The idea of a Jewish nation – whose need for a safe haven was originally used to justify the founding of the state of Israel – is a myth invented little more than a century ago.
HHW
by Jonathan Cook
Global Research, October 8, 2008
thenational.ae
Email this article to a friend
Print this article
Idea of a Jewish people invented, says historian
No one is more surprised than Shlomo Sand that his latest academic
work has spent 19 weeks on Israel’s bestseller list – and that success
has come to the history professor despite his book challenging
Israel’s biggest taboo.
Dr Sand argues that the idea of a Jewish nation – whose need for a
safe haven was originally used to justify the founding of the state of
Israel – is a myth invented little more than a century ago.
An expert on European history at Tel Aviv University, Dr Sand drew on
extensive historical and archaeological research to support not only
this claim but several more – all equally controversial.
In addition, he argues that the Jews were never exiled from the Holy
Land, that most of today’s Jews have no historical connection to the
land called Israel and that the only political solution to the
country’s conflict with the Palestinians is to abolish the Jewish
state.
The success of When and How Was the Jewish People Invented? looks
likely to be repeated around the world. A French edition, launched
last month, is selling so fast that it has already had three print
runs.
Translations are under way into a dozen languages, including Arabic
and English. But he predicted a rough ride from the pro-Israel lobby
when the book is launched by his English publisher, Verso, in the
United States next year.
In contrast, he said Israelis had been, if not exactly supportive, at
least curious about his argument. Tom Segev, one of the country’s
leading journalists, has called the book “fascinating and
challenging”.
Surprisingly, Dr Sand said, most of his academic colleagues in Israel
have shied away from tackling his arguments. One exception is Israel
Bartal, a professor of Jewish history at Hebrew University in
Jerusalem. Writing in Haaretz, the Israeli daily newspaper, Dr Bartal
made little effort to rebut Dr Sand’s claims. He dedicated much of his
article instead to defending his profession, suggesting that Israeli
historians were not as ignorant about the invented nature of Jewish
history as Dr Sand contends.
The idea for the book came to him many years ago, Dr Sand said, but he
waited until recently to start working on it. “I cannot claim to be
particularly courageous in publishing the book now,” he said. “I
waited until I was a full professor. There is a price to be paid in
Israeli academia for expressing views of this sort.”
Dr Sand’s main argument is that until little more than a century ago,
Jews thought of themselves as Jews only because they shared a common
religion. At the turn of the 20th century, he said, Zionist Jews
challenged this idea and started creating a national history by
inventing the idea that Jews existed as a people separate from their
religion.
Equally, the modern Zionist idea of Jews being obligated to return
from exile to the Promised Land was entirely alien to Judaism, he
added.
“Zionism changed the idea of Jerusalem. Before, the holy places were
seen as places to long for, not to be lived in. For 2,000 years Jews
stayed away from Jerusalem not because they could not return but
because their religion forbade them from returning until the messiah
came.”
The biggest surprise during his research came when he started looking
at the archaeological evidence from the biblical era.
“I was not raised as a Zionist, but like all other Israelis I took it
for granted that the Jews were a people living in Judea and that they
were exiled by the Romans in 70AD.
“But once I started looking at the evidence, I discovered that the
kingdoms of David and Solomon were legends.
“Similarly with the exile. In fact, you can’t explain Jewishness
without exile. But when I started to look for history books describing
the events of this exile, I couldn’t find any. Not one.
“That was because the Romans did not exile people. In fact, Jews in
Palestine were overwhelming peasants and all the evidence suggests
they stayed on their lands.”
Instead, he believes an alternative theory is more plausible: the
exile was a myth promoted by early Christians to recruit Jews to the
new faith. “Christians wanted later generations of Jews to believe
that their ancestors had been exiled as a punishment from God.”
So if there was no exile, how is it that so many Jews ended up
scattered around the globe before the modern state of Israel began
encouraging them to “return”?
Dr Sand said that, in the centuries immediately preceding and
following the Christian era, Judaism was a proselytising religion,
desperate for converts. “This is mentioned in the Roman literature of
the time.”
Jews travelled to other regions seeking converts, particularly in
Yemen and among the Berber tribes of North Africa. Centuries later,
the people of the Khazar kingdom in what is today south Russia, would
convert en masse to Judaism, becoming the genesis of the Ashkenazi
Jews of central and eastern Europe.
Dr Sand pointed to the strange state of denial in which most Israelis
live, noting that papers offered extensive coverage recently to the
discovery of the capital of the Khazar kingdom next to the Caspian
Sea.
Ynet, the website of Israel’s most popular newspaper, Yedioth
Ahronoth, headlined the story: “Russian archaeologists find long-lost
Jewish capital.” And yet none of the papers, he added, had considered
the significance of this find to standard accounts of Jewish history.
One further question is prompted by Dr Sand’s account, as he himself
notes: if most Jews never left the Holy Land, what became of them?
“It is not taught in Israeli schools but most of the early Zionist
leaders, including David Ben Gurion [Israel’s first prime minister],
believed that the Palestinians were the descendants of the area’s
original Jews. They believed the Jews had later converted to Islam.”
Dr Sand attributed his colleagues’ reticence to engage with him to an
implicit acknowledgement by many that the whole edifice of “Jewish
history” taught at Israeli universities is built like a house of
cards.
The problem with the teaching of history in Israel, Dr Sand said,
dates to a decision in the 1930s to separate history into two
disciplines: general history and Jewish history. Jewish history was
assumed to need its own field of study because Jewish experience was
considered unique.
“There’s no Jewish department of politics or sociology at the
universities. Only history is taught in this way, and it has allowed
specialists in Jewish history to live in a very insular and
conservative world where they are not touched by modern developments
in historical research.
“I’ve been criticised in Israel for writing about Jewish history when
European history is my specialty. But a book like this needed a
historian who is familiar with the standard concepts of historical
inquiry used by academia in the rest of the world.”
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.
Jonathan Cook is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global
Research Articles by Jonathan Cook
Tell it like it is.
There is a lot of information on the internet. Also a lot odf
bullshit. I have to remain true to my Catholic upbringing. The Muslims
worship the God of Abraham as do Catholics and all Christians and
Jews. Unfortunately some people won't accept the other fellows
cultural ways and worship.
That's why the U.S. is such a great country. We allow secular jews to
express hatred for muslims, and jews believe that a jew hating a
middle eastern muslim is not in anyway an antisemite. Of course the
jews of secular Israel do not believe the indegenous people of the
region called Palestine are a people with a history in the Holy land.
Ancient Israel was a theocracy. But the Christ they killed was the
wrong one. So they have come back as a secular state for jews. That
way they don't have to assimilate in the various countries in which
they live. Excuse me.
An act of war is called a preemptive strike according to the great
Alan Dershowitz. The only requirement is that no diplomacy be allowed.
It is disturbing to watch Israel justifying their actions by saying
"The U.S. has said Hamas is a terrorist organization". We've also said
the "JADL is a terrorist orgANIZATION". So what's new?
I use to think Palestine would be a district of Israel, but a few days
ago I was reading over the 'net about a bi-state called Palestine-
Israel! Wouldn't that be awful? It would preserve the historical
legitimacy of the Holy Bible every word of which was written by the
ancient Jews of religious Israel. Wouldn't that be awful?
I knew a guy in Boston, Massachusetts who spent five years in prison
for refusing the draft. I'll refrain from using Joe's surname, but his
face was the image of the Irish face that was very commonly used for
images of Christ. Air strikes from the air doesn't make you brave when
the target is a police station. They were Hamas police. A terrorist
organization!
DoD
> Israeli best seller breaks national taboo
Low watson goes even deeper in his anti-Jewish depravity.
prince andy
"DoD" <danski...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e008893f-078d-4a44...@h16g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 27, 11:49 pm, HHW <coaster132...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Israeli best seller breaks national taboo
Low watson goes even deeper in his anti-Jewish depravity.
Dud trying to peddle crap again.
Anti semitic simply because it sp[eaks true. Old fart is only comfortable
with the old lies he and his clique have pushed so hard.
prince andy
"DoD" <danski...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e008893f-078d-4a44...@h16g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
> Israeli best seller breaks national taboo
Low watson goes even deeper in his anti-Jewish depravity.
Dud trying to peddle crap again.
Anti semitic simply because it sp[eaks true. Old fart is only comfortable
with the old lies he and his clique have pushed so hard.
"HHW" <coaste...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:35282912-726a-4a2e...@w24g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
Israeli best seller breaks national taboo
by Jonathan Cook
Global Research, October 8, 2008
thenational.ae
Email this article to a friend
Print this article
Idea of a Jewish people invented, says historian
No one is more surprised than Shlomo Sand that his latest academic
work has spent 19 weeks on Israel's bestseller list - and that success
has come to the history professor despite his book challenging
Israel's biggest taboo.
Dr Sand argues that the idea of a Jewish nation - whose need for a
safe haven was originally used to justify the founding of the state of
Israel - is a myth invented little more than a century ago.
An expert on European history at Tel Aviv University, Dr Sand drew on
extensive historical and archaeological research to support not only
this claim but several more - all equally controversial.
HHW
Do you mean I'm anti-Khazar? As I hadn't heard of them until about a
year ago that's unlikely, don't you think?
This issue is pretty fundamental. It goes to the very center of
Zionist ideology. You, for example, hate the Palestinian Resistance as
a result have having bought into Zionism. Tell us, oh Zionist, do the
descendants of Khazars, whose ancestors seem never to have lived
anywhere near Palestine, have the "right" to take it from its native
people? An objective person will address the issue critically. Here is
another Israeli scholar, a Jewish history specialist, who criticizes
Professor Sand's work. You will note as does Jonathan Cook that this
scholar does not really deny Sand's central thesis. What he does is
defend the Israeli historical profession's standards from claims of
distorting the historical record. That may be telling.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ha'aretz Books
Last update - 18:46 06/07/2008
Jewish History
Inventing an invention
By Israel Bartal
Tags: Khazars, Israel Bartal
According to Shlomo Sand, everything you ever thought you knew about
the Jewish people as a nation with ethno-biological origins is false.
Israel Bartal, however, says Sand didn't do his homework
Mattai ve'ekh humtza ha'am hayehudi?
(When and How Was the Jewish People Invented?), by Shlomo Sand
Resling (Hebrew), 358 pages, NIS 94.
The first sentence of "When and How Was the Jewish People Invented?"
reads: "This book is a historical study, not a work of pure fiction.
Nevertheless, it will open with a number of stories rooted in a
collective memory that has been adulterated with a considerable degree
of imagination." I recalled these words when I found myself utterly
astounded by the statements of the author of this learned, fascinating
study, concerned with the "period of silencing" in the "Jewish-Israeli
collective memory," a period that, to quote Sand, gave rise to a total
avoidance of "any mention of the Khazars in the Israeli public
arena."
This assertion, according to which an entire chapter in Jewish history
was deliberately silenced for political reasons, thrust me back to my
days as a ninth grader, in the late 1950s. I recalled the Mikhlal
Encyclopedia, an almost mythological reference text that nearly every
Israeli high school student relied on in those years, the flagship of
what is termed "mainstream Zionism," in the lean Hebrew of 21st-
century Israel. My ears still reverberate with the introduction to the
encyclopedia's entry on "Khazars": "A source of consolation and hope
for the scattered Jewish communities of the Diaspora during the Middle
Ages, the story of the Khazar kingdom today has the ring of pure
mythology. Nonetheless, that story is one of the most wonderful
chapters in Jewish history."
Sand suggests that it was "the wave of decolonization of the 1950s and
1960s [that] led the molders of Israeli collective memory to shield
themselves from the shadow of the Khazar past. There was a profound
fear that, should the Jews now rebuilding their home in Israel learn
that they are not direct descendants of the ?Children of Israel,' the
very legitimacy of both the Zionist enterprise and the State of
Israel's existence would be undermined."
With considerable trepidation, I returned to my yellowing copy of
volume IV of the Mikhlal Encyclopedia. Could I perhaps have been
mistaken and could it be that my teachers in the Socialist-Zionist
city of Givatayim wanted to brainwash me with an ethno-biological
perception of my parents' origin?
When I reread the entry on the Khazars, my mind was put at rest. It
was not the Zionist education to which I, as an Israeli teenager, was
exposed that tried to make me forget the fact that the members of
gentile tribes converted to Judaism in the Khazar Kingdom; instead, it
is the author of this book about the "invention of the Jewish people"
who has invented an ethno-biological Zionist historiography.
Here is what was written about the conversion of the Khazars, a nation
of Turkish origin, in the Zionist Mikhlal Encyclopedia that the State
of Israel's Zionist Ministry of Education recommended so warmly during
that "period of silencing": "It is irrelevant whether the conversion
to Judaism encompassed a large stratum of the Khazar nation; what is
important is that this event was regarded as a highly significant
phenomenon in Jewish history, a phenomenon that has since totally
disappeared: Judaism as a missionary religion.... The question of the
long-term impact of that chapter in Jewish history on East European
Jewry -- whether through the development of its ethnic character or in
some other way -- is a matter that requires further research.
Nonetheless, although we do not know the extent of its influence, what
is clear to us today is that this conversion did have an impact."
Sand, a professor of modern European history at Tel Aviv University,
comments further on the silence of the historians: "Israel's academic
community developed a violent attitude toward this issue.... Any
mention of the Khazars in the public arena in Israel was increasingly
considered eccentric, a flight of fancy, even an open threat."
Zionist historiography, he claims, concealed the possibility that the
millions of Yiddish-speaking Jews were actually descendants of the
Khazars and that even today Israeli historians deny the existence of
an early Jewish nucleus that was augmented by immigrants who moved
from Ashkenaz (present-day northern France and western Germany) to
Eastern Europe.
These claims are baseless. Sand, for example, does not mention the
fact that, from 2000 onwards, a team of scholars from the Hebrew
University of Jerusalem labored on a monumental task: the production
of a three-volume study on the history of the Jews of Russia.
In the first volume, which will shortly be published in Hebrew by the
Zalman Shazar Center for Jewish History (another "Zionist"
institution), considerable attention is devoted to the question of the
origin of the East European Jews and to their link with the history of
the Khazar kingdom.
Sand repeats the method he employs vis-a-vis the place of the Khazars
in Jewish historiography in connection with other topics as well,
presenting readers with partial citations and edited passages from the
writings of various scholars. Several times, Sand declares what his
ideological position is. Like him, I am not one of those who support
the injustices committed by a number of Israeli government agencies
against minority groups in this country in the name of arguments
pretending to represent "historical values." However, critical readers
of Sand's study must not overlook the intellectual superficiality and
the twisting of the rules governing the work of professional
historians that result when ideology and methodology are mixed.
Sand's desire for Israel to become a state "representing all its
citizens" is certainly worthy of a serious discussion, but the manner
in which he attempts to connect a political platform with the history
of the Jewish people from its very beginnings to the present day is
bizarre and incoherent.
Descendants of pagans
What is Sand trying to prove in this study? In his view, the homeland
of the Jewish people is not Palestine, and most Jews are descendants
of the members of different nations who converted to Judaism in
ancient times and in the medieval period. He claims that the Jews of
Yemen and Eastern Europe are descendants of pagans.
According to Sand, this historical truth was concealed by Zionist
thinkers, who developed an ethno-biological ideology, and the so-
called "Jewish people" was invented as late as the 19th century.
Furthermore, he argues, the idea of a "nation" that was exiled from
its homeland in ancient times and which is destined to return to it in
the modern age so as to rebuild its independent state is merely an
invented myth.
Sand also maintains that, in the era preceding the emergence of
European nationalism, the Jews were an ethnic group, not a nation. In
his eyes, the argument promulgated by the Zionists and by their
successors in the Israeli political arena concerning our "right to
this land" rests on a biological-genetic ideology; that argument
became the "narrative of the ruling group" thanks to the fact that the
"authorized scholars of the past" have concealed the truth concerning
the real, impure origin of the Jews.
My response to Sand's arguments is that no historian of the Jewish
national movement has ever really believed that the origins of the
Jews are ethnically and biologically "pure." Sand applies marginal
positions to the entire body of Jewish historiography and, in doing
so, denies the existence of the central positions in Jewish historical
scholarship.
No "nationalist" Jewish historian has ever tried to conceal the well-
known fact that conversions to Judaism had a major impact on Jewish
history in the ancient period and in the early Middle Ages. Although
the myth of an exile from the Jewish homeland (Palestine) does exist
in popular Israeli culture, it is negligible in serious Jewish
historical discussions. Important groups in the Jewish national
movement expressed reservations regarding this myth or denied it
completely.
Sand's references to "authorized" historians are absurd, and
perpetuate a superficial pattern of discussion that is characteristic
of a certain group within Israeli academe. The guiding principle in
this pattern of discussion is as follows: "Tell me what your position
is on the past and I will tell you the nature of your connection with
the agencies of the regime."
The kind of political intervention Sand is talking about, namely, a
deliberate program designed to make Israelis forget the true
biological origins of the Jews of Poland and Russia or a directive for
the promotion of the story of the Jews' exile from their homeland is
pure fantasy.
Sand points to three components in the structuring of the Jewish
national past. First, the national historical narrative, especially
the Zionist narrative, emphasizes the "ethno-biological" identity of
those who belong to the imaginary Jewish nation.
Second, this identity is directly connected with a nationalist
ideology that is a substitute for the religious link between Jewish
communities in the Diaspora that has considerably weakened in the
present era of secularization. Third, an aggressive political
establishment that controls the dissemination of knowledge is
concealing vital information on what really happened in the past,
preventing the publication of sources that can serve as an alternative
to the recommended national narrative, and censoring dangerous
passages in published texts.
The central book of the Zionist "Jerusalem School," "Toldot am
yisrael" ("History of the Jewish People," published in 1969), speaks
extensively of the Jewish communities that existed in the Diaspora
before the destruction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem and whose
total population exceeded that of the tiny Jewish community in
Palestine. As one would expect from a work that reflects a profound
knowledge of scholarly studies in the field, the Zionist "Toldot am
yisrael" explains that the number of Jews in the Diaspora during the
ancient period was as high as it was because of conversion, a
phenomenon that "was widespread in the Jewish Diaspora in the late
Second Temple period .... Many of the converts to Judaism came from
the gentile population of Palestine, but an even greater number of
converts could be found in the Jewish Diaspora communities in both the
East and the West."
Choosing to ignore all this, Sand categorically states in his book
that, "the mass conversions that created such huge Jewish populations
throughout the Mediterranean region are scarcely mentioned in Jewish
national historiography." Apparently, he is obsessed with the idea of
proving that the Zionist historians (including Nahum Slouschz, who
wrote about the North African Jewish warrior-queen Dahia
al-Kahina) were "ethnocentric nationalists." It is irrelevant to Sand
what these historians actually wrote: To hell with the facts -- the
argument is what really counts!
Sand bends over backwards to prove that the great Jewish historians
(such as Simon Dubnow, Salo Baron and Benzion Dinur), who, in their
works, linked Jewish nationalism with liberalism, radicalism and
socialism, were simply racists. Here's what he writes, for example,
about Israeli historian Haim Zeev Hirschberg (1903-1974), who studied
the Jews of North Africa: "His continual attempts to prove that the
Jews were a race of people that had been displaced from its ancient
homeland and which had been condemned to wander from country to
country as an exiled nation ... dovetail beautifully with the
directives of mainstream Zionist historiography." According to Sand,
Hirschberg never managed to liberate himself from a "purifying
substantive ideology." Does this sound familiar? When and where did
you last read that Zionism was a racist movement?
Scattered communities
I will now refer briefly to the connection between the book's
conceptual underpinnings and the author's main historical argument,
namely, that, prior to the modern period, the Jews constituted only a
group of "scattered religious communities." Sand defines national
identity in the spirit of the ideas of the French Revolution. Not only
does he reject the concept of an ethnic identity that is not dependent
on the existence of a political entity confined within clearly defined
borders, he even rejects an identity whose possessors' claim is
founded on a cultural or political entity that is not subject to
control or management by the agencies of the central regime. In his
view, such identities are merely "invented identities" and he does not
believe that pre-modern identities can survive in the modern era. In
fact, Sand advocates the position that was heard in the French
National Assembly in December 1789: "The Jews must not be allowed to
constitute a special political entity or to have a special political
status. Instead, each Jew must on an individual basis be a citizen of
France." However, whereas the champions of the Emancipation in Paris
did recognize the non-religious essence of the pre-modern Jewish
nation, Sand does not.
I was unable to find in Sand's book any innovations in the study of
nationalism. The author is stuck somewhere between historians such as
Eric Hobsbawm, Benedict Anderson and Ernest Gellner -- a generation
behind what is happening today in the field. As far as I can discern,
the book contains not even one idea that has not been presented
earlier in their books and articles by what he insists on defining as
"authorized historians" suspected of "concealing historical truth."
"When and How Was the Jewish People Invented?" is a marvelous blend of
clearly modernist arguments, drawn from the legacy of 18th-century
European Enlightenment, with a moderate, but disturbing (because of
its superficiality), pinch of Foucaultian discourse from a previous
generation.
Moreover, the author's treatment of Jewish sources is embarrassing and
humiliating. What serious reader who knows the history of modern
Hebrew literature can take seriously the views expressed in a book
that defines "Bohen tsadik" (Investigating a Righteous Man), a
satirical (fictional!) work by the Galician intellectual and supporter
of the Haskalah Yosef Perl (1773-1839), as something that was written
by a person named Yitzhak Perl and which "contains 41 letters from
rabbis that relate to various aspects of Jewish life"? Who would
attest to the accuracy of facts in a research study where it is stated
that historian Joseph Klausner (1874-1958) -- a scholar who never was
(despite his burning ambition to do so) a professor of history at the
Hebrew University of Jerusalem and who, instead, served there as a
professor of Hebrew literature -- "was in fact the first official
historian of the ?Second Temple period' at the Hebrew University of
Jerusalem"? Does such sloppiness reflect the author's attitude to the
subject of his research? Or, perhaps, because everything is an
invention anyway, it does not really matter whether the "imagined
object" is black or white?
