This comment neatly summarizes why the Nick Fuentes school of nominally antisemitic “tradcaths” are really shabbos goyim. “We iz da REAL chosen people n shieet!” It really confounds me how swaths of very-online people nowadays are worshiping the Jew god and touting the psychopathic Tanakh as “holy,” while at the same time, claiming to oppose the jew. It really makes no sense…

Now if memory serves me correctly the Edomites (Caananites who did a lot of race-mixing basically according to your article which is why the covenant was not with them amongst other reasons, according to what you show above) were the cousins of the Isralites and came down via Esau and the verse above was used as proof that The Lord established a covenant with these Caananites too; i.e. the 3rd generation and onwards would be part of the covenant that Lord had initially established with the Isralites (true jews).

True HEBREWS.

HEBREWS ≠ JEWS.

If Jesus never existed why do israelis believe he did?
But all the arguing about religion is silly and irrelevant. It’s just a distraction to allow moneymaking opportunities to proceed unhindered in Gaza. The only “god” involved is Filthy Lucre.
Some money making projects that have been pointed out in the Unz Review include mining rich oil deposits off the coast, construction of an Israeli controlled canal to the Red Sea that makes the Egyptian controlled Suez Canal superfluous, a new military base capable of controlling the Middle East and, thanks to bombs leveling existing buildings to rubble, the area is all set for bulldozers to launch real estate ventures. Sweet.
So sad that so many are suffering for the sak of business as usual. Jesus would have wept.

There’s only one reason why RFK Jr. is cozy with the tribe that killed his father… he murdered his wife.

It’s funny that when I read Plutarch’s Live and other ancient sources that mentioned the Phoenicians the descriptions/complaints matched common Jewish stereotypes, cruelty, duplicity etc. I put it down to Greek prejudice against Semitic people.

Below is a snippet from H.G. Wells in his book “A Short History of the Wordâ€�. I Was skeptical at first. Years later I believe he was correct. There’s no other explanation for up to 3-7% of the Roman Empire being Jewish except for mass conversion.

Is it any miracle that in their days of overthrow and subjugation many Babylonians and Syrians and so forth and later on many Phœnicians, speaking practically the same language and having endless customs, habits, tastes and traditions in common, should be attracted by this inspiring cult and should seek to share in its fellowship and its promise? After the fall of Tyre, Sidon, Carthage and the Spanish Phœnician cities, the Phœnicians suddenly vanish from history; and as suddenly we find, not simply in Jerusalem but in Spain, Africa, Egypt, Arabia, the East, wherever the Phœnicians had set their feet, communities of Jews. And they were all held together by the Bible and by the reading of the Bible. Jerusalem was from the first only their nominal capital; their real city was this book of books.

It’s pretty obvious. In 146 B.C., the Roman legions under Scipio Africanus sailed across the Mediterranean to lay siege to Carthage and fulfil Cato’s imperative, “Carthage delenda est”– Carthage must be destroyed. Destroy they did, with legendary thoroughness, leaving not one building stone unturned, and even sewing the fields with salt so no food could be grown.

Even if this is an exaggeration, the Carthaginian sea empire was smashed to bits, with Roman navies ruling the sea. The surviving Phoenicians/Carthaginians had to scramble and did so as has been done some many times throughout history when a people conquered militarily proceeds to re-conquer its conquerors culturally over time. The Carthaginian/Canaanites proceeded to infiltrate and subdue Rome from within, ultimately leading to its disintegration and destruction.

The Jews– the real ones– were already established in Rome as a privileged and powerful religious minority. The religious “conversion” of the Canaanites, consisting mostly of taken the identities of their Jewish cousins, allowed them more easily to move into a Roman society which hated them after three wars, and where Roman mothers still frightened their children with “Hannibal is at the gates!”

Did the “real Jews” acquiesce to this for their own benefit? Were they shoved aside? Good questions. But the “conversion” of Canaanites to Judaism was undoubtedly a result of the Roman victory of them in war.

Gaza War, and its many tactics – especially suicide bombing – is a kind of Aztec “flower war” (Aztecs being another original Moloch people), a limited war designed to produce human sacrifice. Original flowers wars are now cartels wars in Mexico; sacrifice still goes on.

Military goals of Gaza War could have been achieved long time ago, but the war/sacrifice must go on, and recently Israel said it will last at least until the end of year (how did they know, if everything is decided on battlefield?)

It is amazing that people insist that Palestinians of Gaza are the original Jews, whereas all historical knowledge leads to the opinion that they are Philistines, who never converted to Judaism AFAIK nor were part of the Kingdom of Israel.

Considering the very plausible thesis of Carthaginian takeover of Judaism, one must notice otherwise unexplained change to matrilineality from the Torah-mandated patrilineality. As matrilineality and cousin marriage was a custom of Phoenicians (and other people worshipping the Great Mother, Potnia) and surrounding Canaanites, it found the way into Sephardim communities, whose main authority, Maimonides, thought the most perfect marriage to be one of a niece and an uncle.

The very high incidence of cousin marriage among Palestinians is another factor which allows us to see them as Philistines/original Canaanites, and not original Jews.

