-__- OK... Erm... It's now believed that in the Indus Valley, the Indo-Europeans split off from the Dravidians over 6000 years ago. these people wandered as a group to the Baltic area, and split off from there into their respective groups (Indo-Aryan, Hellenic [Greek], Albanian, Tocharian [extinct], Anatolian [extinct], Celtic, Italic, Slavic, Germanic, etc.). For example the Indo-Aryans went to the easternmost part of the Middle East (Kurdistan, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan) and the Indian subcontinent, the Hellenic peoples went to Greece and some of the surrounding isles, the Albanians went to Albania, the Tocharians went to what is now Xinjiang Uighur (in the People's Republic of China), the Anatolians went to what is now Turkey, the Celts went to Western Europe and the British Isles, the Italics went to Italy, the Slavs went to the Ukraine, and the Germanics went to Denmark (I think? I've forgotten). After this, though, there was more movement: the Latins rose and took over the Italian penninsula, driving out all the non-Indo-Europeans there and eventually all the non-Latins. They also took much of the land that was inhabited by Celtic and Germanic peoples (Spain/Portugal used to be Celtic, France was Germanic, etc). The Slavs drove people out of what is now Slavic land, such as Russia, Bulgarian, Poland, etc. There are also the people who stayed put on the shores of the Baltic, such as Avatar. (err... I mean his ancestors Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!) All of these groups diverged into more groups, for example Indo-Aryan into Indic and Iranian. The Shah of Iran requested that thousands of travelling entertainers from India be sent to his nation, eventually these people wandered out towards the heart of the Middle East and to Europe and their language and culture became unique from any Indic culture today.
If it is sensible to blame ideologies, e.g. Nazism, there is nothing wrong with blaming religions or cultural dogmas. Explain the etymology and symbolic significance of the word "goy." Any religion which states that following a certain path guarantees the only salvation possible from an otherwise certain doom - given that this path is abstract and involves religious symbolism - is most definitely a xenophobic, fascist, hateful dogma.
Gypsies are a warrior group originating the Punjab region of India, formed to defend against invading Semites.
This is EXACTLY why I love discussion forums. I had read that it is believed that Gypsies' true ancestors were a group of people who left India between AD 800 and 950, but know nothing of them being a "warrior group". Can you tell us more, or point to some information for us to explore? Peace. _____________ Youth is the first victim of war - the first fruit of peace. It takes 20 years or more of peace to make a man; it takes only 20 seconds of war to destroy him. -- King Boudewijn I, King of Belgium (1934-1993)
The most commonly used word for a non-Jew is goy. The word "goy" means "nation," and refers to the fact that goyim are members of other nations, that is, nations other than the Children of Israel. There is nothing inherently insulting about the word "goy." In fact, the Torah occasionally refers to the Jewish people using the term "goy." Most notably, in Exodus 19:6, G-d says that the Children of Israel will be "a kingdom of priests and a holy nation," that is, a goy kadosh. Because Jews have had so many bad experiences with anti-Semitic non-Jews over the centuries, the term "goy" has taken on some negative connotations, but in general the term is no more insulting than the word "gentile." The more insulting terms for non-Jews are shiksa (feminine) and shkutz (masculine). I gather that these words are derived from the Hebrew root Shin-Qof-Tzade, meaning loathsome or abomination. The word shiksa is most commonly used to refer to a non-Jewish woman who is dating or married to a Jewish man, which should give some indication of how strongly Jews are opposed to the idea of intermarriage. The term shkutz is most commonly used to refer to an anti-Semitic man. Both terms can be used in a less serious, more joking way, but in general they should be used with caution. Source: Judaism 101
"The Jews are strictly forbidden to cheat their brothers and it is considered cheating already if one-sixth of the value has been taken away from him. Whosoever has cheated his brother has to return it to him. Naturally, all that only holds towards the Jew, to cheat a goy he is permitted and he is not permitted to return to him what he has cheated him out of. Because the Bible says: "Thou shalt not cheat thy next brother, but the non-Jews are not our brethren, but as mentioned before, are worse than dogs." Aruch Choszen Hamiszpat 227.