The lugubrious Israeli combination of aggressive one-dimensional
conceptuality and blatant disrespect for details (a characteristic mix
among writers at both ends of the political spectrum) will undoubtedly
captivate the hearts of the public relations executives of the
electronic media. However, we, the skeptical historians, who are
buried between mountains of books and piles of archival files, can
only continue to read what has really been written and to write about
what has really been read.
Prof. Israel Bartal is dean of the humanities faculty of the Hebrew
University. His book "Cossack and Bedouin: Land and People in Jewish
Nationalism" was published by Am Oved in its Ofakim series (Hebrew).
Haaretz Books, July 2008
john...@gmail.com
Shattering a 'national mythology'
By Ofri Ilani
Tags: Palestinians
Of all the national heroes who have arisen from among the Jewish
people over the generations, fate has not been kind to Dahia al-
Kahina, a leader of the Berbers in the Aures Mountains. Although she
was a proud Jewess, few Israelis have ever heard the name of this
warrior-queen who, in the seventh century C.E., united a number of
Berber tribes and pushed back the Muslim army that invaded North
Africa. It is possible that the reason for this is that al-Kahina was
the daughter of a Berber tribe that had converted to Judaism,
apparently several generations before she was born, sometime around
the 6th century C.E.
According to the Tel Aviv University historian, Prof. Shlomo Sand,
author of "Matai ve'ech humtza ha'am hayehudi?" ("When and How the
Jewish People Was Invented?"; Resling, in Hebrew), the queen's tribe
and other local tribes that converted to Judaism are the main sources
from which Spanish Jewry sprang. This claim that the Jews of North
Africa originated in indigenous tribes that became Jewish - and not in
communities exiled from Jerusalem - is just one element of the far-
reaching argument set forth in Sand's new book.
In this work, the author attempts to prove that the Jews now living in
Israel and other places in the world are not at all descendants of the
ancient people who inhabited the Kingdom of Judea during the First and
Second Temple period. Their origins, according to him, are in varied
peoples that converted to Judaism during the course of history, in
different corners of the Mediterranean Basin and the adjacent regions.
Not only are the North African Jews for the most part descendants of
pagans who converted to Judaism, but so are the Jews of Yemen
(remnants of the Himyar Kingdom in the Arab Peninsula, who converted
to Judaism in the fourth century) and the Ashkenazi Jews of Eastern
Europe (refugees from the Kingdom of the Khazars, who converted in the
eighth century).
Advertisement
Unlike other "new historians" who have tried to undermine the
assumptions of Zionist historiography, Sand does not content himself
with going back to 1948 or to the beginnings of Zionism, but rather
goes back thousands of years. He tries to prove that the Jewish people
never existed as a "nation-race" with a common origin, but rather is a
colorful mix of groups that at various stages in history adopted the
Jewish religion. He argues that for a number of Zionist ideologues,
the mythical perception of the Jews as an ancient people led to truly
racist thinking: "There were times when if anyone argued that the Jews
belong to a people that has gentile origins, he would be classified as
an anti-Semite on the spot. Today, if anyone dares to suggest that
those who are considered Jews in the world ... have never constituted
and still do not constitute a people or a nation - he is immediately
condemned as a hater of Israel."
According to Sand, the description of the Jews as a wandering and self-
isolating nation of exiles, "who wandered across seas and continents,
reached the ends of the earth and finally, with the advent of Zionism,
made a U-turn and returned en masse to their orphaned homeland," is
nothing but "national mythology." Like other national movements in
Europe, which sought out a splendid Golden Age, through which they
invented a heroic past - for example, classical Greece or the Teutonic
tribes - to prove they have existed since the beginnings of history,
"so, too, the first buds of Jewish nationalism blossomed in the
direction of the strong light that has its source in the mythical
Kingdom of David."
So when, in fact, was the Jewish people invented, in Sand's view? At a
certain stage in the 19th century, intellectuals of Jewish origin in
Germany, influenced by the folk character of German nationalism, took
upon themselves the task of inventing a people "retrospectively," out
of a thirst to create a modern Jewish people. From historian Heinrich
Graetz on, Jewish historians began to draw the history of Judaism as
the history of a nation that had been a kingdom, became a wandering
people and ultimately turned around and went back to its birthplace.
Actually, most of your book does not deal with the invention of the
Jewish people by modern Jewish nationalism, but rather with the
question of where the Jews come from.
Sand: "My initial intention was to take certain kinds of modern
historiographic materials and examine how they invented the 'figment'
of the Jewish people. But when I began to confront the historiographic
sources, I suddenly found contradictions. And then that urged me on: I
started to work, without knowing where I would end up. I took primary
sources and I tried to examine authors' references in the ancient
period - what they wrote about conversion."
Sand, an expert on 20th-century history, has until now researched the
intellectual history of modern France (in "Ha'intelektual, ha'emet
vehakoah: miparashat dreyfus ve'ad milhemet hamifrats" -
"Intellectuals, Truth and Power, From the Dreyfus Affair to the Gulf
War"; Am Oved, in Hebrew). Unusually, for a professional historian, in
his new book he deals with periods that he had never researched
before, usually relying on studies that present unorthodox views of
the origins of the Jews.
Experts on the history of the Jewish people say you are dealing with
subjects about which you have no understanding and are basing yourself
on works that you can't read in the original.
"It is true that I am an historian of France and Europe, and not of
the ancient period. I knew that the moment I would start dealing with
early periods like these, I would be exposed to scathing criticism by
historians who specialize in those areas. But I said to myself that I
can't stay just with modern historiographic material without examining
the facts it describes. Had I not done this myself, it would have been
necessary to have waited for an entire generation. Had I continued to
deal with France, perhaps I would have been given chairs at the
university and provincial glory. But I decided to relinquish the
glory."
Inventing the Diaspora
"After being forcibly exiled from their land, the people remained
faithful to it throughout their Dispersion and never ceased to pray
and hope for their return to it and for the restoration in it of their
political freedom" - thus states the preamble to the Israeli
Declaration of Independence. This is also the quotation that opens the
third chapter of Sand's book, entitled "The Invention of the
Diaspora." Sand argues that the Jewish people's exile from its land
never happened.
"The supreme paradigm of exile was needed in order to construct a long-
range memory in which an imagined and exiled nation-race was posited
as the direct continuation of 'the people of the Bible' that preceded
it," Sand explains. Under the influence of other historians who have
dealt with the same issue in recent years, he argues that the exile of
the Jewish people is originally a Christian myth that depicted that
event as divine punishment imposed on the Jews for having rejected the
Christian gospel.
"I started looking in research studies about the exile from the land -
a constitutive event in Jewish history, almost like the Holocaust. But
to my astonishment I discovered that it has no literature. The reason
is that no one exiled the people of the country. The Romans did not
exile peoples and they could not have done so even if they had wanted
to. They did not have trains and trucks to deport entire populations.
That kind of logistics did not exist until the 20th century. From
this, in effect, the whole book was born: in the realization that
Judaic society was not dispersed and was not exiled."
If the people was not exiled, are you saying that in fact the real
descendants of the inhabitants of the Kingdom of Judah are the
Palestinians?
"No population remains pure over a period of thousands of years. But
the chances that the Palestinians are descendants of the ancient
Judaic people are much greater than the chances that you or I are its
descendents. The first Zionists, up until the Arab Revolt [1936-9],
knew that there had been no exiling, and that the Palestinians were
descended from the inhabitants of the land. They knew that farmers
don't leave until they are expelled. Even Yitzhak Ben-Zvi, the second
president of the State of Israel, wrote in 1929 that, 'the vast
majority of the peasant farmers do not have their origins in the Arab
conquerors, but rather, before then, in the Jewish farmers who were
numerous and a majority in the building of the land.'"
And how did millions of Jews appear around the Mediterranean Sea?
"The people did not spread, but the Jewish religion spread. Judaism
was a converting religion. Contrary to popular opinion, in early
Judaism there was a great thirst to convert others. The Hasmoneans
were the first to begin to produce large numbers of Jews through mass
conversion, under the influence of Hellenism. The conversions between
the Hasmonean Revolt and Bar Kochba's rebellion are what prepared the
ground for the subsequent, wide-spread dissemination of Christianity.
After the victory of Christianity in the fourth century, the momentum
of conversion was stopped in the Christian world, and there was a
steep drop in the number of Jews. Presumably many of the Jews who
appeared around the Mediterranean became Christians. But then Judaism
started to permeate other regions - pagan regions, for example, such
as Yemen and North Africa. Had Judaism not continued to advance at
that stage and had it not continued to convert people in the pagan
world, we would have remained a completely marginal religion, if we
survived at all."
How did you come to the conclusion that the Jews of North Africa were
originally Berbers who converted?
"I asked myself how such large Jewish communities appeared in Spain.
And then I saw that Tariq ibn Ziyad, the supreme commander of the
Muslims who conquered Spain, was a Berber, and most of his soldiers
were Berbers. Dahia al-Kahina's Jewish Berber kingdom had been
defeated only 15 years earlier. And the truth is there are a number of
Christian sources that say many of the conquerors of Spain were Jewish
converts. The deep-rooted source of the large Jewish community in
Spain was those Berber soldiers who converted to Judaism."
Sand argues that the most crucial demographic addition to the Jewish
population of the world came in the wake of the conversion of the
kingdom of Khazaria - a huge empire that arose in the Middle Ages on
the steppes along the Volga River, which at its height ruled over an
area that stretched from the Georgia of today to Kiev. In the eighth
century, the kings of the Khazars adopted the Jewish religion and made
Hebrew the written language of the kingdom. From the 10th century the
kingdom weakened; in the 13th century is was utterly defeated by
Mongol invaders, and the fate of its Jewish inhabitants remains
unclear.
Sand revives the hypothesis, which was already suggested by historians
in the 19th and 20th centuries, according to which the Judaized
Khazars constituted the main origins of the Jewish communities in
Eastern Europe.
"At the beginning of the 20th century there is a tremendous
concentration of Jews in Eastern Europe - three million Jews in Poland
alone," he says. "The Zionist historiography claims that their origins
are in the earlier Jewish community in Germany, but they do not
succeed in explaining how a small number of Jews who came from Mainz
and Worms could have founded the Yiddish people of Eastern Europe. The
Jews of Eastern Europe are a mixture of Khazars and Slavs who were
pushed eastward."
'Degree of perversion'
If the Jews of Eastern Europe did not come from Germany, why did they
speak Yiddish, which is a Germanic language?
"The Jews were a class of people dependent on the German bourgeoisie
in the East, and thus they adopted German words. Here I base myself on
the research of linguist Paul Wechsler of Tel Aviv University, who has
demonstrated that there is no etymological connection between the
German Jewish language of the Middle Ages and Yiddish. As far back as
1828, the Ribal (Rabbi Isaac Ber Levinson) said that the ancient
language of the Jews was not Yiddish. Even Ben Zion Dinur, the father
of Israeli historiography, was not hesitant about describing the
Khazars as the origin of the Jews in Eastern Europe, and describes
Khazaria as 'the mother of the diasporas' in Eastern Europe. But more
or less since 1967, anyone who talks about the Khazars as the
ancestors of the Jews of Eastern Europe is considered naive and
moonstruck."
Why do you think the idea of the Khazar origins is so threatening?
"It is clear that the fear is of an undermining of the historic right
to the land. The revelation that the Jews are not from Judea would
ostensibly knock the legitimacy for our being here out from under us.
Since the beginning of the period of decolonization, settlers have no
longer been able to say simply: 'We came, we won and now we are here'
the way the Americans, the whites in South Africa and the Australians
said. There is a very deep fear that doubt will be cast on our right
to exist."
Is there no justification for this fear?
"No. I don't think that the historical myth of the exile and the
wanderings is the source of the legitimization for me being here, and
therefore I don't mind believing that I am Khazar in my origins. I am
not afraid of the undermining of our existence, because I think that
the character of the State of Israel undermines it in a much more
serious way. What would constitute the basis for our existence here is
not mythological historical right, but rather would be for us to start
to establish an open society here of all Israeli citizens."
In effect you are saying that there is no such thing as a Jewish
people.
"I don't recognize an international people. I recognize 'the Yiddish
people' that existed in Eastern Europe, which though it is not a
nation can be seen as a Yiddishist civilization with a modern popular
culture. I think that Jewish nationalism grew up in the context of
this 'Yiddish people.' I also recognize the existence of an Israeli
people, and do not deny its right to sovereignty. But Zionism and also
Arab nationalism over the years are not prepared to recognize it.
"From the perspective of Zionism, this country does not belong to its
citizens, but rather to the Jewish people. I recognize one definition
of a nation: a group of people that wants to live in sovereignty over
itself. But most of the Jews in the world have no desire to live in
the State of Israel, even though nothing is preventing them from doing
so. Therefore, they cannot be seen as a nation."
What is so dangerous about Jews imagining that they belong to one
people? Why is this bad?
"In the Israeli discourse about roots there is a degree of perversion.
This is an ethnocentric, biological, genetic discourse. But Israel has
no existence as a Jewish state: If Israel does not develop and become
an open, multicultural society we will have a Kosovo in the Galilee.
The consciousness concerning the right to this place must be more
flexible and varied, and if I have contributed with my book to the
likelihood that I and my children will be able to live with the others
here in this country in a more egalitarian situation - I will have
done my bit.
"We must begin to work hard to transform our place into an Israeli
republic where ethnic origin, as well as faith, will not be relevant
in the eyes of the law. Anyone who is acquainted with the young elites
of the Israeli Arab community can see that they will not agree to live
in a country that declares it is not theirs. If I were a Palestinian I
would rebel against a state like that, but even as an Israeli I am
rebelling against it."
The question is whether for those conclusions you had to go as far as
the Kingdom of the Khazars.
"I am not hiding the fact that it is very distressing for me to live
in a society in which the nationalist principles that guide it are
dangerous, and that this distress has served as a motive in my work. I
am a citizen of this country, but I am also a historian and as a
historian it is my duty to write history and examine texts. This is
what I have done."
If the myth of Zionism is one of the Jewish people that returned to
its land from exile, what will be the myth of the country you
envision?
"To my mind, a myth about the future is better than introverted
mythologies of the past. For the Americans, and today for the
Europeans as well, what justifies the existence of the nation is a
future promise of an open, progressive and prosperous society. The
Israeli materials do exist, but it is necessary to add, for example,
pan-Israeli holidays. To decrease the number of memorial days a bit
and to add days that are dedicated to the future. But also, for
example, to add an hour in memory of the Nakba [literally, the
"catastrophe" - the Palestinian term for what happened when Israel was
established], between Memorial Day and Independence Day."
Sheldon Liberman
How many Middle East countries have freedom of religion?
> That's why the U.S. is such a great country. We allow secular jews to
> express hatred for muslims, and jews believe that a jew hating a
> middle eastern muslim is not in anyway an antisemite.
You may find that an anti-Muslim posture is hardly the domain of just
the Jewish community.
> Of course the
> jews of secular Israel do not believe the indegenous people of the
> region called Palestine are a people with a history in the Holy land.
What? Of course they do.
> Ancient Israel was a theocracy. But the Christ they killed was the
> wrong one. So they have come back as a secular state for jews. That
> way they don't have to assimilate in the various countries in which
> they live. Excuse me.
Excuse me. What are you talking about?
> An act of war is called a preemptive strike according to the great
> Alan Dershowitz. The only requirement is that no diplomacy be allowed.
> It is disturbing to watch Israel justifying their actions by saying
> "The U.S. has said Hamas is a terrorist organization".
Hamas--which happens to be the Hebrew word for violence--was founded
with the raison d'etre to destroy Israel. No U.S. affirmation
required.
> We've also said
> the "JADL is a terrorist orgANIZATION". So what's new?
> I use to think Palestine would be a district of Israel, but a few days
> ago I was reading over the 'net about a bi-state called Palestine-
> Israel! Wouldn't that be awful? It would preserve the historical
> legitimacy of the Holy Bible every word of which was written by the
> ancient Jews of religious Israel. Wouldn't that be awful?
No, it wouldn't.
> I knew a guy in Boston, Massachusetts who spent five years in prison
> for refusing the draft. I'll refrain from using Joe's surname, but his
> face was the image of the Irish face that was very commonly used for
> images of Christ. Air strikes from the air doesn't make you brave when
> the target is a police station. They were Hamas police. A terrorist
> organization!- Hide quoted text -
???
>
> - Show quoted text -
Sheldon Liberman
> On Dec 28, 4:54 am, DoD <danskisan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 27, 11:49 pm, HHW <coaster132...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > Israeli best seller breaks national taboo
>
> > Low watson goes even deeper in his anti-Jewish depravity.
>
> Do you mean I'm anti-Khazar? As I hadn't heard of them until about a
> year ago that's unlikely, don't you think?
You apparently don't. The idea that the Jews descended from the
Khazars was done away with years ago by DNA analysis.
>
> This issue is pretty fundamental. It goes to the very center of
> Zionist ideology. You, for example, hate the Palestinian Resistance as
> a result have having bought into Zionism. Tell us, oh Zionist, do the
> descendants of Khazars, whose ancestors seem never to have lived
> anywhere near Palestine, have the "right" to take it from its native
> people? An objective person will address the issue critically. Here is
> another Israeli scholar, a Jewish history specialist, who criticizes
> Professor Sand's work. You will note as does Jonathan Cook that this
> scholar does not really deny Sand's central thesis. What he does is
> defend the Israeli historical profession's standards from claims of
> distorting the historical record. That may be telling.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> deliberate program designed to make Israelis forget the true ...
>
> read more »
danski...@gmail.com
> On Dec 28, 4:54 am, DoD <danskisan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 27, 11:49 pm, HHW <coaster132...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > Israeli best seller breaks national taboo
>
> > Low watson goes even deeper in his anti-Jewish depravity.
>
> Do you mean I'm anti-Khazar? As I hadn't heard of them until about a
> year ago that's unlikely, don't you think?
No... It is obvious that you are prone to push any and every anti-
Jewish conspiracy.
You started off by saying that you are not against Israel and you
believed that it is a worthy
state, that you are commited to its protection. You originally said
that you wanted it to just
get out of the W.B. Now you are pushing forth the notion that Jews are
not really Jews...and the
Jewish state is not really neccessary. You really are a dick and a
slimey POS.
ÇDoügßT
<john...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:a9c9d579-cd56-4075...@o40g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
john...@gmail.com
> Fuck muslimes, fuck palasimians.
>
Thank you for your contribution.
drahcir
As I replied the last time you posted this nonsense, this guy seems
wholly ignorant of DNA evidence proving Israelite origin of Jews from
all over the world. That invalidates all of the useless verbiage
below.
john...@gmail.com
> On Dec 28, 12:49 am, HHW <coaster132...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> As I replied the last time you posted this nonsense, this guy seems
> wholly ignorant of DNA evidence proving Israelite origin of Jews from
> all over the world. That invalidates all of the useless verbiage
> below.
>
john...@gmail.com
Hear, I meant to say.
HHW
Certainly not Israel. It oppresses its religious minority.
> > That's why the U.S. is such a great country. We allow secular jews to
> > express hatred for muslims, and jews believe that a jew hating a
> > middle eastern muslim is not in anyway an antisemite.
>
> You may find that an anti-Muslim posture is hardly the domain of just
> the Jewish community.
True, indeed, but the intense demonization of the Muslim tradition in
general and the Palestinians in particular in recent decades has been
generated by Jewish interests in the U.S. in an effort to promote the
interests of Israel. Read Mearsheimer & Walt's "The Israel Lobby and
American Foriegn Policy".
> > Of course the
> > jews of secular Israel do not believe the indegenous people of the
> > region called Palestine are a people with a history in the Holy land.
>
> What? Of course they do.
Surely they don't disagree with Deborah Sharavi!?
> > Ancient Israel was a theocracy. But the Christ they killed was the
> > wrong one. So they have come back as a secular state for jews. That
> > way they don't have to assimilate in the various countries in which
> > they live. Excuse me.
>
> Excuse me. What are you talking about?
A good question.
> > An act of war is called a preemptive strike according to the great
> > Alan Dershowitz. The only requirement is that no diplomacy be allowed.
> > It is disturbing to watch Israel justifying their actions by saying
> > "The U.S. has said Hamas is a terrorist organization".
>
> Hamas--which happens to be the Hebrew word for violence--was founded
> with the raison d'etre to destroy Israel. No U.S. affirmation
> required.
Forgive us, Mr. Liberman, but should that determine American Middle
Eastern policy? Israel was founded in a vast ethnic cleansing, one of
the 20th Century's monstrous crimes against humanity.
>
> > We've also said
> > the "JADL is a terrorist orgANIZATION". So what's new?
> > I use to think Palestine would be a district of Israel, but a few days
> > ago I was reading over the 'net about a bi-state called Palestine-
> > Israel! Wouldn't that be awful? It would preserve the historical
> > legitimacy of the Holy Bible every word of which was written by the
> > ancient Jews of religious Israel. Wouldn't that be awful?
>
> No, it wouldn't.
Maybe not, but that too is off the subject, i.e., the American
national interest.
>
> > I knew a guy in Boston, Massachusetts who spent five years in prison
> > for refusing the draft. I'll refrain from using Joe's surname, but his
> > face was the image of the Irish face that was very commonly used for
> > images of Christ. Air strikes from the air doesn't make you brave when
> > the target is a police station. They were Hamas police. A terrorist
> > organization!- Hide quoted text -
>
> ???
That's not enough question marks.
HHW
> On Dec 28, 2:15 pm, HHW <coaster132...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 28, 4:54 am, DoD <danskisan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 27, 11:49 pm, HHW <coaster132...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Israeli best seller breaks national taboo
>
> > > Low watson goes even deeper in his anti-Jewish depravity.
>
> > Do you mean I'm anti-Khazar? As I hadn't heard of them until about a
> > year ago that's unlikely, don't you think?