The ritualism of modern Judaism, in contrast to many precepts of the Old Testament, also allows to see rabbinic Judaism as a syncretic religion heavily influenced by the cult of neighbouring pagan gods. Likewise, in the mould of ethnoreligion, Palestinians are still betrothed to Moloch, even if they do not know it; thus the mass child sacrifice in the form of war deaths of children on the account of Moloch-converts, Israeli Jews (who paid their own during the event promptly called Holocaust, the Great Burnt Sacrifice). The subordinate position of original Moloch people to converts is the consequence of the fact that Jews are still someehow connected to Jahwe, as he is their “ethnogod”.

According to the Old Testament, Jews many times lapsed, divrting from Jahwe to Baal and Ashtarte. Strange to believe that this danger would never return just because rabbis came and brought Talmud.

As a group they never assimilated in India in the true sense (perhaps one off individuals married locally and assimilated). They spoke local languages and perhaps had a local name in addition to a Hebrew one, but they kept all their own customs, culture and rules of food and marriage. But all other tribes in India did too, so they were never unique in that sense. They stood out for the reasons of their great wealth in the heydays.

When Israel was formed, jews from India emigrated there enmasse, so that shows that they did have a strong attachment to their cultural identity.

To me, Judaism and Zionism can be best understood by examining the difference between the Written Torah, a.k.a. The Old Testament, (The Pentateuch-five books of Moses, The Prophets, and The Writings) and The Talmud (known at the time of Jesus as the Oral Traditions of the Elders or Oral Law) as well as the doctrines of the Kabbalah (Jewish occult mystical sorcery divination) the oldest form of the Oral Tradition. Examining this helps to explain the nature & origin of Zionism and why all Jews are not Zionists and not all Zionists are Jews. Here is a document that further explains https://www.eaec.org/The-Hidden-History-of-the-Antichrist–Summary-of-Lucifer-and-the-Kabbalistic-Jews--Teresa-Hillebrandt.pdf

they have more in common with YOU (your precious so-called white race).

I am from Egypt you ignoramus

I believe that Mr. Unz a.k.a. Seaman First Class “Tuck Your Shirt In” Unzman has knowledge of the whereabouts or what’s become of your strawberries, which he has proved beyond the shadow of a doubt and with geometric logic.

Have you considered shorter and obviowsley more sanefnord would be ideal posts? murdermurdermurdermurder After all, it’s not like you’re getting the Unz Review’s Writer’s Longwinded Stipend chloroxfontanelwonderbreadspinach and too many keystrokes are the cobblestones on the road to perdition clumsymonkeybotchedvivectionresurrectabrahamlincoln and should be drastically reduced. Less typitude is more gooditude.

Thanks! That’s interesting that the Edomites were to the south of Israel today. This means we’re getting into the Arabian peninsular territory and specifically near to the regions where jews and Christians were situated, as some historical reports say that Christians and jews were situated in the peninsular towards the north, as well as yemen to the south. Incidentally the northern territory is home to MBS royal reserve territory and im sure you’re aware of the rumours of what he might be.

There were a group of jews that were in the Arabian peninsular awaiting the arrival of their messiah before the advent of muhammad and we know how that panned out, they rejected him on the basis he was an arab, allegedly; I’m wondering if the edomites were that tribe of jews in arabia that rejected muhammad but, were originally themselves a tribe of arabs who were later ‘judaised’ (like some non-indigenous arabs became arabised due to language mainly, but also some inherited cultural traditions such as north Africans and Levantine nations). So these edomites that rejected muhammad were actually closer to him than they originally thought! Interesting hypothesis I suppose and yes I agree it would be a good discussion to have.

Mr. Unz, please cease employing your dishonorable trick of hiding after “[ MORE ]â€� a comment’s portion that demonstrates your advancing an at-best-specious assertion. You hid after a [ MORE ] both (1) the critical span of my comment # 198, which quoted a substantial portion of Toaff’s 2008 “Blood Passoverâ€� edition’s “Afterword,â€� which proves, beyond doubt, that Toaff’s original, 2007 edition DISPROVED the blood libel myth and (2) the vital part of my comment # 198’s criticism of Vivante’s comment # 189, so that such criticism may seem frivolous. I wonder whether you will apply the same tactic to this comment, or even not publish this comment.

You can really think of us as a kind of Roman Empire that never died. But our existence does not have any religious character.
Anything that tries to conquer us will be assimilated by us in reverse.
It may be that we Han people have a profound history education.
Our language itself has historical properties, and every sentence may have a historical counterpart.
So if you get to know the Chinese language in depth, you will even be assimilated by the history that the words carry.
The heritage behind this historical character may be moral, or it may be a very reasonable character of the will to kill and the spirit of resistance.
Depends on how you interpret it.

But it’s true.
Whether the Khazarian theory is true or not, the Khazarian royal family, the Asna family, was given the surname Shi during the Tang Dynasty.
They have a certain history of intermarriage with us Chinese.
The famous Anshi Rebellion in the Tang Dynasty was caused by the betrayal of the Asna family.
After that, they migrated all the way to Europe and became the Khazarian royal family. Our historical documents combined with those of Khazarian Jews fully demonstrate this fact.
The Ashna family did migrate from China to Eastern Europe.
As for how you think Ashkenazi Jews don’t look like us these days…
This may be due to intermarriage with local families after moving to Europe.
In fact, modern molecular biology studies have shown that we Chinese did participate in gene exchange with Ashkenazi Jews.

