.
"Every family that wants to buy or rent
a property must first go through the committee."
Fearful of the implications of the Kaadan ruling,
Jewish communities in the Galilee unveiled a new
approach to barring Arab applicants last year.
They introduced bylaws amounting to loyalty
oaths that require applicants to pledge to support
"Zionism, Jewish heritage and settlement of the land".
Jonathan Cook is a writer and journalist based in Nazareth, Israel.
His latest books are
"Israel and the Clash of Civilisations:
Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East"
(Pluto Press) and "Disappearing Palestine:
Israel's Experiments in Human Despair" (Zed Books). His website is
www.jkcook.net.
A version of this article originally appeared
in The National (www.thenational.ae), published in Abu Dhabi.
tdny
drahcir
> "drahcir" <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:010fe680-bc7b-42b2...@z35g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Mar 22, 12:47 am, "tdny" <t...@live.com> wrote:
>
> http://www.healthanddna.com/ancestry-dna-testing/jewish-dna.html
>
>
>
> > Hey bigot, do you have anything resembling an idea in that thing
> > perched on top of your neck, or is it all you can handle just to surf
> > the net all day desperately trying to find ridiculous antijew
> > propaganda? Are you on disability or some other sort of dole?
>
> You tested yourself yet?
Don't need to. Unlike you, I know who my father is.
>
> Is there something "antijew propaganda" about DNA testing to confirm Jewish
> heritage.
>
> Afraid of the test?
I bet you think that's real assertive, eh? Coming out of your shell,
bigot?
>
> Are you bigoted against people on disability or the dole, unless they are
> Haredim?
I don't like lazy, ignorant, bigoted moochers like you who serve no
function and blame their uselessness on others. Why not get a job, or
at least volunteer - spend at least a few hours per day being
productive, and maybe your neurosis regarding jews would subside.
drahcir
> "drahcir" <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:010fe680-bc7b-42b2...@z35g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Mar 22, 12:47 am, "tdny" <t...@live.com> wrote:
> >>http://www.healthanddna.com/ancestry-dna-testing/jewish-dna.html
>
> > Hey bigot, do you have anything resembling an idea in that thing
> > perched on top of your neck, or is it all you can handle just to surf
> > the net all day desperately trying to find ridiculous antijew
> > propaganda?
>
> Are you on disability or some other sort of dole?
>
Looks like I struck a nerve, eh? Big surprise - how else could you
spend all day the way you do?
>
> http://wrmea.com/archives/May-June_2009/paccharts_32-37.pdf
drahcir
> http://www.healthanddna.com/ancestry-dna-testing/jewish-dna.html
Is there a point lurking anywhere in these posts, bigot?
tdny
"drahcir" <justrich...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:2780ce97-6129-4147...@t23g2000yqt.googlegroups.com...
Laptop?
BTW, submitted your DNA to confirm you are indeed Jewish, yet?
Scary Cat?
tdny
"drahcir" <justrich...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:9cfb248e-f968-49dd...@19g2000yqu.googlegroups.com...
> On Mar 22, 4:08 pm, "tdny" <t...@live.com> wrote:
>> "drahcir" <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:010fe680-bc7b-42b2...@z35g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > On Mar 22, 12:47 am, "tdny" <t...@live.com> wrote:
>>
>> http://www.healthanddna.com/ancestry-dna-testing/jewish-dna.html
>>
>>
>>
>> > Hey bigot, do you have anything resembling an idea in that thing
>> > perched on top of your neck, or is it all you can handle just to surf
>> > the net all day desperately trying to find ridiculous antijew
>> > propaganda? Are you on disability or some other sort of dole?
>>
>> You tested yourself yet?
>
> Don't need to. Unlike you, I know who my father is.
You mean you haven't tested yourself?
Why not?
What have you got to lose?
tdny
"drahcir" <justrich...@gmail.com>
http://www.healthanddna.com/ancestry-dna-testing/jewish-dna.html
> Is there a point lurking anywhere in these posts, bigot?
"I have been taught my masters," Catherine. 5:44
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvWL4AvGr2c&NR=1
drahcir
> "drahcir" <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:9cfb248e-f968-49dd...@19g2000yqu.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Mar 22, 4:08 pm, "tdny" <t...@live.com> wrote:
> >> "drahcir" <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >>news:010fe680-bc7b-42b2...@z35g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> > On Mar 22, 12:47 am, "tdny" <t...@live.com> wrote:
>
> >> http://www.healthanddna.com/ancestry-dna-testing/jewish-dna.html
>
> >> > Hey bigot, do you have anything resembling an idea in that thing
> >> > perched on top of your neck, or is it all you can handle just to surf
> >> > the net all day desperately trying to find ridiculous antijew
> >> > propaganda? Are you on disability or some other sort of dole?
>
> >> You tested yourself yet?
>
> > Don't need to. Unlike you, I know who my father is.
>
> You mean you haven't tested yourself?
> Why not?
> What have you got to lose?
I understand you think you are asserting yourself with this question,
posting your own words instead of links to stupid videos, and I
suppose of itself, that's a good thing, but truly, you sound like an
idiot, since your question, while you, in your utterly lost and
confused "brain", intend it to somehow intimidate, has no meaning -
it's just empty hot air. Why don't you share with the group the reason
you think I should have myself tested. (This should be REAL good!)
drahcir
>
> > Is there a point lurking anywhere in these posts, bigot?
I didn't think so.
>
> "I have been taught my masters," Catherine. 5:44http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvWL4AvGr2c&NR=1
drahcir
> "drahcir" <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:2780ce97-6129-4147...@t23g2000yqt.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Mar 22, 4:47 pm, "tdny" <t...@live.com> wrote:
> >> "drahcir" <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >>news:010fe680-bc7b-42b2...@z35g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> > On Mar 22, 12:47 am, "tdny" <t...@live.com> wrote:
> >> >>http://www.healthanddna.com/ancestry-dna-testing/jewish-dna.html
>
> >> > Hey bigot, do you have anything resembling an idea in that thing
> >> > perched on top of your neck, or is it all you can handle just to surf
> >> > the net all day desperately trying to find ridiculous antijew
> >> > propaganda?
>
> >> Are you on disability or some other sort of dole?
>
> >> Talk about being on the dole, Lol!
>
> > Looks like I struck a nerve, eh? Big surprise - how else could you
> > spend all day the way you do?
>
> >>http://wrmea.com/archives/May-June_2009/paccharts_32-37.pdf
>
> Laptop?
Um, that doesn't answer the question. When you're spending time
posting idiocy all day, you're not doing something productive. I
believe everyone will see that your reaction to the question speaks
for itself. Thanks.
>
> BTW, submitted your DNA to confirm you are indeed Jewish, yet?
I understand you think you are asserting yourself with this question,
posting your own words instead of links to stupid videos, and I
suppose of itself, that's a good thing, but truly, you sound like an
idiot, since your question, while you, in your utterly lost and
confused "brain", intend it to somehow intimidate, has no meaning -
it's just empty hot air. Why don't you share with the group the reason
you think I should have myself tested. (This should be REAL good!)
>
> Scary Cat?
"Scary cat"??? You mean, like, a big, mean cat with huge claws? I
think the term you want is scared-y-cat. That's a cat who is scared.
Get it now, moronic bigot?
tdny
"drahcir" <justrich...@gmail.com:
http://www.healthanddna.com/ancestry-dna-testing/jewish-dna.html
> Hey bigot,
Talking about bigots, lol!
If you don't take the DNA test, you will never know for sure.
drahcir
> "drahcir" <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com:
>
> http://www.healthanddna.com/ancestry-dna-testing/jewish-dna.html
>
> > Hey bigot,
>
> Talking about bigots, lol!
Keep laughing. I've proven you a bigot, and all you've got is your
silliness.
>
> If you don't take the DNA test, you will never know for sure.
Whatsimatta, bigot? Lack the wherewithal to answer the below, now
being posted for the third time?
I understand you think you are asserting yourself with this question
about DNA,
posting your own words instead of links to stupid videos, and I
suppose of itself, that's a good thing, but truly, you sound like an
idiot, since your question, while you, in your utterly lost and
confused "brain", intend it to somehow intimidate, has no meaning -
it's just empty hot air. Why don't you share with the group the reason
you think I should have myself tested. (This should be REAL good!)
>
coaste...@yahoo.com
How about this?
"Ashkenazi Jews are a group with mainly central and eastern European
ancestry."
dsharavi
wrote:
Bopkess.
For roughly a thousand years, the Ashkenazim were a reproductively
isolated population in Europe, despite living in many countries, with
little inflow or outflow from migration, conversion, or intermarriage
with other groups, including other Jews. Human geneticists have
identified genetic variations that have high frequencies among
Ashkenazi Jews, but not in the general European population. This is
true for patrilineal markers (Y-chromosome haplotypes) as well as for
matrilineal markers (mitochondrial haplotypes).
- New Light on Origins of Ashkenazi in Europe
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/14/science/14gene.html?_r=1
Although the historical record is very limited, there is a scholarly
consensus of cultural, linguistic, and genetic evidence that the
Ashkenazi Jewish population originated in the Middle East.
A study by Michael Seldin, a geneticist at the University of
California Davis School of Medicine, found Ashkenazi Jews to be a
clear, relatively homogenous genetic subgroup. Strikingly, regardless
of the place of origin, Ashkenazi Jews can be grouped in the same
genetic cohort — that is, regardless of whether an Ashkenazi Jew's
ancestors came from Poland, Russia, Hungary, Lithuania, or any other
place with a historical Jewish population, they belong to the same
ethnic group.
....
Amid all the interest in Jewish population genetics, scientists and
historians alike sound a strong note of caution. “There are a lot of
things that research like this should never establish, such as who is
a Jew,” Schiffman remarked. “Determining identity of an individual or
a community by genes is wrong,” Skorecki elaborated. “Whether you are
Jewish or not is within the realm of law and custom.” Conversely,
researchers are wary that the data not be used to separate populations
for political or social purposes. “Eighty-five percent of variation
among humans occurs within the same population,” Skorecki stressed.
“The 99.9% of identical DNA means we are all members of a recently
established family called humanity.”
http://www.forward.com/articles/11444/
Deborah
coaste...@yahoo.com
> > If you don't take the DNA test, you will never know for sure.
>
> Whatsimatta, bigot? Lack the wherewithal to answer the below, now
> being posted for the third time?
>
> you think I should have myself tested. (This should be REAL good!)
Because we'd then shift to whether you have any Israelite DNA at all?
Because we'd then shift to hanky panky in the Rhine Valley? Because
we'd then shift to the question of Israelites moving out of Israel
voluntarily as Behar suggests. But most important we'd shift to the
fact that you may be Jewish by culture and religion but you can't
prove that you have any substantial Israelite DNA and that the Return
and Redemption of the land is thus imaginary. Zionists are in fact
ethnic cleansers with ideological cover which misrepresents the
history.
coaste...@yahoo.com
You're disabled morally and you are also on a dole. Accordingly you
owe tdny an apology for having indulged the most rank hypocrisy
imaginable.
drahcir
wrote:
> > > If you don't take the DNA test, you will never know for sure.
>
> > Whatsimatta, bigot? Lack the wherewithal to answer the below, now
> > being posted for the third time?
>
> Why don't you share with the group the reason
>
> > you think I should have myself tested. (This should be REAL good!)
>
> Because we'd then shift to whether you have any Israelite DNA at all?
As of now, according to the studies that you obviously didn't
understand at all, we can be reasonably certain that I do.
> Because we'd then shift to hanky panky in the Rhine Valley? Because
> we'd then shift to the question of Israelites moving out of Israel
> voluntarily as Behar suggests.
Whoa, you are more confused than I'd thought. Why don't you cite from
Behar this "suggestion" H? (This should be REAL good, too.) I must
tell you, H, your confusion here is about as profound as the Tony Judt
debacle. Sheesh, remember that one? That was freakin incredible.
But most important we'd shift to the
> fact that you may be Jewish by culture and religion but you can't
> prove that you have any substantial Israelite DNA
True, but that I have substantial israelite DNA is the most plausible
explanation of the founder effect in both my maternal and paternal
linage. You don't like that conclusion for purely political reasons,
and that makes your opinion quite irrlevant.
and that the Return
> and Redemption of the land is thus imaginary. Zionists are in fact
> ethnic cleansers with ideological cover which misrepresents the
> history.
You haven't a clue. Read a decent book sometime if you'd care to
rectify that. No cleansing, no misrepresentation. Educate yourself,
ignoramus, so that you can cease spewing nonsense.
drahcir
wrote:
If your intent is to prove yourself an ignoramus, I'd say you
succeeded.
drahcir
wrote:
> On Mar 22, 9:23 am, drahcir <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 22, 12:47 am, "tdny" <t...@live.com> wrote:
>
> > >http://www.healthanddna.com/ancestry-dna-testing/jewish-dna.html
>
> > Hey bigot, do you have anything resembling an idea in that thing
> > perched on top of your neck, or is it all you can handle just to surf
> > the net all day desperately trying to find ridiculous antijew
> > propaganda? Are you on disability or some other sort of dole?
>
> You're disabled morally
Proven liars like you cannot pretend to judge others morally.
and you are also on a dole.
In your masturbatory fantasies, that may be true.
Accordingly you
> owe tdny an apology for having indulged the most rank hypocrisy
> imaginable.
What goes in that withered cluster of defective neurons between your
ears often has little relation to reality, so the fact that you see
mirages like the need for an apology must be tolerated.
coaste...@yahoo.com
> On Mar 23, 12:25 pm, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 22, 4:54 pm, drahcir <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Is there a point lurking anywhere in these posts, bigot?
>
> > How about this?
> > "Ashkenazi Jews are a group with mainly central and eastern European
> > ancestry."
>
> Bopkess.
That sentence is found overtly in that post. Take it up with the
author.
coaste...@yahoo.com
> On Mar 23, 3:47 pm, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> > > > If you don't take the DNA test, you will never know for sure.
>
> > > Whatsimatta, bigot? Lack the wherewithal to answer the below, now
> > > being posted for the third time?
>
> > Why don't you share with the group the reason
>
> > > you think I should have myself tested. (This should be REAL good!)
>
> > Because we'd then shift to whether you have any Israelite DNA at all?
>
> As of now, according to the studies that you obviously didn't
> understand at all, we can be reasonably certain that I do.
>
> > Because we'd then shift to hanky panky in the Rhine Valley? Because
> > we'd then shift to the question of Israelites moving out of Israel
> > voluntarily as Behar suggests.
>
> Whoa, you are more confused than I'd thought. Why don't you cite from
> Behar this "suggestion" H? (This should be REAL good, too.)
It's in the article. Look for it yourself.
I must
> tell you, H, your confusion here is about as profound as the Tony Judt
> debacle. Sheesh, remember that one? That was freakin incredible.
Post it.
>
> But most important we'd shift to the
>
> > fact that you may be Jewish by culture and religion but you can't
> > prove that you have any substantial Israelite DNA
>
> True, but that I have substantial israelite DNA is the most plausible
> explanation of the founder effect in both my maternal and paternal
> linage.
No, Ratner. Explain it and answer my follow-up questions.
You don't like that conclusion for purely political reasons,
> and that makes your opinion quite irrlevant.
Of course I don't LIKE your presumptions for political reasons but
that doesn't have anything to do with whether I'll accept conclusive
proofs.
> and that the Return
>
> > and Redemption of the land is thus imaginary. Zionists are in fact
> > ethnic cleansers with ideological cover which misrepresents the
> > history.
>
> You haven't a clue
Refute it DNA does not prove that you have *Israelite* ancestry.
. Read a decent book sometime if you'd care to
> rectify that.
Refute it. You dna material has not proved that any significant amount
of your ancestry is Israelite.
No cleansing, no misrepresentation. Educate yourself,
> ignoramus, so that you can cease spewing nonsense.
Refute it.
coaste...@yahoo.com
Take it up with the author.
coaste...@yahoo.com
> On Mar 23, 3:49 pm, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 22, 9:23 am, drahcir <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 22, 12:47 am, "tdny" <t...@live.com> wrote:
>
> > > >http://www.healthanddna.com/ancestry-dna-testing/jewish-dna.html
>
> > > Hey bigot, do you have anything resembling an idea in that thing
> > > perched on top of your neck, or is it all you can handle just to surf
> > > the net all day desperately trying to find ridiculous antijew
> > > propaganda? Are you on disability or some other sort of dole?
From the article:
Ashkenazi Jews are a group with mainly central and eastern European
ancestry. Ultimately, though, they can be traced back to Jews who
migrated from Israel to Italy in the first and second centuries, Behar
said. Eventually this group moved to Eastern Europe in the 12th and
13th centuries and expanded greatly, reaching about 10 million just
before World War II, he said.
Most historical records indicate that the founding of the Ashkenazi
Jewry took place in the Rhine Basin, followed by dramatic expansion
into eastern Europe. It is estimated that they represented 3 million
of the worlds Jews in the third century and 80% of Jews worldwide
today.
drahcir
wrote:
> On Mar 23, 6:00 pm, drahcir <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mar 23, 3:47 pm, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > > > If you don't take the DNA test, you will never know for sure.
>
> > > > Whatsimatta, bigot? Lack the wherewithal to answer the below, now
> > > > being posted for the third time?
>
> > > Why don't you share with the group the reason
>
> > > > you think I should have myself tested. (This should be REAL good!)
>
> > > Because we'd then shift to whether you have any Israelite DNA at all?
>
> > As of now, according to the studies that you obviously didn't
> > understand at all, we can be reasonably certain that I do.
>
> > > Because we'd then shift to hanky panky in the Rhine Valley? Because
> > > we'd then shift to the question of Israelites moving out of Israel
> > > voluntarily as Behar suggests.
>
> > Whoa, you are more confused than I'd thought. Why don't you cite from
> > Behar this "suggestion" H? (This should be REAL good, too.)
>
> It's in the article. Look for it yourself.
Typical answer. You're just confused, H. There is no "article" - it's
a paper. Nothing of the sort in it. You're obviously confusing two
things as you did with the Tony Judt debacle. That's all besides the
point that the reason Jews left Israel 2000 years ago is IRRELEVANT to
whether Ashkenazim are of Israelite origin. You are so intellectually
bankrupt that even that simple point is apparently beyond you.
>
> I must
>
> > tell you, H, your confusion here is about as profound as the Tony Judt
> > debacle. Sheesh, remember that one? That was freakin incredible.
>
> Post it.
I thought you'd never ask. Ah, the memories....
We'll start here:
*********
> > You've done nothing whatever to attack Pappe,
> You know, H, you need to see a specialist. Did you forget that I
> challenged you to post a positive review? you didn't.
