# History of Judaism & Israel



## Archangel M (Jun 4, 2010)

Helen Thomas tells Jews to go back to Germany

[yt]RQcQdWBqt14[/yt]

"Neutral"..."Facts only" reporters with no bias?  BWAHAHAHAHA!!!

These are the types of people who write the propaganda...I mean "news" that we read. So when the news writes stories about Israel "massacring" poor peace activists, remember this.


----------



## Makalakumu (Jun 4, 2010)

Archangel M said:


> Helen Thomas tells Jews to go back to Germany
> 
> [yt]RQcQdWBqt14[/yt]
> 
> ...



Alex, I'll take fallacy for $400.  There's at least two here, but whatever.

This would be a legitimate point of view if the US did not support Israel and the winners weren't writing the history books.  In fact, I imagine and quite a few of my ancestors who were forced off their lands, rounded up and killed, and/or thrown in camps to rot, might actually agree with this sentiment in a different context.

This is one of the oldest human games on Earth.  One more powerful human group forces another group off their land and the latter is pissed about it.  So, yeah, I can understand why some people would feel that way and it's not that crazy.  Not at all.


----------



## Archangel M (Jun 4, 2010)

Timeline of Judaism. 

Between the years 250 CE and 1948 CE - a period of 1,700 years - Jews have experienced more than eighty expulsions from various countries in Europe - an average of nearly one expulsion every twenty-one years. Jews were expelled from England, France, Austria, Germany, Lithuania, Spain, Portugal, Bohemia, Moravia and seventy-one other countries. Now it looks like we have people who want to expel them from a country that WE (the western world) gave them in the first place.


----------



## JDenver (Jun 4, 2010)

Archangel M said:


> Helen Thomas tells Jews to go back to Germany
> 
> [yt]RQcQdWBqt14[/yt]
> 
> ...



The history on who 'owns' the land now known as Israel is long and complicated.  Of course, Jewish people claim that it's been their land for centuries, which is actually tough to prove outright.  Similarly, the Palestinian claims are also difficult.

So Helen Thomas says that the Jewish people have no actual right to claim it as their land and you figure that's an outlandish statement?  I certainly don't agree.  She's stating what should be an objective fact - that Israel was given to Jewish people and that the outright ownership of that land is highly contentious.


----------



## Archangel M (Jun 5, 2010)

Uhhh..no. The "go back to Germany or Poland" part is the outlandish part. Considering that there are still people alive who survived the death camps.


----------



## Makalakumu (Jun 5, 2010)

There are still people alive in my family that remember the "reservations", the re-education centers, and the deprivation of a way of life. May be Israel can play nicer with its natives. Look at new Zealand. It's not perfect,  but at least they offer the native some self respect.


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 5, 2010)

knuckleheader said:


> How naive. It's the "natives" that want to eliminate Israel. If the enemies of Israel would stop firing rockets/suicide bombers, they'd co-exist.
> 
> 
> The radical Arab militants do not want to live in peace. There are plenty Palestinians that would stop fighting. But, leaders of Hamas and other similar groups keep waging war.
> ...


 


As I said the Jews are the natives of Israel, if people want to take the NZ analogy, imagine that the Maoris had fled around the world when the Europeans invaded then campaigned to get their country back, the UN and others supported them so they were 'given' control back of their own country, does that then make the white European descents the natives. 

Like the Maoris many Jews stayed in their homeland and does it make it any the less their homeland because it's been invaded and the invaders left their descendants there? where do people think Jews actually come from then, do they just think it's a religion or do they realise it's a people and their homeland which many were ejected from is Israel? 
Do people exiled from their countries due to wars and oppression stop being citizens of their country? the Jews in Israel kept, if you like, the home fires burning for us, they put up with great oppression to keep that land in our hearts and for us to return, don't ever call the Arabs the natives and us the invaders, it simply isn't the truth.

Many Palestinians are actually Jordanians, kicked out of Jordan not even quasi 'natives' of Israel.


----------



## Empty Hands (Jun 5, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> Oh and the Jews *are* the natives in Israel, they didn't leave Israel, they were invaded several times by various nations but always there's been Jews in Israel...



According to your own scriptures, the Hebrews (Jews) were invaders as well, whose bloodthirsty tribal God gave the lot of you permission to exterminate the natives and take the country for your own.  I don't know if that even happened, but it's something useful to keep in mind.  There are no clean hands, no neat lines, no pure saints and no pure demons.  Pretending otherwise is self-deluding propaganda.  It also stands in the way of coming to some sort of solution which will allow everyone to live without wholesale murder.  Almost everyone is an invader, what varies is how recently it happened.

Even the North American aboriginal people that migrated from Eurasia replaced the Clovis people that lived there.  I don't know if there was direct conflict between the two, but the timing is suggestive.


----------



## Makalakumu (Jun 5, 2010)

Archangel M said:


> NZ's natives and neighboring countries havent stated that their goals were to wipe NZ off of the map...and made the attempt...have they?



It never got that far.  They broke the tit for a tat violence cycle and the people found ways to live with each other peacefully.  A few years ago, I was researching how other countries dealt with their native peoples and this is one of the only examples I could find where this happened. It certainly wasn't perfect, but at least they avoided the fate of so many other peoples.  Usually, the case was that the violence cycle would get out of control to the point where the more powerful group would kill/displace/imprison everyone in the other group.  

As far as Israel is concerned, unless some kind of arrangement can be made, Israel will eventually be forced to deal harshly with the natives, damn international law.  It's pretty bleak, but probably going to be the end result.


----------



## Makalakumu (Jun 5, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> Many Palestinians are actually Jordanians, kicked out of Jordan not even quasi 'natives' of Israel.



I think that is probably the case for everyone.  The Poles came from somewhere else.  The natives have as well.  That's why, IMO, all of this gets silly after a while.  People aren't really tied to the land of their ancestors because usually, when you trace back the generations, people lived somewhere else and called themselves something else.  

For example, as in the case of my surname, it comes from Kedrowice, which is located in modern Poland.  It used to be part of Prussia.  Germany killed all of the original Prussians and displaced them.  So, is my surname really German?


----------



## Big Don (Jun 5, 2010)

Full audio of the radio communications between Israel and the "Peaceful" flotilla.


> Shut up! Go back to Auschwitz.


Classy...


> We help the arabs go against the US, don't forget 9-11 guys


Real classy...


----------



## CanuckMA (Jun 5, 2010)

maunakumu said:


> This might be a side issue, but something I've always wondered is how can a religion be a race?


 

We are not a race. We are a people. It is sometimes hard to define Jews. You are either born a Jew, if your mother was Jewish, or you can convert through Judaism. But a Jew need not practice Judaism, the same as unless you properly convert, you can practice 'Judaism' as much as you like, it does not make you a Jew. 

We have a history of over 3,000 years in Israel. A history which Muslims are trying hard to eradicate. One of the focus is the digging under Temple Mount. With no proper supervision and cataloging of finds. Literaly removing Jewish history. One thing Xtians need to wake up to. If Muslims eradicate all proof that the Temple stood in Jerusalem, where does that leave the founding story of Xtianity????


----------



## Makalakumu (Jun 6, 2010)

How much is a majority in this case?

Look its pretty much cool knowledge that Poland was a paradise for European jewry. Check aiki the info is there too. The book is just an english translation of a common polish history book written by a group of professors in Krakow. 

I can get there names when I get home.


----------



## elder999 (Jun 6, 2010)

maunakumu said:


> This reads like the argument that many native tribes of North America make where they say they have always been on this land that that their people didn't cross the land bridge and never came from anywhere else.