>
> You apparently don't. The idea that the Jews descended from the
> Khazars was done away with years ago by DNA analysis.
I understand that the DNA analysis pursued back to the level of four
maternal founders of the line but the analysis did not fix the
location of these seminal events. I also understand that Khazar
origins of most of the Ashkenazi are not in dispute. When Dr. Sand's
book is printed in English by Verso here in the United States will you
read it? It is already a best seller elsewhere and looks to become one
world-wide.
> ...
>
> read more »
drahcir
Yes. DNA is not controversial. It's either indicative, or it's not.
People who want to claim DNA is "controversial", like Barry Scheck
when he was defending OJ, or you when you want to see Jews as
something other than the descendants of ancient Israelites, always
have a motive other than impartially searching for truth.
" 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 Y-DNA haplogroups J
and E.
" Ashkenazim also descend, in a smaller way, from European peoples
such as Slavs and Khazars. The non-Israelite Y-DNA haplogroups include
Q (typically Central Asian) and R1a1 (typically Eastern European)."
Kevin Allan Brook
The Jews of Khazaria
http://www.khazaria.com/genetics/abstracts.html
If you did a search for [DNA ashkenazi jewish israelite] or some such
thing, I bet you could find out for yourself, if you really wanted to.
But of course, you don't.
tj...@post.com
are Tatar people. They are not genetically related to the Askkenazi
Jews at all. They are Altaic - which is NOT European and NOT
Semitic. Genes don't lie! Instead, Ashkenazi show similarities with
the various EUROPEAN people they lived amongst and with other
Sephardic Jews, Palestinians and Syrians. I think one other group
too, Muslim today, I just forgot which one. They notably do NOT show
genetic relationship to the Falasha (black) Jews. Khazars are Altaic
people. Not Semitic. European Ashkenazi Jews do not look like Altaic
people at all - and the genes agree, I just explained.
That Jews invented a HUGE history for their Old Testament is known -
it's either mythology or it's just exagerration.
Where did they come from? That is also known. INDIA. Northern
India. Abarama/Brahma and Sara-isvaita are gods there. That is where
they came from. They came in waves, the Yahuda (warriors) and
others. Not all at once. It's Christians that have the insane
penchant for wanting them to have just "popped up like magic" out of
the middle east that muddied the scholarship.
http://personalpages.tds.net/~theseeker/Abraham.htm
Read it.
drahcir
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 Y-DNA haplogroups J
and E.
" Ashkenazim also descend, in a smaller way, from European peoples
such as Slavs and Khazars. The non-Israelite Y-DNA haplogroups include
Q (typically Central Asian) and R1a1 (typically Eastern European)."
Kevin Allan Brook
The Jews of Khazaria
http://www.khazaria.com/genetics/abstracts.html
The Khazar Myth and the New Anti-Semitism
http://tinyurl.com/2nsbj9
• "Israelis have no history in the Land because they are Khazars, who
are not connected to the land" - Al Hayat Al Jadida, June 16, 2003
•"Oddly, the Zionists were mostly non-Jews whose ancestors had
themselves converted to Judaism around 800 AD in a place called
Khazaria, in the Caucasus Mountains between the Caspian and Black
Seas. They were quite literally Caucasians." - Judicial-inc. website
•"In 1917 the Khazar Jews passed a major milestone towards the
creation of their own state in Palestine. The same year they also
created the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia. There followed a Christian
holocaust, the likes of which the world has never seen. The Khazar
Jews were once again in control of Russia after more than 900 years,
and they set about the task of destroying the Russian Christians -
over 100-million of them, at the same time over 20-million religious
Jews also died at the hands of the Khazar Jews." - Aljazeerah.info
website
It is one of the great ironies of the 21st century that anti-Zionists
and anti-Semites on both the Left and the Right, have returned to
racialist arguments against Jews that most of us thought had died out
after World War II.
One of the most bizarre aspects of this "re-racializing" of anti-
Semitism is the role played by the Khazar myth.
The newly fashionable Khazar mythology holds that modern day
Ashkenazim, and especially the European leadership of the Zionist
movement, are not Jews at all in the racial sense, but rather
descendents from non-Jewish Khazars; therefore, the Khazar "theorists"
claim, Zionists and Israelis have no legitimate claims to the Land of
Israel.
It would be hard to exaggerate how widespread the misuse of the Khazar
myth is among those seeking to delegitimize Israel and Jews today. A
recent investigation showed nearly 30,000 websites using the Khazar
"theory" as a bludgeon
against Israel and Zionism.
Advertisement
LeisureTours
Some two hundred websites claim to describe a cabal known as the
Khazarian Zionist Bolsheviks (KZV). Neo-Nazi and Holocaust denial
organizations and websites are particularly fond of the Khazar myth.
It is also growing in popularity among left-wing anti-Zionists.
Arab and Islamofascist propagandists have long bandied about the
Ashkenazim as Khazars theory and Iran's genocidal leaders adore it. Al-
Jazeera has been using the Khazar story to urge a worldwide Christian
religious war against the Khazar pseudo-Jewish imperialists.
Groups promoting the Protocols of the Elders of Zion often cite the
nefarious role of Khazars as "proof" of a worldwide Jewish conspiracy
(I counted 700 such websites). And even Jewish anti-Zionist cranks
like Alfred M. Lilienthal and the Swedish "Israel Shamir" have used
the Khazar myth to attack Zionism.
Why are these various groups suddenly interested in a rather esoteric
and archaic group of people in Central Asia that disappeared nearly a
millennium ago?
The answer is very simple.
According to the Khazar theory of the new anti-Semites, most Jews
today, particularly Ashkenazi Jews, are not racially Jews at all but
descendents from the Turkic tribe of Khazars, whose ruling class and
parts of its rank and file population converted to Judaism in the 8th
or early 9th
century CE. Hence, argue the racialists, Ashkenazi Jews have no rights
to live in the racially Semitic Middle East and especially not in the
Land of Israel.
Fact and Legend
For Jews, the history of the conversion of the Khazars to Judaism is
best known from essays in The Kuzari: In Defense of the Despised
Faith, a medieval book composed by the great Spanish poet and
philosopher Judah Ha-Levi.
Only part of the book actually deals with the Khazar kingdom, about
which little was known, and the historic claims about them in the book
are not considered fully reliable.
In any case, The Kuzari purports to report the debates at the Khazar
royal court that supposedly led to the Khazar elite's conversion to
Judaism. Other senior Jewish officials in the Spanish Muslim regimes
actually corresponded with the Khazar kingdom - most notably Cordova
Rabbi Hasdai ibn Shaprut (whose letters have survived). And the great
Iraqi sage Saadia Gaon is believed to have maintained correspondence
with Jews in the Khazar kingdom.
It is commonly thought that part of the motivation for the Khazars'
conversion was to establish political neutrality for the Khazar
kingdom, which faced potential threats from the powers of both
Christendom and Islam.
The Khazars themselves left no documentary records. The Arab historian
ibn Fadlan wrote about them, but he did so two centuries after the
conversions to Judaism had occurred. Some Jews, having sought refuge
from Byzantine persecutions, probably lived in the Khazar kingdom long
before the conversion of the royalty there.
One ironic historical twist is that the Khazars contributed to the
Cyrillic alphabet, in which Russian and some other Slovak languages
are written. Saint Cyril came to Khazaria in 860 in an attempt to
convert the Khazars to Christianity. Since the Hebrew of the Khazars
and Greek were the main alphabets known to St. Cyril and the early
Slavs, they borrowed from both.
Western interest in the Khazars was stimulated largely by the 1976
book The Thirteenth Tribe by Arthur Koestler, a writer better known
for his lifelong battles against totalitarianism in all its forms.
Koestler's book
was largely based on the earlier book The History of the Jewish
Khazars, by the historianD.M. Dunlop.
Dunlop rejected the idea that large numbers of Ashkenazi Jews could
trace their origins to the Khazars, but not so Koestler. By grossly
and sensationally exaggerating the role and numbers of Khazar
descendents among European Jewry, Koestler - who was a strong Zionist
- inadvertently provided today's racialist anti-Semites with all the
ammunition they could want, and many of them frequently cite his book
as the basis for their racialist denunciations of Israel.
A number of more serious books about Khazars are now on the market,
including The Jews of Khazaria by Kevin Alan Brook. Rabbi Bernard
Rosensweig was one of the leading figures in debunking the Khazar
theory of Ashkenazi Jewish origins. Writing in Tradition (16:5, Fall
1977, pages 139-162), he dismissed it as "wobbly scholarly foundations
without historical support."
Likewise, the Swedish archaeologist Bozena Werbart, an expert on the
Khazars, wrote: "In the Khazar kingdom, Koestler wanted to see the
origin of the eastern European Jewry. Nevertheless, all the historical
and linguistic facts contradicted his theories."
As The Encyclopedia of Judaism (1989) emphatically states, "The notion
that Ashkenazi Jewry is descended from the Khazars has absolutely no
basis in fact."
What Became of the Khazars
The actual Khazar kingdom was partly subjugated by the early Russians
in the 10th century, and whatever was left was annihilated as a result
of the Mongol invasions of Central Asia.
What exactly became of the Khazar Jews is simply not known. Those who
retained their Judaism probably integrated themselves into other
Jewish communities around the world. Some groups of Khazars joined the
Magyar invasion into what became Hungary and may have merged with
local Jews already living in those lands; indeed, archeologists have
found Jewish stars in the remains of Hungarian Khazar villages.
Small groups of Khazar mercenaries probably found refuge in other
places. Most likely the largest integration of Khazar Jews among other
Jews took place in Iran and Iraq, the large communities closest to the
Khazar kingdom and with whom close ties had been maintained.
(An urban legend holds that red-haired Jews are descended from
Khazars, though that could hardly explain King David, not to mention
Esau. Arthur Koestler claimed many were blond with blue eyes.)
In any case, Khazar political existence ended a thousand years ago.
So what are we to make of the Khazar myth concerning Ashkenazi Jews
and their supposed lack of legitimate claims to Israel due to their
Khazar origins? The greatest irony is that even if the entire Khazar
theory of Ashkenazi Jews were correct - and virtually none of it is
correct - it would be entirely irrelevant. Judaism has never defined
Jews on racial grounds. Anyone from any race is welcome as a convert
to Judaism as long as he or she is sincere.
The biblical Israelites themselves were already a racial hodgepodge.
They absorbed the "mixed multitude" that left Egypt together with them
at the time of the Exodus. There are biblical references to Jews of
different racial features, including the black-skinned Shulamit
mentioned in the Song of Songs.
Jews always defined themselves in religious, ethnic-national and at
times linguistic terms, but never along racial lines. If all Ashkenazi
Jews were indeed converted Khazars, as the racial anti-Zionists claim,
they would be no less legitimately Jews - and, as such, would have the
same legitimate claims to the Jewish homeland as any other group of
Jews. (Given the traditional Jewish deference to righteous converts,
maybe more so.)
Pseudo-History and Poppycock
The actual details of the Khazar theory concerning European Jewry are
simply pseudo-history and crackpot poppycock.
Jews already lived in Europe a thousand years before the Khazar
kingdom was formed. There are no genetic markers or indicators at all
showing that Ashkenazi Jews are descended from Turkic tribes. In fact,
there exists considerable genetic evidence showing that European Jews
are closer to Levantine and Syrian Arabs than to Central Asians.
After the Mongol invasion most Khazars probably assimilated into the
Jewish communities of Iran and Iraq, which of course eventually
emerged as important Sephardic centers, formed mainly of Jews with
Semitic racial characteristics, descended from migrants and exiled
Jews from the Land of Israel. In any case, there are more "Semitic"
Sephardic Jews in Israel today than there are European Ashkenazi Jews.
And if the Khazars looked Turkic, how on earth could they give
Ashkenazi Jews a European complexion?
There are other problems. If all Ashkenazi Jews are descended from
converted Khazars, why are there Cohens and Levis among them? One
inherits the status of a Cohen (priest) or Levite from one's father.
Descendants of converts through the male line can never be a Cohen or
a Levite.
And why are there no Khazar surnames among Ashkenazim, or Khazar names
for towns in Europe where Jews lived? And why did most Ashkenazi
communities speak variations of Yiddish rather than Turkic?
As mentioned, the popularity of the Khazar myth among anti-Semites
represents a return of modern anti-Jewish bigotry to the racialism of
the 1930's and earlier.
Nearly every anti-Semitic and neo-Nazi website denounces Zionists and
Israelis as "Khazars." Web chat lists in which Jews defending Israel
are dismissed as "Khazar usurpers" are too numerous to count.
The racialism once again in vogue holds that Jews would only have
legitimate claims to the right of self-determination in their homeland
if they were appropriately Semitic from a racial point of view.
Palestine is part of the Semitic racial lebensraum and those who do
not possess the correct pure racial markings have no business being
there. Racial purity is suddenly the new basis for national rights.
I discovered scores of neo-Nazi websites claiming that "Khazar
Zionists" were really behind the 9/11 attacks. I found thousands of
websites claiming that "Khazar Jew-pretenders" are in a conspiratorial
league with Freemasons, the Vatican, the Illuminati and others to
control the world.
Khazar conspiracists get nuttier by the day; a widely cited Ku Klux
Klan website claims that the pro-Israel evangelist Pat Robertson is
really a Khazar Jew. The neo-Nazi American Patriots Friends Network
claims Khazars are themselves descended from the Magog race and
secretly control America.
If we take the racialist argument to its logical conclusion,
Palestinian Arabs have the right to exercise all claims to sovereignty
in Israel due to their being true racial Jews, while Zionists are non-
Jewish Khazars - racial imposters and usurpers.
To make things even sillier, Arabs themselves are, of course, a mix of
racial strains, with a particularly large Caucasian component thanks
to Arab intermixing with Spanish and Italian Europeans, Caucasian
Berbers, Vandals, Goths, and even some Vikings.
The racialist delegitimizing of Zionism as "Khazar imperialism" is
smack inside the same insane asylum with the "Jesus was a Palestinian"
theory and the claim that all real Jews (from a racial point of view)
converted to Islam after the Arab conquest of Palestine in the 7th
century and so became Palestinian Arabs.
One can also find countless websites claiming those things.
drahcir
from Tunisia and Morocco), eighty-three Ashkenazim (mostly from Russia
and Poland), and 105 non-Jews from Czechoslovakia, and made
comparisons to non-Jews from Lebanon. They found strong genetic
affinities between Sephardim and Ashkenazim, almost no relationship
with non-Jews from Czechoslovakia, and a very close relationship
between Sephardim and Lebanese non-Jews. They found about 23.4% to
28.6% non-Jewish Y-chromosomes in the Ashkenazim, and concluded that
this represented about one percent or less of admixture per generation
for the centuries the Ashkenazim had lived in Central or Northeastern
Europe (p. 63).
In 2000, Hammer et al compared seven Jewish groups (Ashkenazim, Roman,
North African, Kurdish, Near Eastern [Iran and Iraq], Yemenite, and
Ethiopian) with sixteen non-Jewish groups from similar geographical
locations. They concluded that most Jewish groups were similar to each
other, and had experienced little genetic admixture with non-Jewish
groups. They found a strong genetic similarity between most Jews and
Middle Eastern non-Jews. The Palestinians and Syrian non-Jews were
most closely related, but Saudi Arabians, Lebanese, and Druze also
were close. The authors attributed the genetic closeness to ancient
common Middle Eastern origins. They estimated the admixture rate of
Ashkenazim (for all haplotypes) to be 22.7% plus or minus 7.8% over a
period of about eighty generations (p. 6773). Interestingly, Ethiopian
Jews and the Lemba did not match closely with the cluster of Jewish
groups (p. 6774).
In 2001, Nebel et al compared three Jewish and three non-Jewish groups
from the Middle East: Ashkenazim, Sephardim, and Kurdish Jews from
Israel; Muslim Arabs from Israel and the Palestinian Authority Area;
Bedouin from the Negev; and Muslim Kurds. They concluded that
Sephardim and Kurdish Jews were genetically indistinguishable, but
that both were slightly significantly different from Ashkenazim (who
were most closely related to the Muslim Kurds). Nebel et al had
earlier (2000) found a large genetic relationship between Jews and
Palestinians, but in this study found an even higher relationship of
Jews with Iraquis and Kurds. They conclude that the common genetic
background shared by Jews and other Middle Eastern groups predates the
division of Middle Easterners into different ethnic groups (p. 1106).
Interestingly, Nebel et al (2001) also found that the Cohen Modal
Haplotype (CMH), considered the most definitive Jewish haplotype, was
found among 10.1% of Kurdish Jews, 7.6% of Ashkenazim, 6.4% of
Sephardim, 2.1% of Palestianian Arabs, and 1.1% of Muslim Kurds. The
CMH and the most frequent Muslim Kurdish haplotype (MKH) were the same
on five markers (out of six) and very close on the other marker. The
MKH was shared by 9.5% of Muslim Kurds, 2.6% of Sephardim, 2.0% of
Kurdish Jews, 1.4% of Palestinian Arabs, and 1.3% of Ashkenazim. The
general conclusion is that these similarities result mostly from the
sharing of ancient genetic patterns, and not from more recent
admixture between the groups (p. 1099). Rabbi Yaakov Kleiman has
suggested that the CMH is “likely the marker of the Jews’ and Arabs’
shared Patriarch, Abraham” (2004: 20), but much more analysis is
needed on the CMH in populations throughout the world.
In 2004, Behar et al compared data from Ashkenazi groups in ten
different European areas (France, Germany, the Netherlands; Austria-
Hungary, Byelorussia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Russia, and
Ukraine ) with data from non-Jewish groups in seven different
countries (France, Germany, Austria, Hungary, Poland, Romania, and
Russia). They found that nine of the Jewish groups were similar, with
low rates of admixture with non-Jewish groups, but that these
Ashkenazi groups were closely related to non-Ashkenazi Jews and to
some non-Jewish Near Eastern groups. Within Europe, these authors
suggested an admixture rate of 5-8% for all the Jewish nationality
groups except Dutch Jews who had an admixture rate of 46.0% plus or
minus 18.3%. This supposedly resulted from a long history of relative
tolerance from non-Jews, with Jewish women marrying non-Jewish men (p.
362).
Researchers frequently have used haplogroups to measure the genetic
distance between various groups in the world, and combined data allows
the comparison of these three Jewish groups–Ashkenazim, Sephardim, and
Kurdish Jews–with sixty-nine non-Jewish Eurasian populations. The
lower the number, the less genetic distance there is between the
groups, i.e., the closer the groups are related genetically. The
lowest number for the Jewish groups (closet relationship) was 18, and
the highest number (least relationship) was 88. It is important to
note that these relative average genetic distances will differ as more
samples are added, as data from different methodological techniques
are evaluated, and as different judgments are made on adjusting
different studies to make them comparable to each other. Genetic
research is a relatively recent, and rapidly evolving, area of
research, and there will be constant refinements and adjustments as
more research is added.
Of all the groups, the Ashkenazim are most closely related, in order,
to Palestinian Arabs (18), Muslim Kurds (21), Cypriots (22), Greeks
(23), Kurdish Jews (25), Bedouin (26), Sephardi Jews (27), Egyptians
(27), Turks (28), and Pakistani Parsi (31). Sephardim are most closely
related to Italians (18), Turks (20), Ossetians, Georgia (20), Kurdish
Jews (22), Muslim Kurds (24), Greeks (24), Armenians (26), Cypriots
(26), Ashkenazi Jews (27), and Pakistani Parsi (28). Kurdish Jews are
most closely related to Sephardi Jews (22) and Muslim Kurds (22),
Pakistani Parsi (23), Ashkenazi Jews (25), Turks (26), Palestinian
Arabs (28), Ossetians (30), Cypriots (31), Greeks (32), and Armenians
(35). On the other hand, for nineteen Central and Eastern European
populations, the Ashkenazim averaged 55.1, the Sephardim averaged
48.2, and the Kurdish Jews averaged 55.5. The Georgia Ossetians
(X=29.7) and the Romanians (X=33.0) were the closest to all three of
the Jewish groups. For thirteen western European populations, the
Ashkenazim averaged 71.6, the Sephardim averaged 47.9, and the Kurdish
Jews averaged 63.0. The Sephardim were most closely related to the
Southern Portuguese (33), Dutch (36) and French (36), and Northern
Portuguese (40). None of these were particularly close, but they were
much closer than they were for Ashkenazim or Kurdish Jews.
The genetic distances shown in the previous paragraph are in general
agreement with the studies reported in this article, showing that all
three Jewish groups are relatively closely related to each other. The
close relationship between Sephardim and Kurdish Jews is possibly at
least partly a result of the significant interaction between the Jews
of Iraq and the Jews of Spain and North Africa, especially from the
eighth to the tenth centuries CE. The three Jewish groups differ in
their rankings with their closest ten groups, but generally the
differences in rankings for the closet ten groups are small and
subject to changes in ranking as more samples are added. All three
Jewish groups are closely related to Kurdish Muslims, the closest
neighbors of the Kurdish Jews. Kurdish Jews were close to Muslim
Kurds, but so were Ashkenazim and Sephardim, suggesting that much if
not most of the genetic similarity between Jewish and Muslim Kurds is
from ancient times. Considering their physical closeness, however, it
is reasonable to believe that there has been some genetic admixture
not picked up because the two groups started with similar genetic
patterns.