I referred you to Tony Judt. You're forgotten.
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.jewish/msg/a8ced7691d5319db
*********
> > H, because you have been so entertaining with your faux outrage, I
> > will let you off the hook on all the cites but one: I want the message
> > id where you claim that you provided a review by Judt of Pappe.
> I didn't post the review. I referred you to it and you thanked me.
Poor, poor H, gasping for his last breath. Ok, you got me on a
technicality, hoping against hope that it will save you. Provide the
message id of where you "referred me" to the Judt review of Pappe. I
say you won't, because you didn't. Prove me wrong.
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.jewish/msg/fb29f2c1f6377645
**********
Because you had nowhere to turn, you "replied" with some irrelevant
article. I replied thusly:
*********
Oh, by the way, have you come across that Judt review of Pappe yet?
Hmmmm? You know, H, the path of honesty is still open to you. You
could take a big burden off of you and just admit that you were
mistaken, that the dementia caused you to think that you posted, oops,
excuse me, "referred me to" this review. Everyone here will
understand, including me.
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.jewish/msg/350e14eb8d37f1c1
At that point you fled the thread. I brought up the topic again a few
days later:
********
> > Now, what
> > about that Judt review of Pappe that you think you "referred me to",
> > you senile old fart?
> Of course I referred you to it. I recall doing it.
Dementia has two sides: you don't remember things that happened, and
you think you remember things that didn't happen.
> Here's what you
> don't want, Professor Judt himself:
H, you are in quicksand. You started out, so far as I could tell, as a
senile old fart. I drew that conclusion because you seemed to be
unable to recall certain things, recalled other things that didn't
happen, and became easily confused, especially regarding to whom you
were replying. Now your vanity will not allow you to acknowledge that
fact and admit your error, so by the below you show yourself to be a
vain, lying, senile ofd fart, ineptly twisting and turning to try in
vain to extricate yourself, not realizing, due to the dementia, no
doubt, how utterly ridiculous you appear. I cannot spare my valuable
time to read the below. Do you know why? Because i did a search for
"Pappe" in it - the name does not appear. How do you expect anyone to
believe that this is a review of Pappe that doesn't mention Pappe's
name?
(...)
It pains me to conclude that your disease may have robbed you of the
capacity to comprehend that Pappe is a different person from
Mearsheimer or Walt.
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.europe/msg/68c6379485a6b6be
***********
As anyone can read in the quoted text in this last post, the article
by Judt that you desperately posted following "Here's what you don't
want, Professor Judt himself" has nothing whatever to do with Pappe.
It was just a panicked, desperate ploy to escape. At this point you
knew quite well that the review that you "referred me to" was not of
Pappe at all, but of M&W. At this point, you fled the thread.
Having fun reliving old times?
> > But most important we'd shift to the
>
> > > fact that you may be Jewish by culture and religion but you can't
> > > prove that you have any substantial Israelite DNA
>
> > True, but that I have substantial israelite DNA is the most plausible
> > explanation of the founder effect in both my maternal and paternal
> > linage.
>
> No, Ratner. Explain it and answer my follow-up questions.
You mean for the 20th time? OK. Ashkenazim have a preponderance of
middle eastern DNA. They also have DNA from Eastern Europeans and DNA
of other origin that is mysterious, possibly Khazarian, but the
preponderant element is middle eastern, specifically a region of the
middle east that includes ancient Israel but not places like Syria or
Saudi Arabia. How did it get there? One can be honest and put together
cultural, language, and archaeological evidence and conclude that the
evidence points to it being Israelite, or one can play politics and,
in the face of overwhelming evidence, conclude that it is not
israelite, but just got there "somehow".
Here's a quote from an article from the New York Times from 2006,
written so that even you may be able to understand it:
"Dr. Goldstein and his colleagues suggested that the genesis of each
Jewish community, including the Ashkenazis, was that Jewish men had
arrived from the Middle East, taken wives from the host population and
converted them to Judaism, after which there was no further
intermarriage with non-Jews.
The Technion team suggests a different origin for the Ashkenazi
community: if the women too are Middle Eastern in origin, they would
presumably have accompanied their husbands. At least the Ashkenazi
Jewish community might have been formed by families migrating
together.
Dr. Hammer said the new study "moves us forward in trying to
understand Jewish population history." His own recent research, he
said, suggests that the Ashkenazi population expanded through a series
of bottlenecks - events that squeeze a population down to small
numbers - perhaps as it migrated from the Middle East after the
destruction of the Second Temple in A.D. 70 to Italy, reaching the
Rhine Valley in the 10th century.
But Dr. Goldstein said the new report did not alter his previous
conclusion. The mitochondrial DNA's of a small, isolated population
tend to change rapidly as some lineages fall extinct and others become
more common, a process known as genetic drift. In his view, the
Technion team has confirmed that genetic drift has played a major role
in shaping Ashkenazi mitochondrial DNA. But the linkage with Middle
Eastern populations is not statistically significant, he said.
Because of genetic drift, Ashkenazi mitochondrial DNA's have developed
their own pattern, which makes it very hard to tell their source. This
differs from the patrilineal case, Dr. Goldstein said, where there is
no question of a Middle Eastern origin. "
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/14/science/14gene.html
>
> You don't like that conclusion for purely political reasons,
>
> > and that makes your opinion quite irrlevant.
>
> Of course I don't LIKE your presumptions for political reasons but
> that doesn't have anything to do with whether I'll accept conclusive
> proofs.
See NYT above. Notice that it says the "Jewish men arrived from the
middle east". From where else in the middle east but Israel do you
think Jewish men may have arrived 2000 years ago? No one gives a shit
what you'll accept. With all of your bullshit, you have yet to provide
JUST ONE cite that interprets the middle eastern origin of Ashkenazim
in any way other than that they are descendants of Israelites. NOT
EVEN ONE! Provide it NOW or accept the obvious. NO THIRD CHOICE.
>
> > and that the Return
>
> > > and Redemption of the land is thus imaginary. Zionists are in fact
> > > ethnic cleansers with ideological cover which misrepresents the
> > > history.
>
> > You haven't a clue
>
> Refute it DNA does not prove that you have *Israelite* ancestry.
English, please.
>
> . Read a decent book sometime if you'd care to
>
> > rectify that.
>
> Refute it. You dna material has not proved that any significant amount
> of your ancestry is Israelite.
See NYT above. It's proof for non-alzheimic, non-antisemitic assholes
like you.
>
> No cleansing, no misrepresentation. Educate yourself,
>
> > ignoramus, so that you can cease spewing nonsense.
>
> Refute it.
Prove it.
drahcir
wrote:
> On Mar 23, 6:01 pm, drahcir <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mar 23, 3:25 pm, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 22, 4:54 pm, drahcir <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Mar 22, 5:16 pm, "tdny" <t...@live.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > http://www.healthanddna.com/ancestry-dna-testing/jewish-dna.html
>
> > > > Is there a point lurking anywhere in these posts, bigot?
>
> > > How about this?
>
> > > "Ashkenazi Jews are a group with mainly central and eastern European
> > > ancestry."
>
> > If your intent is to prove yourself an ignoramus, I'd say you
> > succeeded.
>
> Take it up with the author.
You are so utterly pitiful. The VERY NEXT SENTENCE from that which you
provided:
"Ultimately, though, they can be traced back to Jews who migrated from
Israel to Italy in the first and second centuries,"
Folks, that is THE VERY NEXT SENTENCE. Is there anyone here who
seriously doubts that HHW, aka iconoclast, aka Cazador is so far gone
that he thinks he can get away with such an infantile attempt at
deception? I have to say, H, that just when I think you can sink no
lower, you somehow manage to. Soooo pitiful....
drahcir
The most important sentence:
"Ultimately, though, they can be traced back to Jews who
migrated from Israel to Italy in the first and second centuries, Behar
said."
The rest is just you unable to comprehend most of what you read
coupled with an amazing ability to allow your politics to affect your
honesty, or lack thereof.
Richard
> "drahcir" <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:010fe680-bc7b-42b2...@z35g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
>
> >>http://www.healthanddna.com/ancestry-dna-testing/jewish-dna.html
>
> > Hey bigot, do you have anything resembling an idea in that thing
> > perched on top of your neck, or is it all you can handle just to surf
> > the net all day desperately trying to find ridiculous antijew
> > propaganda?
>
> Are you on disability or some other sort of dole?
>
Much nervous laughter, no answer. That speaks for itself.
>
> http://wrmea.com/archives/May-June_2009/paccharts_32-37.pdf
dsharavi
Doesn't he always?
Deborah
dsharavi
wrote:
> On Mar 23, 1:39 pm, dsharavi <dshara...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 23, 12:25 pm, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 22, 4:54 pm, drahcir <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Is there a point lurking anywhere in these posts, bigot?
>
> > > How about this?
> > > "Ashkenazi Jews are a group with mainly central and eastern European
> > > ancestry."
>
> > Bopkess.
>
> That sentence is found overtly in that post. Take it up with the
> author.
As usual, you missed the point of the advert -- as well as the
sentences preceding and following your cherry-picked quote:
Jewish DNA Testing
Genelex offers two DNA testing options to help confirm Jewish
heritage.
* Maternal Line or Common Female Ancestor Test (mtDNA for males or
females) examines DNA from the maternal line (i.e., the mtDNA comes
from the participant's Mother's, Mother's, Mother, etc.) and places
the tested individual in a haplogroup. Certain haplogroups are
associated with Jewish populations. For instance, recent scientific
evidence indicates that approximately 40% of current 8 million
Ashkenazi have descended from four women . The estimated world Jewish
population is about 13 million. They may have inherited their genetic
signatures from female ancestors who lived in the Near East.
Each woman left a genetic signature that shows up in their
descendants today. Together, their four signatures appear in about 40%
of Ashkenazi Jews, while being virtually absent in non-Jews and found
only rarely in Jews of non-Ashkenazi origin, the researchers said.
Ashkenazi Jews are a group with mainly central and eastern
European ancestry. Ultimately, though, they can be traced back to Jews
who migrated from Israel to Italy in the first and second centuries,
Behar said. Eventually this group moved to Eastern Europe in the 12th
and 13th centuries and expanded greatly, reaching about 10 million
just before World War II, he said.
Most historical records indicate that the founding of the
Ashkenazi Jewry took place in the Rhine Basin, followed by dramatic
expansion into eastern Europe. It is estimated that they represented 3
million of the worlds Jews in the third century and 80% of Jews
worldwide today.
http://www.healthanddna.com/ancestry-dna-testing/jewish-dna.html
And it's still no indicator of who is, and who is not, a Jew.
Deborah
dsharavi
wrote:
> On Mar 23, 6:01 pm, drahcir <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mar 23, 3:25 pm, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 22, 4:54 pm, drahcir <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Mar 22, 5:16 pm, "tdny" <t...@live.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > http://www.healthanddna.com/ancestry-dna-testing/jewish-dna.html
>
> > > > Is there a point lurking anywhere in these posts, bigot?
>
> > > How about this?
>
> > > "Ashkenazi Jews are a group with mainly central and eastern European
> > > ancestry."
>
> > If your intent is to prove yourself an ignoramus, I'd say you
> > succeeded.
>
> Take it up with the author.
The author, or advertiser, is perfectly clear:
Jewish DNA Testing
Genelex offers two DNA testing options to help confirm Jewish
heritage.
* Maternal Line or Common Female Ancestor Test (mtDNA for males or
females) examines DNA from the maternal line (i.e., the mtDNA comes
from the participant's Mother's, Mother's, Mother, etc.) and places
the tested individual in a haplogroup. Certain haplogroups are
associated with Jewish populations. For instance, recent scientific
evidence indicates that approximately 40% of current 8 million
Ashkenazi have descended from four women . The estimated world Jewish
population is about 13 million. They may have inherited their genetic
signatures from female ancestors who lived in the Near East.
Each woman left a genetic signature that shows up in their
descendants today. Together, their four signatures appear in about 40%
of Ashkenazi Jews, while being virtually absent in non-Jews and found
only rarely in Jews of non-Ashkenazi origin, the researchers said.
Ashkenazi Jews are a group with mainly central and eastern
European ancestry. Ultimately, though, they can be traced back to Jews
who migrated from Israel to Italy in the first and second centuries,
Behar said. Eventually this group moved to Eastern Europe in the 12th
and 13th centuries and expanded greatly, reaching about 10 million
just before World War II, he said.
Most historical records indicate that the founding of the
Ashkenazi Jewry took place in the Rhine Basin, followed by dramatic
expansion into eastern Europe. It is estimated that they represented 3
million of the worlds Jews in the third century and 80% of Jews
worldwide today.
http://www.healthanddna.com/ancestry-dna-testing/jewish-dna.html
Deborah
dsharavi
wrote:
> On Mar 23, 6:03 pm, drahcir <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 23, 3:49 pm, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 22, 9:23 am, drahcir <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Mar 22, 12:47 am, "tdny" <t...@live.com> wrote:
>
> > > > >http://www.healthanddna.com/ancestry-dna-testing/jewish-dna.html
>
> > > > Hey bigot, do you have anything resembling an idea in that thing
> > > > perched on top of your neck, or is it all you can handle just to surf
> > > > the net all day desperately trying to find ridiculous antijew
> > > > propaganda? Are you on disability or some other sort of dole?
>
> From the article:
>
> Ashkenazi Jews are a group with mainly central and eastern European
> ancestry.
Selectively omitted from the article:
Jewish DNA Testing
Genelex offers two DNA testing options to help confirm Jewish
heritage.
* Maternal Line or Common Female Ancestor Test (mtDNA for males or
females) examines DNA from the maternal line (i.e., the mtDNA comes
from the participant's Mother's, Mother's, Mother, etc.) and places
the tested individual in a haplogroup. Certain haplogroups are
associated with Jewish populations. For instance, recent scientific
evidence indicates that approximately 40% of current 8 million
Ashkenazi have descended from four women . The estimated world Jewish
population is about 13 million. They may have inherited their genetic
signatures from female ancestors who lived in the Near East.
Each woman left a genetic signature that shows up in their
descendants today. Together, their four signatures appear in about 40%
of Ashkenazi Jews, while being virtually absent in non-Jews and found
only rarely in Jews of non-Ashkenazi origin, the researchers said.
Ashkenazi Jews are a group with mainly central and eastern
European ancestry. Ultimately, though, they can be traced back to Jews
who migrated from Israel to Italy in the first and second centuries,
Behar said.
> Ultimately, though, they can be traced back to Jews who
> migrated from Israel to Italy in the first and second centuries, Behar
> said. Eventually this group moved to Eastern Europe in the 12th and
> 13th centuries and expanded greatly, reaching about 10 million just
> before World War II, he said.
>
> Most historical records indicate that the founding of the Ashkenazi
> Jewry took place in the Rhine Basin, followed by dramatic expansion
> into eastern Europe. It is estimated that they represented 3 million
> of the worlds Jews in the third century and 80% of Jews worldwide
> today.
Also omitted from the article, or advert:
* Paternal Line Jewish DNA Test (Y-chromosome for males only)
examines DNA from the paternal line (i.e., the Y-chromosome comes from
the participant's Father's, Father's, Father, etc.) and places the
tested individual in a haplogroup. Certain haplogroups are associated
with Jewish populations. The Cohen Modal Haplotype, for instance,
belongs to haplogroup J. The main ethnic element of Ashkenazim (German
and Eastern European Jews), Sephardim (Spanish and Portuguese Jews),
Mizrakhim (Middle Eastern Jews), Juhurim (Mountain Jews of the
Caucasus), Italqim (Italian Jews), and most other modern Jewish
populations of the world is Israelite. The Israelite haplotypes fall
into haplogroups J and E. Ashkenazim also descend, in a smaller way,
from European peoples such as Slavs and Khazars. The non-Israelite
haplogroups include Q (typically Central Asian) and R1a1 (typically
Eastern European).
Start unraveling the mystery of your DNA and heritage today, call
(800) 523-3080 to order, order on-line, or download the order form and
fax or mail in your order. Don't forget to take a look at our other
informational genetic testing products now as you receive significant
discounts when ordering tests at the same time.
http://www.healthanddna.com/ancestry-dna-testing/jewish-dna.html
H should advertise his services for hoof-in-mouth training.
Deborah
dsharavi
apparently beyond H. The advert states clearly that "The main ethnic
element of Ashkenazim (German and Eastern European Jews), Sephardim
(Spanish and Portuguese Jews), Mizrakhim (Middle Eastern Jews),
Juhurim (Mountain Jews of the Caucasus), Italqim (Italian Jews), and
most other modern Jewish populations of the world is Israelite."
It still doesn't determine who is, or who is not, a Jew. And despite
what "Palestinians" acurrently claim, it isn't a title deed to the
portion of former Palestine which is now the state of Israel.
Deborah
coaste...@yahoo.com
> Reading the article, or paper -- really, it's an advert -- is also
> apparently beyond H. The advert states clearly that "The main ethnic
> element of Ashkenazim (German and Eastern European Jews), Sephardim
> (Spanish and Portuguese Jews), Mizrakhim (Middle Eastern Jews),
> Juhurim (Mountain Jews of the Caucasus), Italqim (Italian Jews), and
> most other modern Jewish populations of the world is Israelite."
And that's false. They're selling blood tests. Israelite DNA doesn't
exist.
coaste...@yahoo.com
Therefore there is no benchmark as to what it was.
RATNER
Why don't you share with the group the reason
> you think I should have myself tested. (This should be REAL good!)
HUNTER
Because we'd then shift to whether you have any Israelite DNA at all?
Because we'd then shift to hanky panky in the Rhine Valley? Because
we'd then shift to the question of Israelites moving out of Israel
voluntarily as Behar suggests. But most important we'd shift to the
fact that you may be Jewish by culture and religion but you can't
prove that you have any substantial Israelite DNA and that the Return
dsharavi
> > Reading the article, or paper -- really, it's an advert -- is also
> > apparently beyond H. The advert states clearly that "The main ethnic
> > element of Ashkenazim (German and Eastern European Jews), Sephardim
> > (Spanish and Portuguese Jews), Mizrakhim (Middle Eastern Jews),
> > Juhurim (Mountain Jews of the Caucasus), Italqim (Italian Jews), and
> > most other modern Jewish populations of the world is Israelite."
>
On Mar 24, 11:59 pm, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> And that's false. They're selling blood tests.
Reading the article (as H called it) apparently remains beyond H. In
fact, H directed another poster's attention to the contents of that
same article as a matter of proof. And, in fact, Genelex isn't selling
blood tests. They are offering DNA analyses.
>Israelite DNA doesn't exist.
Funny H should bring that up now, after the article H cited referred
to it without question, which H accepted.