 

Oh, Jesus. *Name two*

While most of the Indians in the western part of the U.S. have interesting creation stories that they might cling to (the Hopi emerged from a hole in the earth that was the passage from the "last world.") they- recognize that they did, in fact, come from somewhere else-some of them have even established ties and direct connections with peoples from Siberia and Tibet because of this. More to the point, linguistically, they're all aware of the athabascan language which is part of Inuit, Northwest Indians of Washington and Oregon, and Dine and Apache-in fact, Dine and some Northwest Indians languages are virtually identical, with only a variety of dialectical and idiomatic differences. 

As for those of us from the East, my people believed that they came from across the Atlantic-and maybe they did......

Almost all tribes-though there have been people on this continent for more than 30,000 years-have myths that say they came from "somewhere else."




maunakumu said:


> How much is a majority in this case?


 
Near as I can tell, *all* of them. There are Jews from all over the world named "Cohen" who have the same alleals(?) that apparently date back to one family from the middle east. Even black Falashas from Ethiopia. 

Judaism isn't a ethnicity or a religion; it's a _tribe_, which is pretty ****in' cool with me.....


----------



## Makalakumu (Jun 6, 2010)

I don't understand how someone can convert to a religion and be part of a tribe. I don't understand how every Jew can trace their geneology back to Palestine.

Another side issue, but Jeff, I think you are intentionally over looking examples of tribes who claim to have inhabited a land forever. Unless you are saying that the ancestors coming down on Bear Butte counts as coming from some where else.


----------



## elder999 (Jun 6, 2010)

maunakumu said:


> I don't understand how someone can convert to a religion and be part of a tribe. I don't understand how every Jew can trace their geneology back to Palestine.


 
Dude, dig it, 'cause I've been saying it for a long time, and it's still true:_understanding is not a a necessary adjunct to *appreciation*._

Every Jew can trace their DNA (not geneaology, which is lost to time) back to a few people that we know to have been in the Middle East (Palestine? Babylon? *Egypt?*) thousands and thousands of years ago-whether they've been in Russia since they can remember or Poland since whenever-that's just a fact. An uncomfortable one for some-because of the implications-but a fact, nonetheless. 

There are black Jews from darkest Africa who share DNA with Todd, Mr. CanuckMA and Irene, and a host of people from Poland, Russia, Czechoslavakia and Germany-Spain, Italy, Greece, Morocco, Armenia and Iran as well-that are common for and almost exclusive to _Jews_.





maunakumu said:


> Another side issue, but Jeff, I think you are intentionally over looking examples of tribes who claim to have inhabited a land forever. Unless you are saying that the ancestors coming down on Bear Butte counts as coming from some where else.


 
Nope. Not ignoring at all-if they say they came from "the last world," the Pleiades, somewhere else in outer space, or across the Atlantic-it's a _myth_ that says they came from "somewhere else", and, like all myths, one that contains a kernel of truth-that is to say, "somewhere else." 

As far as your mention of sacred Bear Butte goes, this also applies-the Lakota, Oglala, Natkota, Cheyenne, Arapahoe and other 60-odd tribes that hold this place sacred have mythologies that say they came to Bear Butte from "somewhere else."

On the other hand, compared to Europeans on the North American continent-or anywhere else-11000 years or more might as well be "forever." :lfao:

Like I said, *name two.*


----------



## CanuckMA (Jun 6, 2010)

maunakumu said:


> I don't understand how someone can convert to a religion and be part of a tribe.


 
Because my tribe has 2 ways to join. Your mother is a Jew. Or you come in through the religion. Once you have made the commitment to join the covenant, you become part of us. In that way, it's akin to citizenship.  It is hard to understand because we are both a people and a religion, entertwined as few others are. Our culture, Laws are religion based, but you can be as secular as can be and still be a Jew.



> I don't understand how every Jew can trace their geneology back to Palestine.


 

Elder did a good job of explaining. We're not claiming *every* Jew. Just a majority. Converts can't. But unless they marry a convert, their kids will share the 'tribal' DNA. Furthermore, Levites and Cohens have even more in common with one another. This day, most Cohanim are _safek_, in doubt. However, studies have been made that shows that most share a common ancestor. Cohanim are the descendants of Aaron.


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 7, 2010)

Lets get it right, Poland was a 'paradise' compared to other European countries, it wasn't a paradise in that it was a place to live a wonderful life, it meant a place where the freedoms were comparative. Haiti may well seem a paradise to a North Korean or vice versa, doesn't mean either place is great to live in, it depends on who you are and where you live. Jews had to live in ghettos, they were allowed to take employment as tax collectors, bankers etc but they aren't careers that make you friends. Poles didn't convert, they are very staunchly Catholic and have kept that faith even through the Communist years. We all know that history professors in a country that hates and killed a whole bunch of people are going to tell the truth about what happened! Look up and see how many Jews the Poles killed during the war and then look up how many Jews they killed when they'd been released from the concentration camps and went back to their villages, please note how quickly after the Germans rounded up the Jews the Poles moved into Jewish homes. Yes many Poles suffered too, many died fighting the Germans but just as many thought the Germans would rid them of the Jews.
http://radziejow.blogspot.com/2009/09/post-world-war-ii-poland-and.html

Genetics, sadly the fact that we share genes with other Jews means we have particular problems with genetic conditions such as Tay-Sachs which is a devastating illness. Most of us have genetic screening to prevent the passing on of this condition, Crohns disease is prevalent too, my son has it. 

In the UK being Jewish is recognised now as a race (tribe) of people. 

I'm in off nights, must sleep!


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 7, 2010)

maunakumu said:


> You saw this on BBC. You said so yourself.
> 
> "On the BBC news (which is pro Arab btw) it showed the Turkish television report..."
> 
> ...


 
You know what? I don't care how many were killed on that boat, nine, nineteen, a hundred even, I really don't care. 
It's not because they crossed swords with Israelis, it's simply I'm all 'cared' out. I cannot care for more things that I can cope with. In an hour I'm off to teach my womens class, their husbands, sons or boyfriends are in Afghan, we've had three dead and more than 19 injuried some horrifically. I have friends, some very close over there, I have students over there. I care for my old father who misses my mother terribly. I support charities like Medicin San Frontiere, a fistula hospital in Ehtiopia, I sponsor a Muslim girl in Bangladesh and support other charities I care for. I care for my fellow Brits suffering in Cumbria, some children survived a school bus crash where two pupils were killed only to see people being shot in the street a week after. I watched a programme about girls who are sexually abused in South Africa, 2 of 3 girls there. There's more I'm not going into but don't ask me to actually care about people who stick their heads in the lions mouth and don't ask me to care who's actually right befcause I don't.

Rewrite the history of my people by all means, perhaps I'll write a book rewriting American history or maybe that's been done. Take the word of whoever you want and tell me I'm lying about my own history, whatever, as the teenagers say.


Denying the Native Americans stories seems to me to be justification for everything they had to suffer. Well they didn't really live here forever so hey it's fine to kick them off their land. Perhaps as the white Americans haven't lived there forever they shouldn't have any objections to Mexicans and others coming over the border to settle in America, after all everyone comes from somewhere else so they wouldn't be illegal immigrants would they?


----------



## Empty Hands (Jun 7, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> Rewrite the history of my people by all means, perhaps I'll write a book rewriting American history or maybe that's been done. Take the word of whoever you want and tell me I'm lying about my own history, whatever, as the teenagers say.



So genetics and religion confers historical knowledge now?  How DO you know what happened to Jews in Poland more than 500 years ago?



Tez3 said:


> Denying the Native Americans stories seems to me to be justification for  everything they had to suffer.



