Jewish race myth trash, and Khazarian converts

I hate to do this, but Geoff has been crapping on incessently lately, and I felt like posting an article or two. Usually I don't dignify idiots like him with a response, but since he seems to feel that one scientific article or book reference is all that is needed to 'prove' a point, then I should not be denied my little bit of fun!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Wow. Evidence that Ashkenazi Levites actually may have picked up a lot of genetic material in Central Asia. Fancy that!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Oh, and Ashkenazi Levites have a mixed ancestry. Oh my, the 'Jewish race' has been tainted.

Oooh, burn! Genetic evidence supporting the case that non-Hebrew Russian-Ukrainian + Turkic Khazars declared themselves converts to Judiasm (and even of the priestly caste!), who later spread their seed.

*chuckles* Wow, Ashkenazic Levites are more likely to have east European or west Asian origins. But wait, didn't all the 'true Jews' (Hebrews) first come from the Middle east? So by the above articles reasoning, it is doubtful if many Ashkenazic Levites are true Hebrews. Oops, another hole shot in the Jewish race myth.

Mass scale conversion! Oh wait, in Geoff's book, converts to Judiasm must be Hebrews.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Wow. Only 3-5% of the general Jewish population has the cohen genetic signature. By golly, there must have been LOTS of intermingling. So much for not marrying Goyim.

[obscenity deleted]

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Its absolutely ridiculous to believe that for 2000 years the askenazim Jews did not mingle and intermarry as well as convert people from their host nations . I mean how do you explain their fair skin and blue eyes .

[anti-semitism deleted]

Well done mate , you earned a cold beer .

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Brian:

This is the point which I like to drive home time and time again. If Jews are so similiar, how do you explain Ethopian (black) Jews, in comparison to European (white) Jews? Which group represent the 'true' Jewish race?

You could make the claim that both contain Hebrew blood, but one of these groups has been very strongly assimilated into the non-Jewish population. This raises questions of racism. Are Ethopian Jews 'less Jewish' than European Jews? Apparently they are, since Israel is reluctant to grant Ethopian Jews safe-haven in Israel.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1104122544946

You're Jewish... as long as you're not black. And then Israel claims that it doesn't discriminate. How laughable!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I have crossed this twice already with different posters , Black or Falasha Jews are not considered Jews because they are the cursed seed of Ham . This way they are denied official reckoning by the Jewish authorities .

 

I'll be looking up your genetic claims later today. Pray they're well supported, but I have a funny feeling they don't say exactly what you're screaming. I also highly doubt they support your "European Jews are different to Occidentals" rant, especially since I note the line:

"The paternal ancestry of the Ashkenazi and Sephardic Levites is different, unlike the Cohanim from the two branches..."

Uh-oh. Incomplete reporting, by any chance?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

So the Levites are different, but not the Cohanim? I think I begin see where the fishy smell is coming from.

However, I think my case is pretty much made with the line:

"Brian Foley said:
[anti-semitism deleted]"

Geoff

 

Uh-oh.

Research has just started and already things are looking bleak for SpongeBrian and MountainTrick.

But on the upside, Jewish history is fascinating!

Check this: Levi (the tribe that mountainhate is whining about above) is only the priestly class. It's totally true! They were scattered among the Northern kingdom and the Southern; they didn't even have any land! And the Northern kingdom was destroyed and the people forced out; see, this stuff is fascinating history. I can't believe I never read up on it before!

And modern Jewish people owe their origins primarily to the tribes of Judah and to a lesser extent Benjamin.

So Levi, in fact, contributes...not too damn much to the "seed pool". Demographic minority, and not representative of all Jews, European or otherwise. So your "genetic differentiation" hypothesis coupled with the "Khazar quirk" totally tanks in the face of the mass of general population of Jewish people in the world today.

This comment: "He [Goldstein] finds that 45 percent of Ashkenazi priests and 56 percent of Sephardic priests have the cohen genetic signature, while in Jewish populations in general the frequency is 3 to 5 percent."

means that the Jewish population en masse is differentiated to that of the priestly families - which account for a tiny, tiny percentage of all Jews worldwide. Cohen, I understand, is just one family within the Levite tribe. Why would Jews worldwide represent that family in particular? Why would this be expected?