Breaking news: Today, 24 May 2024, International Court of Justice ordered Israel to cease assaulting Rafah (https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/192/192-20240524-ord-01-00-en.pdf ]:

You wrote:

Regarding the 2008 edition: I am refering to the original 2nd edition in italian language. I was referencing it because it is easrier for me in to consult the original as italian is my second language where english is only my fourth.

That language does suggest that English is not your mother tongue and may be your “fourth language.” Dois-je déduire que vous êtes français, que votre langue maternelle est le français (la plus belle langue), et que vous êtes une femme (puisque «Vivante» est le féminin of “alive,” “living,” “lively,” or “vivid”)?

After I posted my last-previous comment responding to you comment # 191, https://www.unz.com/article/religious-implications-of-the-carthaginian-theory/#comment-6580248 ], I began considering suspicious your above-quoted statement’s language “2008 edition: I am refering to the original 2nd edition in italian.” Why did I begin considering your statement suspicious?
(a) You stated also:

I remember reading only 3.000 copies of the 2007 italian original were sold before they were retracted. Thus the price of a copy on ebay today is €300-800

[Emphasis mine, Loup-Bouc]
(b) I wondered at your language’s necessary implication that the Jewish pressure produced Toaff’s writing a new edition quickly enough to have the new edition published just one year after the publication of the original 2007 edition.

Interesting. My natural assumption was that the Chinese were similar to the Japanese in ethnocentrism. Although I have heard people say that China is sort of like a Europe in which the Roman Empire never fell, and all regional ethnicities melded into one, so it makes sense that they would have a more assimilationist culture than is popularly believed (not sure if the Roman analogy is accurate though). Out of curiosity, do you think the Jewish population might also have been more amenable in China? There would be none of the pre-existing grievances against the Chinese that they might’ve had against Western populations due to the Roman history. I’d be interested to know if Jews better assimilated into other non-Western, non-Islamic nations, such as India.

I understand what you’re saying, but we might not be that susceptible.
If you believe in Khazarian Jewish theory, then you will find that in fact the Khazarian royal Asna family was born from intermarriage with us Chinese.
Their genetic source is us.
The Khazarian Jews inherited our IQ, but they lost our morality.

Jews don’t look even remotely East-Asian, how could they possibly be hapas?

Dead wrong. But you are not worth an argument.

You don’t dispute “whether” something, you dispute “that” something. Other things you wrote may be correct but I can’t get past that huge pimple.

Forse Lei ha supposto, o sperato, che la lingua italiana sia estranea alla mia conoscenza. Ma capisco, leggo, scrivo, e parlo l’italiano.

Having read the article you linked — il Giornale.it article Toaff: «Fermo “Pasque di sangue” e mi scuso» — I do not dispute whether Jews pressed Toaff to disavow his book’s early edition(s) because, the Jews believed, such edition(s) bore evidence that might lead a sloppy reader (like many Unz Review readers) to believe, falsely, that such edition proved the blood libel true. I do not dispute whether that pressure caused Toaff to block further publication or distribution of such edition(s).

I do dispute whether, in an early version of Toaff’s book, Toaff presented — and, in such version, did not refute or rebut— clear evidence that might suggest the blood libel was true. Hence, I dispute whether Jews extorted Toaff, successfully, to retract and block distribution of such early version of his book and publish a revised version that would not to bear such evidence.

The il Giornale.it article Toaff: «Fermo “Pasque di sangue” e mi scuso» does not indicate or support an inference
â—� (a) that the book’s early edition(s) or revision(s) did
bear evidence that appeared to prove the blood libel true
and
â—� (b) that the book did not bear other evidence that
refuted or rebutted such evidence or its implications.

That article — Toaff: «Fermo “Pasque di sangue” e mi scuso» —concludes with this (final) paragraph [my translation]:

The historian [Toaff] declared that he regretted “…incorrect interpretations” of his work and announced that he will revise the most controversial passages and donate future sales-proceeds to the Anti Defamation League, the New York Jewish organization that fights manifestations of anti-Semitism.

[I altered that paragraph’s grammar, slightly, because a literal English translation would be awkward and tone-deaf. But, I expect you will agree, my alteration does not change meaning or sense .]

* [[[[ Side note: In writing this comment’s remainder, I shall assume, arguendo, that the il Giornale.it article reported only true facts, accurately. Since the article does not purport to quote Toaff beyond appearing to quote the phrase «per le interpretazioni errate» [“for wrong interpretations”] and does not indicate the setting of that snippet that the article does quote, I cannot investigate whether the article misreports the facts it “reports” or whether the article invents or withholds critical facts. End of Side note. ]]]] *

The above-quoted il Giornale.it article’s final paragraph indicates that the Jews’ pressure did affect Toaff grievously. But that paragraph does not state or imply that Toaff’s book — one or two viciously criticized version(s) — bore evidence that suggested the blood libel was true and that was not rebutted by other evidence the book bore.

The article’s last paragraph states that Toaff regretted “incorrect interpretations” of the book, not any of the book’s actual language. But that fact only begs the question whether, in any version(s), Toaff’s book
(a) bore evidence that might indicate
that the blood libel was true
and
(b) did not bear other evidence that refuted or
rebutted such blood-libel-probative evidence.

The article’s final paragraph states also that Toaff apologized to the Anti Defamation League by promising to give the ADL his book’s future sales-proceeds.