The Native American creation stories are obviously wrong.  So are the Abrahamic creation stories.  They do not conform to what we know about the world and our own natural history.  That justifies nothing, either way.
"...if the experiment disagrees with the guess, then the guess is wrong." - Richard Feynman


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 7, 2010)

Empty Hands said:


> So genetics and religion confers historical knowledge now? How DO you know what happened to Jews in Poland more than 500 years ago?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 


Which bit of 'I don't care' did you miss? Goyim will think what they whatever anyone else says, a closed mind is a closed mind. Justified homicide of any people will always be that.... justified by the perpetrators. The truth rarely is a consideration. The Goy professors are 'right' the Jews 'wrong', so what's new.


No point in stopping here anymore.


----------



## CanuckMA (Jun 7, 2010)

EmptyHands, Whatever


----------



## Empty Hands (Jun 7, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> Goyim will think what they whatever anyone else says, a closed mind is a closed mind.



So, to be clear...you are saying that no non-Jew will think fairly in regard to Jews, or listen to their arguments?


----------



## CanuckMA (Jun 7, 2010)

You're right. Jews always had it great. The expulsions, the pogroms, the Shoah never happened. The _Protocols_ is a real text and we control everything.


----------



## Empty Hands (Jun 7, 2010)

CanuckMA said:


> EmptyHands, Whatever



What is this even supposed to mean, seriously?!?  Are you _really _going to claim that your genetics and your religious practices give you some sort of special knowledge of history 500 years dead that no one not in your tribe can comprehend?  Are you _that_ ethnocentric and tribal?

Does my white skin give me special knowledge of the social status of Danish peasants in 1325?  Do my Asian friends have special knowledge of Kublai Khan that no one else can comprehend?

This approaches absurdity.

Either something is true, or it is not, and only research will determine which is which.  Not your ethnicity or your religion.


----------



## Empty Hands (Jun 7, 2010)

CanuckMA said:


> You're right. Jews always had it great. The expulsions, the pogroms, the Shoah never happened. The _Protocols_ is a real text and we control everything.



That is an extreme position to impart to someone.  Clearly you have the citations from this thread to back you up?


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 7, 2010)

Empty Hands said:


> What is this even supposed to mean, seriously?!? Are you _really _going to claim that your genetics and your religious practices give you some sort of special knowledge of history 500 years dead that no one not in your tribe can comprehend? Are you _that_ ethnocentric and tribal?
> 
> Does my white skin give me special knowledge of the social status of Danish peasants in 1325? Do my Asian friends have special knowledge of Kublai Khan that no one else can comprehend?
> 
> ...


 
If this is going to be a discussion on history and historians we need a new thread. 

I imagine if you are Danish and know your history you would have a good idea of what it was it was to be a Danish peasant in 1325. I certainly have more than a good knowledge of what English peasants were doing then from eyewitness accounts, documents of the time, artefacts, written histories,parliamentary, Church and Royal achives etc.
 In 1325 the town I live near looked not so very much different from what it does now as many buildings from that era are still standingsome from earlier. From the Domesday Book we get a very good picture of life in medieaval times. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richmond,_North_Yorkshire

There's no 'magic' in knowing ones history, I'm not claiming special bonds it's just a case of knowing ones Jewish history. So two Polish academics wrote a history, and histories have never been rewritten? How many people know that the original inhabitants, Indians, were entirely wiped out in the West Indies? Or the Korea used to be spelt with a C, the Japanese changed that. Misinformation is everywhere, sometimes by accident sometimes by design. How many people think what Humphrey Bogart said 'play it again Sam'? He didn't, it was 'play it Sam' but guess which is going down in history?

I think you are being a tad hysterical over something very simple, Jews know Jewish history but we didn't say it was hard to understand, there's plenty of non Jews who can understand it. Danes will know their country's history and Mongolians will certainly know the history of Kublai Khan. What is so strange about that? The Scots certainly know their history ask any Scot about Bruce, Wallace and Culloden. I really don't see why you have a problem with me or any other Jew knowing our history. Don't you know yours even if it is short?


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 7, 2010)

We aren't called the People of the Book for nothing! Academic study, historical research, debates and learning are a very big part of being Jewish. hears some reading to start of with and to give you an idea of how much we actually do study our lives, loves and history as well as our values, philosophies and faith.

http://www.academicstudiespress.com/BookSeries.aspx

We also like a good gossip and if you think anything happened to Jews in one part of the world wasn't shared by Jews anywhere else you are mistaken. Israel doesnt have the best intelligence network in the world for nothing, it's run by Jewish grandmothers!

Try this too.
_The Review of Jewish Thought and Intellectual History.

The First issue will be published in September 2009.

This periodical will publish articles dealing with diverse areas of Jewish thought over the ages, including Rabbinic thought and mysticism, Medieval philosophy, Renaissance philosophy, Kabbalah, Hasidism, and Modern and contemporary thought. The journal encourages studies on the repercussions of and interactions with surrounding cultures and schools of thought in Jewish philosophy and mysticism, interfaces of philosophy and other types of thought and literary expression (such as exegesis and poetry), political philosophy, women and gender in Jewish thought, and the Jewish contribution to the sciences.

Editors: Dov Schwartz (Bar Ilan University), Steven Harvey (Bar Ilan University)
Editorial Board: Resianne Fontaine (The University of Amsterdam), Paul Franks (The University of Toronto), Zeev Gries (Ben-Gurion University of the Negev), Warren Zev Harvey (The Hebrew University of Jerusalem), Diana Lobel (Boston University), James Robinson (The University of Chicago), Bernard Septimus (Harvard University) 

There will be two issues a year,

ISSN 1943-8257
240 pp.
_


----------



## Empty Hands (Jun 7, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> I really don't see why you have a problem with me or any other Jew knowing our history.



I don't, of course.  But you didn't offer any cogent facts or citations from history.  You dismissed the work cited by mauna because the authors were Poles.  You offered no reason to do so other than the fact that they were Poles, such as offering other works, citations or academics which would support your point.  When I challenged you on it, you responded with a remark about close minded goy.

What else am I supposed to think?

History is not argued by dismissing the historian for no good reason.


----------



## xJOHNx (Jun 7, 2010)

I always wonder about the simple thing: 
The Jewish people have been exposed to more hate, expulsion and killings that any other race/tribe in the world... Yet why do they impose just the same on other people (being the palestines in this case)?

5 Belgian people were on board of one of the ships.
A special unit that boards ships in international waters? That's illegal. Even if the flotilla was out to break the baracade, operating within international waters is illegal. Simple as it is.

Right now I'm off to get more books on the case and on zionism.


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 7, 2010)

Empty Hands said:


> I don't, of course. But you didn't offer any cogent facts or citations from history. You dismissed the work cited by mauna because the authors were Poles. You offered no reason to do so other than the fact that they were Poles, such as offering other works, citations or academics which would support your point. When I challenged you on it, you responded with a remark about close minded goy.
> 
> What else am I supposed to think?
> 
> History is not argued by dismissing the historian for no good reason.


 

Look, he just said 'two professors' who wrote a 'history' book which said the people converted to Judaism, give me dates, names and places and I'll show you they didn't. I know they didn't but give me something to work on to prove it. Poland at one point was the largest country in Europe, it contained several countries which are separate entities now, it has a very long history, a random 'oh people converted to Judaism in droves cos the liked the way Jews were treated in Poland and I read it in a book' doesn't cut it. I suspect he's thinking about the Khazars, a totally different kettle of fish.