The Morality of the Talmud by ALEXEY, Bishop of Saratov and Tsaritsyn Russky Dom June, 1999 Translated from the Russian Alexey Dorodnitsyn (born Anempodist Yakovlevich Dorodnitsyn), Bishop of Saratov and Tsaritsyn and Rector of the Kazan Seminary, was one of the outstanding Orthodox publicists of the beginning of the Twentieth Century. As a parish missionary in Herson and Yekarterinoslavl, and later as Bishop of Sumsk and Vicar of Kharkov Parish, Alexey Dorodnitsyn spared none of his considerable energies to expose such sects as the "Shaloputy" and the Shtundisty. In this he was greatly aided by a natural literary talent. It was there in the Ukraine that he became acquainted with the life of Judaic communities. In 1913 he published his article "The Morality of the Talmud" as an appendix to the journal "Tserkovnye Vedomosti" (Church News) (St. Petersburg, No. 44). The article stands out in its conciseness and forcefullness from many other works dedicated to the Talmud, that multi-volume collection of Judaic religious and legal norms often used to attack Christians and Christianity. When reading "The Morality of the Talmud" one thought constantly comes to mind: perhaps the key to the activities of such "oligarchs" as Gusinsky and Berezovsky lies precisely in this "morality"? he Talmud divides all of humanity into two parts: Jews and non-Jews, also known as the goyim. "He who is not circumcised is a foreigner", and a foreigner and a heathen are one and the same. Christians, as we shall see, are an object of especial hatred on the part of Jews. Only Jews were created by God -- all other peoples are creatures of the devil. "A Jew is more pleasing to God than the angels." He who offends a Jew offends God's majesty, so any goy who hits a Jew must die. As man towers above the beasts, so does the Jew tower above the rest of Mankind. "These last are in fact the spawn of beasts, so that if it weren't for the Jews there would be none of God's blessings, no sunshine, no rain, no people." All of the rabbis agree with one another that a non-Jew is purely animal in nature. Rabbi Moses ben Nachman, Rabbi Rashi, Rabbi Abravanel, Rabbi Jalqiu and others have compared the goyim to dogs, donkeys, and even pigs. "Only the Jews are worthy of eternal life; all the rest are like donkeys", says Rabbi Abravanel. "You Jews are are completely different people; indeed other people are not people at all, because their souls originate from unclean spirits, while the souls of Jews originate from God", preaches Rabbi Menachem. Rabbi Jalqiu employs similar reasoning: "Only Jews have the right to call themselves people; as for the goyim, who arose from an unclean spirit, they can only be called swine." It is on this principal difference between the Jew, who alone possesses human worth, and the non-Jew that Talmudic morality is based. The first interpreters of the Talmud, the Pharisees, were unable to destroy the commandments determining the relation of a man to his neighbor given by Moses to his people, so they interpreted the commandments in such a manner that the word "neighbor" could refer only to a Jew. Thus the Talmud instructs that the commandment to "love one's neighbor" is applicable only to a Jew. Its application to a non-Jew, whose life is valued the same as a dog's, is not only non-obligatory, but forbidden: "Toward asses and dogs God has more mercy than He does toward the goyim."
From m-w.com Main Entry: goy. Function: noun Pronunciation: 'goi Inflected Form(s): plural goy·im /'goi-&m/; also goys Etymology: Yiddish, from Hebrew gOy people, nation Date: 1841 sometimes disparaging : GENTILE 1 - goy·ish /'goi-ish/ adjective, sometimes disparaging
What a coincidence, look where else I found that quote - all the way down at the bottom of the page. Imagine that!
You forgot to add the "t". It's The Talmud not he Talmud. Guess the image of the letter t didn't copy and paste very well huh? Ah well, such is life. http://eairc.boom.ru/icon/talmudic.html Later, EvilPoet
So EvilPoet... you've posted oblique attacks, but haven't discredited these words. Why are you defending a psychotic, overzealous religion?
Some random d00d posting to USENET (haha) does not constitute proof, EvilPoet. I'm not impressed. As usual, the religious defend with vague allusions and hide behind symbols, while the scientific ask themselves, "What is really valuable about these middle eastern religions?" I find this site invaluable: www.fuckchrist.com As well as this one: http://www.squirm.net/tna/
Do the math I remember when David Letterman interviewed Jon Stewart on the occasion of Stewart's inheriting of The Daily Show. They talked for a minute about Judaism and comedy, and Stewart made reference to something his aunt had said once. Why is it important to be a Jew? Because there are only thirteen million of us left, she told him. So let's stop and think about that: thirteen million Jews, almost half of which are in Israel. That leaves how many Jews in the US? Not many, when we think of the numbers. There are nearly 300,000,000 Americans. If Judaism ever made itself a true threat to the US, we would stomp them into the ground. The worst aspect of the Zionist conspiracy that I'm aware of is the number of Jewish stereotypes badly translated to comedy. Neil Simon is one thing, but when I see St. Elmo's Fire Jew jokes (derived, incidentally, from Neil Simon) translated to post-Christian American sitcoms, I do wonder. (e.g. How many times have you heard the joke about people whispering bad words ... "Did you hear about Betty Goldstein? (Cancer.)" Bad television is the biggest threat of Judaism to the American culture, and that cannot be tied as directly as an anti-Semite might like. More appropriately, then, it might be said that the biggest threat of Judaism to the American culture is an American inability to comprehend what we're looking at. thanx, Tiassa Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Re: Do the math This is why I spoke about dogmas, and not individuals. The Judeo-Christian religions define the belief structures of over 80% of Americans. We're about to fight a war against Arabs we provoked into striking back at us after 50 years of one-sided, pro-Jewish/Christian and anti-Arab policy in the middle east. There is no scientific basis for any of these religions; I consider the dogmas, and not the people (necessarily - it's another debate), to be a threat.