But the statement does not imply that Toaff would exclude from a future edition or revision any language that somebody might consider proof that the blood libel was true: Since Toaff regretted only wrong interpretations of some of his book’s language, Toaff’s apology does not imply that Toaff’s book proved the blood libel true.

That statement indicates only that Toaff promised to pay the ADL wergelt (or weregild or wergild or wergeld)† for the ADL’s feeling the Jews felt defamed — so that the ADL would cease persecuting him (Toaff). That statement does not imply that, in some early version I have not seen, Toaff’s book did prove that the blood libel was true.

† Weregelt? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weregild

I understand what you’re saying, but we might not be that susceptible.
If you believe in Khazarian Jewish theory, then you will find that in fact the Khazarian royal Asna family was born from intermarriage with us Chinese.
Their genetic source is us.
The Khazarian Jews inherited our IQ, but they lost our morality.

It’s okay if you don’t believe in Khazarian Jewish theory.
In fact, most Jews did not dare to settle in China.
Who wants to live in a country where 90% of the people are willing to kill Jews?
We are usually polite to them, but when they cross the line, we can be extreme.
Even our sweeper knows we need to kill all the Jews for world peace.
After all, for 200 years, all the wars against us have been started by Jews, caused by Jews, and driven by Jews.
For example, the Japanese invaded China because they owed money to the Jews. Jews, on the other hand, supported the Japanese invasion while providing loans to Chiang Kai-shek’s government.
Another example is that the Opium War was caused by Sassoon going to his relative Rothschild to lobby the British Parliament.
So many things have happened that we have recorded in history, how can we not hate Jews when we use this history to educate our children?
A new Westerner looking at our online rhetoric might think we are a Nazi state.

Oh, a fellow scolar! I wasn’t expecting a debate!

1. Regarding the 2008 edition: I am refering to the original 2nd edition in italian language. I was referencing it because it is easrier for me in to consult the original as italian is my second language where english is only my fourth.

2. Regarding the pressures to which the author was exposed to, here is an article (in italian): https://www.ilgiornale.it/news/toaff-fermo-pasque-sangue-e-mi-scuso.html . – Might you need a translation use any free online program (deepl.com, google translate, yandex translate etc.).

For your benefit I add here some excerpts:

‘After the uproar caused by the book and the condemnation of the Italian Rabbinical Assembly (…) the professor justified himself with the seriousness of his six years of study with his students and, in an interview with the Jerusalem Post, said he was convinced that he would be better understood in Israel.’

and

‘…the university itself was under a lot of pressure. Bar-Ilan University receives funding mainly from American Orthodox Jews who threatened to withdraw their support. There was even talk of pressure for the university to dismiss the lecturer…’

then the university gave up to the pressures an decided not to support professor Toaff:

‘Yesterday, the university issued a communiqué in which it expressed its ‘anger and great displeasure towards Professor Toaff for his lack of sensitivity in publishing his book on blood sacrifice in Italy. Professor Toaff, … should have shown greater sensitivity and prudence in handling the book and its publication.’

‘…the author as a consequence decided to block the book.’

I remember reading only 3.000 copies of the 2007 italian original were sold before they were retracted. Thus the price of a copy on ebay today is €300-800.

Then the article ends with:

‘The historian declared his regret ‘for the misinterpretations’ of his work, announced that he would revise the most controversial passages and that he would donate proceeds from future sales to the Anti-Defamation League.’

So the 2nd edition of the book was created conceding to the above mentioned pressures.
With the standard formula of apology and donations to jewish organizations as we witnessed the last time in the case of Kanye West.

Hope this helps in your future research of the matter.

Be a coward, if you must: do not reply.

Your new “proof” is an article — Bernard M. Smith, Review of “Passovers of Blood” by Ariel Toaff (JUNE 12, 2023) — that asserts, but presents zero PROOF, that Toaff cut blood libel proof from his initial “Blood Passover” draft to conform his work to the demand of Jews who condemned his proving blood libel (if he did). In that respect, Smith’s article is like yours — a reflection of rabid Jew-hatred, not scholarship or journalism.

Understand this clearly (though I doubt you can): This comment’s first paragraph does not assert;
â—� (a) that Jews are incapable of doing what the blood libel myth suggests
â—� (b) that no medieval European Jew murdered a Christian boy and used the boy’s blood to make Passover matzos
â—� (c) that Toaff did not alter the original manuscript of his Blood Passover book or the initial draft of the 2007 edition (which was revised in 2011) because of extortive pressure leveled by Jews angered by Toaff’s proving (if he did) that the blood libel was actual fact.

This comment’s first paragraph observes ONLY that Smith’s article bears zero PROOF that Toaff cut blood libel proof from is initial “Blood Passover” draft or his initial version of the 2007 edition to conform his work to demands of Jews who condemned his proving blood libel. In that respect, Smith’s article is like yours — a reflection of rabid Jew-hatred, not scholarship or journalism.

Smith’s article is specially condemnable because of this language:

Even if Professor Toaff showed considerable COWARDICE in his pathetic retraction and later mutilation of his work to satisfy intense intra-Jewish criticism, his willingness to explore this issue honestly and deeply—the issue of the “Blood Libel�—is something for which he should be commended.

[Emphasis & capitalization mine, Loup-Bouc.]