Deborah
dsharavi
wrote:
> There is no Israelite DNA. It perished two thousand years ago.
lol
"DNA will survive in the environment for less than one million years
and slowly degrades into short fragments in solution. Claims for older
DNA have been made, most notably a report of the isolation of a viable
bacterium from a salt crystal 250 million years old, but these claims
are controversial."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8469282
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15866038
>Because
> we'd then shift to the question of Israelites moving out of Israel
> voluntarily as Behar suggests.
Behar suggested no such thing, of course.
>But most important we'd shift to the
> fact that you may be Jewish by culture and religion but you can't
> prove that you have any substantial Israelite DNA and that the Return
> and Redemption of the land is thus imaginary.
UNLESS, of course, you're an imaginary "Palestinian" claiming to
possess a great amount of ancient Israelite DNA, and that that gives
you a "right to Return" to Israel.
Deborah
coaste...@yahoo.com
On Mar 25, 1:13 am, dsharavi <dshara...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Sharavi said:
> > > Reading the article, or paper -- really, it's an advert -- is also
> > > apparently beyond H. The advert states clearly that "The main ethnic
> > > element of Ashkenazim (German and Eastern European Jews), Sephardim
> > > (Spanish and Portuguese Jews), Mizrakhim (Middle Eastern Jews),
> > > Juhurim (Mountain Jews of the Caucasus), Italqim (Italian Jews), and
> > > most other modern Jewish populations of the world is Israelite."
Strange language this: "the main ethnic element......is Israelite."
These guys are selling dna analysis. Isn't ethnicity cultural? Does
one's dna have any direct nexus with learning a culture from
childhood?
>
> On Mar 24, 11:59 pm, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> > And that's false. They're selling blood tests.
>
> Reading the article (as H called it) apparently remains beyond H. In
> fact, H directed another poster's attention to the contents of that
> same article as a matter of proof. And, in fact, Genelex isn't selling
> blood tests. They are offering DNA analyses.
>
> >Israelite DNA doesn't exist.
>
> Funny H should bring that up now, after the article H cited referred
> to it without question, which H accepted.
Yes it did but no I didn't. I cited it without incantation. I was
happy to see the term "Israelite" there. As to DNA it's used by
hucksters like you with something to sell. You inevitably rise to such
tempting bait. Not that you give a damn about dna. You have a *purely
political stake* in calling DNA of Middle Eastern origin "Israelite".
It's thought to support Zionist myth and is used in self-justifying
hasbara.
But it can't be supported scientifically. You'd be far better off in
the effort to huckster Israeli rights to Palestine if you based it
exclusively on the Bible and the Holocaust.
There is no "Israelite" diaspora. There isn't any kind of diaspora
after 2,000 years. There's just a religion, a religious life style/
culture and a failed effort at endogamy which at one time may have
passed through what is now Palestine. Religion and culture are learned
behavior. They are gained and lost with each generation. They have no
dna. Sammy Davis Jr. was Jewish but no Israelite. Even at the time of
the two hundred year out-migration of some Jews to Italy, etc., their
dna was already a mixture of various strains going back more thousands
of years and impossible to connect to Palestine.
coaste...@yahoo.com
> On Mar 25, 12:05 am, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> > There is no Israelite DNA. It perished two thousand years ago.
>
> lol
> "DNA will survive in the environment for less than one million years
> and slowly degrades into short fragments in solution. Claims for older
> DNA have been made, most notably a report of the isolation of a viable
> bacterium from a salt crystal 250 million years old, but these claims
>
> >Because
> > we'd then shift to the question of Israelites moving out of Israel
> > voluntarily as Behar suggests.
>
> Behar suggested no such thing, of course.
Only if the huckstering article in question misrepresents him. He is
said to describe out-migration from Palestine to Italy over two
centuries rather than an expulsion by the Roman legions. Look again,
Deb.
drahcir
wrote:
> On Mar 25, 1:13 am, dsharavi <dshara...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Sharavi said:
> > > > Reading the article, or paper -- really, it's an advert -- is also
> > > > apparently beyond H. The advert states clearly that "The main ethnic
> > > > element of Ashkenazim (German and Eastern European Jews), Sephardim
> > > > (Spanish and Portuguese Jews), Mizrakhim (Middle Eastern Jews),
> > > > Juhurim (Mountain Jews of the Caucasus), Italqim (Italian Jews), and
> > > > most other modern Jewish populations of the world is Israelite."
>
> Strange language this: "the main ethnic element......is Israelite."
> These guys are selling dna analysis. Isn't ethnicity cultural?
Here's the definition of "ethnic" from American Heritage:
1. Of, relating to, or characteristic of a sizable group of
people sharing a common and distinctive racial, national, religious,
linguistic, or cultural heritage.
So you see, ethnicity CAN be cultural, in which case DNA would be only
tangentially relevant, but it CAN also be racial, in which case DNA
would be directly relevant. Do you understand now, or do you need
further assistance?
Does
> one's dna have any direct nexus with learning a culture from
> childhood?
>
Perhaps you should learn to use a dictionary before asking more silly
questions.
>
> > On Mar 24, 11:59 pm, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > And that's false. They're selling blood tests.
>
> > Reading the article (as H called it) apparently remains beyond H. In
> > fact, H directed another poster's attention to the contents of that
> > same article as a matter of proof. And, in fact, Genelex isn't selling
> > blood tests. They are offering DNA analyses.
>
> > >Israelite DNA doesn't exist.
>
> > Funny H should bring that up now, after the article H cited referred
> > to it without question, which H accepted.
>
> Yes it did but no I didn't. I cited it without incantation. I was
> happy to see the term "Israelite" there. As to DNA it's used by
> hucksters like you with something to sell. You inevitably rise to such
> tempting bait. Not that you give a damn about dna. You have a *purely
> political stake* in calling DNA of Middle Eastern origin "Israelite".
> It's thought to support Zionist myth and is used in self-justifying
> hasbara.
Here's our H trying to turn the tables on the fact that the simple,
direct explanation, requiring no politics whatsoever, of how a people
living in Europe for 2000 years has as a primary constituent of its
DNA, elements from the middle east. Specifically, these elements are
shared not by most arabs, but only by middle eastern and other jews,
most kurds, and some palestinian arabs. Male and at least some female
members of this people emigrated from the middle east 2000 years ago,
and these people were Jewish at the time of emigration. The simple
logic, proponents of which include many of the very geneticists that
did the studies, is that these people were Israelites. H, because he
doesn't like that for purely political reason, stands there, foot
tapping, arms crossed, and says "NO!" Yet, this maggot has NEVER even
ONCE proposed an alternative explanation of how so much middle eastern
DNA got into a European poplulation - NEVER. He just stands there,
lips pursed, and says he doesn't accept. Who the fuck cares if
something the likes of you accepts?
coaste...@yahoo.com
> On Mar 23, 3:25 pm, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 22, 4:54 pm, drahcir <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 22, 5:16 pm, "tdny" <t...@live.com> wrote:
>
> > > > http://www.healthanddna.com/ancestry-dna-testing/jewish-dna.html
>
> > > Is there a point lurking anywhere in these posts, bigot?
>
> > How about this?
>
> > "Ashkenazi Jews are a group with mainly central and eastern European
> > ancestry."
Clip ad hom
Will there be no response?
drahcir
wrote:
> On Mar 23, 6:01 pm, drahcir <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 23, 3:25 pm, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 22, 4:54 pm, drahcir <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Mar 22, 5:16 pm, "tdny" <t...@live.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > http://www.healthanddna.com/ancestry-dna-testing/jewish-dna.html
>
> > > > Is there a point lurking anywhere in these posts, bigot?
>
> > > How about this?
>
> > > "Ashkenazi Jews are a group with mainly central and eastern European
> > > ancestry."
>
> Clip ad hom
>
> Will there be no response?
I guess you've spent the past 24 or so hours trying to figure out how
to extricate yourself from this, from a few posts up:
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.israel/msg/70e59d04b030ede3
and "will there be no response", posted as a second reply to me in a
silly effort to divert the thread, was all you could come up with. Of
course, you know full well that there was a response, contained in the
linked-to post above, and that that response showed you to be a
despicable and infantile liar. "Will there be no response" is just you
pretending you are unaware of that demonstration, because you couldn't
think of anything else to do. I'd advise you to go back to the drawing
board, but it's really pointless. You'll flee the linked-to post above
- you have no other choice - there will be no response.
coaste...@yahoo.com
> On Mar 25, 2:22 pm, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 25, 1:13 am, dsharavi <dshara...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Sharavi said:
> > > > > Reading the article, or paper -- really, it's an advert -- is also
> > > > > apparently beyond H. The advert states clearly that "The main ethnic
> > > > > element of Ashkenazim (German and Eastern European Jews), Sephardim
> > > > > (Spanish and Portuguese Jews), Mizrakhim (Middle Eastern Jews),
> > > > > Juhurim (Mountain Jews of the Caucasus), Italqim (Italian Jews), and
> > > > > most other modern Jewish populations of the world is Israelite."
>
> > Strange language this: "the main ethnic element......is Israelite."
> > These guys are selling dna analysis. Isn't ethnicity cultural?
>
> Here's the definition of "ethnic" from American Heritage:
>
> 1. Of, relating to, or characteristic of a sizable group of
> people sharing a common and distinctive racial, national, religious,
> linguistic, or cultural heritage.
That all makes sense except racial. Are all Black Sub-Saharan Africans
of the same ethnicity?
> So you see, ethnicity CAN be cultural, in which case DNA would be only
> tangentially relevant,
Ethnicity IS cultural.
but it CAN also be racial,
Can? That's a bit weak of you. When is ethnicity racial? Be careful
now, this is a trick question.
Particular racial details may appear to co-exist with certain
ethnicities, but they never determine them. An ethnic Finn with all
the cultural bells and whistles can have heavily African dna. He's
assimilated. He's definitely a Finn. But having heavily African dna
didn't *make* him an ethnic Finn. Assimilation did.
in which case DNA
> would be directly relevant
Clip ad hom.
No, you conflate race with ethnicity. They are separate categories.
One is biological, the other is experiential.
> Does> one's dna have any direct nexus with learning a culture from
> > childhood?
>
> Perhaps you should learn to use a dictionary before asking more silly
> questions.
Gutless, Ratner. You won't face a perfectly valid question. You try to
escape this way over and over.
>
Clip sharavi ad hom
>
> > > >Israelite DNA doesn't exist.
>
> > > Funny H should bring that up now, after the article H cited referred
> > > to it without question, which H accepted.
>
> > Yes it did but no I didn't. I cited it without incantation. I was
> > happy to see the term "Israelite" there. As to DNA it's used by
> > hucksters like you with something to sell. You inevitably rise to such
> > tempting bait. Not that you give a damn about dna. You have a *purely
> > political stake* in calling DNA of Middle Eastern origin "Israelite".
> > It's thought to support Zionist myth and is used in self-justifying
> > hasbara.
>
> Here's our H trying to turn the tables on the fact that the simple,
> direct explanation, requiring no politics whatsoever, of how a people
> living in Europe for 2000 years has as a primary constituent of its
> DNA, elements from the middle east.
No quarter, Ratner. This is politics on a very important subject. So
long as your corrupt our Congress and abuse the relationship I'll give
you nothing you can't prove. Primary constituent? Weasle words. And
you still have a problem with conflating Middle East with "Israelite".
Specifically, these elements are
> shared not by most arabs, but only by middle eastern and other jews,
> most kurds, and some palestinian arabs.
I like the last comment as the Palestinians are the most likely
descendants of the Israelites of Christ's time.
Perhaps you can explain why the dna in question is designated Middle
Eastern despite the fact that it is "not shared by most Arabs"? 49.99%
is not most. What's going on, Ratner? And also tell us about the
Kurdish connection. Were they not converted like others in the
medieval period, e.g., the Khazars and Armenians?. How do you rule out
that "Jewish" Kurds ended up in Central and Eastern Europe?
Male and at least some female
> members of this people emigrated from the middle east 2000 years ago,
> and these people were Jewish at the time of emigration.
Get real. This is politics. We're doing this ONLY because you think
genetics proves that today's Jews own Palestine. I say that's
ridiculous on multiple levels. I use arguments from people who
disagree with you, such as Shlomo Sand and the lady lawyer who caused
you so much trouble on the genetics front. I also use political
common sense. You pretend to rely on geneticists despite the fact that
you show no sign of actually understanding them. And what you think
you understand you still twist into contradictions. You never address
the significance of Jewish missionary work in the Middle Ages which
turned non-Israelites into Jews. You can't quantify Israelite dna in
European Jews. You don't separate non-Israelite dna from the rest. You
don't address the absurdity of trying to twist these giant ambiguities
into justification for dispossession of the Palestinian people. You
tell Zev essentially that "we've gotta have the dna claim, otherwise
we've got only the Bible." Your basic idea that some Jews MAY have
some dna which MAY, though already very mixed, have passed through
Palestine and therefore that you European Jews own Palestine 2,000
years later is transparent bullshit and must be embarrassing the
scientists. You have yet to find a single geneticist who claims that
his research supports Israel's political claims 2,000 years later even
though there was no Roman expulsion of the Jews.
H Continues: Others who were Jewish by religion but were not Israelite
went to Europe over many hundreds of years. As you know Professor Sand
believes most of them were converts, not of actual Israelite "blood."
Face it, *blood* doesn't contribute to your campaign to finish off the
Palestinian people in this death by a thousand cuts effort any more
than it did for Hitler in his campaign to kill off the Jews.
Sure, some people from what is today's Israel apparently moved to
Europe. I gather there is some historical evidence of Palestinian Jews
in Italy and sprinkled elsewhere around the Med something like 1900
years ago. Perhaps there were others. But what has happened to them
genetically since then, Richard? Though there may be a few traces of
"real Israelites" among their descendants, so what? They can't
represent the bulk of the dna of those who had became the Jews of
Europe by the 1940s.
The simple
> logic, proponents of which include many of the very geneticists that
> did the studies, is that these people were Israelites.
Geneticists functioning as politicians?
Males and some females moved from Palestine to Europe 2000 years ago.
Therefore European Jews own Palestine?
How many of them? It couldn't have been too many weren't driven out of
Palestine. How do you make your political point? Indeed, what is your
political point? You haven't even dared to articulate it. You've never
actually supported this crazy argument on Jewish rights to Palestine
by citations to the scientists. You just do a little pseudo gargling
about it on your own. If they believe this crazy nonsense one would
expect them to say so, yet I've seen no such quotes from these
disciplined men and women. Come on, I can be convinced if they are and
really say so and also make the argument directly. When's that going
to happen?
H, because he
> doesn't like that for purely political reason, stands there, foot
> tapping, arms crossed, and says "NO!"
I've given you lots of reasons for saying "no". Including the fact
that if your argument were true it would still be irrelevant.
Yet, this (clip ad hom) has NEVER even
> ONCE proposed an alternative explanation of how so much middle eastern
> DNA got into a European poplulation - NEVER.
I'm not sure yet that it's really so much proportionately. That's
another of your failures. But, the answer is that some people from the
Middle East moved to Europe, obviously. That's your Achille's heel.
Humankind has been constantly ebbing and flowing over the face of the
earth. Humans have flowed over and past Palestine for eons. In fact,
humans arose in Africa, IIRC. A glance at the map shows that to get to
Europe, many of them must have gone through the Middle East. How does
that connect with today's Israel? They and other generations passed
through. So what? That applies to two thousand years ago just as well.
Constantly shifting populations, in the long term sense always on the
move. Places remain but the people don't and that transient past can't
be utilized to benefit present irredentist politics. It's a conceit of
yours, Ratner, which seems to be largely ethnic.
He just stands there,
> lips pursed, and says he doesn't accept. Who the fuck cares if
> something the likes of you accepts?
You're a poor politician and a worse debater.
> > But it can't be supported scientifically. You'd be far better off in
> > the effort to huckster Jewish rights to Palestine if you based them
> > exclusively on the Bible and the Holocaust.
>
> > There is no "Israelite" diaspora. There isn't any kind of diaspora
> > after 2,000 years. There's just a religion, a religious life style/
> > culture and a failed effort at endogamy which once upon a time may have
dsharavi
> > wrote:
> > >They're selling blood tests.
> On Mar 25, 1:13 am, dsharavi <dshara...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Reading the article (as H called it) apparently remains beyond H. In
> > fact, H directed another poster's attention to the contents of that
> > same article as a matter of proof. And, in fact, Genelex isn't selling
> > blood tests. They are offering DNA analyses.
> > >Israelite DNA doesn't exist.
> > Funny H should bring that up now, after the article H cited referred
> > to it without question, which H accepted.
On Mar 25, 11:22 am, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> Yes it did but no I didn't. I cited it without incantation.
[snip more Watsonian backpedal backpedal argumentum ad hominem
backpedal]
> There is no "Israelite" diaspora.
The Jewish diaspora is the English term used to describe the Galut or
'exile' that encompassed several forced expulsions of Israelites from
what is now the states of Israel, Jordan and parts of Lebanon.
The diaspora is commonly accepted to have begun with the 8th-6th
century BCE conquests of the ancient Jewish kingdoms of Israel and
Judah, destruction of the First Temple, and expulsion of the Jewish
population...A number of Middle Eastern Jewish communities were
established then as a result of tolerant policies and remained notable
centers of Torah life and Judaism for centuries to come. The defeat of
the Great Jewish Revolt in the year 70 CE and of Bar Kokhba's revolt
against the Roman Empire in 135 CE notably contributed to the diaspora
as many Jews were scattered after losing control over Judea or were
sold into slavery throughout the empire.
In 722 BCE the Assyrians under Shalmaneser V conquered the (Northern)
Kingdom of Israel, and many Israelites were deported to Khorasan. For
over 2,700 years since, Persian Jews have lived in the territories of
today's Iran.
After the overthrow of the kingdom of Judah in 588 BCE by
Nebuchadnezzar II of Babylon (see Babylonian captivity) and the
deportation of a considerable portion of its inhabitants to
Mesopotamia, the Jews had two principal cultural centers: Babylonia
and the land of Israel.
>There isn't any kind of diaspora after 2,000 years.
The first mention of a diaspora created as a result of exile is found
in Septuagint in the phrase "esē diaspora en pasais basileias tēs gēs"
translated to mean ‘thou shalt be a dispersion in all kingdoms of the
earth’.
The first recorded usage of the word "diaspora" in the English
language was in 1876 referring to refugees of the Irish famine.
One of the largest diasporas of pre-modern times was the African
Diaspora, which began at the beginning of the 16th century. During the
Atlantic Slave Trade, 9.4 to 12 million people from West, West-Central
and South-east Africa survived transportation to arrive in the Western
Hemisphere as slaves.