*********************Ashkenazim are not closely related to their
Central and Eastern European neighbors or to any group outside the
Middle East or Near East. ***************************
Sephardim are more closely related to their neighbors than are the
Ashkenazim, but the Sephardim still are much more closely related to
the other two Jewish groups, the other Middle Easterners, and the
Mediterraneans than they are to their western European neighbors. The
Jewish community in the Netherlands is the most obvious example of
genetic admixture, a pattern which will be seen more often due to
major increases in intermarriages. The other side of the coin, the
extent to which Jewish genetic patterns have entered non-Jewish
groups, is also a topic which needs much more specific
research.
http://www.cryptojews.com/Comparing_DNA.htm
Get it now, you lying lowlife? I tried to help you with the asterisks,
but of course, you can't even follow a thread in a newsgroup post, so
I can't expect much, can I?
drahcir
> Interesting book, but there is a serious problem. GENETICS. Khazars
> are Tatar people. They are not genetically related to the Askkenazi
> Jews at all. They are Altaic - which is NOT European and NOT
> Semitic. Genes don't lie! Instead, Ashkenazi show similarities with
> the various EUROPEAN people they lived amongst and with other
> Sephardic Jews, Palestinians and Syrians. I think one other group
> too, Muslim today, I just forgot which one. They notably do NOT show
> genetic relationship to the Falasha (black) Jews. Khazars are Altaic
> people. Not Semitic. European Ashkenazi Jews do not look like Altaic
> people at all - and the genes agree, I just explained.
>
> That Jews invented a HUGE history for their Old Testament is known -
> it's either mythology or it's just exagerration.
>
> Where did they come from? That is also known. INDIA.
LOL! You aver idiocy with such authority - very impressive!
Try this:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/bible/program.html
P.S. Am I wrong, or is your below link not only completely uncited,
but even devoid of the author's name? If I am right, what in heaven's
name could have motivated you to cite as a source some silly webpage
that anyone could have authored? Please, let me know what you were,
ahem, "thinking" - I am curious.
HHW
> 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 iswww.jkcook.net.
>
> A version of this article originally appeared in The National
> (www.thenational.ae), published in Abu Dhabi.
>
> Jonathan Cook is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global
> Research Articles by Jonathan Cook
Some may be interested further in Jonathan Cook's work:
Welcome to the Jonathan Cook website
My new book is "Disappearing Palestine"
Click here for more information about this and my other books
Archive
I am a British journalist based in Nazareth, Israel. This site
includes my articles on the Middle East published in international
newspapers, English-language Arab publications and specialist
magazines since 2001.
Click here for my full Index of Articles
My most recent articles can also be found in
Latest Articles
or search this website
Subscribing to my latest articles
Because of unexpected demand from readers to join my mailing list, I
have been forced to close it to new subscribers. Instead I have made
it possible to subscribe in a different format called RSS, or "Really
Simple Syndication", used by many of the big media websites, including
the New York Times and the BBC. To learn more about RSS and how you
can use it, please click here.
To go straight to my news feed click on the RSS icon above
Newspapers, Websites and Journals
My articles have been published in:
The Guardian, Observer, Times and New Statesman (London)
The International Herald Tribune and Le Monde diplomatique (Paris)
Al-Ahram Weekly (Cairo)
The National (Abu Dhabi)
Al-Jazeera English language website (Doha)
The Daily Star (Beirut)
The Middle East Report and Washington Report on Middle East Affairs
(Washington)
Przekroj (Warsaw)
The Irish Times (Dublin)
Electronic Intifada
Counterpunch
Websites with links dedicated to my stories include:
Palestine: Information with Provenance, ZNet, Selves and Others and
Anti-War
Translations of some of my articles can be found on
Rebelion (Spanish)
Tlaxcala (French, Spanish, Italian)
ISM-France (French)
Books
In ‘Disappearing Palestine: Israel’s Experiments in Human Despair’,
published by Zed Books in autumn 2008, I examine the enduring themes
of Zionist colonisation of Palestine. I argue that Israel has
developed and refined policies to disperse, imprison and impoverish
the Palestinian people in a relentless effort to destroy them as a
nation. The West Bank and Gaza have been transformed into laboratories
for testing the infrastructure of confinement, creating a lucrative
'defence' industry by pioneering technologies for crowd control,
surveillance, collective punishment and urban warfare. The goal of
these ever more sophisticated systems of curfews, checkpoints, walls,
permits and land grabs is the disappearance of Palestine.
'Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to
Remake the Middle East', published by Pluto Press in January 2008, has
been praised as 'superb' by John Pilger and 'compelling' by veteran
Middle East reporter David Hirst. In it, I argue that Israel's desire
to be the sole regional power in the Middle East has shaped the Bush
Administration's objectives in the 'war on terror'. The book examines
a host of inter-related issues, from the ethnic cleansing of
Palestinians and the Second Lebanon War to the role of Big Oil and the
demonisation of the Arab world. The current chaos in the Middle East,
far from being a disastrous mistake, is the true goal of the neocons
and Israel.
My first book, entitled 'Blood and Religion: The Unmasking of the
Jewish and Democratic State', was published by Pluto Press in spring
2006. It concerns Israel's treatment of its Palestinian citizens
during the second intifada, and the real reasons for the policies of
territorial separation evident in the Gaza disengagement and the
building of the West Bank wall. It argues that, threatened by
predictions that the combined Palestinian population inside Israel and
the Occupied Territories will soon outnumber the region's Jews, Israel
decided to create an expanded fortress state, where only Jewish blood
and Jewish religion count
To find out more about my books, click here
Why my reporting is different
I have chosen to position myself in the region in two ways - one
professional, the other geographical - that distinguish me from
colleagues. This approach gives me greater freedom to reflect on the
true nature of the conflict and provides me with fresh insight into
its root causes.
Professionally, I am one of the few journalists regularly writing
about the region who work as an independent freelancer. I choose the
issues I wish to cover, so I am not constrained by the ‘treadmill’ of
the mainstream media, which require an endless flow of instant copy
and analysis. I am also not tied to the mainstream agenda, which gives
disproportionate coverage to the concerns of the powerful, in this
case the Israeli and American positions - in the US media to a degree
that makes much of their Israel/Palestine reporting implausible. I
also rarely accept commissions, restricting myself to topics that I
consider to be the most revealing about the conflict.
Geographically, I am the first foreign correspondent to be based in
the Israeli Arab city of Nazareth, in the Galilee. Most reporters
covering the conflict live in Jerusalem or Tel Aviv, with a handful of
specialists based in the West Bank city of Ramallah. The range of
stories readily available to reporters in these locations reinforces
the assumption among editors back home that the conflict can only be
understood in terms of the events that followed the West Bank and
Gaza’s occupation in 1967. This has encouraged the media to give far
too much weight to Israeli concerns about ‘security’ - a catch-all
that offers Israel special dispensation to ignore its duties to the
Palestinians under international law.
Many topics central to the dispute between Israelis and Palestinians,
including the plight of the refugees and the continuing dispossession
of Palestinians living as Israeli citizens, do not register on most
reporters’ radars.
From Nazareth, the capital of the Palestinian minority in Israel,
things look very different. There are striking, and disturbing,
similarities between the experiences of Palestinians inside Israel and
those inside the West Bank and Gaza. All have faced Zionism's appetite
for territory and domination, as well as repeated attempts at ethnic
cleansing. These unifying themes suggest that the conflict is less
about the specific circumstances thrown up by the 1967 war and more
about the central tenets of Zionism as expressed in the war of 1948
that founded Israel and the war of 1967 that breathed new life into
its settler colonial agenda.
Short Biography
Born in Buckinghamshire, England in 1965
Education
BA Honours in Philosophy and Politics from Southampton University in
1987
Postgraduate diploma in Journalism from Cardiff University in 1989
Masters degree in Middle Eastern studies, with distinction, from the
School of Oriental and African Studies, London University, 2000.
Work Experience
Reporter and editor of regional newspapers, 1988-94
Freelance sub-editor with national newspapers, 1994-96
Staff member of The Guardian and Observer newspapers, 1996-2001
Freelance writer, based in Nazareth, Israel, covering the Middle East
since September 2001
Founder of the Nazareth Press Agency in February 2004 (00) 972 54
637 5592
HHW
> On Dec 28, 5:08 pm, john....@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > On 28 Dec, 20:14, drahcir <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:> On Dec 28, 12:49 am, HHW <coaster132...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > As I replied the last time you posted this nonsense, this guy seems
> > > wholly ignorant of DNA evidence proving Israelite origin of Jews from
> > > all over the world. That invalidates all of the useless verbiage
> > > below.
>
> > Let's here it then. Uncontroversial is it?
>
> Yes. DNA is not controversial. It's either indicative, or it's not.
> People who want to claim DNA is "controversial", like Barry Scheck
> when he was defending OJ, or you when you want to see Jews as
> something other than the descendants of ancient Israelites, always
> have a motive other than impartially searching for truth.
>
> " 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 Y-DNA haplogroups J
> and E.
>
> " Ashkenazim also descend, in a smaller way, from European peoples
> such as Slavs and Khazars. The non-Israelite Y-DNA haplogroups include
> Q (typically Central Asian) and R1a1 (typically Eastern European)."
>
> Kevin Allan Brook
>
> If you did a search for [DNA ashkenazi jewish israelite] or some such
> thing, I bet you could find out for yourself, if you really wanted to.
> But of course, you don't.
===========================
Palestine Think Tank
Free Minds for a Free Palestine
Home
Contact
PTT TV
RESISTANCE & STRATEGY
About
Gilad Atzmon - "The Wandering Who?"
By Gilad Atzmon • Sep 2nd, 2008 at 9:51 • Category: Analysis,
Education, Gilad Atzmon, Gilad's Choice, Israel, Newswire, Our
Authors, Palestine, Religion, Zionism
Tel Aviv University historian, Professor Shlomo Sand, opens his
remarkable study of Jewish nationalism quoting Karl W. Deutsch:
A nation is a group of people united by a common mistake regarding its
origin and a collective hostility towards its neighbours” [1]
As simple or even simplistic as it may sound, the quote above
eloquently summarises the figment of reality entangled with modern
Jewish nationalism and especially within the concept of Jewish
identity. It obviously points the finger at the collective mistake
Jews tend to make whenever referring to their ‘illusionary collective
past’ and ‘collective origin’. Yet, in the same breath, Deutsch’s
reading of nationalism throws light upon the hostility that is
unfortunately coupled with almost every Jewish group towards its
surrounding reality, whether it is human or takes the shape of land.
While the brutality of the Israelis towards the Palestinians has
already become rather common knowledge, the rough treatment Israelis
reserve for their ‘promised soil’ and landscape is just starting to
reveal itself. The ecological disaster the Israelis are going to leave
behind them will be the cause of suffering for many generations to
come. Leave aside the megalomaniac wall that shreds the Holy land into
enclaves of depravation and starvation, Israel has managed to pollute
its main rivers and streams with nuclear and chemical waste.
“When And How the Jewish People Was Invented” is a very serious study
written by Professor Shlomo Sand, an Israeli historian. It is the most
serious study of Jewish nationalism and by far, the most courageous
elaboration on the Jewish historical narrative.
In his book, Sand manages to prove beyond any reasonable doubt that
the Jewish people never existed as a 'nation-race', they never shared
a common origin. Instead they are a colourful mix of groups that at
various stages in history adopted the Jewish religion.
In case you follow Sand’s line of thinking and happen to ask yourself,
“when was the Jewish People invented?” Sand’s answer is rather simple.
“At a certain stage in the 19th century, intellectuals of Jewish
origin in Germany, influenced by the folk character of German
nationalism, took upon themselves the task of inventing a people
‘retrospectively,’ out of a thirst to create a modern Jewish
people.” [2]
Accordingly, the ‘Jewish people’ is a ‘made up’ notion consisting of a
fictional and imaginary past with very little to back it up
forensically, historically or textually. Furthermore, Sand - who
elaborated on early sources of antiquity - comes to the conclusion
that Jewish exile is also a myth, and that the present-day
Palestinians are far more likely to be the descendants of the ancient
Semitic people in Judea/Canaan than the current predominantly
Khazarian-origin Ashkenazi crowd to which he himself admittedly
belongs.Khalid Amayreh and many others regard as the “Nazis of our
time”.Astonishingly enough, in spite of the fact that Sand manages to
dismantle the notion of ‘Jewish people’, crush the notion of ‘Jewish
collective past’ and ridicule the Jewish chauvinist national impetus,
his book is a best seller in Israel. This fact alone may suggest that
those who call themselves ‘people of the book’ are now starting to
learn about the misleading and devastating philosophies and ideologies
that made them into what Khalid Amayreh and many others regard as the
“Nazis of our time”.
Hitler Won After All
Rather often when asking a ‘secular’ ‘cosmopolitan’ Jew what it is
that makes him into a Jew, a shallow overwhelmingly chewed answer
would be thrown back at you: “It is Hitler who made me into a Jew”.
Though the ‘cosmopolitan’ Jew, being an internationalist, would
dismiss other people’s national inclinations, he insists upon
maintaining his own right to ‘self determination’. However, it is not
really he himself who stands at the core of this unique demand for
national orientation, it is actually the devil, master-monster anti-
Semite, namely Hitler. Apparently, the cosmopolitan Jew celebrates his
nationalist entitlement as long as Hitler is there to be blamed.
As far as the secular cosmopolitan Jew is concerned, Hitler won after
all. Sand manages to enhance this paradox. Insightfully he suggests
that “while in the 19th century referring to Jews as an ‘alien racial
identity’ would mark one as an anti-Semite, in the Jewish State this
very philosophy is embedded mentally and intellectually” [3]. In
Israel Jews celebrate their differentiation and unique conditions.
Furthermore, says Sand, “There were times in Europe when one would be
labelled as an anti-Semite for claiming that all Jews belong to a
nation of an alien type. Nowadays, claiming that Jews have never been
and still aren’t people or a nation, would tag one as a Jew hater”.
[4] It is indeed pretty puzzling that the only people who managed to
maintain and sustain a racially orientated, expansionist and genocidal
national identity that is not at all different from Nazi ethnic
ideology are the Jews who were, amongst others, the leading targeted
victims of the Nazi ideology and practice.
Nationalism In General and Jewish Nationalism In Particular
Louis-Ferdinand Celine mentioned that in the time of the Middle Ages
in the moments between major wars, knights would charge a very high
price for their readiness to die in the name of their kingdoms, in the
20th century youngsters have rushed to die en masse without demanding
a thing in return. In order to understand this mass consciousness
shift we need an eloquent methodical model that would allow us to
understand what nationalism is all about.
Like Karl Deutsch, Sand regards nationality as a phantasmic narrative.
It is an established fact that anthropological and historical studies
of the origins of different so-called ‘people’ and ‘nations’ lead
towards the embarrassing crumbling of every ethnicity and ethnic
identity. Hence, it is rather interesting to find out that Jews tend
to take their own ethnic myth very seriously. The explanation may be
simple, as Benjamin Beit Halachmi spotted years ago. Zionism was there
to transform the Bible from a spiritual text into a ‘land registry’.
For that matter, the truth of the Bible or any other element of Jewish
historical narrative has very little relevance as long as it doesn’t
interfere with the Jewish national political cause or practice.
One could also surmise that the lack of clear ethnic origin doesn’t
stop people from feeling an ethnic or national belonging. The fact
that Jews are far from being what one can label as a People and that
the Bible has very little historical truth in it, doesn’t really stop
generations of Israelis and Jews from identifying themselves with King
David or Terminator Samson. Evidently, the lack of an unambiguous
ethnic origin doesn’t stop people from seeing themselves as part of a
people. Similarly, it wouldn’t stop the nationalist Jew from feeling
that he belongs to some greater abstract collective.
In the 1970’s, Shlomo Artzi, then a young Israeli singer who was bound
to become Israel’s all-time greatest rock star, released a song that
had become a smash hit in a matter of hours. Here are the first few
lines:
All of a sudden
A man wakes up
In the morning
He feels he is people
And he starts to walk
And to everyone he comes across
He says shalom
To a certain extent Artzi innocently expresses in his lyrics the
suddenness and almost contingency involved in the transformation of
the Jews into people. However, almost within the same breath, Artzi
contributes towards the illusionary national myth of the peace-seeking
nation. Artzi should have known by then that Jewish nationalism was a
colonialist act at the expense of the indigenous Palestinian people.
Seemingly, nationalism, national belonging and Jewish nationalism in
particular create a major intellectual task. Interestingly enough, the
first to deal theoretically and methodically with issues having to do
with nationalism were Marxist ideologists. Though Marx himself failed
to address the issue adequately, early 20th century uprising of
nationalist demands in eastern and central Europe caught Lenin and
Stalin unprepared.
“Marxists’ contribution to the study of nationalism can be seen as the
focus on the deep correlation between the rise of free economy and the
evolvement of the national state.” [5] In fact, Stalin was there to
summarise the Marxist take on the subject. “The nation,” says Stalin,
“is a solid collaboration between beings that was created historically
and formed following four significant phenomena: the sharing of
tongue, the sharing of territory, the sharing of economy and the
sharing of psychic significance…” [6]
As one would expect, the Marxist materialist attempt to understand
nationalism is lacking an adequate historical overview. Instead it
would be reliant upon a class struggle. For some obvious reasons such
a vision was popular amongst those who believe in ‘socialism of one
nation’ amongst them we can consider the proponents of a leftist
branch of Zionism.
For Sand, nationalism evolved due to the “ rapture created by
modernity which split people from their immediate past” [7]. The
mobility created by urbanisation and industrialisation crushed the
social hierarchic system as well as the continuum between past,
present and future. Sand points out that before industrialisation, the
feudal peasant didn’t necessarily feel the need for an historical
narrative of empires and kingdoms. The feudal subject didn’t need an
extensive abstract historical narrative of large collectives that had
very little relevance to the immediate concrete existential need.
“Without a perception of social progression, they did well with an
imaginary religious tale that contained a mosaic of memory that lacked
a real dimension of a forward moving time. The ‘end’ was the beginning
and eternity bridged between life and death.” [8]In the modern secular
and urban world, ‘time’ had become the main life vessel which
illustrated an imaginary symbolic meaning. Collective historical time
had become the elementary ingredient of the personal and the
intimate. The collective narrative shapes the personal meaning and
what seems to be the ‘real’. As much as some banal minds still insist
that the ‘personal is political’, it would be far more intelligible to
argue that in practice, it is actually the other way around. Within
the post-modern condition, the political is personal and the subject
is spoken rather than speaking itself. Authenticity, for the matter,
is a myth that reproduces itself in the form of symbolic identifier.
Sand’s reading of nationalism as a product of industrialisation,
urbanisation and secularism, makes a lot of sense when bearing in mind
Uri Slezkin’s suggestion that Jews are the ‘apostles of modernity’,
secularism and urbanisation. If Jews happened to find themselves at
the hub of urbanisation and secularisation it shouldn’t then take us
by surprise that the Zionists were rather creative as much as others
in inventing their own phantasmic collective imaginary tale. However,
while insisting on their right to be ‘like other people’ Zionists have
managed to transform their imagined collective past into a global,
expansionist, merciless agenda as well as the biggest threat to world
peace.
There Is No Jewish History
It is an established fact that not a single Jewish history text had
been written between the 1st century and early 19th century. The fact
that Judaism is based on a religious historical myth may have
something to do with it. An adequate scrutiny of the Jewish past was
never a primary concern within the Rabbinical tradition. One of the
reasons is probably the lack of a need of such a methodical effort.
For the Jew who lived during ancient times and the Middle Ages, there
was enough in the Bible to answer most relevant questions having to do
with day-to-day life, Jewish meaning and fate. As Shlomo Sand puts it,
“a secular chronological time was foreign to the ‘Diaspora time’ that
was shaped by the anticipation for the coming of the Messiah".
However, in the light of German secularisation, urbanisation and
emancipation and due to the decreasing authority of the Rabbinical
leaders, an emerging need of an alternative cause rose amongst the
awakening Jewish intellectuals. The emancipated Jew wondered who he
was, where he come from. He also started to speculate what his role
might be within the rapidly opening European society.
In 1820 the German Jewish historian Isaak Markus Jost (1793-1860)
published the first serious historical work on Jews, namely “The
History of the Israelites”. Jost avoided the Biblical time, he
preferred to start his journey with the Judea Kingdom, he also
compiled an historical narrative of different Jewish communities
around the world. Jost realised that the Jews of his time did not form
an ethnic continuum. He grasped that Israelites from place to place
were rather different. Hence, he thought there was nothing in the
world that should stop Jews from total assimilation. Jost believed
that within the spirit of enlightenment, both the Germans and the Jews
would turn their back to the oppressive religious institution and
would form a healthy nation based on a growing geographically
orientated sense of belonging.
Though Jost was aware of the evolvement of European nationalism, his
Jewish followers were rather unhappy with his liberal optimistic
reading of the Jewish future. “
From historian Heinrich Graetz on, Jewish historians began to draw the
history of Judaism as the history of a nation that had been a
‘kingdom’, expelled into ‘exile’, became a wandering people and
ultimately turned around and went back to its birthplace.” [9]
For the late Moses Hess, it was a racial struggle rather than a class
struggle that would define the shape of Europe. Accordingly, suggests
Hess, Jews better return and reflect on their cultural heritage and
ethnic origin. For Hess, the conflict between Jews and Gentiles was
the product of racial differentiation, hence, unavoidable.
The ideological path from Hess’s pseudo scientific racist orientation
to Zionist historicism is rather obvious. If Jews are indeed an alien
racial entity (as Hess, Jabotinsky and others believed), they better
look for their natural homeland, and this homeland is no other than
Eretz Yizrael. Cleary, Hess’s assumption regarding a racial continuum
wasn’t scientifically approved. In order to maintain the emerging
phantasmic narrative, an orchestrated denial mechanism had to be
erected just to make sure that some embarrassing facts wouldn’t
interfere with the emerging national creation.
Sand suggests that the denial mechanism was rather orchestrated and
very well thought out. The Hebrew University decision in the 1930’s to
split Jewish History and General History into two distinct departments
was far more than just a matter of convenience. The logos behind the
split is a glimpse into Jewish self-realisation. In the eyes of Jewish
academics, the Jewish condition and Jewish psyche were unique and
should be studied separately. Apparently, even within Jewish academia,
a supreme status is reserved for the Jews, their history and their
self-perception. As Sand insightfully unveils, within the Jewish
Studies departments the researcher is scattering between the
mythological and the scientific while the myth maintains its primacy.