Both together now, kids: Uh-oh.

To Devil and others: I'm really sorry I never read up on your history before. It's damned interesting, let me tell you (admittedly, as an outsider). I mean, you know, one absorbs a little OT over the years but it's not a substitute and I admit I've been really negligent in learning about the history of Jewish people. Mea culpa. People who've been forced to grow up alongside us as eternal outsiders deserve better understanding from their fellows, to say nothing of better treatment for the past 2000 years.

To mountainhate and SpongeBrian: It would seem you morons lost yet again. Genetic variability in one demographically minor line of Judaism does not translate into genetic differentiation between Occidental and European Jews, as you postulated. I have no interest in nor concern for the Jewish "race" idea at the moment: genetically they are similar to Palestinians and to each other. However, breeding within a homogenous subpopulation for a good, what? 5000 years? says to me strongly that they are indeed a "race", the term being admittedly somewhat nebulous. Certainly in biology the term could well be applied.

Man, now that I really think about it, I think you two lunkheads might be wrong about that one too. I may get back to you soon with more info, although essentially it looks like the Khazar debate is finished here too.

Just don't go crying to your mamas when I spank you in front of all these people.

Geoff

 

Yeah, you "funned" yourself out, chief. Lil' too far, eh?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

A minor point but worth making: it's amusing how in Foleyan logic one article makes all the difference, but that the same rule can't apply to anyone disagreeing with said, er, "logic". The same goes for authors: in one article they're just small-time punks from a nobody university, but in the second their authority to speak on an issue is unquestioned. I personally was prudent enough not to criticize the Spanish team on the basis of their qualifications, but based my impressions on their data.

Would t'were we all could.

LOL!

Geoff

 

Its a done deal , Forrest Gump is distancing himself from his claim that the Jews are a race .

 

What, you can't read again now?

"It would seem you morons lost yet again. Genetic variability in one demographically minor line of Judaism does not translate into genetic differentiation between Occidental and European Jews, as you postulated. I have no interest in nor concern for the Jewish "race" idea at the moment: genetically they are similar to Palestinians and to each other. However, breeding within a homogenous subpopulation for a good, what? 5000 years? says to me strongly that they are indeed a "race", the term being admittedly somewhat nebulous. Certainly in biology the term could well be applied."

Guess what? Reproductive isolation. Race seems a good term to me.

Now - what about your Occidental-European hypothesis? You two idiots keep running away from that as fast as your shaking legs will carry you. Are you ever going to admit you were wrong? Come on, fellas: it's not that bad.

Geoff

 

Bah, I'm done for today. Flu anyway. Tune in tomorrow to hear Brian and mountain say:

"Please, Geoff, no more!"

Nighty night.

Geoff

 

Judaism is a religion that created a race (in the popular sense of the word), in the same way that culture and isolation created distinctions between the Chinese and Mongolians. Any broad classification is bound to have exceptions, such as the African Jews.

 

This is not the case because the US gives foreign aid money to Israel, but denounced South Africa when it was apartheid. The US does not fund apartheid states now does it?

 

So Roman Catholics through the millenia are now a race ? So according to this logic Irish and Italians are actually one race called Catholics , I hardly think so , its a stretch your theory .

America bankrolled South Africa during the apartheid era with financial loans as well as traded .

 

I wan't making a logical rule, only pointing out in this instance what happened. The Roman Catholics spread their gospel all around, and converted the natives of many countries to their religion. Jews don't really do this. The Island of Ireland made the Irish somewhat uniform, and the alps did the same for Italians.

 

Geoff:

Wrong. Some of them were priests... some of them weren't. This doesn't change the fact that they are believed to be one of the twelve tribes of the Hebrews.

Quite right. They received cities and special responsibilities, as well as tithes from the other tribes.

Excellent! An admission that not all of the Ashkenazic Jews are 'true' Jews.