From the late nineteenth century, and formally from 1910, Japan made
Korea a colony. Millions of Chinese fled to western provinces not
occupied by Japan (i.e., in particular Ssuchuan/Szechwan and Yunnan in
the Southwest and Shensi and Kansu in the Northwest) and to Southeast
Asia.
The largest Asian diaspora outside of Southeast Asia is that of the
Indian diaspora. The overseas Indian community, estimated at over 25
million, is spread across many regions in the world, on every
continent.
Following WWII, the creation of the state of Israel, and a series of
uprisings against colonialist rule, the Middle East nations became
more hostile in relation to their historic Jewish populations
(Sephardim) of nearly 1 million people. Most of them emigrated, with
the majority resettling in Israel, where they became known as Mizrahi
Jews.
After WWII, the Soviet Union and Communist-controlled Poland, Hungary
and Yugoslavia expelled hundreds of thousands of ethnic Germans, most
of whom were descendants of immigrants who had settled in those areas
nearly two centuries before.
The Romani are widely dispersed, with their largest concentrated
populations in Europe. Linguistic and genetic evidence indicates the
Romanies originated on the Indian subcontinent, emigrating from India
towards the northwest no earlier than the 11th century.
>There's just a religion, a religious life style/
> culture and a failed effort at endogamy which at one time may have
> passed through what is now Palestine. Religion and culture are learned
> behavior. They are gained and lost with each generation. They have no
> dna. Sammy Davis Jr. was Jewish but no Israelite. Even at the time of
> the two hundred year out-migration of some Jews to Italy, etc., their
> dna was already a mixture of various strains going back more thousands
> of years and impossible to connect to Palestine.
Keep up the spew, O pillock of ignorance. If nothing else, it's
vaguely amusing.
Deborah
dsharavi
wrote:
> On Mar 25, 1:30 am, dsharavi <dshara...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mar 25, 12:05 am, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > There is no Israelite DNA. It perished two thousand years ago.
>
> > lol
> > "DNA will survive in the environment for less than one million years
> > and slowly degrades into short fragments in solution. Claims for older
> > DNA have been made, most notably a report of the isolation of a viable
> > bacterium from a salt crystal 250 million years old, but these claims
>
> > >Because
> > > we'd then shift to the question of Israelites moving out of Israel
> > > voluntarily as Behar suggests.
>
> > Behar suggested no such thing, of course.
>
> Only if the huckstering article in question misrepresents him.
Au contraire, O pillock of mendacity, it's YOU who are misrepresenting
him. As well as displaying your usual ignorance of history, of course.
Deborah
dsharavi
> > wrote:
> > > Strange language this: "the main ethnic element......is Israelite."
> > > These guys are selling dna analysis. Isn't ethnicity cultural?
>
> > Here's the definition of "ethnic" from American Heritage:
>
> > 1. Of, relating to, or characteristic of a sizable group of
> > people sharing a common and distinctive racial, national, religious,
> > linguistic, or cultural heritage.
>
wrote:
> That all makes sense except racial. Are all Black Sub-Saharan Africans
> of the same ethnicity?
It depends on whether one is characterising them by racial, national,
religious, linguistic, or cultural standards.
> > So you see, ethnicity CAN be cultural, in which case DNA would be only
> > tangentially relevant,
>
> Ethnicity IS cultural.
> but it CAN also be racial,
> Can? That's a bit weak of you.
Then it's also weak of the OED, which defines it as racial as wella s
cultural.
>When is ethnicity racial?
Look it up.
[snip verbose flull]
Deborah
drahcir
wrote:
> On Mar 25, 1:55 pm, drahcir <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mar 25, 2:22 pm, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 25, 1:13 am, dsharavi <dshara...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > Sharavi said:
> > > > > > Reading the article, or paper -- really, it's an advert -- is also
> > > > > > apparently beyond H. The advert states clearly that "The main ethnic
> > > > > > element of Ashkenazim (German and Eastern European Jews), Sephardim
> > > > > > (Spanish and Portuguese Jews), Mizrakhim (Middle Eastern Jews),
> > > > > > Juhurim (Mountain Jews of the Caucasus), Italqim (Italian Jews), and
> > > > > > most other modern Jewish populations of the world is Israelite."
>
> > > Strange language this: "the main ethnic element......is Israelite."
> > > These guys are selling dna analysis. Isn't ethnicity cultural?
>
> > Here's the definition of "ethnic" from American Heritage:
>
> > 1. Of, relating to, or characteristic of a sizable group of
> > people sharing a common and distinctive racial, national, religious,
> > linguistic, or cultural heritage.
>
> That all makes sense except racial. Are all Black Sub-Saharan Africans
> of the same ethnicity?
Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Have you ever heard the term "ethnic
slur"? It's often against a race, not a culture. You're playing a
silly game, H, and it just makes you look, um, silly.
>
> > So you see, ethnicity CAN be cultural, in which case DNA would be only
> > tangentially relevant,
>
> Ethnicity IS cultural.
That's what some antisemitic, alzheimic, worthless codger on usenet
says. American Heritage Dictionary disagrees. We'll just leave it at
that.
>
> but it CAN also be racial,
>
> Can? That's a bit weak of you.
No, you obviously don't understand the definition of "weak" either.
According to American Heritage Dictionary, ethinicity CAN involve
racial, national, religious, linguistic, OR cultural elements. Perhaps
you don't comprehend the definition of "or"?
> When is ethnicity racial? Be careful
> now, this is a trick question.
See above example. If you need more assistance, perhaps you should
contact the editors of the American Heritage Dictionary. You can ask
them your trick question.
>
> Particular racial details may appear to co-exist with certain
> ethnicities, but they never determine them. An ethnic Finn with all
> the cultural bells and whistles can have heavily African dna. He's
> assimilated. He's definitely a Finn. But having heavily African dna
> didn't *make* him an ethnic Finn. Assimilation did.
LOL! No, it didn't. Thanks, H. You obviously have no clue that in
trying desperately to make your point, you come off looking
ridiculous. A black in Finland would NEVER be regarded as ethnically
Finnish by anyone, no matter how assimilated he was. And the funniest
part of this is that he wouldn't be regarded as ethnically Finnish by
YOU, either - you just got yourself befuddled.
>
> in which case DNA
>
> > would be directly relevant
>
> Clip ad hom.
>
> No, you conflate race with ethnicity.
LOL! he snips a point, then replies to it!!
They are separate categories.
> One is biological, the other is experiential.
>
> > Does> one's dna have any direct nexus with learning a culture from
> > > childhood?
>
> > Perhaps you should learn to use a dictionary before asking more silly
> > questions.
>
> Gutless, Ratner. You won't face a perfectly valid question. You try to
> escape this way over and over.
Purely masturbatory, H. I don't need to try to "escape" a weakling
like you. I have fun toying with you, and I like fun.
>
> Clip sharavi ad hom
>
> > > > >Israelite DNA doesn't exist.
>
> > > > Funny H should bring that up now, after the article H cited referred
> > > > to it without question, which H accepted.
>
> > > Yes it did but no I didn't. I cited it without incantation. I was
> > > happy to see the term "Israelite" there. As to DNA it's used by
> > > hucksters like you with something to sell. You inevitably rise to such
> > > tempting bait. Not that you give a damn about dna. You have a *purely
> > > political stake* in calling DNA of Middle Eastern origin "Israelite".
> > > It's thought to support Zionist myth and is used in self-justifying
> > > hasbara.
>
> > Here's our H trying to turn the tables on the fact that the simple,
> > direct explanation, requiring no politics whatsoever, of how a people
> > living in Europe for 2000 years has as a primary constituent of its
> > DNA, elements from the middle east.
>
> No quarter, Ratner.
Sheesh, it's hard to imagine how an asshole like you evolved. Here you
are, making a complete idiot of yourself, and you tell me "no
quarter", as if any if needed. Pitiful.
This is politics on a very important subject. So
> long as your corrupt our Congress and abuse the relationship I'll give
> you nothing you can't prove. Primary constituent? Weasle words. And
> you still have a problem with conflating Middle East with "Israelite".
This ass learned a new word and now, like a little child, uses it all
over the place. In fact it is above misused, but his desire to show
off transcends his comprehension.
I scan below, and the amount of HHWBabble is simply beyond belief. No
one here is going to read your crap. All of your bullshit is designed
to distract from one glaring point - the simple, logical explanation
that is accepted by all non-antisemites is that the way middle eastern
DNA got into jewish populations all over the world, including Europe,
is that Israelites migrated 2000 years ago and wound up in various
places. It's a theory that fits all the data. You don't like that
theory for purely political reasons, yet you have NEVER even ONCE
cited an alternative explanation of how so much middle eastern DNA got
into a European population - NEVER. If you can cite a theory here that
fits all the data and is proposed by someone qualified and peer
reviewed, cite it. I'm not interested in taking the time to deal with
ridiculous crap that you, a proven liar and cretin, come up with - I
need an expert cite that is peer reviewed. If you can't cite, you
lose, Period.
Ugh, that you would spend hours writing the mounds of crap below is
simply astounding
Zulu
wrote:
Have you noticed that, just like did nazis, the zionists insist in
considering "the jews" as a singular "race" coming from a unique
region?.
Such obsession can be observed on specific researches carried out by
jews and Israeli centers. On Google, ashkenazi + genetics gives
806,000 hits!!
No way to make zionazis understand Shlomo Sand despite many historical
evidences confirm his thesis while no historical or archeological
findings support zionist myths like "massive exodus from Israel" and
so on.
Some tips
Shattering a 'national mythology'
By Ofri Ilani
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/966952.html
The Mythic Past: Biblical Archaeology and the Myth of Israel
By Thomas L. Thompson
Relying on archaeological rather than biblical evidence, the author
sketches the ancient economy and society of the people of Palestine.
Rather than the unified "kingdom of Israel" depicted in the Bible, he
paints a picture of a turbulent tribal Palestine, buffeted by drought,
waves of immigrants from the Aegean, and expansionist neighbors.
Contrasting this evidence with biblical narratives, shot through as
they are with elements of the miraculous and the fantastic, Thompson
questions the historicity of such scriptural accounts as the stories
of the kingships of Saul, David, and Solomon and the Babylonian exile.
Thompson finds magnificent poetry in the Bible, brilliant epic
narratives and folktales, and great philosophical and moral writing
that raises important questions about the meaning of life and the name
of God: "it is only as history that the Bible does not make sense." In
rather heavyhanded fashion, Thompson makes a good general point: that
many biblical narratives should not be read literally as history; but
in his total reliance on archaeology, he may overstate his case
somewhat for the ahistoricity of the Bible.
http://books.google.com/books?id=QzOJ9nMlUJcC
The Masada myth: collective memory and mythmaking in Israel by Nachman
Ben-Yehuda
In 73 A.D., legend has it, 960 Jewish rebels under siege in the
ancient desert fortress of Masada committed suicide rather than
surrender to a Roman legion. Recorded in only one historical source,
the story of Masada was obscure for centuries. In The Masada Myth,
Israeli sociologist Nachman Ben-Yehuda tracks the process by which
Masada became an ideological symbol for the State of Israel, the
dramatic subject of movies and miniseries, a shrine venerated by
generations of Zionists and Israeli soldiers, and the most profitable
tourist attraction in modern Israel.
Ben-Yehuda describes how, after nearly 1800 years, the long,
complex, and unsubstantiated narrative of Josephus Flavius was edited
and augmented in the twentieth century to form a simple and powerful
myth of heroism. He looks at the ways this new mythical narrative of
Masada was created, promoted, and maintained by pre-state Jewish
underground organizations, the Israeli army, archaeological teams,
mass media, youth movements, textbooks, the tourist industry, and the
arts.
http://books.google.com/books?id=YoXUXvBUUjgC
'The Origin of Palestinians and their Genetic Relatedness with other
Mediterranean Populations',
Antonio Arnaiz-Villena, Nagah Elaiwa, Carlos Silvera,Ahmed Rostom,
Juan Moscoso, Eduardo Gómez-Casado, Luis Allende, Pilar Varela, and
Jorge Martínez-Laso
ABSTRACT:
The genetic profile of Palestinians has, for the first time, been
studied by using human leukocyte antigen (HLA) gene variability and
haplotypes. The comparison with other Mediterranean populations by
using neighbor-joining dendrograms and correspondence analyses reveal
that Palestinians are genetically very close to Jews and other Middle
East populations, including Turks (Anatolians), Lebanese, Egyptians,
Armenians and Iranians.
Archaeologic and genetic data support that both Jews and Palestinians
came from the ancient Canaanites, who extensively mixed with
Egyptians, Mesopotamian and Anatolian peoples in ancient times. Thus,
Palestinian-Jewish rivalry is based in cultural and religious, but not
in genetic, differences.
The relatively close relatedness of both Jews and Palestinians to
western Mediterranean populations reflects the continuous circum-
Mediterranean cultural and gene flow that have occurred in prehistoric
and historic times.
This flow overtly contradicts the demic diffusion model of western
Mediterranean populations substitution by agriculturalists coming from
the Middle East in the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition.
Human Immunology 62, 889-900 (2001). American Society for
Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics, 2001. Published by Elsevier
Science Inc.
drahcir
so very avoidable. Let's review. You butted into a discussion between
that silly bigot tdny and me. I asked her about one of her myriad,
useless links
"Is there a point lurking anywhere in these posts, bigot?"
and you wanted to come like the knight in shining armor that you see
yourself as to her rescue. You proudly trumpeted:
"How about this?
"Ashkenazi Jews are a group with mainly central and eastern European
ancestry." "
Now at this stage you were in mortal danger, a little boy in the
lion's den, but I gave you an escape. Instead of stomping on you, I
very kindly replied
"If your intent is to prove yourself an ignoramus, I'd say you
succeeded. "
You could have simply slunk away, but there's something in you that
compels you to beg to be mortified. So instead of leaving it at that,
you replied:
"Take it up with the author."
And so I did. What did I find? You got your just deserts in my reply:
"You are so utterly pitiful. The VERY NEXT SENTENCE from that which
you
provided:
"Ultimately, though, they can be traced back to Jews who migrated from
Israel to Italy in the first and second centuries,"
Folks, that is THE VERY NEXT SENTENCE. Is there anyone here who
seriously doubts that HHW, aka iconoclast, aka Cazador is so far gone
that he thinks he can get away with such an infantile attempt at
deception? I have to say, H, that just when I think you can sink no
lower, you somehow manage to. Soooo pitiful.... "
***********
You're now dead in that subthread - you'll flee as sure as the sun
will rise tomorrow morning. And you could have avoided this so easily
by simply keeping your silly mouth shut. Before leaving, I'd like to
revisit another post in this thread. It's here:
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.israel/msg/f46647b4f9f2fc6d
I was amazed to read your request for me to post one of the funniest
episodes with you in our history - the Tony Judt debacle. Did you feel
like a big man when you made your two-word request, "Post it"? Did
your chest get big? Did you strut proudly around the room after
pushing "Send"? Tell me, was it that your alzheimic "brain" had
forgotten all about the incident, or rather that your ego just got in
the way of your better judgment again? Needless to say, the linked-to
post is another, the second in this thread alone, from which you'll
flee. Please, at least for the next few months, save yourself
embarrassment and don't deny fleeing threads.
tdny
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1154631.html
British scientists have succeeded in proving the Lemba
tribe of Zimbabwe and South Africa descended from
Jewish ancestors, according to a report by the BBC.
According to the report, the scientists conducted DNA tests
on a large sample of the Lemba people, which confirmed
Semitic origins dating back more than two millennia.
The BBC says that the 80,000 Lemba tribe members abstain from eating pork,
wear yarmulke-like skull caps, conduct ritual animal slaughter, and even put
a Star of David on their gravestones.
The report says the tribe has an oral tradition that links them to the
ancient Jews.
They also circumcise their male children,
which is not a common practice in Zimbabwe,
but is one of the basic principles of the Jewish faith.
Members of the priestly clan of the Lemba even have a genetic element also
found among the Jewish priestly line - known as Cohen.
"This was amazing," Professor Tudor Parfitt from the University of London
told the BBC. "It looks as if the Jewish priesthood continued in the West by
people called Cohen, and in same way it was continued by the priestly clan
of the Lemba," he added.
"They have a common ancestor who geneticists say lived about 3,000 years ago
somewhere in north Arabia, which is the time of Moses and Aaron when the
Jewish priesthood started," Parfitt told the BBC.
In addition, the report says, the Lemba have a sacred prayer language that
combines Hebrew and Arabic, which indicates their roots were in Israel and
Yemen.
"We have been a very secretive people, because we believe we are a special
people," religious Lemba singer Fungisai Zvakavapano-Mashavave told the BBC.
The tribe even uses a religious artifact they say connects them to their
Jewish ancestry - a replica of the Biblical Ark known as the ngoma lungundu,
meaning "the drum that thunders," which they say was made by Moses.
The tribe's oral tradition says that centuries ago a small group of men
began a long journey carrying the ngoma lungundu from Yemen to southern
Africa.
The Ark went missing during the 1970s and was eventually rediscovered in
Harare in 2007 by Professor Parfitt.
"Many people say that the story is far-fetched, but the oral traditions of
the Lemba have been backed up by science," Parfitt said.
Despite their "Jewish roots," many of the tribe are now Christian or Muslim,
the report claims. But, says Perez Hamandishe, a pastor and member of
parliament, "Christianity is my religion, and Judaism is my culture."
tdny
Have you ever wondered if you have Jewish or 10-Israel Ancestry?
Many people from non-Jewish families ask themselves, "Am I Jewish?",
"Am I Hebrew?", or
"Were my ancestors of the Lost 10 Tribes of Israel?"
Believe it or not, you can actually have your DNA tested
by FamilyTreeDNA (a simple cheek swab) to help confirm
if you have Israelite ancestors.
tdny
Family Tree DNA is the pioneer and the world's
largest DNA testing company in the new field
of genetic genealogy.
If you are looking for that long-lost relative or ancestor,
or if you feel that some day, someone may use a DNA
repository to look for long-lost relatives, you should
consider doing this simple DNA test.
Your ancestors left clues in your DNA which you can
use to determine your deep ancestral origins and to
link you with others in recent time.
We can compare your results with our database -
the largest of its kind in the world -
and tell you whether those clues indicate
possible Jewish ancestry and whether you
match others who are Jewish.
Our Jewish comparative databases are the largest in the world,
containing records for Ashkenazim and Sephardim, as well as
Levites and Cohanim.
drahcir
Well, looks like they got that one right.
> Such obsession can be observed on specific researches carried out by
> jews and Israeli centers.
"by jews and israeli centers" - gosh, are you a dolt trying to sound
erudite? (rhetorical question).