Stereotypes: It's all in what's important I'm having a difficult time with the notion of dealing with my daughter's maternal grandfather. My family has wondered why I'm so worried about ideology, but a couple of examples should suffice: • The man has been known to use the phrase "He jewed me", meaning that someone has ripped him off. We all know that stereotypes exist about Jews and money, but what I find most bizarre about it is that this man is as "Jewish" as they come when money is involved. In other words, he can cast what stereotypes he wants about the Jews, but I have yet to hear from him what is so important about the Jews that he is to be forgiven the same principles he accuses in others. • The man has been known to claim the Pope is the Devil, yet of charity he taught his daughter according to a saying of Jesus that is not in the Bible, and is found only in the Didache, also known as The Teaching of the Twelve, a volume whose authority is acknowledged only by the Catholics. And most recently, he chose to not buy a house in a given neighborhood not because the property value would go down, not because it wasn't a functional location, but because, and I quote, "While we were looking, I met this gentleman who lived just up the street, and he was a Caucasian fellow, you know. He had a Porsche and a Volvo in his driveway, so it seemed like he had his stuff together, and he was telling me that there were some weird things happening with the ethnic balance in the neighborhood." Ethnic balance? How's that? What does that mean? The crime numbers are stable, the property values rising, and that part of town is expected to reap the benefits of the area's new mass-transit disaster just as soon as the politicians quit trying to kill the program. In the end, it's what it sounds like: there are too many black people in the neighborhood. Such is the mentality of those who perceive ethnicity and heritage as cause to feel threatened. We see, in our example, a real human being of my association, that it's all in what is important to each person. Catholics, blacks, Jews? It's easy enough to blame others for what one cannot comprehend. But I'm still unsure why I should respect such a position. thanx, Tiassa Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
You seem to have created a non-sequitur here. Let me explain something: You've found an example of one man who exemplifies a confused ideology. This does not mean that everyone who shares views resembling these has the same ideological basis. For you to assume that would be like picking out a deranged crackhead and saying, "See! Negroes are on crack and retarded!" So with this argumentative fallacy behind you, I hope you'll move on.
Prozak I will overlook that intellectual failure of yours. I will even forgive the audacity of that remark. It doesn't assert anything of the sort. Rather, it exemplifies the stupidity of divisive, presumptive social perspectives. I've found, for instance, that most people employ the same devices as this man does. They harp on stereotypes while forgiving themselves the same conduct because they're not Jewish or black or whatever. The end result is that these issues are human issues, not Catholic or Jewish or black. When the people who abide by such confused ideologies realize this little tidbit, a whole lot of their frustration goes away, as well as a whole lot of mine, and a whole lot of the Jewish guy and the black woman who are discriminated against, so to speak. Point being is that such confused ideologies are rife with hypocrisy, which undermines the legitimacy of the asserted stereotype. within the ideology. Don't you think anti-Catholicism is undermined in the least by employment of Catholic theology? Or anti-Semitism undermined when the anti-Semite conducts himself according to the stereotype? You're right, Prozak, such points have nothing to do whatsoever with considerations of Jews being a threat to the United States of America. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Which is funny since I'm usually the one reminding people that most crackheads are white. Now then, what if I'm talking about the nigger crackhead retards while freebasing? Is the fact that I'm not black enough to exempt me from being a retard if I'm smoking crack? Why don't you tell me where to move? In the meantime, you might wish to take your superior reading skills and self-righteousness and stop to think that perhaps I'm posting in terms of the topic, and not in terms of you. Perhaps I should start labeling my posts "To Prozak" or "To our Topic Poster" or "To Nobody In Particular". If I've created a non-sequiter, it's only to your own chosen path for examining this issue. And that's your own problem, Prozak. Here's a hint: when addressing people specifically, I usually put it in my post. For instance, three hints that this post is directed at you, Prozak: • Your name in the title • The exclusive citing of your posts within the body of the text • My continued use of your name, Prozak, since I feel compelled to constantly remind all of whom I'm speaking to just in case it isn't clear to you at this point Now then, teacher ... why don't you write the outline and tell me what you would like me to post? What's funny is that the first post was intended to be humorous. Of course, I should know better than to present humor to this forum that bears the minimal prerequisite of being able to understand Doonesbury. But I really didn't think daily comic strips were that tough. And the second post was about stereotypes in general. Too bad you missed that. Try Zohlopht. thanx, Tiassa Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