You have pretty much admitted that the Levi's never owned any land in Israel. Also, my sources point out that they originated in CENTRAL ASIA, and were most likely KHAZARIAN CONVERTS.

So, do you agree that the Levi's of today don't have a spiritual right to Israel?

And by the way, in case you haven't noticed, but you claim that ALL Ashkenazic Jews originated in Israel has been shot down.

Did you read the other articles? The genetic 'abnormalities' in the Levi isn't the only evidence in favour of the Khazar theory.

It would be expected, since Cohen priests obeyed their religion, and only married other Hebrews. This is exactly why the Cohen are (selectively) used as an example to demonstrate the 'purity' and lack of imbreeding in the Hebrew population. "OMG, the Cohen are all so similiar and Jewish! Obviously the Jewish race only bred with themselves!".

Ironically, the Cohen only represent roughly 2% of the Jewish population. The vast majority of the Jews have almost no similiarity whatsoever with these Cohen ('pure' Hebrews). In fact, as my article makes clear, the fact that the many non-Cohen Jews intermingled with their host population OBSCURES their common ancestry. That is quite an embarassment for your 'Jewish race theory'.

Yes, I can't blame you. You address one article, miss the point, conveniently ignore the other points, and then realize that you are getting your ass kicked. Uh-oh indeed.

Translation: "I see that WAA WAA WAA, BOO HOO HOO! I don't like my own medicine!"

I see that you miss the point yet again.
The fact remains that the Ashkenazi Levites ARE regarded as a branch of the Hebrews. The genetic evidence has demonstrated that they originated in Central Asia, and are not related to the other 'true' Jews. This puts you in a difficult position. Should the Levities have a right to Israel, even if they aren't 'true' Jews?

I can't blame you. Your fantasy of a Jewish 'race' has been shot down, so you're running off with your tail between your legs.

Massive contradiction. In another thread, you made the bogus claim that Palestinians = Jews.

The fact is that in the majority of cases, this DIDN'T happen. Perhaps you should try reading my articles in depth:

So your claim that the Jews only bred within their homogenous subpopulation is bullshit. They were basically 'bred out' into their host populations, which explains the existence of black, arabic, and white Jews.

Oh, and don't forget this article:

 

Wrong. They were priests. And they consituted a demographic minority, not majority. Judah was the majority, which is why they are called "Jews" today and not "Levites".

Yes! Only 99.9% of them. Hardly a majority in your world.

Yes - it was Judah and Benjamin that owned the land, not Levi, since they actually didn't have any land allotment. They, and not the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, may have been partially founded by males from other groups - regrettably, however, I also note that "Jewishness" is matrilineal, not patrilineal.

So close for you: and still so far.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Seems uncertain. Their male descendance is more introgressed, but the maternal descendance - which in the eyes of Jews determines "Jewishness" - may well be unintrogressed. I think you'll have to do a little better to settle the issue on the Levites.

I also note that if the Levites didn't have a "genetic right" to settle in Israel - a curious definition which seems to be at least partially your invention - that would amount to a tiny fraction of all Jews. So their priestly families would have to stay home, or maybe come on worker visas. Or they could train people from the, I don't know, 99% of all other Jews who aren't of Levi.

You're not really helping your argument here with this Levite thing, you know.

Red herring. Where'd I say that. I don't recall the word "all". But to be more precise in my response to your pathetic "last gasp attack": the vast majority of Ashkenazi Jews are not genetically different from either the vast majority of Occidentals nor the vast majority of Palestinians. If you want

And, again: the Levi constituted a small minority of all Jews. You don't seem capable of understanding this point. I don't see why not, unless you're deliberately avoiding.

And this is relevant...how? Evidently they aren't examples of Caanite stock. The rest of Judah and Benjamin - that is to say, the majority of all other Jews - are. Again, you seem obsessed with constructing a giant straw man in the hopes to set it ablaze. Blaze away: for the straw man itself is very, very tiny. Your comment here ironically demonstrates this:

 

Many of the Jews that converted to Islam mixed in with the Palestinian (native Canaanite) population and became Palestinians. These Palestinians still have claim to the land because their ancestors were Jewish and they are by race from Judah, unless however now you believe that religion is the precursor for obtaining lands from 1000 years ago?