----------



## CanuckMA (Jun 7, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> Look, he just said 'two professors' who wrote a 'history' book which said the people converted to Judaism, give me dates, names and places and I'll show you they didn't. I know they didn't but give me something to work on to prove it. Poland at one point was the largest country in Europe, it contained several countries which are separate entities now, it has a very long history, a random 'oh people converted to Judaism in droves cos the liked the way Jews were treated in Poland and I read it in a book' doesn't cut it. I suspect he's thinking about the Khazars, a totally different kettle of fish.


 
And even for the Khazars, it's not strictly true. While the King did convert at one time, and made Judaism the official religion of the Kingdom, there is no proof that the population followed suit. The Khazars are usually brought in the discussion to 'prove' that Ashkenazi Jews are native from Europe, DNA evidence to the contrary.


----------



## CanuckMA (Jun 7, 2010)

The closest references I could find is that at some point there was Jewish immigration to Poland. That is not the same as large scale conversions. 

And the situation in Poland was _better_. Not good, just better. Better did not stop the Jews from being blamed and killed for the Plague.


----------



## Empty Hands (Jun 7, 2010)

CanuckMA said:


> And he's been asked for titles and authors.
> 
> We can't directly cite other sources because it never happened. History books are usualy light on mentioning things that don't happen.



"At some point in the last decades of the 8th century or the early 9th  century, the Khazar royalty and nobility  converted to Judaism, and part of the general population  followed.  The extent of the conversion is debated. Ibn  al-Faqih reported in the 10th century that "all the Khazars are  Jews." Notwithstanding this statement, some scholars believe that only  the upper classes converted to Judaism; there is some support for this  in contemporary Muslim texts."  LINK

"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."
LINK in Ha'aretz.

Still so sure?  All you have here is dogmatic insistence.  I find it odd to believe so strongly with no evidence on your side, and some to the contrary, that no mass conversions to Judaism have ever happened.


----------



## xJOHNx (Jun 7, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> Zionism and Judaism are different subjects, Not all Jews are Zionists, not all Zionists are Jews. (an example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orde_Wingate )
> 
> Try the books on my suggested reading list.


I know.


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 7, 2010)

Empty Hands said:


> "At some point in the last decades of the 8th century or the early 9th century, the Khazar royalty and nobility converted to Judaism, and part of the general population followed. The extent of the conversion is debated. Ibn al-Faqih reported in the 10th century that "all the Khazars are Jews." Notwithstanding this statement, some scholars believe that only the upper classes converted to Judaism; there is some support for this in contemporary Muslim texts." LINK
> 
> "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."
> LINK in Ha'aretz.
> ...


 

Shal we get back to the point and perhaps you could stop moving the goalposts?  *It was stated that* *Christians converted to Judaism in Poland* *because the Jews were treated better than the Christians.* That's the point we are arguing, that life was so good for the Jews in Poland everyone wanted to be a Jew. Didn't happen. Thats why* I* suggested that he was thinking about the Khazars not the Poles.

The Khazars are a whole different case. Yes they converted, for many reasons most political. but not because they wanted to be Jews in Poland having the good life though many of their descendants turned up there centuries later.

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v13/n3/full/5201319a.html


and I'm Sephardi btw.


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 7, 2010)

xJOHNx said:


> I know.


 
But not everyone does.


----------



## Empty Hands (Jun 7, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> Shal we get back to the point and perhaps you could stop moving the goalposts?  *It was stated that* *Christians converted to Judaism in Poland* *because the Jews were treated better than the Christians.*



Yes, that's what *mauna *said.  But it's not what you said in response, which is that no mass conversions to Judaism had ever happened.

From your post #48: "Large numbers of people converted to Judaism? Really? where did you get  that from? Very few people want to convert to Judaism as it usually  means getting killed or at the very least kicked out of your country. I  think your research is faulty there. I have no knowledge of _large_  numbers converting, why would they when hated so much by the  Christians? Give me a year or even a century this happened because I can  assure you that didn't happen."

That is the claim I am addressing here.  I am also addressing your initial dismissal of the research based on nothing more than the nationality of the authors.  That's bigoted and wrong, and bad history to boot.  If right is on your side, then you won't need bigotry to prove it.

I am not arguing, either, that the authors you dismissed were right.  I have no idea.  But you claimed they were wrong in the wrong way.


----------



## xJOHNx (Jun 7, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> But not everyone does.



True that. Lots of ignorance.
On every side.


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 7, 2010)

Empty Hands said:


> Yes, that's what *mauna *said. But it's not what you said in response, which is that no mass conversions to Judaism had ever happened.
> 
> From your post #48: "Large numbers of people converted to Judaism? Really? where did you get that from? Very few people want to convert to Judaism as it usually means getting killed or at the very least kicked out of your country. I think your research is faulty there. I have no knowledge of _large_ numbers converting, why would they when hated so much by the Christians? Give me a year or even a century this happened because I can assure you that didn't happen."
> 
> ...


 

This is the internet, I don't have the time and others the patience to preface all my comments with qualifying statements such as _'as you have brought up the subject of mass conversions in Poland I am answering specifically on the subject of conversions in Poland and people who like to nitpick shouldn't go assuming I'm talking worldwide, as it's patently obvious one is talking about the mass conversions in Poland not anywhere else.' _

You are actually quite aware of what I was speaking of but chose to be perverse and try to twist it into something else, hey if thats what pushes your buttons go for it. 

*What research, what professors, what book?* No information was provided.


Sorry Arch, I don't think Canuck or I can answer that question! You'll have to see if an American Jew can supply an answer.


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 7, 2010)

xJOHNx said:


> True that. Lots of ignorance.
> On every side.


 

Not necessarily ignorance, not everyone is interested in the subject.


----------



## CanuckMA (Jun 7, 2010)

Empty Hands said:


> "At some point in the last decades of the 8th century or the early 9th century, the Khazar royalty and nobility converted to Judaism, and part of the general population followed. The extent of the conversion is debated. Ibn al-Faqih reported in the 10th century that "all the Khazars are Jews." Notwithstanding this statement, some scholars believe that only the upper classes converted to Judaism; there is some support for this in contemporary Muslim texts." LINK
> 
> "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."
> LINK in Ha'aretz.
> ...


 

On Shlomo Sand and his book:



> One component of Sand's argument is that the people who were the original Jews living in Israel, contrary to what is official, accepted history, were not exiled following the Bar Kokhba revolt. He has suggested that much of the present day world Jewish population are individuals, and groups, who converted to Judaism at later periods. Additionally, he suggests that the story of the exile was a myth promoted by early Christians to recruit Jews to the new faith. Sand writes that "_Christians wanted later generations of Jews to believe that their ancestors had been exiled as a punishment from God._"[7] Sand argues that most of the Jews were not exiled by the Romans, and were permitted to remain in the country. He puts the number of those exiled at tens of thousands at most. He further argues that many of the Jews converted to Islam following the Arab conquest, and were assimilated among the conquerors. He concludes that the progenitors of the Palestinian Arabs were Jews.[8]
> Sand's explanation of the birth of the myth of a Jewish people as a group with a common, ethnic origin has been summarized as follows: "[a]t 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."[6]
> He also comments that: "It is true that I am an historian of France and Europe, and not of the ancient period. (...)",[6] and that: "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."[7]
> *[edit] Critics*
> ...


 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shlomo_Sand


Hardly convincing evidence, from someone with a clear agenda.


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 7, 2010)

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v13/n3/full/5201319a.html


Again, but it was hard reading admittedly but interesting.