On Google, ashkenazi + genetics gives
> 806,000 hits!!
Amazing discovery, there, einstein!
>
> No way to make zionazis understand Shlomo Sand despite many historical
> evidences confirm his thesis while no historical or archeological
> findings support zionist myths like "massive exodus from Israel" and
> so on.
Sand was panned by nearly every scholarly review. You just THINK you
like Sand because you THINK he may be of use to you.
>
> Some tips
>
> Shattering a 'national mythology'
> By Ofri Ilanihttp://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/966952.html
>
> The Mythic Past: Biblical Archaeology and the Myth of Israel
> By Thomas L. Thompson
>
> Relying on archaeological rather than biblical evidence, the author
> sketches the ancient economy and society of the people of Palestine.
> Rather than the unified "kingdom of Israel" depicted in the Bible, he
> paints a picture of a turbulent tribal Palestine, buffeted by drought,
> waves of immigrants from the Aegean, and expansionist neighbors.
> Contrasting this evidence with biblical narratives, shot through as
> they are with elements of the miraculous and the fantastic, Thompson
> questions the historicity of such scriptural accounts as the stories
> of the kingships of Saul, David, and Solomon and the Babylonian exile.
> Thompson finds magnificent poetry in the Bible, brilliant epic
> narratives and folktales, and great philosophical and moral writing
> that raises important questions about the meaning of life and the name
> of God: "it is only as history that the Bible does not make sense." In
> rather heavyhanded fashion, Thompson makes a good general point: that
> many biblical narratives should not be read literally as history; but
> in his total reliance on archaeology, he may overstate his case
> somewhat for the ahistoricity of the Bible.
>
> http://books.google.com/books?id=QzOJ9nMlUJcC
He has his theories, others have theirs. Big deal.
>
> The Masada myth: collective memory and mythmaking in Israel by Nachman
> Ben-Yehuda
He apparently has no support for his cause-celebre. The site of Masada
still remains today, along with the structures the romans built to
attack it.
>
> In 73 A.D., legend has it, 960 Jewish rebels under siege in the
> ancient desert fortress of Masada committed suicide rather than
> surrender to a Roman legion. Recorded in only one historical source,
> the story of Masada was obscure for centuries. In The Masada Myth,
> Israeli sociologist Nachman Ben-Yehuda tracks the process by which
> Masada became an ideological symbol for the State of Israel, the
> dramatic subject of movies and miniseries, a shrine venerated by
> generations of Zionists and Israeli soldiers, and the most profitable
> tourist attraction in modern Israel.
> Ben-Yehuda describes how, after nearly 1800 years, the long,
> complex, and unsubstantiated narrative of Josephus Flavius was edited
> and augmented in the twentieth century to form a simple and powerful
> myth of heroism. He looks at the ways this new mythical narrative of
> Masada was created, promoted, and maintained by pre-state Jewish
> underground organizations, the Israeli army, archaeological teams,
> mass media, youth movements, textbooks, the tourist industry, and the
> arts.
>
> http://books.google.com/books?id=YoXUXvBUUjgC
>
> 'The Origin of Palestinians and their Genetic Relatedness with other
> Mediterranean Populations',
This one was the funniest! From the same page:
"....but found the struggle with the Philistines
(Palestinians) more difficult."
OK, so the palestinians are the Phillistines, right? Um, from later on
the page:
"In fact, the Palestinians are nowadays thought to come
from the Egyptian garrisons that were abandoned to their
own fate on the Canaan land by 1200 years BC"
Um, please make up your "mind". From slightly later:
"Palestinians held five important city-states when the
fighting with Israel began (after 1200 BC): Gaza, Ash-
elon, Ashod, Ekron and Gath (Figure 1). They won
several battles and the time that they were in control of
all Canaan, west to the Jordan river (about 100 years?)
has been enough to name the land as Palestine until after
World War II [9]. They probably had an iron technology
higher than Israelites, because they did not let Israelites
to work as blacksmiths when they were ruling over Israel-
ites [see Bible starting in Samuel 13 and 19; 5,7]."
This is from a SCHOLARLY PAPER Last quote:
"Palestinians are close to Egyptians, Lebanese, Iranians,
Cretans, Macedonians and Sardinians, and also to
Algerians, Spaniards, French, Italians and Basques
(Table 3, Figures 4, 5, and 6). "
That sentence begins a section. What fourth grader wrote that?
This paper is a riot. One wonders who slept with whom to get it
published. A 2 minute google yields the fact that this article was
retracted by ASHI:
"Regrettably it has come to our attention that an article in a recent
issue of Human Immunology included certain statements that the
American
Society of Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics (ASHI, the owner of
the
journal), the editor-in-chief, and we as Publisher found were entirely
inappropriate for articles published in this journal. Together ASHI,
the
editor and we made the decision to withdraw the article as it appears
in
that issue of the journal . All electronic versions of the article are
no
longer available, therefore, and we have informed Current Contents of
these actions. We would like to advise you to either ignore the
article in
question (including the mention of the title in the Contents listing
for
this issue) or preferably, to physically remove the relevent pages.
Elsevier Science aims for the highest standards in scientific
publishing
and we deeply regret any upset that has been caused by the original
publication of this article and its subsequent withdrawal ".
Thanks for the laughs, asshole.
someone-who-knows
Zulu <zu...@volcanomail.com> wrote:
> Have you noticed that, just like did nazis, the zionists insist in
> considering "the jews" as a singular "race" coming from a unique
> region?.
This is rather silly. Everyone, no matter what his/her
origin or race is, can convert to Judaism.
> On Google, ashkenazi + genetics gives 806,000 hits!!
This seems to be Google's ridiculously inaccurate initial
estimate. Actually scrolling through the search results
will provide a far lower number.
Look for "French collaborators", quite a few hits! :)
Rt. Hon. Denis Stuart-Fox
"someone-who-knows" <someone-...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:hoj5p0$oma$1...@pcls6.std.com...
Good God. What an idiot you are.
>
The Revd
<someone-who-k...@nospam.com> wrote:
>In article <157bec26-a9e8-4039...@q16g2000yqq.googlegroups.com>,
>Zulu <zu...@volcanomail.com> wrote:
>
>> Have you noticed that, just like did nazis, the zionists insist in
>> considering "the jews" as a singular "race" coming from a unique
>> region?.
>
>This is rather silly. Everyone, no matter what his/her
>origin or race is, can convert to Judaism.
Yes, but jewdism is just another bogus religion. Nobody can covert to
being jewish, i.e belonging to the jew race.
The Peeler
Nothing as bogus as a sick, subnormal, degenerate psychopathic swine like
you, The Retd! <G>
--
--
Retarded, subnormal and extremely proud of it: our resident psychopath, The
Retd!
Toad Hall
"The Peeler" <peeli...@invalid.admin> wrote in message
news:4bad3ee9$1...@news.x-privat.org...
> On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 19:06:48 -0400, The Retd wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 20:34:40 +0000 (UTC), someone-who-knows-jack-shit
>> <someone-who-k...@nospam.com> wrote:
>>
>>>In article
>>><157bec26-a9e8-4039...@q16g2000yqq.googlegroups.com>,
>>>Zulu <zu...@volcanomail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Have you noticed that, just like did nazis, the zionists insist in
>>>> considering "the jews" as a singular "race" coming from a unique
>>>> region?.
>>>
>>>This is rather silly. Everyone, no matter what his/her
>>>origin or race is, can convert to Judaism.
>>
>> Yes, but jewdism is just another bogus religion. Nobody can covert to
>> being jewish, i.e belonging to the jew race.
>
> Nothing as bogus as a sick, subnormal, degenerate psychopathic swine like
> you, The Retd! <G>
I can think of one or two ethnic groups - Jews and Griks.
The Peeler
Can you, dumb troll? That's really not much you can think of, troll! But I
guess it's quite an achievement for an idiot like you! LOL
coaste...@yahoo.com
> On Mar 26, 1:05 am, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 25, 1:55 pm, drahcir <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 25, 2:22 pm, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > On Mar 25, 1:13 am, dsharavi <dshara...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Sharavi said:
> > > > > > > Reading the article, or paper -- really, it's an advert -- is also
> > > > > > > apparently beyond H. The advert states clearly that "The main ethnic
> > > > > > > element of Ashkenazim (German and Eastern European Jews), Sephardim
> > > > > > > (Spanish and Portuguese Jews), Mizrakhim (Middle Eastern Jews),
> > > > > > > Juhurim (Mountain Jews of the Caucasus), Italqim (Italian Jews), and
> > > > > > > most other modern Jewish populations of the world is Israelite."
>
> > > > Strange language this: "the main ethnic element......is Israelite."
> > > > These guys are selling dna analysis. Isn't ethnicity cultural?
>
> > > Here's the definition of "ethnic" from American Heritage:
>
> > > 1. Of, relating to, or characteristic of a sizable group of
> > > people sharing a common and distinctive racial, national, religious,
> > > linguistic, or cultural heritage.
>
> > That all makes sense except racial. Are all Black Sub-Saharan Africans
> > of the same ethnicity?
>
> Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
When is it "yes," and when is it "no"? You're taking the position,
Ratner, answer the queston.
Have you ever heard the term "ethnic
> slur"?
Of course, and we've both also heard the term "racial slur". The issue
immediately before us is your conflation of the two.
It's often against a race, not a culture.
But there are two terms. And you can't say that "they" are
interchangeable.
You're playing a
> silly game, H, and it just makes you look, um, silly.
Rather, Ratner, you think you are playing a game but you don't
understand the rules or the logic involved.
>
>
>
> > > So you see, ethnicity CAN be cultural,
HAHA! Give us a situation in which ethnicity is NOT cultural. This is
NOT a trick question so a reasonable defense of your womanhood
requires the courage of an honest answer. And if you do attempt it,
then tell us whether Talmud learning is transmitted from generation to
generation via dna?
in which case DNA would be only
> > > tangentially relevant,
>
> > Ethnicity IS cultural.
>
> That's what some antisemitic, alzheimic, worthless codger on usenet
> says. American Heritage Dictionary disagrees. We'll just leave it at
> that.
>
No we won't. You're in a corner, Ratner, and you're easy pickings.
You're going to take some more bruising before I let you out----or
up.
>
> > but it CAN also be racial,
Give us an example of ethnicity being racial but not cultural.
>
> > Can? That's a bit weak of you.
>
> No, you obviously don't understand the definition of "weak" either.
Sure I do. You embody the definition in just about every imaginable
way. Must I go into it?
> According to American Heritage Dictionary, ethinicity CAN involve
> racial, national, religious, linguistic, OR cultural elements. Perhaps
> you don't comprehend the definition of "or"?
All too well. Capitalizing it was not wise. Apparently the AHD editors
feel that linguistic, religious and national elements are NOT
cultural?
> > When is ethnicity racial? Be careful
> > now, this is a trick question.
>
> See above example.
No, no, in the "above" you do not answer the question and if you can't
do it your entire "ethnicity can be racial" superstructure collapses.
If you need more assistance, perhaps you should
> contact the editors of the American Heritage Dictionary. You can ask
> them your trick question.
> > Particular racial details may appear to co-exist with certain
> > ethnicities, but they never determine them. An ethnic Finn with all
> > the cultural bells and whistles can have heavily African dna. He's
> > assimilated. He's definitely a Finn. But having heavily African dna
> > didn't *make* him an ethnic Finn. Assimilation did.
>
> LOL!
It really does get more and more amusing as you struggle with this
particular hasbara mission. You're determined to have it both ways.
Clip ad hom
A black in Finland would NEVER be regarded as ethnically
> Finnish by anyone, no matter how assimilated he was.
Not by ANYONE you say!? Not by an ethnologist according to the
standards of the profession? How he is 'regarded' by racists such as
you is not germane. You might as well have said that African Americans
aren't Americans though they may have lived here for four hundred
years. In fact given our melting pot heritage you might as well have
said that there are no Americans (except Indians) and there is no such
thing as assimilation.
And the funniest
> part of this is that he wouldn't be regarded as ethnically Finnish by
> YOU, either - you just got yourself befuddled.
Nonsense. You can't see how your personal lack of intellectual
discipline contributes to your culture's ancient intolerance of others
which today we call racism.
> > in which case DNA
>
> > > would be directly relevant
>
> > Clip ad hom.
>
> > No, you conflate race with ethnicity.
>
> LOL! he snips a point, then replies to it!!
>
> They are separate categories.
>
> > One is biological, the other is experiential.
>
> > > Does> one's dna have any direct nexus with learning a culture from
> > > > childhood?
>
> > > Perhaps you should learn to use a dictionary before asking more silly
> > > questions.
>
> > Gutless, Ratner. You won't face a perfectly valid question. You try to
> > escape this way over and over.
>
> Purely masturbatory, H. I don't need to try to "escape" a weakling
> like you. I have fun toying with you, and I like fun.
Yeah, we can all see how much fun you're having.
> > Clip sharavi ad hom
>
> > > > > >Israelite DNA doesn't exist.
>
> > > > > Funny H should bring that up now, after the article H cited referred
> > > > > to it without question, which H accepted.
>
> > > > Yes it did but no I didn't. I cited it without incantation. I was
> > > > happy to see the term "Israelite" there. As to DNA it's used by
> > > > hucksters like you with something to sell. You inevitably rise to such
> > > > tempting bait. Not that you give a damn about dna. You have a *purely
> > > > political stake* in calling DNA of Middle Eastern origin "Israelite".
> > > > It's thought to support Zionist myth and is used in self-justifying
> > > > hasbara.
>
> > > Here's our H trying to turn the tables on the fact that the simple,
> > > direct explanation, requiring no politics whatsoever, of how a people
> > > living in Europe for 2000 years has as a primary constituent of its
> > > DNA, elements from the middle east.
>
> > No quarter, Ratner.
>
> Sheesh, it's hard to imagine how an asshole like you evolved. Here you
> are, making a complete idiot of yourself, and you tell me "no
> quarter", as if any if needed. Pitiful.
Whistling past the grave yard.
>
> This is politics on a very important subject. So
> > long as your corrupt our Congress and abuse the relationship I'll give
> > you nothing you can't prove. Primary constituent? Weasle words. And
> > you still have a problem with conflating Middle East with "Israelite".
>
> This ass learned a new word and now, like a little child, uses it all
> over the place. In fact it is above misused, but his desire to show
> off transcends his comprehension.
The sentences above are completely meaningless and were meant to be
so..
> I scan below, and the amount of HHWBabble is simply beyond belief. No
> one here is going to read your crap.
I'm currently getting between six hundred to over a thousand reads a
week. That's not overwhelming but it's well worth the effort.
All of your bullshit is designed
> to distract from one glaring point - the simple, logical explanation
> that is accepted by all non-antisemites is that the way middle eastern
> DNA got into jewish populations all over the world, including Europe,
> is that Israelites migrated 2000 years ago and wound up in various
> places.
But obviously not in a Roman gulag. Well, here's progress. It's a red
letter day and with all due modesty I shall take credit for it. At
least you now admit that at best from your point of view Israelites
"migrated" in undetermined numbers to a few places in the Med basin
two thousand years ago. I count that as a major success. You no longer
cling to the Roman expulsion myth concocted by the early Zionists in
the 19th Century. Shlomo Sand did it. The next step would, I suppose,
be to attack as baseless the tattered remnant of the claim which
logically must be that if any "people" called place X home and then
left it voluntarily for hundreds or thousands of years, they can take
it back anytime they like.
I also take credit for the fact that you no longer use the term
"Israelite DNA" interchangeably for Middle East DNA. That too is a
victory which "fits all the data" as you put it.
Now, where's our pie graph, Richard" You use optimistic modifiers for
Middle East DNA in the modern Ashkenazi, but you don't quantify it.
Why not? Certainly you would if it were available and helped you. We
need to get that straight if possible so we can evaluate the logic and
justice of your residual argument.
It's a theory that fits all the data. You don't like that
> theory for purely political reasons, yet you have NEVER even ONCE
> cited an alternative explanation of how so much middle eastern DNA got
> into a European population - NEVER.
In the first place stop whining. So long as we bleed and die to
maintain Israel's strategic position in the Middle East, so long as
you corrupt our Congress to accomplish it, so long as Israel mounts
this vast espionage challenge on American soil and so long as you
bleed us for three billion every year in borrowed money, then you have
no right to whine about me giving you nothing in debate.
As I say, you're modifiers are optimistic: you ask how "so much"
Middle Eastern DNA got into a European population? How much is so
much? Does it vary as to different groups of Jews? Most importantly
how does it compare with the sum of all non-Middle Eastern dna in this
European Jewish population? Let's presume it really isn't a dominant
figure. Where do you go then with your claim to the land of the
Palestinians? Will it at last be just the Bible or will you pursue
another racist approach, viz., that your dna is better than theirs and
you get a handicap.
If you can cite a theory here that
> fits all the data and is proposed by someone qualified and peer
> reviewed, cite it. I'm not interested in taking the time to deal with
> (clip ad hom) that you, a (clip multiple ad homs) come up with - I
> need an expert cite that is peer reviewed. If you can't cite, you
> lose, Period.
Ah, you're gonna run, and I should consider your "needs"? Why?
Because you're such a Mensch, such a sweet and charming Jewish
gentleman? What you need is a decent interval during which to slip
away. But you won't get even that from me.
>
(Clip disingenuous ad hom) At this point Ratner gives up on this post
but the reader is encouraged to read my work to the end.
drahcir
ahem, "debate" with the likes of you, H?
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.israel/msg/c10cee18c6ee1f05
drahcir
wrote:
<snip>
I've decided to reply only to demonstrate even further your
scumminess.
>
> > > > > Strange language this: "the main ethnic element......is Israelite."
> > > > > These guys are selling dna analysis. Isn't ethnicity cultural?
>
> > > > Here's the definition of "ethnic" from American Heritage:
>
> > > > 1. Of, relating to, or characteristic of a sizable group of
> > > > people sharing a common and distinctive racial, national, religious,
> > > > linguistic, or cultural heritage.
>
> > > That all makes sense except racial. Are all Black Sub-Saharan Africans
> > > of the same ethnicity?
>
> > Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
>
> When is it "yes," and when is it "no"? You're taking the position,
> Ratner, answer the queston.
I suggest you take it up with the editors of the American Heritage
Dictionary.
>
> Have you ever heard the term "ethnic
>
> > slur"?
>
> Of course, and we've both also heard the term "racial slur". The issue
> immediately before us is your conflation of the two.
Again with the "conflate". Ethnic slur CAN mean racial slur, according
to the American Heritage Dictionary. It can also apply to non-racially
defined cultures, again according to the definition of "ethnic"
accepted by most everyone except senile oafs like you.