Yet, it often gets into a stalling dilemma by the ‘small devious
facts’.
The New Israelite, the Bible and Archaeology
In Palestine, the new Jews and later the Israelis were determined to
recruit the Old Testament and to transform it into the amalgamate code
of the future Jew. The ‘nationalisation’ of the Bible was there to
plant in young Jews the idea that they are the direct followers of
their great ancient ancestors. Bearing in mind the fact that
nationalisation was largely a secular movement, the Bible was stripped
of its spiritual and religious meaning. Instead, it was viewed as an
historical text describing a real chain of events in the past. The
Jews who had now managed to kill their God learned to believe in
themselves. Massada, Samson and Bar Kochva became suicidal master
narratives. In the light of their heroic ancestors, Jews learned to
love themselves as much as they hate others, except that this time
they possessed the military might to inflict real pain on their
neighbours. More concerning was the fact that instead of a
supernatural entity - namely God - who command them to invade the land
and execute a genocide and to rob their ‘promised land’ of its
indigenous habitants, within their national revival project it was
them as themselves, Herzl, Jabotinsky, Weitzman, Ben Gurion, Sharon,
Peres, Barak who decided to expel, destroy and kill. Instead of God,
it was then the Jews killing in the name of Jewish people. They did it
while Jewish symbols decorate their planes and tanks. They followed
commands that where given in the newly restored language of their
ancestors.
Surprisingly enough, Sand who is no doubt a striking scholar, fails to
mention that the Zionist hijacking of the Bible was in fact a
desperate Jewish answer to German Early Romanticism. However, as much
as German philosophers, poets, architects and artists were
ideologically and aesthetically excited about pre-Socratic Greece,
they knew very well that they were not exactly Hellenism’s sons and
daughters. The nationalist Jew took it one step further, he bound
oneself into a phantasmic blood chain with his mythical ancestors, not
before long he restored their ancient language. Rather than a sacred
tongue, Hebrew had become a spoken language. German Early Romanticist
never went that far.
German intellectuals during the 19th century were also fully aware of
the distinction between Athens and Jerusalem. For them, Athens stood
for universal, the epic chapter of humanity and humanism. Jerusalem
was, on the contrary, the grand chapter of tribal barbarism.
Jerusalem was a representation of the banal, non-universal,
monotheistic merciless God, the one who kills the elder and the
infant. The Germanic Early Romantic era left us with Hegel, Nietzsche,
Fichte and Heidegger and a just a few Jewish self-haters, leading
amongst them, Otto Weininger. The Jerusalemite left us with not a
single master ideological thinker. Some German Jewish second-rate
scholars tried to preach Jerusalem in the Germanic exedra, amongst
them were Herman Cohen, Franz Rosenzveig and Ernst Bloch. They
obviously failed to notice that it was the traces of Jerusalem in
Christianity, which German Early Romanticists despised.
In their effort to resurrect ‘Jerusalem’, archaeology was recruited to
provide the Zionist epos with its necessary ‘scientific’ ground.
Archaeology was there to unify the Biblical time with the moment of
revival. Probably the most astonishing moment of this bizarre trend
was the 1982 ‘military burial ceremony’ of the bones of Shimon Bar
Kochva, a Jew rebel who died 2000 years earlier. Executed by the chief
military Rabbi, a televised military burial was given to some sporadic
bones found in a cave near the Dead Sea. In practice suspected remains
of a 1st century Jew rebel was treated as an IDF casualty. Clearly,
archaeology had a national role, it was recruited to cement the past
and the present while leaving the Galut out.
Astonishingly enough, it didn’t take long before things turned the
other way around. As archaeological research become more and more
independent of the Zionist dogma, the embarrassing truth filtered out.
It would be impossible to ground the truthfulness of the Biblical tale
on forensic facts. If anything, archaeology refutes the historicity of
the Biblical plot. Excavation revealed the embarrassing fact. The
Bible is a collection of innovative fictitious literature.
As Sand points out, the Early Biblical story is soaked with
Philistines, Aramaeans and camels. Embarrassingly enough, as far as
excavations are there to enlighten us, Philistine didn’t appear in the
region before the 12th century BC, the Aramaeans appears a century
later and camels didn’t show their cheerful faces before the 8th
century. These scientific facts lead Zionist researchers into some
severe confusion. However, for non-Jewish scholars such as Thomas
Thompson, it was rather clear that the Biblical is a “late collection
of innovative literature written by a gifted theologian.” [10] The
Bible appears to be an ideological text that was there to serve a
social and political cause.Embarrassingly enough, not much was found
in Sinai to prove the story of the legendary Egyptian Exodus,
seemingly 3 million Hebraic men, women and children were marching in
the desert for 40 years without leaving a thing behind. Not even a
single matzo ball, very non-Jewish one may say.
The story of the Biblical resettlement and the genocide of the
Canaanite which the contemporary Israelite imitates to such success is
another myth. Jericho, the guarded city that was flattened to the
sounds of horns and almighty supernatural intervention was just a tiny
village during the 13th century BC.
As much as Israel regards itself as the resurrection of the monumental
Kingdom of David and Salomon, excavation that took place in the Old
City of Jerusalem in the 1970’s revealed that David’s kingdom was no
more than a tiny tribal setting. Evidence that was referred by Yigal
Yadin to King Solomon had been refuted later by forensic tests made
with Carbon 14. The discomforting fact has been scientifically
established. The Bible is a fictional tale, and not much there can
ground any glorifying existence of Hebraic people in Palestine at any
stage.
Who invented the Jews?
Quite early on in his text, Sand raises the crucial and probably the
most relevant questions. Who are the Jews? Where did they come from?
How is it that in different historical periods they appear in some
very different and remote places?
Though most contemporary Jews are utterly convinced that their
ancestors are the Biblical Israelites who happened to be exiled
brutally by the Romans, truth must be said. Contemporary Jews have
nothing to do with ancient Israelites, who have never been sent to
exile because such an expulsion has never taken place. The Roman Exile
is just another Jewish myth.
“I started looking in research studies about the exile from the land”
says Sand in an Haaretz interview [11], “but to my astonishment I
discovered that it has no literature. The reason is that no one exiled
the people of the country. The Romans did not exile peoples and they
could not have done so even if they had wanted to. They did not have
trains and trucks to deport entire populations. That kind of logistics
did not exist until the 20th century. From this, in effect, the whole
book was born: in the realization that Judaic society was not
dispersed and was not exiled.”
Indeed, in the light of Sand’s simple insight, the idea of Jewish
exile is amusing. The thought of Roman Imperial navy was working 24/7
schlepping Moishe’le and Yanka’le to Cordova and Toledo may help Jews
to feel important as well as schleppable, but common sense would
suggest that the Roman armada had far more important things to do.
However, far more interesting is the logical outcome: If the people of
Israel were not expelled, then the real descendants of the inhabitants
of the Kingdom of Judah must be the Palestinians.
“No population remains pure over a period of thousands of years” says
Sand. [12] “But the chances that the Palestinians are descendants of
the ancient Judaic people are much greater than the chances that you
or I are its descendents. The first Zionists, up until the Arab Revolt
[1936-9], knew that there had been no exiling, and that the
Palestinians were descended from the inhabitants of the land. They
knew that farmers don’t leave until they are expelled. Even Yitzhak
Ben-Zvi, the second president of the State of Israel, wrote in 1929
that, ‘the vast majority of the peasant farmers do not have their
origins in the Arab conquerors, but rather, before then, in the Jewish
farmers who were numerous and a majority in the building of the
land.’”
In his book Sand takes it further and suggests that until the First
Arab Uprising (1929) the so-called leftist Zionist leaders tended to
believe that the Palestinian peasants who are actually ‘Jews by
origin’ would assimilate within the emerging Hebraic culture and would
eventually join the Zionist movement. Ber Borochov believed that “a
falach (Palestinian Peasant), dresses as a Jew, and behaves as a
working class Jew, won’t be at all different from the Jew”. This very
idea reappeared in Ben Gurion’s and Ben-Zvi’s text in 1918. Both
Zionist leaders realised that Palestinian culture was soaked with
Biblical traces, linguistically, as well as geographically (names of
villages, towns, rivers and mountains). Both Ben Gurion and Ben-Zvi
regarded, at least at that early stage, the indigenous Palestinians as
ethnic relatives who were holding close to the land and potential
brothers. They as well regarded Islam as a friendly ‘democratic
religion’. Clearly, after 1936 both Ben-Zvi and Ben Gurion toned down
their ‘multicultural’ enthusiasm. As far as Ben Gurion is concerned,
ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians seemed to be far more appealing.
One may wonder, if the Palestinians are the real Jews, who are those
who insist upon calling themselves Jews?
Sand’s answer is rather simple, yet it makes a lot of sense. “The
people did not spread, but the Jewish religion spread. Judaism was a
converting religion. Contrary to popular opinion, in early Judaism
there was a great thirst to convert others.” [13]
Clearly, monotheist religions, being less tolerant than polytheist
ones have within them an expanding impetus. Judaic expansionism in its
early days was not just similar to Christianity but it was Judaic
expansionism that planted the ‘spreading out’ seeds in early Christian
thought and practice.
“The Hasmoneans,” says Sand, [14] “were the first to begin to produce
large numbers of Jews through mass conversion, under the influence of
Hellenism. It was this tradition of conversions that prepared the
ground for the subsequent, widespread dissemination of Christianity.
After the victory of Christianity in the 4th century, the momentum of
conversion was stopped in the Christian world, and there was a steep
drop in the number of Jews. Presumably many of the Jews who appeared
around the Mediterranean became Christians. But then Judaism started
to permeate other regions - pagan regions, for example, such as Yemen
and North Africa. Had Judaism not continued to advance at that stage
and had it not continued to convert people in the pagan world, we
would have remained a completely marginal religion, if we survived at
all.”
The Jews of Spain, whom we believed to be blood related to the Early
Israelites seem to be converted Berbers. “I asked myself,” says Sand,
“how such large Jewish communities appeared in Spain. And then I saw
that Tariq ibn Ziyad, the supreme commander of the Muslims who
conquered Spain, was a Berber, and most of his soldiers were Berbers.
Dahia al-Kahina’s Jewish Berber Kingdom had been defeated only 15
years earlier. And the truth is there are a number of Christian
sources that say many of the conquerors of Spain were Jewish converts.
The deep-rooted source of the large Jewish community in Spain was
those Berber soldiers who converted to Judaism.”
As one would expect, Sand approves the largely accepted assumption
that the Judaicised Khazars constituted the main origins of the Jewish
communities in Eastern Europe, which he calls the Yiddish Nation. When
asked how come they happen to speak Yiddish, which is largely regarded
as a German medieval dialect, he answers, “the Jews were a class of
people dependent on the German bourgeoisie in the east, and thus they
adopted German words.”
In his book Sand manages to produce a detailed account of the
Khazarian saga in Jewish history. He explains what lead the Khazarian
kingdom towards conversion. Bearing in mind that Jewish nationalism
is, for the most part, lead by a Khazarian elite, we may have to
expand our intimate knowledge of this very unique yet influential
political group. The translation of Sand’s work into foreign
languages is an immediate must. (It is forthcoming in French, as
reported in Are the Jews an invented people?, by Eric Rouleau).
What Next?
Professor Sand leaves us with the inevitable conclusion. Contemporary
Jews do not have a common origin and their Semitic origin is a myth.
Jews have no origin in Palestine whatsoever and therefore, their act
of so-called ‘return’ to their ‘promised land’ must be realised as an
invasion executed by a tribal-ideological clan.
However, though Jews do not constitute any racial continuum, they for
some reason happen to be racially orientated. As we may notice, many
Jews still see mixed marriage as the ultimate threat. Furthermore, in
spite of modernisation and secularisation, the vast majority of those
who identify as secular Jews still succumb to blood ritual
(circumcision) a unique religious procedure which involves no less
than blood sucking by a Mohel.
As far as Sand is concerned, Israel should become “a state of its
citizens”. Like Sand, I myself believe in the same futuristic utopian
vision. However, unlike Sand, I do grasp that the Jewish state and its
supportive lobbies must be ideologically defeated. Brotherhood and
reconciliation are foreign to Jewish tribal worldview and have no room
within the concept of Jewish national revival. As dramatic as it may
sound, a process of de-judaification must take place before Israelis
can adopt any universal modern notion of civil life.
Sand is no doubt a major intellectual, probably the most advanced
leftist Israeli thinker. He represents the highest form of thought a
secular Israeli can achieve before flipping over or even defecting to
the Palestinian side (something that happened to just a few, me
included). Haaretz interviewer Ofri Ilani said about Sand that unlike
other ‘new historians’ who have tried to undermine the assumptions of
Zionist historiography, “Sand does not content himself with going back
to 1948 or to the beginnings of Zionism, but rather goes back
thousands of years.” This is indeed the case, unlike the ‘new
historians’ who ‘unveil’ a truth that is known to every Palestinian
toddler i.e., the truth of being ethnically cleansed, Sand erects a
body of work and thought that is aiming at the understanding of the
meaning of Jewish nationalism and Jewish identity. This is indeed the
true essence of scholarship. Rather than collecting some sporadic
historical fragments, Sand searches for the meaning of history. Rather
than a ‘new historian’ who searches for a new fragment, he is a real
historian motivated by a humanist task. Most crucially, unlike some of
the Jewish historians who happen to contribute to the so-called left
discourse, Sand’s credibility and success is grounded on his argument
rather than his family background. He avoids peppering his argument
with his holocaust survivor relatives. Reading Sand’s ferocious
argument, one may have to admit that Zionism in all its faults has
managed to erect within itself a proud and autonomous dissident
discourse that is far more eloquent and brutal than the entire anti-
Zionist movement around the world.
If Sand is correct, and I myself am convinced by the strength of his
argument, then Jews are not a race but rather a collective of very
many people who are largely hijacked by a late phantasmic national
movement. If Jews are not a race, do not form a racial continuum and
have nothing to do with Semitism, then ‘anti-Semitism’ is,
categorically, an empty signifier. It obviously refers to a signifier
that doesn’t exist. In other words, our criticism of Jewish
nationalism, Jewish lobbying and Jewish power can only be realised as
a legitimate critique of ideology and practice.
Once again I may say it, we are not and never been against Jews (the
people) nor we are against Judaism (the religion). Yet, we are
against a collective philosophy with some clear global interests. Some
would like to call it Zionism but I prefer not to. Zionism is a vague
signifier that is far too narrow to capture the complexity of Jewish
nationalism, its brutality, ideology and practice. Jewish nationalism
is a spirit and spirit doesn’t have clear boundaries. In fact, none of
us know exactly where Jewishness stops and where Zionism starts as
much as we do not know where Israeli interests stop and where the
Neocon’s interests start.
As far as the Palestinian cause is concerned, the message is rather
devastating. Our Palestinian brothers and sisters are at the forefront
of a struggle against a very devastating philosophy. Yet, it is
clearly not just the Israelis whom they fight with rather a fierce
pragmatic philosophy that initiates global conflicts on some gigantic
scale. It is a tribal practice that seeks influence within corridors
of power and super powers in particular. The American Jewish Committee
is pushing for a war against Iran. Just to be on the safe side David
Abrahams, a ‘Labour Friend of Israel’ donates money to the Labour
Party by proxy. More or less at the same time two million Iraqis die
in an illegal war designed by one called Wolfowitz. While all the
above is taking place, millions of Palestinians are starved in
concentration camps and Gaza is on the brink of a humanitarian crisis.
As it all happens, ‘anti-Zionist’ Jews and Jews in the left (Chomsky
included) insist upon dismantling the eloquent criticism of AIPAC,
Jewish lobbying and Jewish power posed by Mearsheimer and Walt. [15]
Is it just Israel? Is it really Zionism? Or shall we admit that it is
something far greater than we are entitled even to contemplate within
the intellectual boundaries we imposed upon ourselves? As things
stand, we lack the intellectual courage to confront the Jewish
national project and its many messengers around the world. However,
since it is all a matter of consciousness-shift, things are going to
change soon. In fact, this very text is there to prove that they are
changing already.
To stand by the Palestinians is to save the world, but in order to do
so we have to be courageous enough to stand up and admit that it is
not merely a political battle. It is not just Israel, its army or its
leadership, it isn’t even Dershowitz, Foxman and their silencing
leagues. It is actually a war against a cancerous spirit that
hijacked the West and, at least momentarily, diverted it from its
humanist inclination and Athenian aspirations. To fight a spirit is
far more difficult than fighting people, just because one may have to
first fight its traces within oneself. If we want to fight Jerusalem,
we may have to first confront Jerusalem within. We may have to stand
in front of the mirror, look around us. We may have to trace for
empathy in ourselves in case there is anything left.
[1] When And How The Jewish People Was Invented? Shlomo Sand, Resling
2008, pg 11
[2] http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/966952.html
[3] When And How The Jewish People Was Invented? Shlomo Sand, Resling
2008, pg 31
[4] Ibid pg 31
[5] Ibid pg 42
[6] Ibid
[7] Ibid pg 62
[8] Ibid
[9] http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/966952.html
[10] When And How The Jewish People Was Invented? Shlomo Sand, Resling
2008, pg 117
[11] http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/966952.html
[12] Ibid
[13] Ibid
[14] Ibid
[15] http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n06/mear01_.html
HHW
> On Dec 28, 5:08 pm, john....@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > On 28 Dec, 20:14, drahcir <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:> On Dec 28, 12:49 am, HHW <coaster132...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > As I replied the last time you posted this nonsense, this guy seems
> > > wholly ignorant of DNA evidence proving Israelite origin of Jews from
> > > all over the world. That invalidates all of the useless verbiage
> > > below.
>
> > Let's here it then. Uncontroversial is it?
>
> Yes. DNA is not controversial. It's either indicative, or it's not.
> People who want to claim DNA is "controversial", like Barry Scheck
> when he was defending OJ, or you when you want to see Jews as
> something other than the descendants of ancient Israelites, always
> have a motive other than impartially searching for truth.
>
> " 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 Y-DNA haplogroups J
> and E.
>
> " Ashkenazim also descend, in a smaller way, from European peoples
> such as Slavs and Khazars. The non-Israelite Y-DNA haplogroups include
> Q (typically Central Asian) and R1a1 (typically Eastern European)."
>
> Kevin Allan Brook
>
> If you did a search for [DNA ashkenazi jewish israelite] or some such
> thing, I bet you could find out for yourself, if you really wanted to.
> But of course, you don't.
==========================
Last update - 16:53 01/03/2008
An invention called 'the Jewish people'
By Tom Segev
Tags: Israel
Israel's Declaration of Independence states that the Jewish people
arose in the Land of Israel and was exiled from its homeland. Every
Israeli schoolchild is taught that this happened during the period of
Roman rule, in 70 CE. The nation remained loyal to its land, to which
it began to return after two millennia of exile. Wrong, says the
historian Shlomo Zand, in one of the most fascinating and challenging
books published here in a long time. There never was a Jewish people,
only a Jewish religion, and the exile also never happened - hence
there was no return. Zand rejects most of the stories of national-
identity formation in the Bible, including the exodus from Egypt and,
most satisfactorily, the horrors of the conquest under Joshua. It's
all fiction and myth that served as an excuse for the establishment of
the State of Israel, he asserts.
According to Zand, the Romans did not generally exile whole nations,
and most of the Jews were permitted to remain in the country. The
number of those exiled was at most tens of thousands. When the country
was conquered by the Arabs, many of the Jews converted to Islam and
were assimilated among the conquerors. It follows that the progenitors
of the Palestinian Arabs were Jews. Zand did not invent this thesis;
30 years before the Declaration of Independence, it was espoused by
David Ben-Gurion, Yitzhak Ben-Zvi and others.
If the majority of the Jews were not exiled, how is it that so many of
them reached almost every country on earth? Zand says they emigrated
of their own volition or, if they were among those exiled to Babylon,
remained there because they chose to. Contrary to conventional belief,
the Jewish religion tried to induce members of other faiths to become
Jews, which explains how there came to be millions of Jews in the
world. As the Book of Esther, for example, notes, "And many of the
people of the land became Jews; for the fear of the Jews fell upon
them."
Advertisement
Zand quotes from many existing studies, some of which were written in
Israel but shunted out of the central discourse. He also describes at
length the Jewish kingdom of Himyar in the southern Arabian Peninsula
and the Jewish Berbers in North Africa. The community of Jews in Spain
sprang from Arabs who became Jews and arrived with the forces that
captured Spain from the Christians, and from European-born individuals
who had also become Jews.
The first Jews of Ashkenaz (Germany) did not come from the Land of
Israel and did not reach Eastern Europe from Germany, but became Jews
in the Khazar Kingdom in the Caucasus. Zand explains the origins of
Yiddish culture: it was not a Jewish import from Germany, but the
result of the connection between the offspring of the Kuzari and
Germans who traveled to the East, some of them as merchants.
We find, then, that the members of a variety of peoples and races,
blond and black, brown and yellow, became Jews in large numbers.
According to Zand, the Zionist need to devise for them a shared
ethnicity and historical continuity produced a long series of
inventions and fictions, along with an invocation of racist theses.
Some were concocted in the minds of those who conceived the Zionist
movement, while others were offered as the findings of genetic studies
conducted in Israel.
Prof. Zand teaches at Tel Aviv University. His book, "When and How Was
the Jewish People Invented?" (published by Resling in Hebrew), is
intended to promote the idea that Israel should be a "state of all its
citizens" - Jews, Arabs and others - in contrast to its declared
identity as a "Jewish and democratic" state. Personal stories, a
prolonged theoretical discussion and abundant sarcastic quips do not
help the book, but its historical chapters are well-written and cite
numerous facts and insights that many Israelis will be astonished to
read for the first time.