_"Ashkenazi Jews, who have resided in various European countries during the Diaspora, traditionally trace their origin to the Jewish people that lived in the Holy Land before the Roman exile. However, some studies claimed that a substantial part of Ashkenazim were descendants of Eastern European non-Jews. In particular, according to Middle Age historians, the Khazars from a small kingdom near the Caspian Sea converted en masse to Judaism1 and therefore might have contributed to the composition of the emerging Ashkenazi community. *Yet, recent* *genetic studies, based on Y chromosome polymorphic markers, clearly showed that Ashkenazim are more closely related to other Jewish and Middle Eastern groups than to their host populations in Europe*.2, 3, 4 Those findings argue against large-scale male-mediated gene flow into the Ashkenazi community during the Diaspora. The male admixture proportion of Europeans in Ashkenazi Jews was estimated to be 0.5% per generation,3 *indicating that Ashkenazim remained, to a large extent, genetically isolated throughout their history."*_




_"It is historically well documented that the Khazar King Bulan and his court converted to Judaism at the end of the 8th century CE.1 The Khazars were originally a Turkic tribe from Central Asia who settled in the northern Caucasus and later spread to southern Russia and eastern Ukraine. Some authors argue that after the fall of their kingdom in the second half of the 10th century CE, the Khazar converts were absorbed by the emerging Ashkenazi Jewish community in Eastern Europe.18, 19 Since R-M17 haplogroup is also found at moderate to high frequencies in Central Asia20 and southern Russia/Ukraine,5 this haplogroup could have been present in the Khazars. *However, if the R-M17 chromosomes in Ashkenazi Jews do indeed represent the vestiges of the mysterious Khazars then, according to our data, this contribution was limited to either a single founder or a few closely related men, and does not exceed* *






12% of the present-day Ashkenazim."*_



_I_ admit I do like that expression 'male mediated gene flow'! Such a scientific expression for well, you know what lol!


----------



## elder999 (Jun 7, 2010)

Empty Hands said:


> The Native American creation stories are obviously wrong. So are the Abrahamic creation stories. They do not conform to what we know about the world and our own natural history. That justifies nothing, either way.
> "...if the experiment disagrees with the guess, then the guess is wrong." - Richard Feynman


 
Nope. No more "wrong" than Genesis.

They just don't mean what you think-can't be taken at face value-mean something else-are allegorical-

-do I really have to go on? :lfao:


----------



## Empty Hands (Jun 7, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> You are actually quite aware of what I was speaking of but chose to be perverse and try to twist it into something else, hey if thats what pushes your buttons go for it.



No, I was responding to what you said - what I quoted.  I was quite clear on my intentions.  I'm sorry if I was unclear somehow, but this is not perversity.  If you take issue with my characterization of your words - then *tell me what you meant*.  Don't throw up your hands and impugn my character.  That's not how good debate or honest communication happens.


----------



## Empty Hands (Jun 7, 2010)

CanuckMA said:


> Hardly convincing evidence, from someone with a clear agenda.



That may well be.  But it's wrong to say that no such arguments or works exist.  If the facts are wrong, then correct the facts - but don't shut down debate based on declarative statements with nothing to back them up.  This back and forth is much more useful than the earlier "trust me, I'm Jewish" argument closely followed by talk of close minded goy and blatantly misrepresented arguments.


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 7, 2010)

elder999 said:


> Nope. No more "wrong" than Genesis.
> 
> They just don't mean what you think-can't be taken at face value-mean something else-are allegorical-
> 
> -do I really have to go on? :lfao:


 
But, but the people who keep trying to convert me told me that the world was created in 7 days...oh no were they lying to me!


Totally nothing to do with anything other than Native Americans, can anyone explain why we had four Native Americans busking in our local town the other week? quite a shock, not something we see much, well anything, of really. They certainly looked authentic.


----------



## Empty Hands (Jun 7, 2010)

elder999 said:


> Nope. No more "wrong" than Genesis.



Which is also wrong, so yes. 



elder999 said:


> They just don't mean what you think-can't be taken at face value-mean something else-are allegorical-
> 
> -do I really have to go on?



Unless the tale of a Creator God creating the world and all that is in it is an allegory for natural laws producing a universe with no intelligent creator.  Somehow I don't think that's what the authors intended.

Of course, you and I have had this go-around before, so I won't get into it again.  Suffice to say I don't think you apply the same scientific rigor to your beliefs in the divine that you do to your physics work.  I don't mean that in a mean way either, no one is perfectly consistent.


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 7, 2010)

Empty Hands said:


> No, I was responding to what you said - what I quoted. I was quite clear on my intentions. I'm sorry if I was unclear somehow, but this is not perversity. If you take issue with my characterization of your words - then *tell me what you meant*. Don't throw up your hands and impugn my character. That's not how good debate or honest communication happens.


 
I'm stressed.... if you want good debate or honest communication look elsewhere, I'm argumentative. Besides why aren't you also asking Maunu for his professors details and his proof etc?  
I have a big responsibility at the moment, Canuck would understand as a Canadian, you lot are a republic so wouldn't. Can't tell until after the Visit, oops.


----------



## CanuckMA (Jun 7, 2010)

Empty Hands said:


> That may well be. But it's wrong to say that no such arguments or works exist.


 

There are works and arguments that the Shoah never happened. Doesn't mean they're right.


----------



## elder999 (Jun 7, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> quite a shock, not something we see much, well anything, of really. They certainly looked authentic.


 

Fer the money??? :lfao:


----------



## Makalakumu (Jun 7, 2010)

http://www.amazon.com/Gods-Playground-History-Poland-Origins/dp/0231053517

Here's a better book then the dusty old text book my grandmother owned (which is unfortunately no longer in my possession).  It says basically the same thing but is a MUCH thicker book.

Here's another source that people can access right now.

http://rslissak.com/content/khazar-kingdom-jewish-empire-middle-ages

The Khazar Kingdom extended into Poland where Jewish people were afforded high status.  This caused a great many people to convert and eventually provided a basis for Poland to form a society that was relatively Jew friendly.  

So, now, here's my question.  If Palestine and Israel have formed a propaganda/anti-propaganda cycle over this issue, is there ever going to be a way to resolve this question?

Suppose that mass conversions really did happen.  Does it really change all that much politically?  

As far as the genetic research goes, I simply do not believe that all Jews share DNA that links them back to Palestine.  That's impossible.  I understand that studies could show that certain insular and conservative communities may have maintained some bloodlines, but I seriously doubt that every Jew on the planet contains some kind of special genetic material that ties them all together.  This is doubly impossible if one considers the mass conversions (or any conversions for that matter) that have occurred throughout history.

All of this is starting to sound exactly like the claims made by other religious groups like conservative Christians or Muslims.


----------



## CanuckMA (Jun 7, 2010)

OK. It's not all Jews, it's the majority. And mass conversions did not occur. The Khazars never mass converted. Numerous DNA studies have been done and shown the same thing. The majority of Jews all over the world share DNA that links them to a tribe and to the Middle East. Furthermore, Cohanim share DNA that traces back to a common ancestor. Cohanim are the descendents of Aaron.


----------



## xJOHNx (Jun 8, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> Not necessarily ignorance, not everyone is interested in the subject.


But they have an opinion on it, so it becomes ignorance


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 8, 2010)

maunakumu said:


> http://www.amazon.com/Gods-Playground-History-Poland-Origins/dp/0231053517
> 
> Here's a better book then the dusty old text book my grandmother owned (which is unfortunately no longer in my possession). It says basically the same thing but is a MUCH thicker book.
> 
> ...


 

Believe what you wish. The fact that you use the word Palestine not Israel shows where your sympathies lie. We aren't claiming anything 'magic' or mystical, just that we share a common DNA which the kind folks in the labs seem to agree. I doubt that's impossible, the people of Shetland share DNA with the Norwegians not the Scots,I imagine there's plenty of other groups of people who share DNA around the world. *It's science not anything weird*, it's not 'special' it just means a bunch of people came from a place, travelled around, marrying and having kids. Why do you see that as impossible. Do native Hawaiians not share DNA then? it's common to be able to take a DNA sample and discover where or who a person is descended from. 