>
> It's often against a race, not a culture.
> But there are two terms. And you can't say that "they" are
> interchangeable.
Yes, I can, because they often are. Princeton University defines
"ethnic slur" as
noun - a slur on someone's race or language
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ethnic+slur
I suggest you give those so and so's at Princeton a call and give them
a piece of you, um, "mind"....
>
> You're playing a
>
> > silly game, H, and it just makes you look, um, silly.
>
> Rather, Ratner, you think you are playing a game but you don't
> understand the rules or the logic involved.
You apparently don't understand the definitions of simple words. Re
your "logic", I refer readers to the "syllogism" debacle:
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.jewish/msg/ddf88ff410f09acc
This should prove beyond any doubt that the confused jumble of semi-
functioning neurons between your ears is about as capable of any
simple logic as I am of doing an iron cross.
>
> > > > So you see, ethnicity CAN be cultural,
>
> HAHA! Give us a situation in which ethnicity is NOT cultural.
Um, when it is racial According to the American Heritage dictionary,
ethnicity CAN be cultural, and it CAN be racial, as evidenced by the
use of the preposition "or" in its definition. Perhaps you don't
comprehend the difference between race and culture. Try the dictionary
- it may help.
This is
> NOT a trick question so a reasonable defense of your womanhood
> requires the courage of an honest answer. And if you do attempt it,
> then tell us whether Talmud learning is transmitted from generation to
> generation via dna?
Poor, desperate H....
>
> in which case DNA would be only> > > tangentially relevant,
>
> > > Ethnicity IS cultural.
>
> > That's what some antisemitic, alzheimic, worthless codger on usenet
> > says. American Heritage Dictionary disagrees. We'll just leave it at
> > that.
>
> No we won't. You're in a corner, Ratner, and you're easy pickings.
Perhaps. But American Heritage Dictionary is in my corner, not yours.
> You're going to take some more bruising before I let you out----or
> up.
BWAHAHAHAHA!!!
>
>
> > > but it CAN also be racial,
>
> Give us an example of ethnicity being racial but not cultural.
>
Have you already forgotten "ethnic slur" from above, you alzheimic
oaf?
>
> > > Can? That's a bit weak of you.
>
> > No, you obviously don't understand the definition of "weak" either.
>
> Sure I do. You embody the definition in just about every imaginable
> way. Must I go into it?
Well, it doesn't say much for you that you've been forced into fleeing
3 threads just this past week with "weak" me, does it? If you'd care
for links, just ask.
>
> > According to American Heritage Dictionary, ethinicity CAN involve
> > racial, national, religious, linguistic, OR cultural elements. Perhaps
> > you don't comprehend the definition of "or"?
>
> All too well. Capitalizing it was not wise. Apparently the AHD editors
> feel that linguistic, religious and national elements are NOT
> cultural?
H, sit down. You're obviously getting into a tizzy. The various
adjectives used by the AHD editors are not synonymous, and that is why
they included them all. A culture can include various languages. A
group speaking the came language can have different cultures or
religions. See, this is yet more proof that simple reasoning is beyond
you.
>
> > > When is ethnicity racial? Be careful
> > > now, this is a trick question.
>
> > See above example.
>
> No, no, in the "above" you do not answer the question and if you can't
> do it your entire "ethnicity can be racial" superstructure collapses.
See above example, you alzheimic imbecile - if you can'f find it,
press Ctrl-F and type in "ethnic slur". Friggin idiot....
>
> If you need more assistance, perhaps you should
>
> > contact the editors of the American Heritage Dictionary. You can ask
> > them your trick question.
> > > Particular racial details may appear to co-exist with certain
> > > ethnicities, but they never determine them. An ethnic Finn with all
> > > the cultural bells and whistles can have heavily African dna. He's
> > > assimilated. He's definitely a Finn. But having heavily African dna
> > > didn't *make* him an ethnic Finn. Assimilation did.
>
> > LOL!
>
> It really does get more and more amusing as you struggle with this
> particular hasbara mission. You're determined to have it both ways
Empty, masturbatory blahblah.
> Clip ad hom
>
> A black in Finland would NEVER be regarded as ethnically
>
> > Finnish by anyone, no matter how assimilated he was.
>
> Not by ANYONE you say!? Not by an ethnologist according to the
> standards of the profession?
Not by ANYONE. PERIOD.
How he is 'regarded' by racists such as
> you is not germane.
LOL! A proven antisemite such as yourself is clearly unable to gauge
who is a racist.
You might as well have said that African Americans
> aren't Americans though they may have lived here for four hundred
> years.
Really, H? So for you, there is such a thing as being "ethnically
American", and it is precisely the same sort of thing as being
ethnically Finnish. I see....
In fact given our melting pot heritage you might as well have
> said that there are no Americans (except Indians) and there is no such
> thing as assimilation.
The above is so completely idiotic, so indicative of you inability to
think rationally, it isn't worth seriously replying to.
>
> And the funniest
>
> > part of this is that he wouldn't be regarded as ethnically Finnish by
> > YOU, either - you just got yourself befuddled.
>
> Nonsense. You can't see how your personal lack of intellectual
> discipline contributes to your culture's ancient intolerance of others
> which today we call racism.
There is no "we". You are a unique idiot. This is just all laughable.
> > > in which case DNA
>
> > > > would be directly relevant
>
> > > Clip ad hom.
>
> > > No, you conflate race with ethnicity.
>
> > LOL! he snips a point, then replies to it!!
>
> > They are separate categories.
>
> > > One is biological, the other is experiential.
>
> > > > Does> one's dna have any direct nexus with learning a culture from
> > > > > childhood?
>
> > > > Perhaps you should learn to use a dictionary before asking more silly
> > > > questions.
>
> > > Gutless, Ratner. You won't face a perfectly valid question. You try to
> > > escape this way over and over.
>
> > Purely masturbatory, H. I don't need to try to "escape" a weakling
> > like you. I have fun toying with you, and I like fun.
>
> Yeah, we can all see how much fun you're having.
You can't. Everyone else can.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Poor idiot.
>
> All of your bullshit is designed
>
> > to distract from one glaring point - the simple, logical explanation
> > that is accepted by all non-antisemites is that the way middle eastern
> > DNA got into jewish populations all over the world, including Europe,
> > is that Israelites migrated 2000 years ago and wound up in various
> > places.
>
> But obviously not in a Roman gulag. Well, here's progress. It's a red
> letter day and with all due modesty I shall take credit for it. At
> least you now admit that at best from your point of view Israelites
> "migrated" in undetermined numbers to a few places in the Med basin
> two thousand years ago. I count that as a major success.
That's because you are senile:
"No historian believes that the romans exiled the jews"
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.jewish/msg/af91659b86105d70
You no longer
> cling to the Roman expulsion myth concocted by the early Zionists in
> the 19th Century. Shlomo Sand did it.
YOU ARE A SENILE OAF.
drahcir
>
> All of your bullshit is designed
>
> > to distract from one glaring point - the simple, logical explanation
> > that is accepted by all non-antisemites is that the way middle eastern
> > DNA got into jewish populations all over the world, including Europe,
> > is that Israelites migrated 2000 years ago and wound up in various
> > places.
>
> But obviously not in a Roman gulag. Well, here's progress. It's a red
> letter day and with all due modesty I shall take credit for it. At
> least you now admit that at best from your point of view Israelites
> "migrated" in undetermined numbers to a few places in the Med basin
> two thousand years ago. I count that as a major success. You no longer
> cling to the Roman expulsion myth concocted by the early Zionists in
> the 19th Century. Shlomo Sand did it. The next step would, I suppose,
> be to attack as baseless the tattered remnant of the claim which
> logically must be that if any "people" called place X home and then
> left it voluntarily for hundreds or thousands of years, they can take
> it back anytime they like.
The departure was hardly "voluntary". If you ever decide to read a
decent book, you'll understand. For now, you, the idiot, scratch your
stupid head and say "DUH, NO EXILE = VOLUNTARY". That's how morons
"think".
>
> I also take credit for the fact that you no longer use the term
> "Israelite DNA" interchangeably for Middle East DNA. That too is a
> victory which "fits all the data" as you put it.
You can take credit as much as for your other bullshit with exile. You
are simply masturbating. I NEVER used "israelite DNA" synonymously
with "Middle Eastern DNA" I ALWAYS maintained that concluding
Israelite from Middle Eastern is a logical inference from history,
culture, and archaeology. You are just so hungry for getting stroked
that, when no one else will do it, you do it yourself by lying.
>
> Now, where's our pie graph, Richard" You use optimistic modifiers for
> Middle East DNA in the modern Ashkenazi, but you don't quantify it.
> Why not? Certainly you would if it were available and helped you. We
> need to get that straight if possible so we can evaluate the logic and
> justice of your residual argument.
You need to cite a study that explains the middle eastern DNA in some
way other than that jews around the world that exhibit it are
descended from Israelites. Until you do, that theory stands. PERIOD.
> It's a theory that fits all the data. You don't like that
>
> > theory for purely political reasons, yet you have NEVER even ONCE
> > cited an alternative explanation of how so much middle eastern DNA got
> > into a European population - NEVER.
>
> In the first place stop whining. So long as we bleed and die to
> maintain Israel's strategic position in the Middle East,
As usual, you try to change the subject when cornered. The DNA issue
is DONE, FINISHED, CONCLUDED, unless you cite at least one peer-
reviewed study that explains how middle eastern DNA got into jews from
all over the world, by some theory other than that they are all
descended from israelites. DO IT OR THE DNA DISCUSSION IS OVER.
so long as
> you corrupt our Congress to accomplish it, so long as Israel mounts
> this vast espionage challenge on American soil and so long as you
> bleed us for three billion every year in borrowed money, then you have
> no right to whine about me giving you nothing in debate. ...
>
> read more »
Cazador
> On Mar 27, 11:31 pm, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> <snip>
Clip Ms. Ratner's breast beating.
> > > > > > Strange language this: "the main ethnic element......is Israelite."
> > > > > > These guys are selling dna analysis. Isn't ethnicity cultural?
>
> > > > > Here's the definition of "ethnic" from American Heritage:
You'd be better off with the OED.
> > > > > 1. Of, relating to, or characteristic of a sizable group of
> > > > > people sharing a common and distinctive racial, national, religious,
> > > > > linguistic, or cultural heritage.
>
> > > > That all makes sense except racial. Are all Black Sub-Saharan Africans
> > > > of the same ethnicity?
>
> > > Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
>
> > When is it "yes," and when is it "no"? You're taking the position,
> > Ratner, answer the queston.
>
> I suggest you take it up with the editors of the American Heritage
> Dictionary.
Of course, you can't describe how the theory, which may or may not
exist and which in any event you do not understand, will work out in
practice.
> > >Have you ever heard the term "ethnic slur"?
> > Of course, and we've both also heard the term "racial slur". The issue
> > immediately before us is your conflation of the two.
> Again with the "conflate". Ethnic slur CAN mean racial slur, according
> to the American Heritage Dictionary.
That's not what your unquoted quote says. How 'bout putting ALL of
what it does say, beginning to end, in quotes? Then when it is
illogical I'll go to AHD and discover how you've introduced your
distortions.
It can also apply to non-racially
> defined cultures, again according to the definition of "ethnic"
> accepted by most everyone (clip ad hom)
I haven't yet gone to the web at all on these issues. Confidence
combined with risk is what makes this fun. But I'll say that race can
not determine a man's culture and in fact what does is circumstance.
I'll further say that there is no nexus between race and culture.
So, accordingly, I'll ask that you name one:
A. non-racially defined culture, and one,
B. racially defined culture.
> > It's often against a race, not a culture.
> > But there are two terms. And you can't say that "they" are
> > interchangeable.
>
> Yes, I can, because they often are. Princeton University defines
> "ethnic slur" as
>
> noun - a slur on someone's race or language
>
> http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ethnic+slur
>
> I suggest you give those so and so's at Princeton a call and give them
> a piece of you, um, "mind"....
No, no. It's not going to be this easy. This was written by an
academic bureaucrat in a one size fits all mode. That won't do This
is a politically correct statement by Princeton, designed for use in
dealing with campus red necks.
> > >You're playing a silly game, H, and it just makes you look, um, silly.
>
> > Rather, Ratner, you think you are playing a game but you don't
> > understand the rules or the logic involved.
>
> You apparently don't understand the definitions of simple words. Re
> your "logic", I refer readers to the "syllogism" debacle:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.jewish/msg/ddf88ff410f09acc
Folks, just read the entire exchange.
(Delete multiple ad homs)
> > > > > So you see, ethnicity CAN be cultural,
>
> > HAHA! Give us a situation in which ethnicity is NOT cultural.
>
> Um, when it is racial
Okay, give us an example of a culture which is determined exclusively
by race.
According to the American Heritage dictionary,
> ethnicity CAN be cultural, and it CAN be racial, as evidenced by the
> use of the preposition "or" in its definition.
Well now, we're fearlessly testing this so called definition, and I
should remind you that you've been asked to give it to us entire and
in its original form.
Perhaps you don't
> comprehend the difference between race and culture. Try the dictionary
> - it may help.
Had you an education, Miss Ratner, you wouldn't be trying to supply
your insufficiency in the social sciences with a dictionary. And
certainly not with any but the OED.
> This is
>
> > NOT a trick question so a reasonable defense of your womanhood
> > requires the courage of an honest answer. And if you do attempt it,
> > then tell us whether Talmud learning is transmitted from generation to
> > generation via dna?
>
> Poor, desperate H....
> > in which case DNA would be only> > > tangentially relevant,
>
> > > > Ethnicity IS cultural.
>
> > > That's what some antisemitic, alzheimic, worthless codger on usenet
> > > says. American Heritage Dictionary disagrees. We'll just leave it at
> > > that.
>
> > No we won't. You're in a corner, Ratner, and you're easy pickings.
>
> Perhaps. But American Heritage Dictionary is in my corner, not yours.
We'll see whether that helps you.
> > You're going to take some more bruising before I let you out----or
> > up.
>
> BWAHAHAHAHA!!!
>
> > > > but it CAN also be racial,
>
> > Give us an example of ethnicity being racial but not cultural.
>
> Have you already forgotten "ethnic slur" from above, you alzheimic
> oaf?
And have you forgotten "racial slur" AND your sense of direction?
Answer the question. Do it directly. Concentrate now, I said racial
but not cultural. I say to you again that there is no such thing as
purely racial ethnicity. Give us an example of an ethnicity consisting
exclusively of racial characteristics or admit that you can not.
> > > > Can? That's a bit weak of you.
>
> > > No, you obviously don't understand the definition of "weak" either.
>
> > Sure I do. You embody the definition in just about every imaginable
> > way. Must I go into it?
> Well, it doesn't say much for you that you've been forced into fleeing
> 3 threads just this past week with "weak" me, does it? If you'd care
> for links, just ask.
Are you sure it isn't sixteen threads? Isn't that what you said last
week? If you give urls to particular posts to which you claim merited
a response but didn't get one, I'll consider them. I'm not going to
read through old threads based on some assertion from you.
> > > According to American Heritage Dictionary, ethinicity CAN involve
> > > racial, national, religious, linguistic, OR cultural elements. Perhaps
> > > you don't comprehend the definition of "or"?
>
> > All too well. Capitalizing these terms was not wise. Apparently the AHD editors
> > feel that linguistic, religious and national elements are NOT
> > cultural?
>
> (Clip ad homs)
The various
> adjectives used by the AHD editors are not synonymous,
What adjectives are non-synonymous? And why are you bringing up non-
synonymous adjectives in the first place? Is there blood in the
water, Ratner? Getting a little nervous about the sharks in these
waters?
and that is why
> they included them all.
Huh? Been talking to those editors? What non-synonymous adjectives?
A culture can include various languages.
Really now? So if one or two in a given culture speak an additional
language, the *culture* includes various languages?
A
> group speaking the came language can have different cultures or
> religions.
(Clip ad hom)
Why do you change the subject from the fundamental difference between
zoology and learned behavior? What happened to race? You've lost your
sense of direction. Remember how important dna is to you. You're now
blabbering away tangentially.
> > > > When is ethnicity racial? Be careful
> > > > now, this is a trick question.
>
> > > See above example.
>
> > No, no, in the "above" you do not answer the question and if you can't
> > do it your entire "ethnicity can be racial" superstructure collapses.
>
>(Clip multiple ad homs)
>
I ask you again, when is ethnicity racial?
> > > If you need more assistance, perhaps you should
> > > contact the editors of the American Heritage Dictionary. You can ask
> > > them your trick question.
> > > > Particular racial details may appear to co-exist with certain
> > > > ethnicities, but they never determine them. They are peripheral. An ethnic Finn with all
> > > > the cultural bells and whistles can have heavily African dna. He's
> > > > assimilated. He's definitely a Finn. But having heavily African dna
> > > > didn't *make* him an ethnic Finn. Assimilation did.
>
> > > LOL!
>
> > It really does get more and more amusing as you struggle with this
> > particular hasbara mission. You're determined to have it both ways
>
> (Clip ad hom)
>
> > Clip ad hom
>
> > A black in Finland would NEVER be regarded as ethnically
>
> > > Finnish by anyone, no matter how assimilated he was.
>
> > Not by ANYONE you say!? Not by an ethnologist according to the
> > standards of the profession?
>
> Not by ANYONE. PERIOD.
But how did the studies of twins separated at birth turn out? Do you
remember them?
> How he is 'regarded' by racists such as you is not germane.
>
> LOL! A (clip ad hom) such as yourself is clearly unable to gauge
> who is a racist.
Are you about to tell us that Jews are of a separate race here in
America and in Europe after living there for 2,000 years? I'll have to
admit that racism is a Zionist specialty. I'm currently awaiting Deb's
expert Zionist definition of antisemitism.
> > You might as well have said that African Americans aren't Americans though they may have lived here for four hundred
> > years.
> Really, H?
If they can't be ethnic Finns, they can't be ethnic Americans. Pretty
simple isn't it?
So for you, there is such a thing as being "ethnically
> American",
Sure.
and it is precisely the same sort of thing as being
> ethnically Finnish. I see....
What you can't see is the inherent arrogance in a Jew denying other
Americans their ethnicity.
> >In fact given our melting pot heritage you might as well have said that there are no Americans (except Indians) and there is no such
> > thing as assimilation.
>
> The above is so completely idiotic, so indicative of you inability to
> think rationally, it isn't worth seriously replying to.
You are trapped by what you said. You can't escape by hedging with the
"precisely the same thing" cop out.
> > And the funniest
>
> > > part of this is that he wouldn't be regarded as ethnically Finnish by
> > > YOU, either - you just got yourself befuddled.