Why should they be discriminated against on the basis of Islam as their religion? Islam does not discriminate between race as does Judaism, so it is more appealing especially to people who don't believe there is a chosen people and all of humankind is chosen as to their belief in Allah (swt), not their ancestry or race.

I didn't believe it was anti-semitic to argue genetics and ancestry.

Also, I agree completely with the points of both mountainhare and Brian Foley and I don't believe it is anti-semitic at all to say Khazar Jews don't have ancestry to the Holy Lands.

Mr. 'Dhimmi' GeoffP, you take these arguments very personally. Are Jewish (as in race) by any chance?

 

I've never heard of Judaism discriminating based on race

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

why do you think this?

To quote you:

To quote Does Judaism Preach Racism?:

Don't you agree with the view that even if there are racist Jews, you can't blame the religion?

 

Actually, I've never supported this position, only refuted the arguments of those arguing against it on genetic grounds. Please read my posts. In point of fact, however, Palestinians and Jews are not genetically differentiated in any meaningful way (see above articles). There appears to be no genetic basis to refuse Jews immigrating to that region.

In the first, Judaism does not discriminate between race, making the first point completely false. And, actually, Mohammed is on record as having made a particularly racist remark against black people, suggesting that islam does indeed have a discriminatory history. Similarly, you yourself have advocated the murder of homosexuals and apostates, so it suggests to me underlying tones of hypocrisy. But perhaps you can leave your red herrings by the wayside, and I shall do likewise. (I note that neither do Christianity, Hinduism nor Buddism make any such racial distinctions, but that you fail to mention any of them, which also suggests bias on your part.)

It isn't. It is merely anti-Semitic to make anti-Semitic remarks, as Brian Foley has done previously. I assume you do not concur with him, or will not do so in a public forum?

The anti-Semitism or non-anti-Semitism of the "Khazar hypothesis" is not being questioned here. Please cease using red herrings to distract the argument. (Or, optionally, you may point out above where I said that the "Khazar hypothesis" was anti-Semitic. Good luck.) What is being questioned - and has, in fact, been refuted - is the hypothesis that the "genetic right" hypothesis (which, again, I have not expressed support with per se) is faulty because European Jews are genetically distinct from Occidentals. This latter hypothesis - which was Foley's and mountainhare's initial hypothesis, making no distinctions whatever for "tribe" - has already been falsified: European Jews are in fact, highly genetically related to Occidentals and even to Palestinians (Tissue Antigens. 47(1):63-71, January 1996). Foley and mountainhare were thus incorrect.

Now, they did change their hypothesis after the previous one had been eliminated by me to reflect results just for the Levite tribe. Thus, if you "agree completely" with mountainhare and Foley, then you might possibly be correct in making an injunction against the "genetic right of return" for Khazar Jews only. However, most Jews, of course, come from the tribes of Benjamin and Judah. The Khazarians compose a tiny fraction of all Judaism. Also unfortunately for your argument, Jews define "Jewishness" in relation to external groups as matrilineal inheritance, not patrilineal, and so the entire "Khazar hypothesis" is in danger of pre-analytical discarding as it relates to "genetic right of return". I recommend you read the articles kindly cited above by Mr Foley and mountainhare.

I take deliberate ignorance quite personally. Stupidity or ignorance based on itself I can accept, but never deliberate stupidity, and especially not for reasons of hate.

And, as I've illustrated many times to Foley and mountainhare in response to their attacks on my perceived 'race', if I may, I am not Jewish. One would have assumed that this would have been clear from reading my above mea culpa (that means "I am guilty") about not knowing more about the history of Judaism.

I caution you also that you cannot first agree with Foley et al that Jews are "just" Palestinians, then ask about race without understanding the biological character as defined here, that being: reproductive isolation without genetic differentiation.

Geoff

 

:bugeye: Geoff, you have to had realized I'd ask:

Where my good person might I find this remark?