The mosquito from Kiryat Yam
On March 27, 1948, a meeting was held in Hiafa concerning the fate of
the Bedouin of Arab al-Ghawarina in the Haifa area. "They must be
removed from there, so that they, too, will not add to our troubles,"
Yosef Weitz, of the Keren Kayemeth (Jewish National Fund), wrote in
his personal diary. Two months later, Weitz reported to the
organization's director, "Our Haifa Bay has been evacuated completely
and there is hardly a remnant of those who encroached our border."
They were probably expelled to Jordan; some were allowed to remain in
the village of Jisr al-Zarqa. The fate of the Arab al-Ghawarina
Bedouin has recently made the headlines thanks to Shmuel Sisso, mayor
of the Haifa suburb of Kiryat Yam. He has filed a complaint with the
police against Google. The reason is the addition that one of the
site's surfers, a resident of Nablus, attached to the center of Kiryat
Yam in the world satellite photo, stating that the city is built on
the ruins of a village that was destroyed in 1948, Arab al-Ghawarina.
Sisso's complaint says that this is slanderous.
The facts are as follows: The lands of the Zevulun Valley were
purchased in the 1920s by the JNF and by various construction
companies, among them one called Gav Yam. The Zionist Archives have
the plan for the establishment of Kiryat Yam, dated 1938, and a letter
from 1945 states that there were already 100 homes there. Government
maps from the British Mandate period identify the territory on which
Kiryat Yam was built by two names: Zevulun Valley and Ghawarina. Thus
it appears that this was not a settlement but an area in which Bedouin
resided.
The Web site of the Israeli organization Zochrot (Remembering) states
that there were 720 people at the site in 1948 and that the area was
divided among three kibbutzim: Ein Hamifratz, Kfar Masaryk and Ein
Hayam, today Ein Carmel.
This story has been making the rounds on the Internet and drawing
responses, which can be summed up as follows: "If Sisso is suing
Google because they stated that he is living on a destroyed Arab
village, the implication is that he thinks this is something bad."
Sisso, a lawyer of 57 who is identified with Likud and was formerly
Israeli consul general in New York, says, "I don't think there is
anything bad about it, but other people might think it is bad,
especially people abroad, and that is liable to hurt Kiryat Yam,
because people will not want to invest here. Since we are not sitting
on a Palestinian village, why should we have to suffer for no
reason?"
Moroccan-born, Sisso arrived in Israel in 1955. "I wandered around the
whole region and I saw no trace of anyone's having been here before us
and supposedly expelled." He asked an American law professor how, if
at all, Google could be sued for slander or for damages. This, he
says, is the contribution of Kiryat Yam to the struggle against the
right of return (of the Palestinian refugees).
It could turn out to be the most riveting trial since Ariel Sharon
sued Time magazine, but mayor Sisso has no illusions: "Me against
Google is like a mosquito against an elephant," he said this week.
Who America belongs to
Two professors, Gabi Shefer and Avi Ben-Zvi, were guests this week on
Yitzhak Noy's "International Hour" current events program on Israel
Radio. The anchor, sounding slightly concerned, asked whether the
achievements of Barack Obama show that the United States no longer
belongs to the white man. Prof. Shefer confirmed this: Obama is an
immigrant, he said. Prof. Ben-Zvi asked to add a remark: Gabi Shefer
is right, he said. They are both wrong. If Obama were an immigrant, he
would not be eligible to be elected president. He was born in
Honolulu, some two years after Hawaii became the 50th state of the
union.
drahcir
so, state it concisely. If not, stop wasting bandwidth.
drahcir
show is precisely, if not, please stop wasting bandwidth.
drahcir
Descendants of pagans
movement expressed reservations regarding this myth or denied it
completely.
Sand's references to "authorized" historians are absurd, and
perpetuate a superficial pattern of discussion that is characteristic
of a certain group within Israeli academe. The guiding principle in
this pattern of discussion is as follows: "Tell me what your position
is on the past and I will tell you the nature of your connection with
the agencies of the regime."
The kind of political intervention Sand is talking about, namely, a
Ben Cramer
"drahcir" <justrich...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b5a7272d-c5c7-4ce3...@r2g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
Whining snipped.
Shut the fuck up RATner, you obsessed freak.
ÇDoügßT
news:0b092c9c-ca8c-4258...@f40g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
On 28 Dec, 19:49, "ÇDoügßT" <n...@muerto.com> wrote:
> Fuck muslimes, fuck palasimians.
>
Thank you for your contribution.
*****************
Here's a big fuck off to you too!
kangarooistan
> Israeli best seller breaks national taboo
>
>
> Global Research, October 8, 2008
> thenational.ae
>
> Email this article to a friend
> Print this article
>
> Idea of a Jewish people invented, says historian
changes , as it clearly must
There can never be a solution that satisfies everybody , like in a
failed marriage one party must leave or both will suffer
Clearly there will never be a solution unless there is a complete
separation of jews christians and Muslims in the Middle East
The war will continue until one group eventually destroys the others,
western taxpayers and jews will eventually run out of money and
leave , Muslims are growing very fast and very angry , they will
eventually win the wars in the Middle East and western taxpayers will
LOSE eventually when they can no longer afford to fight on
Muslims will increase over the next few decades and bleed western
taxpayers and Israel to death , it is not a matter of religion or
right and wrong
it is a simple mathematical reality , Muslims will win the war in the
end , GOD does not come into the debate , he will not do a thing to
help jews or christians why should we help their mythical helpless
gods
IF there is a GOD he is clearly helping the Muslims as they are
winning , and will eventually restore Palestine and ban ALL jews and
ALL Christians forever this time , so as it is inevitable WHY destroy
the planet first , why not simply remove jews and christians
Jews and Christians were offered rights to live in Palestine for 1000
years in peace , and proved they are untrustworthy guests
You can NEVER fool a Muslim twice
There will be a Muslim victory eventually , and they will NEVER ever
let a single jew or christian near Palestine EVER again
GOD will not save jews or christians , as he failed to help them in
the first Crusades or Nazi POW camps GOD wont play a part in the
results
Jews and Christians wont like it but it is inevitable
As it is inevitable , the only question is how much suffering the
Jews and Christians will choose to force on the world and their
children
GOD will not help them
If GOD ever chooses to act he wont need our help
Everybody on earth will suffer until Palestine is AGAIN ruled by and
for Muslims , like it was for over 1000 years very successfully and
will AGAIN soon be
Crusaders and Jews failed every time they tried and run the middle
East , GOD did not help them then and clearly is not now
Muslims always won in the end ,once western Christians and Jews were
crushed , the best thing we can all do is help the war end quickly
by forcing jews and Christians to pay for their own funerals and
hope they all die quickly
WHY should non jews and non Christians pay to murder Muslim babies
for war criminals
Refuse to pay for jews and christian war crimes and let the war end
quickly so jews and christian nutters can see how useless their gods
are
Why drag it out for ever
Let the jews and christians die if they want , why waste your money
and lives dying for a god who does not want to help his worshipers
The entire world will die unless this war ends fast
There is only one possible victor in the end it will be an Islamic
country AGAIN
YOU need to choose if you want your children to live or die
If you really love your children you will do all in your power to end
this ever escalating war as quickly as possible
GOD does not need your help or your taxes if he wants he can wave
his hand and create whatever he chooses , he wont lift a finger to
help jews or christians so if left up to men , the MUSLIMS will
eventually win
Why not help end the war ASAP , kick out all jews and ALL christians
ASAP
problem solved
kanga
======
HHW
> On Dec 28, 5:08 pm, john....@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > On 28 Dec, 20:14, drahcir <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:> On Dec 28, 12:49 am, HHW <coaster132...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > As I replied the last time you posted this nonsense, this guy seems
> > > wholly ignorant of DNA evidence proving Israelite origin of Jews from
> > > all over the world. That invalidates all of the useless verbiage
> > > below.
>
> > Let's here it then. Uncontroversial is it?
>
> Yes. DNA is not controversial. It's either indicative, or it's not.
Absolutely false. You still haven't learned. DNA data is a tiny part
of the mosaic of data necessary to come to the conclusion you want.
There is something inherently incompetent about the operation of your
mind. You instinctively leap at what you think is an opportunity to
proclaim the *certainty* of the "Israelite origin of Jews from all
over the world". In the first place scholars don't believe that that
even may be true, much less that it could be proved by DNA analysis.
Characteristically you haven't even absorbed the review of the Sand
book by the hostile Israeli scholar Dr. Israel Bartal, the specialist
in Jewish History. He *admits* you're wrong.
DNA studies simply can't do what you think they have done because of
the nature of the scientific method. They lend themselves to temporary
assessments regarding degrees of probability of certain propositions.
They neither can nor in my estimate ever will yield such certainty,
especially with reference to critical geographical questions which are
separate questions altogether. History and archaeology have collected
nowhere near the data necessary to chronologically map population
flows over the surface of Eurasia for the last 4,000 years, much less
10,000 which in human history is more or less the modern era.
> People who want to claim DNA is "controversial", like Barry Scheck
> when he was defending OJ, or you when you want to see Jews as
> something other than the descendants of ancient Israelites, always
> have a motive other than impartially searching for truth.
>
> " 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 Y-DNA haplogroups J
> and E.
>
> " Ashkenazim also descend, in a smaller way, from European peoples
> such as Slavs and Khazars. The non-Israelite Y-DNA haplogroups include
> Q (typically Central Asian) and R1a1 (typically Eastern European)."
>
> Kevin Allan Brook
> The Jews of Khazariahttp://www.khazaria.com/genetics/abstracts.html
Sheldon Liberman
That's just one more construct of a delusion mind desparate to see
reality as he'd like it to be.
>
> > > That's why the U.S. is such a great country. We allow secular jews to
> > > express hatred for muslims, and jews believe that a jew hating a
> > > middle eastern muslim is not in anyway an antisemite.
>
> > You may find that an anti-Muslim posture is hardly the domain of just
> > the Jewish community.
>
> True, indeed, but the intense demonization of the Muslim tradition in
> general and the Palestinians in particular in recent decades has been
> generated by Jewish interests in the U.S. in an effort to promote the
> interests of Israel. Read Mearsheimer & Walt's "The Israel Lobby and
> American Foriegn Policy".
You mean the rag piece that Harvard dissassociated it's name from? I
found the rebuttal publications foar more compelling. However, one
need read neither to know that to point out the Israel lobby's
possible disproportionate influence in Washington is simply to blame
it for its own success. Such is typically the act of an underacheiver.
>
> > > Of course the
> > > jews of secular Israel do not believe the indegenous people of the
> > > region called Palestine are a people with a history in the Holy land.
>
> > What? Of course they do.
>
> Surely they don't disagree with Deborah Sharavi!?
Surely they've never heard of her. And Israel is must less secular
than you might think. Only 20% identify themselves as such.
>
>
>
> > > Ancient Israel was a theocracy. But the
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Sheldon Liberman
> On Dec 28, 1:45 pm, SheldonLiberman<shel...@liberman.com> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 28, 2:15 pm, HHW <coaster132...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 28, 4:54 am, DoD <danskisan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Dec 27, 11:49 pm, HHW <coaster132...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > Israeli best seller breaks national taboo
>
> > > > Low watson goes even deeper in his anti-Jewish depravity.
>
> > > Do you mean I'm anti-Khazar? As I hadn't heard of them until about a
> > > year ago that's unlikely, don't you think?
>
> > You apparently don't. The idea that the Jews descended from the
> > Khazars was done away with years ago by DNA analysis.
>
> I understand that the DNA analysis pursued back to the level of four
> maternal founders of the line but the analysis did not fix the
> location of these seminal events. I also understand that Khazar
> origins of most of the Ashkenazi are not in dispute. When Dr. Sand's
> book is printed in English by Verso here in the United States will you
> read it? It is already a best seller elsewhere and looks to become one
> world-wide.
The study you refer to is a different one than the one I do. See:
Hammer, M. F.; A. J. Redd, E. T. Wood, M. R. Bonner, H. Jarjanazi, T.
Karafet, S. Santachiara-Benerecetti, A. Oppenheim, M. A. Jobling, T.
Jenkins, H. Ostrer, and B. Bonné-Tamir (May 9 2000). "Jewish and
Middle Eastern non-Jewish populations share a common pool of Y-
chromosome biallelic haplotypes.
It was also a common belief amongst the Khazars that converted that
they were in truth one of the lost tribes of Israel. Even if this were
not the case, if Ashkenazic Jews were all descendent of converts,
there should not be any kohanim (priests) among them, a status that
follows a paternal link. I am one myself. The same series of DNA tests
show that the kohanic claim, supported by tradition alone, is highly
likely.
As for reading Dr. Sand's book, no thanks. I have no more time for
such as I do for the likes of Chomsky, Finkelstein, and Irving. I'll
read the critiques from sources I trust.
Sheldon Liberman
> > with the raison d'etre to destroy Israel. No U.S. affirmation
> > required.
>
> Eastern policy? Israel was founded in a vast ethnic cleansing, one of
> the 20th Century's monstrous crimes against humanity.
>
American policy has always been to support those countries which
shares it's values. As for ethnic cleansing, that's pure fantasy.
>
>
> > > We've also said
> > > the "JADL is a terrorist orgANIZATION". So what's new?
> > > I use to think Palestine would be a district of Israel, but a few days
> > > ago I was reading over the 'net about a bi-state called Palestine-
> > > Israel! Wouldn't that be awful? It would preserve the historical
> > > legitimacy of the Holy Bible every word of which was written by the
> > > ancient Jews of religious Israel. Wouldn't that be awful?
>
> > No, it wouldn't.
>
> Maybe not, but that too is off the subject, i.e., the American
> national interest.
I didn't raise that point, you did.
>
>
>
> > > I knew a guy in Boston, Massachusetts who spent five years in prison
> > > for refusing the draft. I'll refrain from using Joe's surname, but his
> > > face was the image of the Irish face that was very commonly used for
> > > images of Christ. Air strikes from the air doesn't make you brave when
> > > the target is a police station. They were Hamas police. A terrorist
> > > organization!- Hide quoted text -
>
> > ???
>
> That's not enough question marks.
I agree, given the complete incomprensible the statements to which
they were attached.
drahcir
> On Dec 28, 8:54 pm, drahcir <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 28, 5:08 pm, john....@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > On 28 Dec, 20:14, drahcir <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:> On Dec 28, 12:49 am, HHW <coaster132...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > As I replied the last time you posted this nonsense, this guy seems
> > > > wholly ignorant of DNA evidence proving Israelite origin of Jews from
> > > > all over the world. That invalidates all of the useless verbiage
> > > > below.
>
> > > Let's here it then. Uncontroversial is it?
>
> > Yes. DNA is not controversial. It's either indicative, or it's not.
>
> Absolutely false. You still haven't learned. DNA data is a tiny part
> of the mosaic of data necessary to come to the conclusion you want.
DNA is all you need to completely contradict Sand. If Jewish DNA is
from the middle east, it's not Khazar. Simple. You don't want to see
it simply because it doesn't come out the way you so desperately want
it to. Tough.
> There is something inherently incompetent about the operation of your
> mind.
This coming from the moron who couldn't get straight the subject of a
review he himself posted, who cannot follow a simply usenet thread. H,
the operation of my mind is so far beyond your meager skill set that
your comment is ridiculous.
You instinctively leap at what you think is an opportunity to
> proclaim the *certainty* of the "Israelite origin of Jews from all
> over the world".
I didn't proclaim anything. I cited evidence. Here, I will cite it
again, just for you:
> " 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 Y-DNA haplogroups J
> and E.
> " Ashkenazim also descend, in a smaller way, from European peoples
> such as Slavs and Khazars. The non-Israelite Y-DNA haplogroups include
> Q (typically Central Asian) and R1a1 (typically Eastern European)."
> Kevin Allan Brook
> The Jews of Khazariahttp://www.khazaria.com/genetics/abstracts.html
This is corroborated by the many other cites I have provided in this
thread.
I will condense and use capital letters so maybe it will sink in:
THE MAIN ETHNIC ELEMENT OF ASHKENAZIM IS ISRAELITE.
Get it? End of story. Sand is and idiot. You are a lying idiot. I
would ask you to stop the nonsense, but since nonsense is all you are
capable of, you might asphyxiate.
In the first place scholars don't believe that that
> even may be true, much less that it could be proved by DNA analysis.
HHW bullshit holds no water. I have cited 4 separate studies, in
addition to the synopsis above. You got 4 contradictory studies? Post
them. Otherwise please shut your incredibly stupid mouth.
> Characteristically you haven't even absorbed the review of the Sand
> book by the hostile Israeli scholar Dr. Israel Bartal, the specialist
> in Jewish History. He *admits* you're wrong.
>
> DNA studies simply can't do what you think they have done because of
> the nature of the scientific method.
OK, here we go. The moron that preached about deduction and couldn't
even post a definition of a syllogism that made sense, the
insufferable dolt that had to run in terror rather than try to support
his own post, is now going to start lecturing about the scientific
method. Listen, asshole, you want to lecture, I suggest you email
Brook and the geneticists that authored the four studies I posted and
see what they have to say to a lowly, lying moron like you that is
clueless not only about genetics, but about logic and especially about
israeli history. It is their words I have used, not mine. Their
conclusions, not mine. You simply don't like it. Who cares what a
lying, proven moron likes or doesn't?
They lend themselves to temporary
> assessments regarding degrees of probability of certain propositions.
> They neither can nor in my estimate
YOUR ESTIMATE??? You don't have the right to estimate, imbecile. You
don't want to accept the opinions of those who have the knowledge and
intelligence, as the authors I cited, because they don't fit your
agenda, plain and simple.
ever will yield such certainty,
> especially with reference to critical geographical questions which are
> separate questions altogether. History and archaeology have collected
> nowhere near the data necessary to chronologically map population
> flows over the surface of Eurasia for the last 4,000 years, much less
> 10,000 which in human history is more or less the modern era.
Incredibly stupid statement. RIght now we know 2 things: we know that
the DNA of European jews is similar to present-day middle eastern
populations, and we know that it is dissimilar to the surrounding
European populations. That much is fact, indisputable fact. What the
geneticists have done is to propose hypotheses based on those facts.
What Sand has done is blow hot air without an iota of genetic support.
DoD
It is interesting that people like watson, just love to call you
people the descendants of the "Christ killers" and turn around and say
that you have no connection to the Middle East.
What makes this even more irritating and insulting to those of us that
are Christian and I would assume the same for you Jews is that people
like watson support the PalArabs who just recently legalized
CRUCIFIXION.........
It is amazing how we have such depraved people like watson in the west.
AirRaid Mach 2.5
dsharavi
> Dr Sand argues that the idea of a Jewish nation – whose need for a
> safe haven was originally used to justify the founding of the state of
> Israel – is a myth invented little more than a century ago.
Evidently Prof Sand never heard of Hirsch Kalisher, Moses Hess, or
Mordechai Manuel Noah.
> Dr Sand’s main argument is that until little more than a century ago,
> Jews thought of themselves as Jews only because they shared a common
> religion. At the turn of the 20th century, he said, Zionist Jews
> challenged this idea and started creating a national history by
> inventing the idea that Jews existed as a people separate from their
> religion.
Then there's Prof Sand's argument that Spanish Jews originate from the
Berber tribe of Warrior-Queen Dahia al-Kahina. The Queen's tribe
converted to Judaism "several generations before she was born sometime
around the 6th century C.E."; they fought off the Muslim invasion of
North Africa, then participated in the Muslim conquest of the Iberian
peninsula, and hence became the ancestors of Spanish Jews.
Lovely fantazia.
Deborah
dsharavi
> > Do you mean I'm anti-Khazar? As I hadn't heard of them until about a
> > year ago that's unlikely, don't you think?
On Dec 28, 11:45 am, Sheldon Liberman <shel...@liberman.com> wrote:
> You apparently don't. The idea that the Jews descended from the
> Khazars was done away with years ago by DNA analysis.
Now we've got a new "theory", Shel -- and that's that Spanish Jews
descend from a Warrior Queen Berber tribe, who converted to Judaism
sometime in the 6thC CE, the fought a losing fight against the Muslim/
Arab invasion of North Africa, then participated in the Muslim/Arab
invasion of the Iberian peninsula.
This new Khazar fantazia is brought to you by the same Tel Aviv prof
who claims that the idea of re-establishing the Jewish state in the
Land of Israel is only a century old. Clearly, the good professor
never heard of Moses Hess or Hirsch Kalisher -- and he certainly never
heard of Mordechai Manuel Noah.
What fun these loons are.
Deborah
dsharavi
> > > year ago that's unlikely, don't you think?
> On Dec 28, 1:45 pm, Sheldon Liberman <shel...@liberman.com> wrote:
> > You apparently don't. The idea that the Jews descended from the
> > Khazars was done away with years ago by DNA analysis.
On Dec 28, 6:33 pm, HHW <coaster132...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I understand that the DNA analysis pursued back to the level of four
> maternal founders of the line but the analysis did not fix the
> location of these seminal events. I also understand that Khazar
> origins of most of the Ashkenazi are not in dispute.
Now how can HHW possibly "understand" that the alleged "Khazar
origins" of European Jews are not, as he claims, "in dispute" -- when
the topic isn't even a blip on the radar -- when he never heard of the
Khazars "until about a year ago"?
Deborah
dsharavi
> “When And How the Jewish People Was Invented” is a very serious study
> written by Professor Shlomo Sand, an Israeli historian. It is the most
> serious study of Jewish nationalism and by far, the most courageous
> elaboration on the Jewish historical narrative.
>
> In his book, Sand manages to prove beyond any reasonable doubt that
> the Jewish people never existed as a 'nation-race', they never shared
> a common origin. Instead they are a colourful mix of groups that at
> various stages in history adopted the Jewish religion.
Presumably, the good professor "proves" this, just like he "proves"
his notion that Spanish Jews descend from a Warrior Queen's Berber
tribe, which converted to Judaism in the 6thC, fought against the
Muslim Arab invasions in the 7th century, then participated in the
Muslim Arab invasion and conquest of Iberia.
Deborah
Peace Power
You don't do facts, zionazi slime.