You know you said originally that *it was Christians in Poland that were* *converting to Judaism*? You've only mentioned the Khazars after I did and they weren't Christians at all. It was also an Eastern country,the Khazars coming to Poland is very likely a myth, there's no substansive evidence, you second source says nothing about them being in Poland at all. There's still no evidence of mass conversions of Christians though plenty on the forcible conversions of Jews.
http://www.imninalu.net/Khazars.htm

Look at the map, the Khazar kingdom is nowhere near Poland.

It's a common tactic of anti semitic groups to state that the Jewish people of Europe were all converted and therefore have no claim to Israel or even to claim themselvers as Jews, it's all a plot to take over the world. Try Googling 'Jewwatch' an organisation that claims to be defending you from us. Mass conversions of Christians to Judaism is a myth too, I imagine Popes, Bishops etc would have been pretty quickly onto that one! there's no country in the world that has mass conversions to Judaism, it's not a religion that encourages conversion apart from the odd wedding, it's a hard religion to follow, many Jews in fact don't follow it, we aren't all religious many are secular. Christian authorities frowned to say the least on any conversion to Judaism, it tended to get you burnt at the stake or some such thing.

Jewish communities in many places remained isolated from the surrounding population, partly because we believe in intermarrying (not close relatives but fellow Jews) and partly because living with Christian neighbours wasn't always peaceful, there were times yes when the local population was friendly enough that Jews could start livng beyond the Pale but not often enough to dilute the genepool very much. The comments about conversions etc are also directed only at one group the Ashenazi, I'm Sephardi, my genes are very much Middle Eastern. As I've said before we are concerned about 'Jewish' genes because of the genetic flaws that result in terminal and painful diseases, my family have all been gene tested for that reason as have many Jews in the UK. It's painful to find that you will not be able to have children and both spouses carry the Tay-Sachs gene but far better not to have a child suffer.

There's a danger of reading too much into our claim on Israel, why shouldn't we have a homeland? Take away all the European Jewish stuff and you will find Jews who have lived in Israel for generations upon generations.No one cared about who was in that land, it was a global backwater or worse, unimportant until the Jewish settlers arrived and started irrigating it, building and making it a worthwhile place then it became desirable by others and the wars begun. Arabs happily sold useless land to the Jewsih settlers, thinking they were making money while all the Jews did was break their backs, now when there's farms on the lands the Arabs are calling foul. The call went up 'we will drive the Jews into the sea' and the naive believed it, leaving their homes and land in places like Jordan for what they thought was going to be the now fertile Jewish land, it didn't happen and the Arabs were left with nothing. As I said, naive. As I've also said wars are rarely about religion, not even the Crusades were, it's about greed, power and jealousy, it's no different in the Middle East. Israel has land the Arabs want though in many cases they sold it, they could have irrigating it, built modern cities, they didn't they Jews did so they want to take it away. Religion has nothing to do with it, there's Christian Arabs who fight in Israel's armed forces there's even Muslim Arabs in Israeli uniforms. Don't go thinking this is all a mystical, unwinnable battle between religious nuts, it's not, _it's about land and water_.

The author of your first book is not without criticism, he's been involved in contraversy regarding his views on the Holocaust and was indeed refused a post at Stanford University because of 'scientific flaws'. His is a very Polish centric view of Jews, he's an honorary citizen of four Polish cities and has, many believe, bought into the Polish view of history. Try Lucy Dawidowicz's 'the War Against Jews' and 'The Holocaust and the Historians'.


----------



## elder999 (Jun 8, 2010)

maunakumu said:


> As far as the genetic research goes, I simply do not believe that all Jews share DNA that links them back to Palestine. That's impossible. I understand that studies could show that certain insular and conservative communities may have maintained some bloodlines, but I seriously doubt that every Jew on the planet contains some kind of special genetic material that ties them all together. .


 

Well, no-not really. Oddly enough, Jewish males from communities as disparate as Yemen, Georgia and Eastern Asia are more likely to share a very high degree of Y- chromosone familiarity. WHen compared to non-Jews from the same region, i.e.Georgian Jew vs. Geoergian Muslim, this degree of similarity falls away-_exceopt that the closer one gets to the middle east, the more this similarity increases._, to the point that the Y-chromosone corrlates as highly with Jews as it does with non-Jews. So we see a Y chromosone (or, more properly, a set of Y chromosones), spread from fathers to sons, that statistically appears to start in the middle east and spread outward, chiefly among people called "Jewish." Studies have estab lished that the Y chromosone associated with the _kohanim_-males said to descend from the priestly caste dating to the time of Aaron, the brother of moses-carry a specific Y chromosone called the COhen Model Halotype. Half of all _kohanim_ carry this signature, which points to a common ancestor from the middle east, around 1000 BCE.

THings get a bit more complicated when examining Jewish mitochondrial DNA,for just the reasons that you've stated, but I'm surprised at a fellow scientist throwing the word "impossible" around so blithely, Scott-especially considering that biology isn't even my field....:lol:

Understand, though, while this evidence proves roots in the Middle East,in my opinion it doesn't reinforce any claim on the state of Israel/Palestine, any more than I have any claim on Siberia, GHana or the Hawaiian islands..:lol:....maybe even less claim than I have on the eastern half of Long Island...:lfao:


----------



## Archangel M (Jun 8, 2010)

Interesting how science can be a trump card when it supports ones politics and questionable when it doesn't. Especially when you see it in a person claiming to be a scientist.


----------



## elder999 (Jun 8, 2010)

Archangel M said:


> Interesting how science can be a trump card when it supports ones politics and questionable when it doesn't. Especially when you see it in a person claiming to be a scientist.


 
I don't know if this is directed at me or just a general statement, given the seeming contradiction of the my last post, but I should say that I don't really have any opinion on the Israel/Palestine question other than to sey that I wish the U.S. would scale back some of its support to Israel, for reasons that have nothing to do with that particular question. And, that while the science is incontovertible, in my opinion, it's no less so than would be evidence of Shoshone migration from Siberia, or African importation to these shores as cargo from West Africa, or the small bit of mitochondrial DNA that I carry that proves that my great-great grandmother was _probably_ Polynesian-just as ridiculous for me to lay claim to any of those places based on DNA evidence- it's also clear that my father's people: the Shinnecock and Montauk Indians of Long Island-did have a legitimate claim on the eastern half of Long Island right up until 1915, they *don't* have it anynmore, and possession *is* 9/10ths of the law, as they say.....:lol:


----------



## Archangel M (Jun 8, 2010)

It was more of a general statement. I know that you and Mauna have science backgrounds so this debate makes me smirk a bit.


----------



## CanuckMA (Jun 8, 2010)

But the DNA evidence is in support of the Jews being from the Middle East, along with documented history. There has been a continued Jewish presence in Israel for thousands of years. Moreso since the late 1800s, Jews have been purchasing land and settling back there. When the question of giving the Jews a homeland, Israel was not chosen by throwing a dart at a map. And the reason for the strange map of the original partition plan was because it was divided along the majority populations at the time. 

One of the popular ways to de-legitimize Israel is to deny our claim to the land. The myth of the Khazars is often cited. Along with the attempts to destroy evidence of the Temple. It is amazing that in a country where you can't dig a vegetable garden without an archeologist present, large scale digging has taken place on Temple Mount, under the guise of construction. The dirt and artifacts simply being carted away, at which point they lose historical context. The goal is to be able to 'prove' that the Temple never stood in Jerusalem. Of course the side effect is to destroy the founding story of Xtianity. 