Smith’s article does not demonstrate a “pathetic retraction” the only legitimate way — by comparing Toaff’s original manuscript or his book’s original, 2007 edition with the 2016 revised edition and finding at least one instance of Toaff’s having deleted, altered, or supplemented his original manuscript’s or initial 2007 edition’s text to extinguish the original manuscript’s indications (if any) that the blood libel was actual fact.

In my comment # 172 (https://www.unz.com/article/religious-implications-of-the-carthaginian-theory/#comment-6578293 ], I wrote, inter alia, this:

I have compared
� (a) the “2016 revised edition� quotes and content-references I used in my earlier-year comments (referenced, quoted, and linked in those comments)
with
â—� (b) the text of the 2007-edition/2011-revision.
Also, I investigated whether other “2o16 revised edition� arguably-Jew-exonerating passages were present in the 2007-edition/2011-revision version. In every instance, the two versions were identical.

After I re-read Smith’s article (because you cited it as proof), I did a further comparison of the same kind. I found no instance of Toaff’s having changed anything so that the 2016 revised edition failed to bear unrebutted blood-libel-proving evidence that was present in the 2007 edition revised in 2011. My language “unrebutted blood-libel-proving evidence”? I use that language as I did in my comment #`177 (https://www.unz.com/article/religious-implications-of-the-carthaginian-theory/#comment-6578586 ]:

Toaff’s book does observe “evidence� (like torture-induced “confessions�) that a medieval Jew or medieval Jews committed ritual murder, etc. But also Toaff’s book rebuts that evidence, compellingly — as I showed in my comments ## 32 and 172 (the former by linking one of my years-earlier comments).

Smith’s article includes also this toxic dross:

…the book [Toaff’s Blood Passover] reads as if written by a mind slowly and definitively being convinced of the veracity of the charge—namely, that certain Ashkenazi Jews abducted Christian children to crucify them and use their dried and desiccated blood in the Passover ritual. By the end, there appears little doubt that Professor Toaff believes that the “libelâ€� of Jewish ritual murder and blood use was, in fact, true for many Ashkenazi Jews.

That language proves only this:
â—� (a) Smith read Toaff’s book with a mind (i) pre-convinced that the blood libel is truth and (ii) compelled to to find “corroboration” in Toaff’s book.
â—� (b) Smith presumed, magically (as if with a mind-reading device), to “see” into Toaff’s brain and “discover” that Toaff was convincing himself that the “unimaginable” had occurred — that medieval European Jews had practiced ritual murder of Christian boys and used the boys’ blood to make Passover matzos. [Smith achieved a feat that the best-ever psychoanalyst or hypnotist could not achieve merely by reading a patient’s or hypnosis-subject’s book.]

The clear fact is this: Nowhere does Toaff’s book — either edition — prove blood libel. Rather, in both editions — 2007, revised 2011 & 2016 revised edition — Toaff’s book disproves blood libel.

Eventually, your, and other like, horse shit will pile up so heavily that it will crush Unz Review into oblivion.

I suspect this needs being emphasized:
â—� (a) I do not hold that Jews are incapable of doing what the blood libel myth suggests
â—� (b) I do not hold that no medieval European Jew murdered a Christian boy and used the boy’s blood to make Passover matzos.

My here-relevant position is solely this:
â—� (a) I have not encountered any valid, reliable evidence that proves medieval Jews committed ritual murder of Christian boys and used the boys’ blood in Passover ceremonies or other Jewish rites.
â—� (b) By asserting, without support of compelling valid, reliable evidence, that the blood libel is true, you, Smith, and other, sloppy, rabidly anti-Jew writers provide grist for Zionists and Orthodox Jews’ discrediting even legitimate criticism of such Jews’ manifest evil.

As I already explained in the comment you’re replying to, I’m not an expert on Toaff’s work, and proving Unz’s analysis of it was not the point of my article, so I see no reason to argue with you about it. I read Unz’s analysis on Toaff’s work and found it very convincing. He’s clearly very intelligent and level-headed, and I’ve found his analyses to be highly accurate in areas that I am familiar with. Meanwhile, I have no idea who you are, and the many lengthy rants that you’ve posted have been chalked full of petty insults and cusswords. So until I research the topic myself, I feel pretty confident that he is right, and you are wrong.

For anyone interested, this article by Bernard M. Smith clearly documents the pressure that Toaff faced and the fact that he edited the book in response, with links to news articles from the time:

https://www.unz.com/article/review-of-passovers-of-blood-by-ariel-toaff/

I thought the fact that there was pressure was pretty self-evident, and I only responded to you initially because I thought it was funny that you would act incredulous when told that Toaff was pressured by the Jewish community. If you’re still angry about this, I suggest you take up the issue with Unz, Bernard Smith, or someone else who has defended the theory in detail. I don’t intend to engage with you further on this topic, but I will pray that you find inner peace.

“Unhinged” is an adjective that fits you — for your intransigent belief that evidence-free, blood libel accusation constitutes legitimate scholarship and proper journalism — despite the accusation is refuted by Toaff’s compelling, punctilious scholarship (his book, “Blood Passover”).

Why did you not thank Brás Cubas for his below-quoted dependent clause?

Aside from the egregious errors pointed out by commenter Loup-Bouc

You called me “unhinged” without acknowledging Brás Cubas’s observations that I “pointed out” your “egregious errors.”

What rational significance resides in my being “an anonymous commenter”?

Why are hard logic, proof-demands, and compelling deconstructions “rantings”?