All you know is zionist propaganda.
The GAZA, CHANUKAH MASSACRE - photo slide show:
http://sabbah.biz/mt/archives/2008/12/29/updated-gaza-massacre-photo-gallery/
DoD
> On Dec 29, 4:04 pm, dsharavi <dshara...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
Stop screeching around here like the nutjob you are.
Peace Power
tj...@post.com
There is quite a bit of scholarship from India on this subject, you'll
have to just find it.
Here is email for the author of the one I cited, because it was ALL
the info in one place, not a huge book on the subject.
I can find more. http://www.viewzone.com/abraham.html That's one
author - online. There are books on this subject.
The Bible stories are MYTHS, simple as that. Intelligent Jews know
this and some want to rewrite it to reflect reality - since they are
not stupid superstitious people.
Did you even READ the link I gave you? Probably not. I suggest you
do - and I for one am glad that people from India ARE looking into
this Abrahm thing - because prior to that, this was known in the oral
histories of quite a few people in/from the East.
YOu do realize that there is nothing insulting to Jews in that
article? Or maybe you thought there was. They didn't just spring up
out of thin air. Even the OT says that they GOT to Ur. It just
doesn't say wherefrom.
HHW
> On Dec 28, 9:18 pm, HHW <coaster132...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Snip
> > > How many Middle East countries have freedom of religion?
>
> > Certainly not Israel. It oppresses its religious minority.
>
> That's just one more construct of a delusion mind desparate to see
> reality as he'd like it to be.
It is actually trying to drive its religious minority, citizens no
less, out of the country. Has that escaped you?
Snip
DoD
> The GAZA, CHANUKAH MASSACRE - photo slide show:http://sabbah.biz/mt/archives/2008/12/29/updated-gaza-massacre-photo-...
Don't start wars.
HHW
> On Dec 28, 3:49 pm, HHW <coaster132...@yahoo.com> wrote:> Israeli best seller breaks national taboo
Snip
> Why not help end the war ASAP , kick out all jews and ALL christians
> ASAP
>
> problem solved
>
> kanga
> ======
Sometimes the cure is worse than the disease. The problem is primarily
the American role in the mess. Fix that and the Israelis will be on a
fast track to a solution.
Ben Cramer
"Sheldon Liberman" <she...@liberman.com> wrote in message
news:423bac53-e66c-43ac...@v31g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 28, 9:18 pm, HHW <coaster132...@yahoo.com> wrote:
snip
>>
>> > How many Middle East countries have freedom of religion?
>>
>> Certainly not Israel. It oppresses its religious minority.
>That's just one more construct of a delusion mind desparate to see
>reality as he'd like it to be.
Is that a fact?
Try this, lying jew. I've plenty more where this came from .
CHRISTIANS BRUTALIZED IN HOLY LAND
By Mark Glenn
Some 200 Christian Zionist leaders, representing churches spread throughout
America, Europe, Africa and Asia, gathered in Israelís Knesset to "beg
forgiveness" for 2,000 years of "Christian persecution" of Jews.
The well publicized ceremony took place under the auspices of the "Knesset
Christian Allies Caucus," just one of a growing number of partnerships
springing up in recent years between organized Jewish and Christian Zionist
groups for the purpose of funneling Christian money and political support
toward Israel. Part of the statement reads as follows:
"On behalf of millions of Christians, we repent before you for crimes
committed against the Jewish people throughout history in the name of
Christianity..We have sinned against God and against you.. To you we
owe much.. Through you, God gave us the Holy Scriptures, and because of this
we have a heritage, a destiny, a hope and a compass for living..What a
treasure you are in the sight of our God! You are His chosen and the apple
of His eye.."
But despite the fact that Israel was built (and continues to live) off of
handouts from Christian countries-principally the U.S. and Germany-and for
all the inherent groveling and breast-beating that this mea culpa was meant
to convey, it obviously did not "cut the mustard" in improving
Christian/Jewish relations in Israel, the birthplace of Jesus Christ and the
2,000-year-old religion created in His name.
Besides the fact that Israel has now become a haven for international
gangsters-meaning rampant prostitution, drugs, human trafficking and money
laundering to name a few-there are other indicators surrounding Israel's
political and social character as well that show she is anything but
friendly to the morals and precepts of Christian teachings. Christian
churches that were not taxed are now being sent heavy bills. Media outlets
featuring Christian programming on television and radio are having their
license renewal applications rejected.
More telling though is the fact that physical attacks on Christians, their
symbols and institutions continue in Israel unabated, and not by
"Islamo-fascists" (so much discussed by the likes of Norman Podhoretz,
Daniel Pipes, John Hagee, Bill O'Reilly, et al.) but rather by a more
fanatical sect that has nursed a hatred for Christianity since its
inception, the people who collectively call themselves "the Israelites" and
whom Christians are told to "bless."
Pastor Hagee has been an avid supporter of the state Israel since his first
visit there in 1978. "I went to Israel as a tourist and returned home a
committed Zionist," he said. His book says that Jesus did not come to Earth
to be the Messiah. In what appears to be a growing trend these days,
physical attacks on Christians, their churches and symbols are beginning to
show a marked rise in Israel.
For nearly a century, since the invasion of Palestine began, Christians of
all denominations have suffered bombings, shootings, arsons and wanton acts
of senseless destruction of their sacred properties-and all of it by a horde
of Marxist/atheist invaders from Eastern Europe calling themselves "God's
chosen." From the moment they arrived-announcing to the world "We're
baaaack" with all the fanfare that their grip over the Western media
afforded them-they picked up where their alleged ancestors left off in
attempting to erase the name of the hated Jesus from the Holy Land.
Mimicking the same kind of behavior their Bolshevik cousins exhibited during
and after the takeover of Russia and using the "fog of war" as a smokescreen
for their actions, Christian church properties have been bulldozed, blown up
or burned down on numerous occasions, all of it chalked up to "collateral
damage." Since the Jews of Europe began reconstructing the nation that was
destroyed some 2,000 years ago following the predictions of Jesus Himself,
priests, pastors, nuns, churches,
cemeteries, Bibles, icons, stained-glass widows, all were all fair game as
far as the Zionists were concerned when it came to maintaining its
exclusively "Jewish character."
Not long after Israel declared her statehood, legislation was passed
outlawing Christians trying to convert Jews to the religion of Jesus Christ
with a 5-year prison sentence attached for good measure.
Now, no longer limited to impersonal attacks done in the middle of the night
with minimal chance of being caught, Jews (and particularly those in
Jerusalem, the city of Jesus's sham trial and murder by his enemies) are
coming out in the open now and displaying their ancestral hatred for all
things Christian without any evident fear of what kind of consequences might
follow.
Out-in the-open physical attacks on priests, pastors, statues and Christian
processions by extremist Jews is now more the norm than the exception. A
recent case involving a Greek Orthodox clergyman involved a skullcap-wearing
elderly Jew tapping on the window of the clergyman's car and when the man
opened his window, the Jew spat in his face, something becoming a daily
occurrence in Israel. Only a few days later, a yeshiva student spat at the
cross as it was being carried by the Armenian archbishop during a procession
near the Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem and did so under the
watchful eye of his rabbi, who did nothing to impede him.
In another recent case, 13 bishops from Austria were barred from praying at
Jerusalem's Western Wall by a rabbi who oversees the site. The Christians
refused to remove the crosses around their necks, which the rabbi considered
"insulting." Other Christians who have seen the increasingly bold and
violent nature on the part of Israel's Jews toward them and their faith in a
manner up close and personal say that during Jewish religious festivals such
as Purim (celebrating the hanging of Haman and the execution of 75,000
Persians) they stay inside and lock their doors, fearing their lives are in
danger amid a band of rowdy, drunken and violent Jewish extremists.
One would think that, with all the lecturing taking place during the last
half-century by organized Jewish groups when it comes to "hatred" and
"intolerance" (not to mention the undeniable influence these groups have
wielded in getting "hate crimes" legislation passed in most Christian
countries), there would be more concern paid for this growing trend in the
"headquarters" of Jewish values in the world-Israel.
With all the fear-mongering to which Christians are subjected on a daily
basis when it comes to Islam that is inaccurately portrayed as inherently
anti-Christian by the likes of John Hagee, Pat Robertson, Joseph Farah and
other neo-cons, you would expect some attention given to this alarming
business taking place in Israel. And yet, not a peep from any of them.
Attacks on Christians by Jews Increasing in Israel, Palestine
A former schoolteacher fluent in several languages, Mark Glenn spoke at the
AFP-TBR conference on the Middle East panel. He is a prolific writer whose
provocative essays have been published worldwide. He and his wife Vicki and
their eight children maintain a ranch in northern Idaho. His book, No Beauty
in the Beast, can be ordered from TBR BOOK CLUB (1-877-773-9077) for $28
ppd.
Ben Cramer
Of course they do. They need this lie.
Ben Cramer
On Dec 28, 9:18 pm, HHW <
> > Hamas--which happens to be the Hebrew word for violence--was founded
> > with the raison d'etre to destroy Israel. No U.S. affirmation
> > required.
>
>> Forgive us, Mr.Liberman, but should that determine American Middle
>> Eastern policy? Israel was founded in a vast ethnic cleansing, one of
>> the 20th Century's monstrous crimes against humanity.
>>
>American policy has always been to support those countries which
>shares it's values.
What values do Ersatz israel and the Jewnited States share?
Enlighten me.
HHW
Mythical and irrelevant. What you presume certain people might have
thought on that subject 1,500 years ago can not be known with any
reliability.
Even if this were
> not the case, if Ashkenazic Jews were all descendent of converts,
> there should not be any kohanim (priests) among them, a status that
> follows a paternal link.
Only drahcir is silly enough to make assertions of that sort. His
version is that all the world's Jews of today are descendants of
"Israelites".
I am one myself. The same series of DNA tests
> show that the kohanic claim, supported by tradition alone, is highly
> likely.
All tribes have priests.
> As for reading Dr. Sand's book, no thanks. I have no more time for
> such as I do for the likes of Chomsky, Finkelstein, and Irving. I'll
> read the critiques from sources I trust.
I can't speak for Irvinig, not having read anything by him, but you're
missing a lot by not experiencing Chomsky and Finkelstein. Of course
it may be the form of hiding characteristic of Ratner.
Snip
HHW
> On Dec 28, 9:18 pm, HHW <
>
> > > Hamas--which happens to be the Hebrew word for violence--was founded
> > > with the raison d'etre to destroy Israel. No U.S. affirmation
> > > required.
>
> > Forgive us, Mr.Liberman, but should that determine American Middle
> > Eastern policy? Israel was founded in a vast ethnic cleansing, one of
> > the 20th Century's monstrous crimes against humanity.
>
> American policy has always been to support those countries which
> shares it's values.
America is not ZIonist. Therefore we don't share Israel's central
ideological values.
As for ethnic cleansing, that's pure fantasy.
It was called the Nakba, Mr. Liberman. It began in late 1947 and
wasn't actually concluded until the early 50's Read Pappe's "The
Ethnic Cleansing of Pallestine".
snip
DoD
> On Dec 29, 1:05 pm, Sheldon Liberman <shel...@liberman.com> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 28, 9:18 pm, HHW <
>
> > > > Hamas--which happens to be the Hebrew word for violence--was founded
> > > > with the raison d'etre to destroy Israel. No U.S. affirmation
> > > > required.
>
> > > Forgive us, Mr.Liberman, but should that determine American Middle
> > > Eastern policy? Israel was founded in a vast ethnic cleansing, one of
> > > the 20th Century's monstrous crimes against humanity.
>
> > American policy has always been to support those countries which
> > shares it's values.
>
> America is not ZIonist. Therefore we don't share Israel's central
> ideological values.
You are a real creep. You certainly don't represent America... From a
poll earlier this year..
"Only 6 percent of Americans think the United States should stand
behind the Palestinians in Middle East peace talks."
Ben Cramer
"DoD" <danski...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:90b13c1d-d176-4782...@s36g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
>Don't start wars.
That should be addressed to the yids. It's they who start all the wars,
stupid.
Ben Cramer
I'm surprised it's that high doodoo, given the jew owned media have been
beating up on Arabs for decades.
fla...@verizon.net
On 29-Dec-2008, DoD <danski...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > It was also a common belief amongst the Khazars that converted that
> > they were in truth one of the lost tribes of Israel. Even if this were
> > not the case, if Ashkenazic Jews were all descendent of converts,
> > there should not be any kohanim (priests) among them, a status that
> > follows a paternal link. I am one myself.
Me, too - ok, a *daughter* of one :-)
> > The same series of DNA tests
> > show that the kohanic claim, supported by tradition alone, is highly
> > likely.
> >
& the studies further show a suprisingly high degree of
marital fidelity on the part of the wives (I remember this
from a television program on the subject: I freely admit
to not know what particular quality proves this)
> > As for reading Dr. Sand's book, no thanks. I have no more time for
> > such as I do for the likes of Chomsky, Finkelstein, and Irving.
Good analogy. Very good analogy; fitting.
> > I'll
> > read the critiques from sources I trust.
>
> It is interesting that people like watson, just love to call you
> people the descendants of the "Christ killers" and turn around and say
> that you have no connection to the Middle East.
>
When have bigots ever been logical?
> What makes this even more irritating and insulting to those of us that
> are Christian and I would assume the same for you Jews is that people
> like watson support the PalArabs who just recently legalized
> CRUCIFIXION.........
>
OMG. You are not kidding about this - I know you better than that.
I am absolutely astounded.
> It is amazing how we have such depraved people like watson in the west.
It's a sickness.
Susan
Ben Cramer
<fla...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:V%h6l.1930$Es4...@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
>
> On 29-Dec-2008, DoD <danski...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> > It was also a common belief amongst the Khazars that converted that
>> > they were in truth one of the lost tribes of Israel. Even if this were
>> > not the case, if Ashkenazic Jews were all descendent of converts,
>> > there should not be any kohanim (priests) among them, a status that
>> > follows a paternal link. I am one myself.
>
> Me, too - ok, a *daughter* of one :-)
Also the daughter of a Catholic nun. You don't qualify as a real yid, cohen.
Sorry to have rained on your parade.
Eli Grubman
>
>On 29-Dec-2008, DoD <danski...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> > It was also a common belief amongst the Khazars that converted that
>> > they were in truth one of the lost tribes of Israel. Even if this were
>> > not the case, if Ashkenazic Jews were all descendent of converts,
>> > there should not be any kohanim (priests) among them, a status that
>> > follows a paternal link. I am one myself.
>
>Me, too - ok, a *daughter* of one :-)
Except for the fact that your father (whom you refer to as an a"h)
changed his name to KKKohen from something else.
Eli
Kosher Cunny
"Eli Grubman" <eli.g...@googlemail.com> wrote in message
news:o5cjl49ibel7pjnqj...@4ax.com...
ben Murphy
KC
Poor Eli Grabmen is a Real Psychopath! LOL
<BG> Watch our poor psychopathic sod's interest in other people's lives! He
doesn't have one himself! Absolutely NONE!
In case someone is still in doubt about that, check this:
Just so that everyone gets a clue of the MISERY our village idiot, aka
psychopath Grabmen, is going through:
this sick psychopathic swine was trolling and spamming yesterday from 02:27
a.m. (MID: <v8dgl4l0t11q5hhgn...@4ax.com>) till 22:51 p.m.
(MID: <r1lil49ln6jnps4pv...@4ax.com>)! That is, for more than
TWENTY HOURS, again! LOL
And it started trolling and spamming today again at 03:27... after not even
a FIVE HOUR break!!! ROTFLOL
Now lets watch how many hours this sick, degenerate, psychopathic swine with
ABSOLUTELY NO LIFE OUTSIDE USENET will hold out today! LOL
Such utter MISERY was never seen on the Usenet before!
Doctor Panta
--
Everyone check this: psychopath Grabmen glued to his computer today as from
3:27 a.m. again (MID: <l65jl4hgggf11q7qn...@4ax.com>).
Watch the poor psycho with no life AT ALL making a complete ass of himself,
AGAIN, for the next FOURTEEN to TWENTY HOURS (and more) at a stretch!
AirRaid
Sheldon Liberman
It hasn't escape me. It simply doesn't exist.
Sheldon Liberman
> "SheldonLiberman" <shel...@liberman.com> wrote in message
Thanks for the laugh, clown. Maybe the "author" would be so kind as to
point out some examples.
Tell it like it is.
I agree, but a secular jewish state means an Israel without the sermon
on the mount.
Sheldon Liberman
> "SheldonLiberman" <shel...@liberman.com> wrote in message
Sorry, fella, but you're unenlightenable. As for values....hmmm...this
is toughie, unless you want to count democracy, freedom of religion,
freedom of speech, capitalism.....
Sheldon Liberman
> > > > Do you mean I'm anti-Khazar? As I hadn't heard of them until about a
> > > > year ago that's unlikely, don't you think?
> > > You apparently don't. The idea that the Jews descended from the
> > > Khazars was done away with years ago by DNA analysis.
>
>
> > I understand that the DNA analysis pursued back to the level of four
> > maternal founders of the line but the analysis did not fix the
> > location of these seminal events. I also understand that Khazar
> > origins of most of the Ashkenazi are not in dispute.
>
> origins" of European Jews are not, as he claims, "in dispute" -- when
> the topic isn't even a blip on the radar -- when he never heard of the
> Khazars "until about a year ago"?
>
> Deborah
I doubt he's even heard of a fork until a year, if even.
Tell it like it is.
>
> - Show quoted text -
What doesn't exist, Sheldon? That Israeli law is exclusive of Muslims
and Christians? THAT does exist. A Holy Land in the Middle East
without Muslims and Christians and religious Jews is an oxymoron.
After the Muslims, what are you going to do: declare open season on
religious jews and Christians. No tele-evangelist wants to believe
he, a Christian Zionist, is not welcome in a secular jewish state
calling itself by the religious and holy name of Israel.. Sephardim
are second class citizens even though Messianic are the native jews
of the region (Sephardim) and they alone gave so-called jews the
legitimacy to found the SECULAR state based solely on religious
promises contained in the Torah.
Putting Talmud above Torah is the distinguishing
characteristic of a secular jew. It is what got Christ killed in 33
A.D., and brought the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem when the
Romans realized after a generation had passed that they had been used
by the high priest Caiiphas and the Sanhedrin to kill the jewish
Christ. As a result, as you know, Christ became the Roman God.
Understand Sheldon, Israel was a theocracy in
ancient times, as was the entire Middle Eastern world, and though the
leaders of the people in Jerusalem did not accept Jesus from the town
of Nazareth as the Christ, they did agree to kill the man according to
the prophets in the Jewish Books. Doublethink.
dsharavi
<DanielAlbertDesfos...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> What doesn't exist, Sheldon? That Israeli law is exclusive of Muslims
> and Christians? THAT does exist. A Holy Land in the Middle East
> without Muslims and Christians and religious Jews is an oxymoron.
> After the Muslims, what are you going to do: declare open season on
> religious jews and Christians. No tele-evangelist wants to believe
> he, a Christian Zionist, is not welcome in a secular jewish state
> calling itself by the religious and holy name of Israel.. Sephardim
> are second class citizens even though Messianic are the native jews
> of the region (Sephardim) and they alone gave so-called jews the
> legitimacy to found the SECULAR state based solely on religious
> promises contained in the Torah.
> Putting Talmud above Torah is the distinguishing
> characteristic of a secular jew. It is what got Christ killed in 33
> A.D., and brought the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem when the
> Romans realized after a generation had passed that they had been used
> by the high priest Caiiphas and the Sanhedrin to kill the jewish
> Christ. As a result, as you know, Christ became the Roman God.
> Understand Sheldon, Israel was a theocracy in
> ancient times, as was the entire Middle Eastern world, and though the
> leaders of the people in Jerusalem did not accept Jesus from the town
> of Nazareth as the Christ, they did agree to kill the man according to
> the prophets in the Jewish Books. Doublethink.
Except for these NGs, one seldom sees such an outpouring of utter
ignorance.
Deborah
dsharavi
> > > > > year ago that's unlikely, don't you think?
> > > On Dec 28, 1:45 pm, SheldonLiberman<shel...@liberman.com> wrote:
> > > > You apparently don't. The idea that the Jews descended from the
> > > > Khazars was done away with years ago by DNA analysis.
> > On Dec 28, 6:33 pm, HHW <coaster132...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > I understand that the DNA analysis pursued back to the level of four
> > > maternal founders of the line but the analysis did not fix the
> > > location of these seminal events. I also understand that Khazar
> > > origins of most of the Ashkenazi are not in dispute.
> > Now how can HHW possibly "understand" that the alleged "Khazar
> > origins" of European Jews are not, as he claims, "in dispute" -- when
> > the topic isn't even a blip on the radar -- when he never heard of the
> > Khazars "until about a year ago"?
On Dec 30, 9:00 am, Sheldon Liberman <shel...@liberman.com> wrote:
> I doubt he's even heard of a fork until a year, if even.
<chuckle> One might say the same of the author of the tripe HHW
posted. And the guy's a professor? It's sad to see to what depths
academic standards have declined these past years.
Deborah
dsharavi
> > > > Certainly not Israel. It oppresses its religious minority.
> > > That's just one more construct of a delusion mind desparate to see
> > > reality as he'd like it to be.
On Dec 30, 8:46 am, Sheldon Liberman <shel...@liberman.com> wrote:
> It hasn't escape me. It simply doesn't exist.
Well, it does in Middle Eastern countries of the Muslim countries
persuasion--with the exception of those Muslim countries which have
driven out their religious minorities altogether, of course.
Deborah
Tell it like it is.
> On Dec 28, 10:09 pm, HHW <coaster132...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > “When And How the Jewish People Was Invented” is a very serious study
> > written by Professor Shlomo Sand, an Israeli historian. It is the most
> > serious study of Jewish nationalism and by far, the most courageous
> > elaboration on the Jewish historical narrative.