The latest bizzare attempt was the protest over the Dead Sea Scroll exhibit in Toronto. Pro-Palestinian groups were urging a boycott of the exhibit because the scrolls were stolen from them. WTF? 2,000 year old fragment of scrolls with text of Tanach, written in HEBREW, who else do they belong to? 

All we want is to live in peace on our tiny bit of desert.


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 8, 2010)

I'm not in the least scientific so things have to be put in simple terms for me but I can understand that genes are shared by groups of people and it's not a big deal. I don't see why it's impossible to believe that a group of people who lived in Europe should have DNA that proves they orginate in the Middle East. There's nothing mystical about that.
Now whether that proves they are entitled to live there again may well be another argument altogether but I'm put my heart on my sleeve and you know where I stand on that. It's not much to be allowed to live somewhere where you came from and there's nowhere else for you to go as was the case for many Jews. If people don't think the Jews should have been allowed to settle in Israel after the last war just where do you think they should have gone, back to Germany? To the USSR? Where should the displaced and countryless Jews gone? Why not back to the land they came from, after all how many times have people said 'go back to where you came from'.  

It's not a claim actually  based on DNA, its based on many things that have been already mentioned. Saying we were making the claim based on DNA was putting words into our mouths.

_The DNA question came up when the claim was made that the European Jews weren't actually Jewish but Christians who converted._ The DNA proves they were from the Middle East and not from European Christians. It was being said that Jews who came from Europe weren't actually Jews and therefore had no claim on Israel, it wasn't that we were using the DNA claim to prove Israel was ours! We used it to prove that the Jews of Europe _were_ actually descended from the Jews of the Middle East. Others are trying to cloud the issue by claiming we are using a magic 'Jewish gene' ( you know you have it when it shouts oy vay) to prove that the Jewish people are special. Nope, different groups of people share DNA, there's nothing special in that and we aren't claiming we have special powers ( quite the opposite the 'Jewish' gene also makes us lousy at drinking alcohol in any quantities). 

Other things being implied were that there were no Jews left only Arabs in Isreal, one of our claims to Israel is in fact that a great deal of the land was actually owned by Jews and other Jews should have the right to settle on that land, possession 9/10s etc lol! As I've said the Jews never went away in Israel, many have lived there for generations and generations. It was never a case of a people descending on a land where there were no Jews, what land wasn't originally owned by Jews was sold to them by eager Arabs.


----------



## elder999 (Jun 8, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> . Saying we were making the claim based on DNA was putting words into our mouths..


 
I never said Jews were making any claims based on DNA-just that the DNA points to their coming fromt he Middle East. 

Pretty sure that gene isn't identified by jumping up and saying  _oy vey!_

It says _mazel tov!_ :lfao:


----------



## CanuckMA (Jun 8, 2010)

elder999 said:


> I never said Jews were making any claims based on DNA-just that the DNA points to their coming fromt he Middle East.
> 
> Pretty sure that gene isn't identified by jumping up and saying _oy vey!_
> 
> It says _mazel tov!_ :lfao:


 
It's easy to identify. There's a little bit missing at the end. :uhyeah:


----------



## Makalakumu (Jun 8, 2010)

elder999 said:


> THings get a bit more complicated when examining Jewish mitochondrial DNA,for just the reasons that you've stated, but I'm surprised at a fellow scientist throwing the word "impossible" around so blithely, Scott-especially considering that biology isn't even my field....:lol:



Impossible = highly unlikely.  Jeez, my semantic-*MINDED *friend, talking with you is like boxing with someone with a good jab.


----------



## CanuckMA (Jun 8, 2010)

maunakumu said:


> Impossible = highly unlikely. Jeez, my semantic-nazi friend, talking with you is like boxing with someone with a good jab.


 

First, throwing the nazi word at any time is dubious. Using it to a Jew during a discussion of Jews is in bad taste.

Moreover, Impossible does not equate to highly unlikely. Impossible means that is simply cannot be. Highly unlikely means that while there is a possibility, the odds are long.

As a scientist, I assume that precision is paramount. 

You're also arguing with Jews. We have a multi-thousand year old tradition of analyzing every single word in a text. :ultracool


----------



## elder999 (Jun 8, 2010)

maunakumu said:


> Impossible = highly unlikely. Jeez, my semantic-nazi friend, talking with you is like boxing with someone with a good jab.


 

Probably should have said "semantic-mazi" with the quotes, there...:lol:

highly unlikely="_improbable_."_, _not impossible.

In any case, based on what I've posted that exactly what you've called "impossible," is, in fact demonstrably *probable*.



CanuckMA said:


> .
> 
> You're also arguing with Jews. We have a multi-thousand year old tradition of analyzing every single word in a text. :ultracool


 
_I'm_ not Jewish, though I'm probably on your side of this part of the argument.


----------



## Makalakumu (Jun 8, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> Believe what you wish. The fact that you use the word Palestine not Israel shows where your sympathies lie.



My sympathies?  I decided to be un-PC and say Palestine.  I have nothing against Jews or any other religion.  I do not support the war crimes on either side, however, and I think the two people's are stuck in a dreadful cycle of violence.

In regards to Polish History, well, it's just part of the the accepted history.  The Khazars are part of it, initiating the first wave of conversions.  Christians converting to Judaism because it afforded them a chance at better life is part of it.  It's not hard to understand, imagine some starving Christian peasant seeing the Jews live in the towns owning their own homes, growing their own food, owning businesses, essentially being prosperous.  This initiated the second wave of conversions in the Middle Ages.

Later, the Jewish prosperity was used against the Jews by the Swedes and the Russians.  They crafted propaganda that basically stated that the Jews owned everything, that the king was basically a Jew, and the religion was blamed for all of Polands ills.  That pretty much ended the relative prosperity that Jews found in Poland.

http://www.amazon.com/s/?ie=UTF8&ke...ooks&hvadid=3135107991&ref=pd_sl_75ny2rpjmh_b

Here's another book that lays it all out again.  It's historical fiction, but if you've read Michener, you'll know that he actually went to Poland and spoke to all of the experts in order to get all of the details right.  

And that encompasses all I know and have read on the matter.  Did the mass conversions really happen?  I don't know, but it seems that a great many Polish experts in history seem to think so.  I also know that if this is true, then the claim that all Jews directly tie back to Israel (see I can be PC) is false.

Here's what I want to know.  Suppose that this is true, does it really matter all that much?  Could one simply say, oh sure, lots of Jews converted from other lands, but our primary homeland is still Israel?  For some reason that I don't understand, there seems to be a focus on purity or at least a sanctity of bloodline.


----------



## Makalakumu (Jun 8, 2010)

CanuckMA said:


> First, throwing the nazi word at any time is dubious. Using it to a Jew during a discussion of Jews is in bad taste.
> 
> Moreover, Impossible does not equate to highly unlikely. Impossible means that is simply cannot be. Highly unlikely means that while there is a possibility, the odds are long.
> 
> ...



That was meant to be a joke.  I won't tell anyone to lighten up, so I'll apologize.  That is a fair rebuke.

Lots of scientists use impossible in the fashion that I've used it, with the idea that impossible doesn't really exist, it represents one end of a scale of improbability.


----------



## Makalakumu (Jun 8, 2010)

Archangel M said:


> Interesting how science can be a trump card when it supports ones politics and questionable when it doesn't. Especially when you see it in a person claiming to be a scientist.



IMO, "science" has been corrupted by political influence and this has turned the whole industry on it's end.  Politicians have learned that attaching the word "science" to a thing suddenly gives it more merit and they can always find someone with the proper piece of paper to do the work for some money.  It's a sad state of affairs and I'm not sure how to turn that ship around.