Why do you not try to answer my comment # 177 (https://www.unz.com/article/religious-implications-of-the-carthaginian-theory/#comment-6578586 ]?
.
You cannot grasp your stupid error: By asserting without compelling PROOF that the “blood libel” is truth and by adopting an assertion that a Jewish organization induced Toaff to convert truth to lies in his book, you gift Zionists and Orthodox Jews two premises of trashing whatever legitimate observations your article may bear, and, tortiously, you defame Toaff, an excellent and courageous scholar.

You are disgusting, contemnible.

Jewish migration to China has historically been infinitesimal compared to the West. You haven’t resisted their influence, you were just too far away for them, and phenotypically distinct enough that they couldn’t blend in. However, the fact that the Sassoon’s bullied your people in one of the few major Jewish-Chinese interactions does not bode well for your nation if they ever start coming in larger numbers.

That’s an interesting verse, and an interesting discussion to have. The verse seems to be making an exception specifically for the Edomites and Egyptians. The exception doesn’t apply to all Canaanites, as Deuteronomy 23:3 states that Moabites and Ammonites are not allowed. So I think it’s clear that the person you were arguing with was incorrect if they were saying that all Canaanites were included in the covenant because of the Edomite exception. Along with that, the Edomites were to the south of Israel, whereas the Phoenicians were to the north. I don’t see how modern Jews, if descended from Phoenicians, could claim that they have a connection with the Edomites.

This article connects the contents of those two articles by Unz in a mostly plausible manner, shedding light on both of them.

Thank you, that was the primary purpose of this article. I am operating on the assumption that the content is true in both of those articles by Unz, my purpose was not to convince anyone that they’re true. I’m certainly not an expert on Prof. Toaff, but if there’s a choice between Unz’s analysis of Toaff’s work and the unhinged ranting of Loup-Bouc, an anonymous commenter on his site, I’m going with Unz’s analysis.

Aside from the egregious errors pointed out by commenter Loup-Bouc and other (by the author’s own admission) outlandish claims, I found this article interesting. I had previously enjoyed Ron Unz’s own article on the Jewish origin issue, but did not enjoy as much Unz’s article about the Jewish religion. This article connects the contents of those two articles by Unz in a mostly plausible manner, shedding light on both of them.

There is absolutely no reason to read or comment with this absolute HG Wells nullity ofta writer.

The Carthaginian theory would explain two things. Firstly, why there were such large populations of Jews outside Palestine in the first and second centuries AD. And secondly, why these “Jews” had such a profound hatred of the Romans.

The Jews are recorded as having fought the Romans in Libya, Egypt and Cyprus. In Libya and Cyprus, they are recorded as having carried out huge massacres of Gentiles in the most sadistic ways.

Correction of my comment # 178, https://www.unz.com/article/religious-implications-of-the-carthaginian-theory/#comment-6578615

My comment 178’s text ought to be this:

I intended my comment # 177 (https://www.unz.com/article/religious-implications-of-the-carthaginian-theory/#comment-6578586%5 ) to reply to Lawrence Erickson’s comment # 173, https://www.unz.com/article/religious-implications-of-the-carthaginian-theory/#comment-6578383
I apologize for the unclarity.

Now I apologize not only for the unclarity that my comment # 178 observed and regretted. I apologize also for my fingers’ being spastic.

I intended my comment # 1777 (https://www.unz.com/article/religious-implications-of-the-carthaginian-theory/#comment-6578586%5D to reply to Lawrence Erickson’s comment # 173, https://www.unz.com/article/religious-implications-of-the-carthaginian-theory/#comment-6578383
I apologize for the unclarity.

A general “Jewish” tendency cannot prove an occurrence of a specific, discrete act of a particular Jew or group of Jews pursuing a particular discrete objective.

Very few empirical generalizations can prove specific, discrete, actual events. And very few empirical generalizations can prove or tend to prove specific, discrete, actual events of significance.

â—� (a) Mammals are aerobic.
[[[[[[ Side-Note: Some creatures are, or have been, not aerobic, i.e., anaerobic. See, e.g., this: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2859860/ End Side-Note.]]]]]]
â—� (b) You, Lawrence Erickson, are a mammal.
â—� (c) Therefore, you are aerobic.
â—� (d) Hence, you have breathed.

That reasoning is an instance of empirically/logically sound proof from generalization to particular fact. But that proof is insignificant.

The generalization “Mammals are aerobic” cannot prove either (i) that you will breath at 14:27:02.619 hours, 21 June 2024, or (ii) that you breathed at 15:42:07.348 hours, 12 February 2023.

Now the matter of the probative value of a generalization that some or many Jews pressure individuals to state pro-Jewish opinions or to retract anti-Jewish opinions:

Just as such generalization cannot prove that some medieval Jews committed ritual murder of Christian boys and used the boys’ blood to make matzoh balls for Passover, such generalization cannot prove that a Jewish organization pressured Toaff to retract from his book “Blood Passover” as statement or statements consistent with an assertion that some medieval Jews committed ritual murder of Christian boys and used the boys’ blood to make matzoh balls for Passover.

Such assertions beg PROOF — valid, reliable evidence sufficient to convince a proper judicial tribunal or, at least, a fair-size body of dispassionate, unbiased, honorable, intelligent individuals. So, your comment’s “argument” is shit.