>
> > In his book, Sand manages to prove beyond any reasonable doubt that
> > the Jewish people never existed as a 'nation-race', they never shared
> > a common origin. Instead they are a colourful mix of groups that at
> > various stages in history adopted the Jewish religion.
>
> Presumably, the good professor "proves" this, just like he "proves"
> his notion that Spanish Jews descend from a Warrior Queen's Berber
> tribe, which converted to Judaism in the 6thC, fought against the
> Muslim Arab invasions in the 7th century, then participated in the
> Muslim Arab invasion and conquest of Iberia.
>
> Deborah
When you secular Zionists do not accept the Hebrew books as inspired
of God you prove what is to the world an ashkenazi jew as
differentiated from the religious jews who are DNA related to Abraham
and all Arabs. Your words "Notion" Proves" typically Gdless
ashkenazim. Doesn't rate any credibility with those who recognize the
legitimacy of the Hebrew books. Even though I am a Catholic by birth I
have enough sense to know a Pope has not more right than a religious
jew, Sephardim, to determine the intended meaning of Hebrew words by
the original authors of the Torah. Which is the only part of the
Hebrew prophets most ashkenazim recognize, since it was used to get
them [back] to the Holy Land..
Ashkenazi Jews know sin. The Day of
Atonement being used currently by ashkenazim to justify jewish sins
rather than condemn sin is a grave mistake, in my Catholic opinion..
When a jew imputes knowledge of sin, which, in his case, is extensive,
onto innocence, he exposes himself. "forgive us our trespasses". "As
we forgive".
Sheldon Liberman
> On Dec 29, 1:05 pm, SheldonLiberman<shel...@liberman.com> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 28, 9:18 pm, HHW <
>
> > > > Hamas--which happens to be the Hebrew word for violence--was founded
> > > > with the raison d'etre to destroy Israel. No U.S. affirmation
> > > > required.
>
> > > Forgive us, Mr.Liberman, but should that determine American Middle
> > > Eastern policy? Israel was founded in a vast ethnic cleansing, one of
> > > the 20th Century's monstrous crimes against humanity.
>
> > American policy has always been to support those countries which
> > shares it's values.
>
> America is not ZIonist. Therefore we don't share Israel's central
> ideological values.
>
> As for ethnic cleansing, that's pure fantasy.
>
> wasn't actually concluded until the early 50's Read Pappe's "The
> Ethnic Cleansing of Pallestine".
Nakba refers to what the Arabs refer to the catastrophe, or the
establishment of the State of Israel. It wouldn't have been considered
such had the Arabs accepted Israel and the original lines of partition
in the first place. What Israeli leader ever declared the intent to
"drive the Arabs in the sea (the ultimate act of ethnic cleansing)?
And if I remember my history correctly, wasn't the Arab armies that
attacked the nascient State of Israel within hours of her
independence?
As for Pappe's book, you can't be serious. Do you regularly fall into
the ideological trap that just because an author is Jewish his words
are automatically authoritative in matters that cater to anti-Jewish-
establishment delusion? People like Chomsky, Finkelstein, Irving, and
others bank on it. See http://www.meforum.org/article/1886 .
And if the Arabs were the victims of ethnic cleansing, why are there
over a million of them in Israel proper? How many Jews are left in
Arab lands? Why is Arabic an official language in Israel? Where in the
region do Arabs enjoy more personal freedoms?
You have no case, Watson, or whatever your name is.
And for the record, there was no such thing a Palestinian prior to the
mid-1960s. Never an independent state. Never a separate culture as a
people. Never anything that would have even identified them as a
cohesive units. And I absolutely dare you to show otherwise.
>
> snip
dsharavi
> > Presumably, the good professor "proves" this, just like he "proves"
> > his notion that Spanish Jews descend from a Warrior Queen's Berber
> > tribe, which converted to Judaism in the 6thC, fought against the
> > Muslim Arab invasions in the 7th century, then participated in the
> > Muslim Arab invasion and conquest of Iberia.
> > Deborah
On Dec 30, 9:34 am, "Tell it like it is."
<DanielAlbertDesfos...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> When you secular Zionists do not accept the Hebrew books as inspired
> of God
Where do you get off presuming that I'm a "secular Zionist", or that
you actually know what you're talking about?
Deborah
dsharavi
> > > > > with the raison d'etre to destroy Israel. No U.S. affirmation
> > > > > required.
> > > > Forgive us, Mr.Liberman, but should that determine American Middle
> > > > Eastern policy? Israel was founded in a vast ethnic cleansing, one of
> > > > the 20th Century's monstrous crimes against humanity.
> > > American policy has always been to support those countries which
> > > shares it's values.
> On Dec 29, 9:49 pm, HHW <coaster132...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > America is not ZIonist. Therefore we don't share Israel's central
> > ideological values.
> > As for ethnic cleansing, that's pure fantasy.
> > It was called the Nakba, Mr.Liberman. It began in late 1947 and
> > wasn't actually concluded until the early 50's Read Pappe's "The
> > Ethnic Cleansing of Pallestine".
300 pages of Communist twaddle.
On Dec 30, 9:36 am, Sheldon Liberman <shel...@liberman.com> wrote:
> Nakba refers to what the Arabs refer to the catastrophe, or the
> establishment of the State of Israel. It wouldn't have been considered
> such had the Arabs accepted Israel and the original lines of partition
> in the first place. What Israeli leader ever declared the intent to
> "drive the Arabs in the sea (the ultimate act of ethnic cleansing)?
> And if I remember my history correctly, wasn't the Arab armies that
> attacked the nascient State of Israel within hours of her
> independence?
Indeed they did--six months after the Palestine Arabs launched a wave
of terrorism against Palestinian Jews almost immediately following the
partition vote.
> As for Pappe's book, you can't be serious. Do you regularly fall into
> the ideological trap that just because an author is Jewish his words
> are automatically authoritative in matters that cater to anti-Jewish-
> establishment delusion?
Careful, Shel, you are blaspheming HHW's God and His Holey Text.
Speaking of Pappe's Holey Text, I can't resist inserting a few notes
to Pappe's many, many errors:
--Palestine in the 19th century did not have a “flourishing
Palestinian Arab population”.
--Theodor Herzl did not found Zionism in the late 1880s.
--Zionism never contained an “ideology of ethnic superiority”.
--The Biluim were not led by Moshe Lilienblum and Leon Pinsker, and
did not establish “the first Zionist settlements in Palestine”.
--Tel Aviv was not “founded on a Saturday morning in July 1907”.
--There was no Anglo-French plan for the occupation of Palestine in
1912.
--T.E. Lawrence was not a party to the 1916 McMahon-Hussein
correspondence.
--The Hebrew University was not built in 1920.
--The British did not accord Jews “preferential treatment” over
Arabs,
nor did the British help Jews create the Hagana.
--Ben-Gurion did not lead the Zionist Movement from the 1920s to the
1960s, nor was he chairman of the Jewish Agency in 1929.
--The Arab Higher Committee was not “established by 1934”.
--The Palmach was not active in the 1930s; it did not exist.
--The Mufti did not flee Palestine in 1938.
--The Arab Higher Committee never tried to "negotiate a principled
settlement with the Jewish Agency".
--Ben-Gurion never said, “I am for compulsory transfer. I do not see
anything immoral in it.”
--The UNSCOP presented its report on 31 August 1947, not on 29
November 1947.
--The partition resolution did not have “an equal number of
supporters
and detractors”.
--No “series of attacks” on Arab villages began “in early December
1947”; Arab attacks on, and massacre of, Jews began the day following
the partition vote.
--Arabs weren't expelled within 12 days of the partition resolution.
--No “forced expulsions” of Arabs began in “mid-February 1948.”
--The Palmach did not fight the British in 1948, nor was it commanded
by Moshe Dayan.
--Ben-Gurion did not meet with “leading Zionists and young Jewish
military officers” on 10 March 1948, or at any other time, to
finalize
plans to “ethnically cleanse” Palestine.
--Plan D did not provide for mass murder or for the “forcible
expulson” of hundreds of thousands of Arabs, and there was no "master
plan to rid the future Jewish state of as many Palestinians as
possible."
--Jews did not expel 250,000 Arabs while under British rule.
--The Jewish Agency did not declare the state of Israel on 15 May
1948.
--The Arabs did not invade with “small, ill-equipped forces”, nor did
they confront a “superior, well-armed Israeli military.”
--Jewish forces “on the eve of battle” did not comprise an air force,
a navy, units of tanks, or heavy artillery.
--There was no “tacit collusion” with the Jordanians which
“neutralized” the Legion.
--The first truce was not 'signed' on 10 June 1948, or on any other
date.
--800,000 Arabs were not expelled in six months, nor were 531 Arab
villages destroyed.
--“Successful Israeli campaigns” did not continue, nor lead to the
Jews' “complete control of Palestine”, in August 1948; nor was the
war
“completed by October”.
--The Jews did not in 1949 create “forced labor camps” for
“Palestinians”.
>People like Chomsky, Finkelstein, Irving, and
> others bank on it. Seehttp://www.meforum.org/article/1886.
> And if the Arabs were the victims of ethnic cleansing, why are there
> over a million of them in Israel proper? How many Jews are left in
> Arab lands? Why is Arabic an official language in Israel? Where in the
> region do Arabs enjoy more personal freedoms?
> You have no case, Watson, or whatever your name is.
> And for the record, there was no such thing a Palestinian prior to the
> mid-1960s.
Well, there were Palestinians like Ben-Gurion, Golda Meier, Ben-Zvi,
Shertok, etc etc -- but that was prior to 1948, and they were Jews.
>Never an independent state. Never a separate culture as a
> people. Never anything that would have even identified them as a
> cohesive units. And I absolutely dare you to show otherwise.
I wonder if this will prompt yet another adjuration to "Read Pappe!"
Deborah
Sheldon Liberman
<DanielAlbertDesfos...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Dec 30, 8:46 am, Sheldon Liberman <shel...@liberman.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 29, 9:24 pm, HHW <coaster132...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 29, 12:16 pm, SheldonLiberman<shel...@liberman.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Dec 28, 9:18 pm, HHW <coaster132...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > Snip
>
> > > > > > How many Middle East countries have freedom of religion?
>
> > > > > Certainly not Israel. It oppresses its religious minority.
>
> > > > That's just one more construct of a delusion mind desparate to see
> > > > reality as he'd like it to be.
>
> > > It is actually trying to drive its religious minority, citizens no
> > > less, out of the country. Has that escaped you?
>
> > > Snip
>
> > It hasn't escape me. It simply doesn't exist.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> What doesn't exist, Sheldon? That Israeli law is exclusive of Muslims
> and Christians? THAT does exist.
Prove it.
A Holy Land in the Middle East
> without Muslims and Christians and religious Jews is an oxymoron.
> After the Muslims, what are you going to do: declare open season on
> religious jews and Christians. No tele-evangelist wants to believe
> he, a Christian Zionist, is not welcome in a secular jewish state
> calling itself by the religious and holy name of Israel.. Sephardim
> are second class citizens even though Messianic are the native jews
> of the region (Sephardim) and they alone gave so-called jews the
> legitimacy to found the SECULAR state based solely on religious
> promises contained in the Torah.
I'd argue this point if I had the faintest idea what it was.
> Putting Talmud above Torah is the distinguishing
> characteristic of a secular jew.
Er, no, secular Jews don't hold by the Talmud nor by any other
scriptural document. And you can't put Talmud above Torah since the
former is essentially a discussion on how to implement Torah law, and
is augment by Rabbinical ordinances meant to safeguard Torah law.
It is what got Christ killed in 33
> A.D., and brought the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem when the
> Romans realized after a generation had passed that they had been used
> by the high priest Caiiphas and the Sanhedrin to kill the jewish
> Christ. As a result, as you know, Christ became the Roman God.
He was a Jewish scholar ostracized for his heretical ideas. Being
Jewish subjected him to Jewish law, including the death penalty for
preaching these ideas.
> Understand Sheldon, Israel was a theocracy in
> ancient times, as was the entire Middle Eastern world, and though the
> leaders of the people in Jerusalem did not accept Jesus from the town
> of Nazareth as the Christ, they did agree to kill the man according to
> the prophets in the Jewish Books. Doublethink.- Hide quoted text -
>
The didn't accept him as the Messiah and for good reason. The Catholic
Church has absolved the Jews of responsibility in his death.
DoD
> On Dec 30, 9:13 am, "Tell it like it is."
> Except for these NGs, one seldom sees such an outpouring of utter
> ignorance.
Daniel Albert Deswhoosits is just plain weird.
Ben Cramer
"dsharavi" <dsha...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3d5d5dfa-f596-40f0...@y1g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
He's a bit off the mark. We all know you to be a turd with legs, slime.
Ben Cramer
"Sheldon Liberman" <she...@liberman.com> wrote in message
news:60867994-eed4-40a6...@l39g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
Typical response from a hate-filled jew.
Well done.
Ben Cramer
What a load of b'ollocks.
The yids whined and screeched for decades to get the US to swallow their
freedom of speech, religion, political correctness, support of poofterism
etc, yet don't allow it in Ersatz israel.
Israel is an ethnocentric, apartheid, terrorist state that is as far removed
from real democracy as can be imagined.
Ben Cramer
Look no further than the pathetic efforts of one Lipstadt to observe that,
slime.
>
> Deborah
>
Ben Cramer
Nope. It's on television on a daily basis. Yid b'ullshit and lies all day.
Ben Cramer
On Dec 29, 9:49 pm, HHW <coaster132...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Dec 29, 1:05 pm, SheldonLiberman<shel...@liberman.com> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 28, 9:18 pm, HHW <
>
> > > > Hamas--which happens to be the Hebrew word for violence--was founded
> > > > with the raison d'etre to destroy Israel. No U.S. affirmation
> > > > required.
>
> > > Forgive us, Mr.Liberman, but should that determine American Middle
> > > Eastern policy? Israel was founded in a vast ethnic cleansing, one of
> > > the 20th Century's monstrous crimes against humanity.
>
> > American policy has always been to support those countries which
> > shares it's values.
>
> America is not ZIonist. Therefore we don't share Israel's central
> ideological values.
>
> As for ethnic cleansing, that's pure fantasy.
>
> It was called the Nakba, Mr.Liberman. It began in late 1947 and
> wasn't actually concluded until the early 50's Read Pappe's "The
> Ethnic Cleansing of Pallestine".
>Nakba refers to what the Arabs refer to the catastrophe, or the
>establishment of the State of Israel. It wouldn't have been considered
>such had the Arabs accepted Israel and the original lines of partition
>in the first place.
Why the hell should they have agreed to having their country swiped from
them?
Ben Cramer
> > > > > Hamas--which happens to be the Hebrew word for violence--was
> > > > > founded
> > > > > with the raison d'etre to destroy Israel. No U.S. affirmation
> > > > > required.
> > > > Forgive us, Mr.Liberman, but should that determine American Middle
> > > > Eastern policy? Israel was founded in a vast ethnic cleansing, one
> > > > of
> > > > the 20th Century's monstrous crimes against humanity.
> > > American policy has always been to support those countries which
> > > shares it's values.
> On Dec 29, 9:49 pm, HHW <coaster132...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > America is not ZIonist. Therefore we don't share Israel's central
> > ideological values.
> > As for ethnic cleansing, that's pure fantasy.
> > It was called the Nakba, Mr.Liberman. It began in late 1947 and
> > wasn't actually concluded until the early 50's Read Pappe's "The
> > Ethnic Cleansing of Pallestine".
>300 pages of Communist twaddle.
Communist = Jewish.
Sheldon Liberman
> "Sheldon Liberman" <shel...@liberman.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1dc22976-67bf-4a55...@v13g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 29, 9:36 pm, "Ben Cramer" <ben'salw...@around.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "SheldonLiberman" <shel...@liberman.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:484b3d67-2e68-4c2d...@k18g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
> > On Dec 28, 9:18 pm, HHW <
>
> > > > Hamas--which happens to be the Hebrew word for violence--was founded
> > > > with the raison d'etre to destroy Israel. No U.S. affirmation
> > > > required.
>
> > >> Forgive us, Mr.Liberman, but should that determine American Middle
> > >> Eastern policy? Israel was founded in a vast ethnic cleansing, one of
> > >> the 20th Century's monstrous crimes against humanity.
>
> > >American policy has always been to support those countries which
> > >shares it's values.
>
> > What values do Ersatz israel and the Jewnited States share?
>
> > Enlighten me.
> >Sorry, fella, but you're unenlightenable. As for values....hmmm...this
> >is toughie, unless you want to count democracy, freedom of religion,
> >freedom of speech, capitalism.....
>
> What a load of b'ollocks.
Ah yes, you're canned response to that which you don't understand,
which is to say, everything.
>
> The yids whined and screeched for decades to get the US to swallow their
> freedom of speech, religion, political correctness, support of poofterism
> etc, yet don't allow it in Ersatz israel.
>
> Israel is an ethnocentric, apartheid, terrorist state that is as far removed
> from real democracy as can be imagined.
Once again you demonstrate that you're opinion is of such value that
you wouldn't trust it anywhere outside a NG.
Sheldon Liberman
> "Sheldon Liberman" <shel...@liberman.com> wrote in message
So prove it already.
HHW
> Tell me, H, in your "brain", does this refute DNA evidence? If so,
> show is precisely, if not, please stop wasting bandwidth.
What's "this," Ratner?
HHW
Ratner quotes Professor israel Bartal thus:
Snip
No "nationalist" Jewish historian has ever tried to conceal the well-
known fact that conversions to Judaism had a major impact on Jewish
history in the ancient period and in the early Middle Ages. Although
the myth of an exile from the Jewish homeland (Palestine) does exist
in popular Israeli culture, it is negligible in serious Jewish
historical discussions. Important groups in the Jewish national
movement expressed reservations regarding this myth or denied it
completely.
Snip
----------------------------------------------------------
Why do you post Dr. Bartal's article when it conflicts with your
position?
Sheldon Liberman
Professor? Really? He sounds more like Gilligan.
Eli Grubman
Psychopath! LOL <grabmen....@andfound.invalid> wrote:
>On Tue, 30 Dec 2008 00:26:23 -0500, Eli Grubman, the dickless, brainless,
>lifeless and sleepless wonder, wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 30 Dec 2008 05:07:01 GMT, fla...@verizon.net wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>On 29-Dec-2008, DoD <danski...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> > It was also a common belief amongst the Khazars that converted that
>>>> > they were in truth one of the lost tribes of Israel. Even if this were
>>>> > not the case, if Ashkenazic Jews were all descendent of converts,
>>>> > there should not be any kohanim (priests) among them, a status that
>>>> > follows a paternal link. I am one myself.
>>>
>>>Me, too - ok, a *daughter* of one :-)
>>
>> Except for the fact that your father (whom you refer to as an a"h)
>> changed his name to KKKohen from something else.
>>
>> Eli
>
><BG> Watch our poor psychopathic sod's interest in other people's lives! He
>doesn't have one himself! Absolutely NONE!
>
>In case someone is still in doubt about that, check this:
>
>Just so that everyone gets a clue of the MISERY our village idiot, aka
>psychopath Grabmen, is going through:
>
>this sick psychopathic swine was trolling and spamming yesterday from 02:27
>a.m. (MID: <v8dgl4l0t11q5hhgn...@4ax.com>) till 22:51 p.m.
>(MID: <r1lil49ln6jnps4pv...@4ax.com>)! That is, for more than
>TWENTY HOURS, again! LOL
>
>And it started trolling and spamming today again at 03:27... after not even
>a FIVE HOUR break!!! ROTFLOL
>
>Now lets watch how many hours this sick, degenerate, psychopathic swine with
>ABSOLUTELY NO LIFE OUTSIDE USENET will hold out today! LOL
>
>Such utter MISERY was never seen on the Usenet before!
>
>
>Doctor Panta
*LOL*
Kalespera, Pantahose, you piece of shit grik a"h! We LAUGH at the
ineptness of your stalking! Who ever heard of a stalker taking a TWO
DAY BREAK? Never in the history of various newsgroups on THE Usenet
has such an inept stalker been seen! LOL
<Extremely bugger griks>
*plonk*
Eli
Ben Cramer
Why do you lie, jew? Why do you deceive yourself?
My opinion is shared by many world leaders.
Ben Cramer
>So prove it already.
Prove what, stupid person?
drahcir
um, your review by Segev. You know, the one that doesn't contain the
three letters d, n, and a within close proximity of one another.
drahcir
Cite PRECISELY why you think the above conflicts with my position. You
need to cut and paste from my posts - none of your "paraphrasing".
Poor Eli Grabmen is a Real Psychopath! LOL
You can't refute ANY of the things stated about you above, can you, poor
psychopathic swine Grabmen! LOL
You REALLY, have NO life outside Usenet AT ALL!!! Absolutely NONE!
Come on, you laughing stock, try to disprove it by posting around the
clock again! LMAO!
Doctor Panta
--
Everyone check this: psychopath Grabmen glued to his computer today as from
3:38 a.m. again (MID: <2mmll4tc7raak2u99...@4ax.com>).
Watch the poor psycho with no life AT ALL making a complete ass of himself,
AGAIN, for the next FOURTEEN to TWENTY HOURS (and more) at a stretch!
Sheldon Liberman
No, actually you accept the opinion of certain world leaders when if
fits your pre-existing agenda. I doubt that world leader comes to the
NG in order to gain perspective.
You, on the other hand come to the NG because it's the only forum in
which you can express and opinion with getting laughed at directly to
your face.
she...@liberman.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
Cramer, I'm still willing to bet you on which of us has the higher IQ.
Still as chicken as ever?
B.H. Cramer
How very wrong you are, sheldie. You are the stereotypical lying yid.
B.H. Cramer
<she...@liberman.com> wrote in message
news:e2e76f32-6ef6-4504...@e1g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
Not at all, sheldie. I know what my IQ is and I have a pretty good idea of
what yours is, based on your nonsense and childish prattling.