>
> > Nonsense. You can't see how your personal lack of intellectual
> > discipline contributes to your sub-culture's ancient intolerance of others,
> > which today we call racism.
>
> There is no "we". (clip ad homs)
But certainly there is. At one level we consists of Israel Shahak and
HHW.
> > > > in which case DNA
>
> > > > > would be directly relevant
>
> > > > Clip ad hom.
>
> > > > No, you conflate race with ethnicity.
>
> > > LOL! he snips a point, then replies to it!!
The "no" follows "relevant". Pay attention
Again: you conflate race with ethnicity.
> > > > They are separate categories. One is biological, the other is experiential.
>
> > > > > Does> one's dna have any direct nexus with learning a culture from
> > > > > > childhood?
>
> > > > > Perhaps you should learn to use a dictionary before asking more silly
> > > > > questions.
>
> > > > Gutless, Ratner. You won't face a perfectly valid question. You try to
> > > > escape this way over and over.
>
> > > (Clip obscenity) H. I don't need to try to "escape" a (cllip ad hom)
> > > This (clip ad hom) learned a new word and now, like a little child, uses it all
tdny
a probable common ancestry for many of the world's Jews,
but has also made clear that Jews and their Arab neighbors
hail from the same stock.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1157346.html
What does it mean to be a Jew?
Is it solely a religious affiliation?
Is it simply an affinity to an ancient cultural tradition?
Or is it literally bone-deep?
Status as a Jew has historically been determined either
by matrilineal descent or by conversion into the faith.
However, in two millennia of diaspora,
Jewish identity has become far more
multifaceted than the progenitors of the
tribe could ever have imagined.
Today, Jewish identity is defined variously through religious practice,
secular cultural identification, and the controversial notion of Jewish
ethnicity - the idea of Jewish blood.
Understandably, the notion of "Jewish blood" makes a lot of people cringe.
The notion of racial purity was famously paramount to Nazi ideology.
The Nuremberg Laws and other Nazi policies labeled even
non-practicing Jews as such, condemning them to death
solely by virtue of their Jewish ancestry.
Traditional knowledge holds that there was once a distinct nation
of people who all practiced the Jewish religion, a Hebrew people
with a common geographic origin and, in all likelihood, relatively
uniform physical appearance.
But there are those,
like Tel Aviv University professor Shlomo Sand,
who question both the relevance and validity of this notion in modern
discourse.
Sand is the author of a book called
"The Invention of the Jewish People",
and a proponent of the belief that today's Jews
are the descendants of different global populations
who converted to Judaism over the ages, rather than
the offspring of an exiled Hebrew nation.
Sand rejects the traditional narrative of a Roman-instigated diaspora and
views the notion of Jewish ethnicity as a racist one used to perpetuate
a Zionist myth of ownership of the land of Israel.
Jewish identity exists in countless diverse modes.
The most important aspect of Jewish identity to many
religious Jews is their faith and their daily practice,
their attendance at synagogue and the sincerity of their prayer.
There are plenty of Jewish atheists who attend synagogue and
celebrate Jewish holidays on a solely cultural basis, as a way of
engaging with their distinct heritage.
In addition, there are those secular Jews who self-identify
as such due to their belief that Jewish blood runs through
their veins.
Today, nearly two millennia after the destruction of the Second Temple,
people identifying themselves as Jewish hail from nearly every corner of
the globe.
Intermarriage and assimilation were seemingly prevalent in every
outpost of the Jewish diaspora, as evidenced by the vastly divergent
appearances of the world's Jews.
Regarding the Kaifeng Jews of China, the Bnei Menashe of Northern India,
the Ashkenazi Jews of Europe and even the monotheistic Lemba of Zimbabwe,
one may ask: how can it be said that these people share a single ethnicity?
Some say science holds the answer.
DNA studies conducted over the past two decades
have made interesting headway in the scientific analysis
of Jewish genealogy.
A 2000 study analyzing seven geographically distinct Jewish
groups found that six were more related to each other than
to the non-Jewish populations of their respective Diaspora homes.
Research done the following year indicated that Sephardic
and Kurdish Jews are essentially indistinguishable on the
genetic level, while differing slightly from Ashkenazis.
London's Daily Telegraph reported in January that Indian
scientists are seeking a genetic connection between the
Pashtun ethnic group and the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel.
This case is made particularly newsworthy by the fact that
it is largely ethnic Pashtuns who make up the leadership of
Afghanistan's Taliban, an Islamic fundamentalist entity at
potentially violent odds with the Jews.
Perhaps the best-known study of Jewish DNA was
published in 1997 in the science journal Nature.
It found that Cohanim (members of the Jewish priestly class)
from different Jewish populations share a common genetic
marker despite their geographic diversity.
This marker, known as the Cohen Modal Haplotype,
or CMH, is common both in Ashkenazi and Sephardic
populations and indicates a common male ancestor for many Cohanim.
Researchers in 2000 found that members of one clan
of the Lemba tribe of Southern Africa exhibit the CMH
in high frequencies, lending credence to the claim of
some Lemba to historic Jewish origin.
Another study found the CMH to be present among the Bene Israel of India,
whose oral traditions tell of ancestors arriving in India after a shipwreck
in
the 2nd century BCE.
It is important to mention that some of these same studies have
come to surprising conclusions about the relationship of the Jews
with other Middle Eastern populations.
A 2000 study found that Arabs and Jews share
a "relatively recent common ancestor",
while the same study that encompassed
seven distinct Jewish populations also
acknowledged an "extremely close affinity"
of Jews with non-Jewish Middle Eastern populations.
The closest genetic link found in that study was
between the six most-related Jewish groups and
Syrian and Palestinian populations.
DNA research has gone some way towards establishing
a probable common ancestry for many of the world's Jews,
but has also made clear that Jews and their Arab neighbors
hail from the same stock.
Does Jewish ancestry forty generations in the
past really mean anything to the world's far-flung Jews?
Or is it their practice and culture that truly matter?
Is information about distant ancestry truly relevant?
It's up to the Jews - and their distant Arab cousins - to decide.
drahcir
> On Mar 28, 11:43 am, drahcir <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 27, 11:31 pm, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
> > <snip>
>
> Clip Ms. Ratner's breast beating.
>
> > > > > > > Strange language this: "the main ethnic element......is Israelite."
> > > > > > > These guys are selling dna analysis. Isn't ethnicity cultural?
>
> > > > > > Here's the definition of "ethnic" from American Heritage:
>
> You'd be better off with the OED.
>
> > > > > > 1. Of, relating to, or characteristic of a sizable group of
> > > > > > people sharing a common and distinctive racial, national, religious,
> > > > > > linguistic, or cultural heritage.
>
> > > > > That all makes sense except racial. Are all Black Sub-Saharan Africans
> > > > > of the same ethnicity?
>
> > > > Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
>
> > > When is it "yes," and when is it "no"? You're taking the position,
> > > Ratner, answer the queston.
>
> > I suggest you take it up with the editors of the American Heritage
> > Dictionary.
>
> Of course, you can't describe how the theory, which may or may not
> exist and which in any event you do not understand, will work out in
> practice.
HHWBabble. The definition of the word is clear to non-alzheimic
persons.
>
> > > >Have you ever heard the term "ethnic slur"?
> > > Of course, and we've both also heard the term "racial slur". The issue
> > > immediately before us is your conflation of the two.
> > Again with the "conflate". Ethnic slur CAN mean racial slur, according
> > to the American Heritage Dictionary.
>
> That's not what your unquoted quote says.
Who knows what the cretin means by that? In any case, that's EXACTLY
what the AHD says.
How 'bout putting ALL of
> what it does say, beginning to end, in quotes? Then when it is
> illogical I'll go to AHD and discover how you've introduced your
> distortions.
More HHWBabble - he's trying to complicate the very simple situation
where he is at odds with the AHD.
>
> It can also apply to non-racially
>
> > defined cultures, again according to the definition of "ethnic"
> > accepted by most everyone (clip ad hom)
>
> I haven't yet gone to the web at all on these issues. Confidence
> combined with risk is what makes this fun. But I'll say that race can
> not determine a man's culture and in fact what does is circumstance.
> I'll further say that there is no nexus between race and culture.
Irrelevant blahblah.
>
> So, accordingly, I'll ask that you name one:
>
> A. non-racially defined culture, and one,
>
> B. racially defined culture.
If you've got a point to make, make it. You don't get to ask random
questions. You've got the definition of "ethnic". You apparently don't
comprehend it - I suppose that's to be expected.
>
> > > It's often against a race, not a culture.
> > > But there are two terms. And you can't say that "they" are
> > > interchangeable.
>
> > Yes, I can, because they often are. Princeton University defines
> > "ethnic slur" as
>
> > noun - a slur on someone's race or language
>
> >http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ethnic+slur
>
> > I suggest you give those so and so's at Princeton a call and give them
> > a piece of you, um, "mind"....
>
> No, no. It's not going to be this easy. This was written by an
> academic bureaucrat in a one size fits all mode. That won't do This
> is a politically correct statement by Princeton, designed for use in
> dealing with campus red necks.
either that, or you're an idiot. We'll let readers decide which.
>
> > > >You're playing a silly game, H, and it just makes you look, um, silly.
>
> > > Rather, Ratner, you think you are playing a game but you don't
> > > understand the rules or the logic involved.
>
> > You apparently don't understand the definitions of simple words. Re
> > your "logic", I refer readers to the "syllogism" debacle:
>
> >http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.jewish/msg/ddf88ff410f09acc
>
> Folks, just read the entire exchange.
>
> (Delete multiple ad homs)
>
> > > > > > So you see, ethnicity CAN be cultural,
>
> > > HAHA! Give us a situation in which ethnicity is NOT cultural.
>
> > Um, when it is racial
>
> Okay, give us an example of a culture which is determined exclusively
> by race.
Your request does not derive from what I said. Study it, and you'll
agree that you're as capable of simple logic as I am of an iron
cross.
>
> According to the American Heritage dictionary,
>
> > ethnicity CAN be cultural, and it CAN be racial, as evidenced by the
> > use of the preposition "or" in its definition.
>
> Well now, we're fearlessly testing this so called definition, and I
> should remind you that you've been asked to give it to us entire and
> in its original form.
Enough with the "us". If you'd like another definition, you should be
able to find it yourself. When you do, you can post it here.
>
> Perhaps you don't
>
> > comprehend the difference between race and culture. Try the dictionary
> > - it may help.
>
> Had you an education, Miss Ratner, you wouldn't be trying to supply
> your insufficiency in the social sciences with a dictionary.
Again, no logic. I don't need the dictionary - I am using it as
evidence to defeat you. You can't even grasp that simple point. You
are so silly, you misused "supply" - I believe if you consult AHD,
you'll see that the word you wanted is "supplant".
And
> certainly not with any but the OED.
H, you've got nothing except your idiocy. I've got reference works.
It's AHD, Princeton, and me vs. some grandiose, senile, lying,
cowardly codger. Not much of a contest.
>
> > This is
>
> > > NOT a trick question so a reasonable defense of your womanhood
> > > requires the courage of an honest answer. And if you do attempt it,
> > > then tell us whether Talmud learning is transmitted from generation to
> > > generation via dna?
>
> > Poor, desperate H....
> > > in which case DNA would be only> > > tangentially relevant,
>
> > > > > Ethnicity IS cultural.
>
> > > > That's what some antisemitic, alzheimic, worthless codger on usenet
> > > > says. American Heritage Dictionary disagrees. We'll just leave it at
> > > > that.
>
> > > No we won't. You're in a corner, Ratner, and you're easy pickings.
>
> > Perhaps. But American Heritage Dictionary is in my corner, not yours.
>
> We'll see whether that helps you.
>
> > > You're going to take some more bruising before I let you out----or
> > > up.
>
> > BWAHAHAHAHA!!!
>
> > > > > but it CAN also be racial,
>
> > > Give us an example of ethnicity being racial but not cultural.
>
> > Have you already forgotten "ethnic slur" from above, you alzheimic
> > oaf?
>
> And have you forgotten "racial slur" AND your sense of direction?
H, you asked again for an example although you'd been provided one
above. So, whereas my question makes sense, yours doesn't, since I'm
not asking for anything redundantly.
> Answer the question. Do it directly.
Oh, you want me to answer:
And have you forgotten "racial slur" AND your sense of direction?
Ok. No.
Concentrate now, I said racial
> but not cultural. I say to you again that there is no such thing as
> purely racial ethnicity. Give us an example of an ethnicity consisting
> exclusively of racial characteristics or admit that you can not.
An ethnic slur CAN be a racial slur, according to AHD. Thus, according
to AHD, it would be correct to refer to the addressing of a Hutu
tribesman as "nigger" as an ethnic slur. So would it be for referring
to me as "kike". In both situations, the term "racial slur" would
probably be equally appropriate, unless, of course, the speaker had
something particularly against Hutu culture, in which case "racial
slur" would be inappropriate. Do you undetstand now, H, or do you need
more assisatance? By the way, "ethnicity" as you are using it is
defined by AHD as simply "an ethnic group".
>
> > > > > Can? That's a bit weak of you.
>
> > > > No, you obviously don't understand the definition of "weak" either.
>
> > > Sure I do. You embody the definition in just about every imaginable
> > > way. Must I go into it?
> > Well, it doesn't say much for you that you've been forced into fleeing
> > 3 threads just this past week with "weak" me, does it? If you'd care
> > for links, just ask.
>
> Are you sure it isn't sixteen threads? Isn't that what you said last
> week?
No, it isn't. Chalk up one more lie to HHW.
If you give urls to particular posts to which you claim merited
> a response but didn't get one, I'll consider them. I'm not going to
> read through old threads based on some assertion from you.
Don't concern yourself. SOME of them have been posted in another
thread today.
>
> > > > According to American Heritage Dictionary, ethinicity CAN involve
> > > > racial, national, religious, linguistic, OR cultural elements. Perhaps
> > > > you don't comprehend the definition of "or"?
>
> > > All too well. Capitalizing these terms was not wise. Apparently the AHD editors
> > > feel that linguistic, religious and national elements are NOT
> > > cultural?
>
> > (Clip ad homs)
>
> The various
>
> > adjectives used by the AHD editors are not synonymous,
>
> What adjectives are non-synonymous? And why are you bringing up non-
> synonymous adjectives in the first place? Is there blood in the
> water, Ratner? Getting a little nervous about the sharks in these
> waters?
LOL! You have a vivid imagination, H. You've got a lot of explaining
to do in various threads, but you won't - you're fled as sure as the
sun will rise in the morning. If you're a shark, you're an eviscerated
one.
>
> and that is why
>
> > they included them all.
>
> Huh? Been talking to those editors? What non-synonymous adjectives?
If you'd left my paragraph intact instead of blurting out your idiocy,
it would be clear.
>
> A culture can include various languages.
>
> Really now? So if one or two in a given culture speak an additional
> language, the *culture* includes various languages?
Um, no. Your brain is apparently short-circuiting. Who said anything
about "one or two"? Has a simpleton like you ever heard of, say, the
Philippines?
>
> A
>
> > group speaking the came language can have different cultures or
> > religions.
>
> (Clip ad hom)
>
> Why do you change the subject from the fundamental difference between
> zoology and learned behavior? What happened to race? You've lost your
> sense of direction. Remember how important dna is to you. You're now
> blabbering away tangentially.
H, you are one very sick individual. Not only a complete lack of
principle, but, as in the Judt debacle, you are now attempting to
attribute your utter confusion to me. Go sit in a hot tub and bring
the dictionary. When you educate yourself sufficiently as to the
definition of common words, all this will become clear. Good night,
sweet prince.
The Revd
>
>On 26-Mar-2010, The Peeler <peeli...@invalid.admin> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 19:06:48 -0400, The Retd wrote:
>>
>> > Yes, but jewdism is just another bogus religion.
>
>Whatever that is.
>Luckily, it's nothing to do with Judaism [sic].
However you spell it, KKKohen, it;s just another bogus religion.
And gullible cunts like you believe in it!
>> > Nobody can covert to
>> > being jewish, i.e belonging to the jew race.
>
>Since there is no "jewish race" I suppose he's right - then again,
>anyone can make up all sorts of fantasies to be "right" about
>under those circumstances.
Of course there;s a jew race, KKKohen...it;s what gives jews their
distinctive appearance! Religion can;t possibly do that!
drahcir
Basically a true article - very unusual for you, bigot. The only thing
I would stress is that when the author says
> The closest genetic link found in that study was
> between the six most-related Jewish groups and
> Syrian and Palestinian populations.
he left out one VERY crucial word: some, as in SOME Syrian and
Palestinian populations. Most of the arab world does not share the
Cohen gene.
> DNA research has gone some way towards establishing
> a probable common ancestry for many of the world's Jews,
> but has also made clear that Jews and their Arab neighbors
> hail from the same stock.
SOME of their Arab neighbors.
tdny
Last update - 10:11 29/03/2010
Israel is sliding toward McCarthyism and racism
By David Landau
Tags: East Jerusalem, Israel Egypt
"In every generation a man is to consider himself as if
he personally experienced the Exodus from Egypt."
That is the central message of the Haggadah,
of the seder night and indeed of Passover
itself - the Festival of Freedom.
The message isn't necessarily confined to
the experience of the Hebrew slaves,
who were delivered from bondage.
The entire epic of the Exodus is meaningful.
Our generation, in particular,
the generation of renaissance and occupation,
might do well to consider the narrative from
the Egyptian perspective.
In other words,
how does a society professing
the noblest values toward the Other -
"In the best of the land bring your father and your brothers to live,"
Pharaoh urges Joseph (Genesis 47:6);
"the foundations of freedom, justice and peace,"
Israel's Declaration of Independence proclaims -
how does such a society come to adopt policies
of discrimination, persecution and endless conflict?
"Let's double-cross them," the new pharaoh,
the one who "knew not Joseph," says of his Jewish minority.
"Or else they'll grow demographically,
and when war comes, they'll side with the enemy ...
" Sound familiar?
How, then, does a society morph in this way?
The answer seems to be, inadvertently.
Since last Passover,
over the first year of Benjamin Netanyahu's prime ministership,
Israel has slid almost inadvertently a long way down the slope
that leads to McCarthyism and racism.
Inadvertently. That must be the explanation.
Otherwise, how to explain the dismal fact that during
this year a heinous travesty was perpetrated against Naomi Chazan -
and the streets of our cities weren't seething with mass demonstrations?
Major crossroads around the country were adorned with a literally
Sturmer-like cartoon portraying this hitherto respected and
distinguished woman, until recently a deputy speaker of the Knesset,
who heads a fund that pours millions of philanthropic dollars into
educational and civil, social projects in Israel -
and thousands of decent people were not out there shouting,
'Fascism shall not pass!'