But your comment’s “argument” is even worse — like toxin-infested shit. Your argument ASSUMES — WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE — that in/with the first printing of the first and unrevised edition his book “Blood Passover,” Toaff presented clear and unrebutted evidence that some medieval Jews committed ritual murder of Christian boys and used the boys’ blood to make matzoh balls for Passover — or even just committed ritual murder of Christian boys.

Toaff’s book does observe “evidence” (like torture-induced “confessions”) that a medieval Jew or medieval Jews committed ritual murder, etc. But also Toaff’s book rebuts that evidence, compellingly — as I showed in my comments ## 32 and 172 (the former by linking one of my years-earlier comments).

Many Jews and some Jewish organizations oppose Zionism and the genocidal conduct of Israel. See, e.g.,
â–  https://www.stopwar.org.uk/article/gaza-massacre-condemned-by-survivors-and-descendants-of-survivors-of-the-holocaust/
â–  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G12Z0td-Nqo

Video Link
â–  https://thegrayzone.com/2024/03/15/genocide-democrats-max-blumenthal-wndc/
â–  https://www.stopwar.org.uk/article/from-albert-einstein-to-noam-chomsky-famous-jews-who-have-opposed-israel/

Your bias is blind to all but itself. Hence it is blind to the manifest position of the Jewish organizations and individual Jews who inveigh against Zionism and Israel’s genocidal treatment of Palestinians. Your “proofs” prove naught but your stupid bias.

Since you do not present valid, reliable PROOF of your anti-Jew assertions and, apparently, think such proper proof is unnecessary, you are a rabid political hack, and untrustworthy.

I am a vocal, active, opponent of Zionism, Israel (even Israel’s existence), and Jews who adhere, even if just subliminally, to the Talmud, Mishnah, Kabbala, and Tanakh — those evil Jewish supremacy texts. But if you utter an anti-Jew assertion, I demand you prove your assertion WITH SUFFICIENT, VALID, RELIABLE EVIDENCE. Otherwise, your assertion can abet Zionism and Jewish supremacism.

Do not bother me again. Or, perhaps your prefer this: fuck off asshole.

It doesn’t matter.
You don’t understand Chinese women.
Our women’s obsession with money is in some ways far more extreme than that of the Jews.
We can see if the Jews will reverse assimilate into the Chinese.
Kaifeng Jews may be a good example, they have long forgotten the language and culture, and look no different from the Chinese.

After I posted my first comment replying to your comment — my comment # 172, here, https://www.unz.com/article/religious-implications-of-the-carthaginian-theory/#comment-6578293 — I wondered: Did you read my comment # 94? That comment is here: https://www.unz.com/article/religious-implications-of-the-carthaginian-theory/#comment-6574964

Good article and it jogged my memory about some similar discussions I was having about a year ago on the issue of the group that the Covenant was with. The person I was having a debate with is pro-Zionist, pro-genocide etc.

The troubling verse they brought up was the following:

Deuteronomy 23:7-8 King James Version (KJV)
Thou shalt not abhor an Edomite; for he is thy brother: thou shalt not abhor an Egyptian; because thou wast a stranger in his land. The children that are begotten of them shall enter into the congregation of the LORD in their third generation.

Now if memory serves me correctly the Edomites (Caananites who did a lot of race-mixing basically according to your article which is why the covenant was not with them amongst other reasons, according to what you show above) were the cousins of the Isralites and came down via Esau and the verse above was used as proof that The Lord established a covenant with these Caananites too; i.e. the 3rd generation and onwards would be part of the covenant that Lord had initially established with the Isralites (true jews).

I appreciate the biblical summary and to be honest this Carthaginian seems more probable than the Khazar theory you gave in the article but how does the verse above figure into the biblical information you gave in the article? Could these people that established Israel, by hook and by crook, be considered as jews or even Isralites from a biblical perspective also?

What “pressure� was exerted on Toaff? By what “Jewish community�? When? Where? What form of pressure? Manifested in what context, venue? Where and how was is such pressure expressed, effected, recorded……? What particular amendments resulted from such Jewish community pressure? What is your PROOF?

You really need proof that Jewish organizations pressured a scholar who said that they ritually murdered Christian children?

I have two editions/revisions of Toaff’s Blood Passover. One is the edition/revision I referenced, quoted, and linked in my two earlier-year comments that I referenced and linking in this thread. The other is also a Lucchese and Gianetti translation of the 2007 edition revised by the original translators (Lucchese and Gianetti) in 2011. That latter version is not a 2016 edition or 2016 translation.

The translators (Lucchese and Gianetti) are (or were) rabidly anti-Jew. In their 2016 revised edition, they added a Foreword they wrote. In that Foreword, the two translators attacked, visiously, what they called Toaff’s recantation of what they assert was Toaff’s earlier version. The translators intimate, without proof, that the earlier edition was somehow (they do not show language-changes) less inclined to question accusations that Jews committed ritual murder of Christian boys whose blood the Jews used in celebrations of Passover.

One may expect that those two translators would have evidenced, somehow, their recantation assertion — their intimation that Toaff altered the text to “exonerate” Jews accused of ritual murder, etc., or to discredit the accusations.. But they did not.

The translators assert:

Bruh –

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/05/travel/the-man-who-changed-the-face-of-shanghai-.html

https://sixthtone.com/news/1010830

https://blogs.bl.uk/untoldlives/2012/06/victor-sassoon-and-shanghai.html

If a white man speaks Chinese, identifies with Chinese culture and marries a Chinese wife, then he is Chinese.