----------



## CanuckMA (Jun 8, 2010)

elder999 said:


> _I'm_ not Jewish, though I'm probably on your side of this part of the argument.


 
But you argue like one. 


I have a sharp knife...  :lfao:


----------



## Archangel M (Jun 8, 2010)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazars#Debate_about_Khazar_conversion_to_Judaism



> The theory that all or most Ashkenazi ("European") Jews might be descended from Khazars (rather than Semitic groups in the Middle East) dates back to the racial studies of late nineteenth century Europe, and was frequently cited to assert that most modern Jews are not descended from Israelites and/or to refute Israeli claims to Palestine. It was first publicly proposed in lecture given by the racial-theorist Ernest Renan on January 27, 1883, titled "Judaism as a Race and as Religion."[38] It was repeated in articles in The Dearborn Independent in 1923 and 1925, and popularized by racial theorist Lothrop Stoddard in a 1926 article in the Forum titled "The Pedigree of Judah", where he argued that Ashkenazi Jews were a mix of people, of which the Khazars were a primary element.[19][39] Stoddard's views were "based on nineteenth and twentieth-century concepts of race, in which small variations on facial features as well as presumed accompanying character traits were deemed to pass from generation to generation, subject only to the corrupting effects of marriage with members of other groups, the result of which would lower the superior stock without raising the inferior partners."[40] This theory was adopted by British Israelites, who saw it as a means of invalidating the claims of Jews (rather than themselves) to be the true descendants of the ancient Israelites, and was supported by early anti-Zionists.[19][39]
> 
> ...
> 
> ...



Perhaps your reference to the Nazis is in close goosestep with your adherence to this theory.


----------



## CanuckMA (Jun 8, 2010)

maunakumu said:


> In regards to Polish History, well, it's just part of the the accepted history. The Khazars are part of it, initiating the first wave of conversions. Christians converting to Judaism because it afforded them a chance at better life is part of it. It's not hard to understand, imagine some starving Christian peasant seeing the Jews live in the towns owning their own homes, growing their own food, owning businesses, essentially being prosperous. This initiated the second wave of conversions in the Middle Ages.


 
It is not accepted by credible historians.

And the consensus about the Khazars is the the populace did not convert.

The most likely reason for the Khazars, who were not Europeans anyway, to make Judaism the 'officail' religion was likely to try to maintain religious sovereignty against their neighbours, Xtians and Muslims, while not beeing branded heretics.

There was a time of large immigration from Europe into Greater Poland. But never mass conversions. 

While there were Jewish villages, shtetls, where Jews owned the businesses, outside they were nothing. Hardly the conditions that a Xtian in a Xtian country would want to attach itself to. Plus for a Xtian, that would be like devolving. 




> Here's another book that lays it all out again. It's historical fiction, but if you've read Michener, you'll know that he actually went to Poland and spoke to all of the experts in order to get all of the details right.


 
I've read Michener. I like him. But his novels, while seemingly well researched, are hardly the stuff of history. He'll take the smallest thing and go on a flight of fancy.



> And that encompasses all I know and have read on the matter. Did the mass conversions really happen? I don't know, but it seems that a great many Polish experts in history seem to think so. I also know that if this is true, then the claim that all Jews directly tie back to Israel (see I can be PC) is false.
> 
> Here's what I want to know. Suppose that this is true, does it really matter all that much? Could one simply say, oh sure, lots of Jews converted from other lands, but our primary homeland is still Israel? For some reason that I don't understand, there seems to be a focus on purity or at least a sanctity of bloodline.


 
Nothing to do with sanctity of bloodline. Can you understand how falacies like the Khazars have been used for the past 60 years to de-legimitize our claim to Israel? You start with mass conversions in Europe to proceed to Ashkenazi Jews are just European, to statements like Helen Thomas just made, to the Arab world using it to justify the destruction of Israel.


----------



## Makalakumu (Jun 8, 2010)

Archangel M said:


> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazars#Debate_about_Khazar_conversion_to_Judaism
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps your reference to the Nazis is in close goosestep with your adherence to this theory.



I was totally ignorant about how controversial this topic was. About the only thing I can say is that I read Michener and read some history books and they concurred. That said I concede my position in this discussion.


----------



## CanuckMA (Jun 8, 2010)

Big Don said:


> Or will there be 40 more posts on Jewish genetics?


 

Well we do have the best jeans because Levi Strauss was one of us. :ultracool


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 8, 2010)

Big Don said:


> OK. This is the THIRD post concerning Reuters faking pictures of the "Peaceful"terrorist sympathizers. Can we get back to the topic? Or will there be 40 more posts on Jewish genetics?


 
It was a geneuine discussion though!


----------



## Makalakumu (Jun 5, 2010)

Tez3 said:


> On the BBC news (which is pro Arab btw) it showed the Turkish television report of* all* the coffins of those killed arriving in Turkey, 9 of them. They are being buried in Turkey.



If that really was all of the coffins, then that settles it.  The point is that you've got to take what the MSM offers with a chunk of rock salt.  Even the BBC is not above taking video of nine coffins and claiming that this was all there was.  There may still have been more killed, we simply don't know.



Tez3 said:


> Oh and the Jews *are* the natives in Israel, they didn't leave Israel, they were invaded several times by various nations but always there's been Jews in Israel, the number swelled of course with immigration but always Jews have owned land, lived and died in Israel. Many, many thousands actually, thoughout the land. Jesus was a Jew remember, living in Israel called by the Romans Palestine, no Muslims around then, just Jews and the invaders. The Muslim invaders came later, so did the Christian Crusaders, the Turks and the British but always Jews were living there.
> 
> Who is anyone to 'give' Israel to it's original people? Perhaps Britain as the original 'owners' of America should 'give' back the land to it's original owners the native Americans?  Americans certainly led by example there didn't they? don't throw stones when you live in a glass house.



This might be a side issue, but something I've always wondered is how can a religion be a race?  In Poland and Germany, at various times, large numbers of people converted to Judaism.  Many of the Israelis now, came from this stock.  How can anyone consider these people to be the natives of Palestine?  

How many Jews (or Israelis) can really trace back their lineage to Jews that lived in Palestine?


----------



## Tez3 (Jun 6, 2010)

maunakumu said:


> If that really was all of the coffins, then that settles it. The point is that you've got to take what the MSM offers with a chunk of rock salt. Even the BBC is not above taking video of nine coffins and claiming that this was all there was. There may still have been more killed, we simply don't know.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
I didn't say the BBC reported only 9 coffins, I said the Turks reported nine coffins and they have a dog in this fight as the 'protestors' were funded by them, it's in their interest to say there were more killed not less.

Large numbers of people converted to Judaism? Really? where did you get that from? Very few people want to convert to Judaism as it usually means getting killed or at the very least kicked out of your country. I think your research is faulty there. I have no knowledge of _large_ numbers converting, why would they when hated so much by the Christians? Give me a year or even a century this happened because I can assure you that didn't happen. Individual conversions on marriage more than likely but there were no large scale conversions. However between 1800 and 1810 one tenth of the German population converted to Christianity not the other way around. Fifty out of the 405 Jewish families in Berlin converted.

The natives of Israel _are_ the Jews, what, did you think every single Jew from Jesus' time upped and left the country? A great many left as slaves, to other parts of the known world at the time but Jews have always lived in Israel, long before the Arabs arrived. Have a look at Jewish history, Jews were still in Israel when the Crusaders were there,they were still there at the end of the First World War and they were still thee after the Second World War.  Jews have always been in Israel. Why wouldn't they be?


----------