One needn't like all of the organizations that Chazan's
New Israel Fund supports to be outraged and disgusted
and frightened by the style of the campaign that was
mounted against her.
(Full disclosure: I've lectured on occasion for the New Israel Fund.)
What's so depressing about the Chazan affair is not so much the
crude brutishness of her adversaries as the limp impotence
of the many people who tut-tutted - and did nothing.
When this form of inadvertence descends
on an enlightened society, it numbs and paralyzes.
That, perhaps, is how to understand a recent academic
discussion broadcast on Army Radio about the "Nakba Law."
A noted jurist explained that a bill submitted by a group
of MKs, slapping a three-year jail term on anyone mourning
the Nakba ["the catastrophe," as the Palestinians see 1948 and after]
on Independence Day was unlikely to get through the Knesset.
Even if it did, she went on, it would probably be struck down
by the High Court of Justice. The criminal code, she explained,
was not the appropriate means to deal with "the problem."
However, she added, completely matter-of-fact,
a bill cutting off state funding from any local authority
marking the Nakba on Independence Day would probably
get through.
Its curtailment of freedom of speech could be deemed proportionate.
(A bill in this vein has since passed its first reading.)
Not a word of reservation from this jurist or her
interviewer, who himself is an academic lawyer.
No value judgment.
Just dry academic analysis.
Without making any ghastly comparisons,
listening to this radio program, one found oneself thinking
that in other countries where the regime steadily transformed
from democratic to non-democratic,
there must have been liberal-minded,
gently spoken academics who provided
meticulous, legalistic analysis of malevolent
laws enacted against minorities.
As history, both ancient and more recent, teaches us,
there is another vital component in the inculcation of
a whole society with xenophobia.
It's the big lie, repeated over and over until ordinary people
inadvertently come to regard it as truth.
"Go and worship your God,"
Pharaoh pretended to Moses, time after time.
His own people no doubt believed him.
In our own case, this past year, Netanyahu has incessantly repeated his
mantra that he's merely doing in Jerusalem "what all my predecessors have
done for 43 years." The purpose of this pretense is to erase from the public
mind, at home and abroad, the fact that two of his predecessors negotiated
with the Palestinians and the Americans over dividing the city. The purpose,
too, is deliberately to blur the hugely significant difference between
building in the Jewish neighborhoods that have been developed over decades
and forcibly inserting Jewish settlers into all-Arab neighborhoods like
Sheikh Jarrah. The purpose, basically, is to obliterate any chance of
implementing the "Clinton parameters" - Jewish areas to Israel, Arab areas
to Palestine, Holy Basin to God [or an international consortium representing
Him] and thus reaching a fair compromise on Jerusalem.
The demonstrations taking place on Fridays at Sheikh Jarrah offer some
smidgen of hope that not everyone has been duped and silenced. The Naomi
Chazan front was abandoned. The "Nakba Law" front was lost without a fight.
The battle line in Israel's war of survival as a Jewish and democratic state
now runs through the Arab neighborhoods of Jerusalem. There, alongside the
few brave Israelis out demonstrating, the president of the United States has
planted his pennant, too. Is that the line, at last, where Israel's decline
will be halted?
PROMOTION: Mamilla Hotel
The Peeler
> On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 04:12:13 GMT, flav...@verizon.net wrote:
>
>>
>>On 26-Mar-2010, The Peeler <peeli...@invalid.admin> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 19:06:48 -0400, The Retd wrote:
>>>
>>> > Yes, but jewdism is just another bogus religion.
>>
>>Whatever that is.
>>Luckily, it's nothing to do with Judaism [sic].
>
> However you spell it, KKKohen, it;s just another bogus religion.
> And gullible cunts like you believe in it!
And however you spell it, psychopath: it's none of your business ...like
nothing in real life is any of your business, psycho.
>>> > Nobody can covert to
>>> > being jewish, i.e belonging to the jew race.
>>
>>Since there is no "jewish race" I suppose he's right - then again,
>>anyone can make up all sorts of fantasies to be "right" about
>>under those circumstances.
>
> Of course there;s a jew race, KKKohen...it;s what gives jews their
> distinctive appearance! Religion can;t possibly do that!
As always: only in your sick psychopathic mind, The Retd! Looks like it's
time for you already AGAIN to apply for your next prolonged stay at the
loony bin! LOL
Zulu
wrote:
> In article <157bec26-a9e8-4039-8970-abd4f1c89...@q16g2000yqq.googlegroups.com>,
>
> Zulu <z...@volcanomail.com> wrote:
> > Have you noticed that, just like did nazis, the zionists insist in
> > considering "the jews" as a singular "race" coming from a unique
> > region?.
>
> This is rather silly. Everyone, no matter what his/her
> origin or race is, can convert to Judaism.
>
> > On Google, ashkenazi + genetics gives 806,000 hits!!
>
> This seems to be Google's ridiculously inaccurate initial
> estimate. Actually scrolling through the search results
> will provide a far lower number.
>
> Look for "French collaborators", quite a few hits! :)
26,300 for "french collaborators"
46,800 for criminal zionazis
You win.
Zulu
> On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 20:34:40 +0000 (UTC), someone-who-knows-jack-shit
>
> >In article <157bec26-a9e8-4039-8970-abd4f1c89...@q16g2000yqq.googlegroups.com>,
>
> >> Have you noticed that, just like did nazis, the zionists insist in
> >> considering "the jews" as a singular "race" coming from a unique
> >> region?.
>
> >This is rather silly. Everyone, no matter what his/her
> >origin or race is, can convert to Judaism.
>
> Yes, but jewdism is just another bogus religion. Nobody can covert to
> being jewish, i.e belonging to the jew race.
What is the "jew race"?
Do you adopt the nazi definition or do you prefer the zionazi one?
TallHenry
Zulu <zu...@volcanomail.com> wrote:
> you win
No, you "win", frogshit:
"French tourists are the worst in the world, coming across
as penny-pinching, rude and terrible at languages, according
to a new survey".
The Revd
wrote:
Nobody could possibly be worse than Izzies and New York jews.
Happy Easter, asshole! LOL
Zulu
> In article <7babb8ac-0ceb-4ddd-99c5-3a7b93c11...@u31g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
Poor Looser
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_xwKFm6ni4
TallHenry
In article <b79c4fc0-3b98-43d9...@i25g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,
Zulu <zu...@volcanomail.com> wrote:
[...]
The Peeler
Spoken like the TRUE retard that you are, The Retd! LOL
The Revd
<peelingth...@not-for-mail.invalid> wrote:
>On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 10:58:26 -0400, The Retard wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 13:05:20 +0000 (UTC), TallHenry <n...@home.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>In article <7babb8ac-0ceb-4ddd...@u31g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
>>>Zulu <zu...@volcanomail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> you win
>>>
>>> No, you "win", frogshit:
>>>
>>> "French tourists are the worst in the world, coming across
>>> as penny-pinching, rude and terrible at languages, according
>>> to a new survey".
>>>
>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8143780.stm
>>
>> Nobody could possibly be worse than Izzies and New York jews.
>> Happy Easter, asshole! LOL
>
>Spoken like the TRUE retard that you are, The Retd! LOL
Oh, I forgot Griks: won't spend a cent more than they absolutely have
to, the cheap cunts! LOL
<Bugger Grease>
Zulu
> In article <b79c4fc0-3b98-43d9-afe8-f7c7b0dfe...@i25g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,
No money to go to France?
Bad luck, everybody wants to go there to visit that beautiful country.
We'll always have Paris....
All people go to my home, bestial nazi. 80 million people can’t be
wrong.
France is the most visited touristy country in the world.
It is expected it will be even better with the decreasing rate of Euro/
$
Are all tourists masochists?
<>
Another may simply be that Americans as well as 78 million other
people love France.
Paris alone received an estimated 45 million visitors in 2008.
Judging by this it seems fair to assume that the warmth and charm of
France and the
City of Light have earned that #1 designation.
With beautiful coastline, amazing national parks, art, music, cheese
and wine, it is
easy to see why more people visit France each year than any other spot
in the world.
<>
France holds on to rank as top tourist destination
Jun 02, 2009
Despite a global economic monetary crisis people are still travelling.
And France is
still the number one destination in the world. Has been for several
years running.
The gap between France and her closest competition (#2 Spain) is wide
and a virtual
chasm exists between France and America, currently #3 on the list.
According to the French ministry of Economy, which includes tourism,
France received
over 80 million visitors in 2008, a huge number as well remarkable.
This figure
represents only a .3% decrease over 2007 figures. France must be doing
something
right, 80 million people can’t be wrong.
By the numbers the top three destinations are France, Spain, America,
respectively.
Both Spain and America receive more revenue from tourists despite the
numbers. This
is largely due to the way tourists and dollars are counted and a
result of geography.
France and Spain both enjoy shared borders and proximity to a large
mobile population
that is free to travel without border interference. America is
geographically
isolated by comparison. French officials count pass through visitors
and only
receipts of money spent in France. America has far fewer pass through
travellers and
counts things like airfare to the U.S. as part of the tourist
expenditure regardless
of the fact it was purchased outside the U.S.
Another factor in the disparity of spending is that persons travelling
to America
tend to stay longer due to the great distance travelled to get there.
The result is
more spending. Conversely Europe is easily crossed by train or car.
Travel times are
shorter thus decreasing the length of stay and the spending as well.
Ignoring efforts by the House of Representatives in 2003 to discredit
France for
refusing to participate in the toppling of the Iraqi government
Americans continue to
travel. Only during economic trials has there been a decrease. By some
estimates 2008
saw a decrease of only about 2% which means that roughly 2.5 to 3
million Americans
are still visiting France each year.
Accounting for 6.9% of French GDP tourism is a high priority for the
government and
people of France. Major campaigns to increase the perception and
understanding of
French attitude and culture have been highly successful according to
Thierry Baudier
of the French Tourism Office.
Repeat travellers make up a large portion of the American tourist camp
in France. One
reason for this may be the perceived equality of costs in France even
with the Euro
standing strong against the dollar. Another may simply be that
Americans as well as
78 million other people love France. Paris alone received an estimated
45 million
visitors in 2008.
Judging by this it seems fair to assume that the warmth and charm of
France and the
City of Light have earned that #1 designation.
With beautiful coastline, amazing national parks, art, music, cheese
and wine, it is
easy to see why more people visit France each year than any other spot
in the world.
http://www.eturbonews.com/9583/france-holds-rank-top-tourist-destination
TallHenry
Zulu <zu...@volcanomail.com> wrote:
[...]
"French tourists are the worst in the world, coming across
as penny-pinching, rude and terrible at languages, according
to a new survey".
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8143780.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7542418.stm
France accused in Rwanda genocide
Rwanda has accused France of playing an active
role in the genocide of 1994, in which about
800,000 people were killed.
The Peeler
>>>
>>> Nobody could possibly be worse than Izzies and New York jews.
>>> Happy Easter, asshole! LOL
>>
>>Spoken like the TRUE retard that you are, The Retd! LOL
>
> Oh, I forgot Griks: won't spend a cent more than they absolutely have
> to, the cheap cunts! LOL
>
> <Bugger Grease>
Specifically you forgot ridiculous housebound frustrated psychopaths like
you, the cheapest nuts the world has ever seen! LOL
--
The top 5 truths about our resident psychopath, The Retard:
the desperate psycho can't SLEEP anymore,
he can't get out of the house anymore,
he got NOBODY to talk to anymore,
he can't FUCK anymore,
he got no life outside Usenet AT ALL!
Michael Ejercito
> On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 18:36:26 -0400, The Retard wrote:
>
> >>> Nobody could possibly be worse than Izzies and New York jews.
> >>> Happy Easter, asshole! LOL
>
> >>Spoken like the TRUE retard that you are, The Retd! LOL
>
> > Oh, I forgot Griks: won't spend a cent more than they absolutely have
> > to, the cheap cunts! LOL
>
> > <Bugger Grease>
at large?
Of course, Nazi nithings have a reputation for blowing their
welfare checks on meth and kiddie porn.
>
> Specifically you forgot ridiculous housebound frustrated psychopaths like
> you, the cheapest nuts the world has ever seen! LOL
So true.
Michael
The Revd
<meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Mar 31, 4:30�am, The Peeler <anonym...@not-for-mail.invalid> wrote:
>> On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 18:36:26 -0400, The Retard wrote:
>>
>> >>> Nobody could possibly be worse than Izzies and New York jews.
>> >>> Happy Easter, asshole! �LOL
>>
>> >>Spoken like the TRUE retard that you are, The Retd! LOL
>>
>> > Oh, I forgot Griks: �won't spend a cent more than they absolutely have
>> > to, the cheap cunts! �LOL
>>
>> > <Bugger Grease>
> So they are more likely to be in good financial shape than humanity
>at large?
WE ask the questions, cocksucker.
> Of course, Nazi nithings have a reputation for blowing their
>welfare checks on meth and kiddie porn.
Mexes/spics/gooks have a reputation of blowing their Food Stamps at
the barrio liquor store.
dsharavi
> DNA tests support Zimbabwe tribe's claim of Jewish roots
>
> http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1154631.html
>
> British scientists have succeeded in proving the Lemba
> tribe of Zimbabwe and South Africa descended from
> Jewish ancestors, according to a report by the BBC.
For some time. The BBC - and you -- only noticed in 2010? See the
Jeiwsh Virtual Library:
Zimbabwe’s “Black Jews”: The Lemba People
By Ariel Scheib
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/Lemba_Jews.html
Lemba
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud_0002_0012_0_12113.html
Genetic Ancestry, Jewish
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud_0002_0007_0_07174.html
A goyischekop blebt a goyischekop.
Deborah
dsharavi
> http://jewsandjoes.com/can-dna-tell-me-if-i-have-jewish-or-10-israel-...
>
> Have you ever wondered if you have Jewish or 10-Israel Ancestry?
>
> Many people from non-Jewish families ask themselves, "Am I Jewish?",
> "Am I Hebrew?", or
>
> "Were my ancestors of the Lost 10 Tribes of Israel?"
Blowing money on DNA tests to answer those questions will result in
nothing more than blowing money -- especially on the last one.
Deborah
The Peeler
> On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 08:58:24 -0700 (PDT), Michael Ejercito
> <meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Mar 31, 4:30�am, The Peeler <anonym...@not-for-mail.invalid> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 18:36:26 -0400, The Retard wrote:
>>>
>>> >>> Nobody could possibly be worse than Izzies and New York jews.
>>> >>> Happy Easter, asshole! �LOL
>>>
>>> >>Spoken like the TRUE retard that you are, The Retd! LOL
>>>
>>> > Oh, I forgot Griks: �won't spend a cent more than they absolutely have
>>> > to, the cheap cunts! �LOL
>>>
>>> > <Bugger Grease>
>> So they are more likely to be in good financial shape than humanity
>>at large?
>
> WE ask the questions, cocksucker.
YOU only get your pathetic bleeding psychopathic ass clobbered here time and
again, The Retd! <G>
>> Of course, Nazi nithings have a reputation for blowing their
>>welfare checks on meth and kiddie porn.
>
> Mexes/spics/gooks have a reputation of blowing their Food Stamps at
> the barrio liquor store.
YOU got a reputation for being one of Usenet's foremost village idiots and
laughing stock, The Retd! Is true!!!! LOL
The Revd
>
>On 29-Mar-2010, The Peeler <peeli...@invalid.admin> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 07:50:43 -0400, The Retd wrote:
>>
>> > On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 04:12:13 GMT, flav...@verizon.net wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >>On 26-Mar-2010, The Peeler <peeli...@invalid.admin> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 19:06:48 -0400, The Retd wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> > Yes, but jewdism is just another bogus religion.
>> >>
>> >>Whatever that is.
>> >>Luckily, it's nothing to do with Judaism [sic].
>
>What a maroon.
What a th*ck Ir*sh cunt.
>> >
>> > However you spell it,
>
>Wow - this is as close as he gets to admitting
>that he knows he deliberately mis-spells it.
Wow, is that so, KKKohen? Wow!
>> > KKKohen [sic], it;s [sic] just another bogus religion.
>
>It wouldn't be as funny if he weren't so illiterate ---
You have a problem w/the use of semi-colons in place of apostrophes,
KKKohen? LOL
>> > And gullible cunts like you believe in it!
>
>--- or projecting.
You *wish*, KKKohen.
>> And however you spell it, psychopath: it's none of your business
>
>& that's why he pretends it is - it's the whole denial thing.
What business is it of *yours*, shitske?
>>...like nothing in real life is any of your business, psycho.
>>
>> >>> > Nobody can covert to
>> >>> > being jewish, i.e belonging to the jew race.
>> >>
>> >>Since there is no "jewish race" I suppose he's right - then again,
>> >>anyone can make up all sorts of fantasies to be "right" about
>> >>under those circumstances.
>> >
>> > Of course there;s [sic] a jew [sic] race [sic],
>
>In his wet dreams, of course.
In *reality*, KKKohen.
>> ...it;s [sic] what gives jews [sic] their
>> > distinctive appearance!
>
>I wonder how many times he can ignore the fact that
>Yaphet Kotto does not look like Natalie Portman who
>does not look like Leslie Howard who does not look
>like --- oh, just *name any Jew*!
Does KKKohen really 'think' that "distinctive appearance" means all
looking identical? Or is it being deliberately th*ck?
>> Religion can;t [sic] possibly do that!
>>
>> As always: only in your sick psychopathic mind,
>
>Or what passes for it.
'Conversion' will *never* make you look jewish, KKKohen. That;s why
your two circumcised half-jew b'rats get beaten up in jew school every
day! LOL
drahcir
> On Mar 26, 10:35 am, "tdny" <t...@live.com> wrote:
>
> > DNA tests support Zimbabwe tribe's claim of Jewish roots
>
> >http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1154631.html
>
> > British scientists have succeeded in proving the Lemba
> > tribe of Zimbabwe and South Africa descended from
> > Jewish ancestors, according to a report by the BBC.
>
> For some time. The BBC - and you -- only noticed in 2010? See the
> Jeiwsh Virtual Library:
She's lucky if she notices her diapers are wet.
>
> Zimbabwe’s “Black Jews”: The Lemba People
> By Ariel Scheibhttp://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/Lemba_Jews.html
>
> Lembahttp://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud_0002_0012_0_...
>
> Genetic Ancestry, Jewishhttp://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud_0002_0007_0_...
drahcir
Why don't you ask here what her, ahem, "point" is?
The Peeler
<snip all the repetitive predictable garbage>
Having another hissy fit today, The Retd. Or is it still the SAME one you've
been suffering from over the last TEN YEARS? ROTFLOL