Lol. Looks like the Jews already took at least one Chinese scalp.

Did Judaism reconcile by accomodating the new comer’s existing practices that included usuary and child sacrifice but with the caveats that the gentiles woukd be the victims?

Interesting point. This seems quite likely to have been another compromise by the Pharisees and other Jewish proselytizers to attract the Carthaginians. It’s easy to see how overemphasizing the common enemy idea eventually led to seeing all gentiles as subhuman.

As for the Ariel Toaff book Blood Passover, the link in question http://israelshamir.net/BLOODPASSOVER.pdf takes you to the 2016 version of the translation of the book from italian language. The first translation was done the same year as the original book was printed (ie 2007). However bare in mind that prof. Toaff was pressured by the jewish comunity to ammend his original work and as a result a 2008 second edition was printed and the 2007 version retracted from bookstores (and has today a very high price in second hand bookstores). This one being in alligment with the official jewish wersion of history. What I am saying is that the link takes you to the censured version of the book. As it is written on page 2 of the 2016 translation: ‘Revised. Please use this version. Last revision: August 1, 2016. Annuls and replaces all previous versions.’

I can understand the problems of European cultural reality.
The abandonment of religion is inevitable anyway. Otherwise, there will be many cases in which people will obtain a large amount of wealth in the name of religion and continue to cheat.
The way I propose is only a way in the absence of a way.
When you can’t unify culture and language, you have to find one that has historically unified Europe, or it will remain fragmentary, like the European Union.

This brings to mind Freud’s self-identification with (“Semitic”) Hannibal and his quest to get revenge on “Rome.”
Here’s a random link as starting point: https://www.reddit.com/r/PhoeniciaHistoryFacts/comments/jky2bk/hannibal_was_the_hero_of_sigmund_freud_founder_of/

European culture has much deeper roots than the Roman Empire is. It’s no wonder you don’t know that Romans were not ethnic, but a type of state organization. As for the Roman leaders who promoted Christianity, it’s a bit more complex. They first persecuted and even killed Christians (Emperors Decius, Probus, Diocletian), tolerated Christianity (Emperor Galerius), legalized it (Emperors Constantine and Licinius), later built the largest churches (Justinian). Perhaps you will be interested in the hidden or lesser-known fact that they were all Serbs.

Such a small trace either way that claims of origin are super dubious.

This sounds pretty plausible.

Jonah would appear to be a funny little story about Jews traveling around the Med and Near East.

The Phoenicians settled in Carthage, forming the bulk of the population from which Hannibal and the political-military establishment of Carthage emerged. The Phoenicians had significant genetic, social, political, and religious interactions with the Canaanites over centuries. All three groups worshipped Baal and engaged in the sacrifice of newborn males.

Jewish people were already living in Carthage at the time of its destruction. It is entirely possible that ideas and rituals were exchanged horizontally among them, which may have accelerated when a good number of Carthaginians converted to Judaism. The same was true for the Phoenicians.

Judaism borrowed heavily from Persian religion. This practice was not new; reincarnation, from Buddhism, also permeated certain Jewish strands.

It is highly possible that the practice of sacrifice was also emulated. In Jewish stories, we see resistance against the incorporation of Baal into its divine realm.
The struggle for exclusive monotheism did weaken the Jewish society and led to frequent regicides
.

Did Judaism reconcile by accomodating the new comer’s existing practices that included usuary and child sacrifice but with the caveats that the gentiles woukd be the victims?

You misunderstood.
We pay attention to cultural identity, blood identity is not so important.
If a white man speaks Chinese, identifies with Chinese culture and marries a Chinese wife, then he is Chinese.
This is true even for Chinese emigrants.
In fact, in the past decade, the number of Chinese emigrants has been decreasing, while the number of immigrants from Japan and South Korea has been increasing.
As for the so-called Chinese “run people” along the US-Mexico border, most of them are criminals who have committed serious crimes and do not want to be caught by our country.

As for Sassoon.
Remember, Sassoon did not create Shanghai, but Sassoon made a lot of money through China.
This is a debt owed to the Chinese people, which will have to be repaid later.
In fact, if you look at the holdings of HSBC, you can see that we have tried to capture the Sassoon power to some extent.

I was at first skeptical about whether or not there was a forced conversion by the Maccabees, but this does absolutely appear to be the case that many were forcibly converted:

R1 Maccabees relates the story of how Mattathias (ca. 166 BC) forcibly circumcised the sons of Jewish parents who had abandoned the rite.[6] Forced circumcision of Gentiles by Jews is attested from the second century BC onwards. In 125 BC John Hyrcanus conquered Edom, which the Romans called Idumea; and the Idumeans were forcibly converted to Judaism, by threat of exile or death, depending on the source.[7][8] As reported by Josephus, circumcision was required of the Idumeans:

Hyrcanus took also Dora and Marissa, cities of Idumea, and subdued all the Idumeans; and permitted them to stay in that country, if they would circumcise their genitals, and make use of the laws of the Jews; and they were so desirous of living in the country of their forefathers, that they submitted to the use of circumcision, and the rest of the Jewish ways of living; at which time therefore this befell them, that they were hereafter no other than Jews.[9]

Scholars disagree on the interpretation of the sources. For example, Steven Weitzman believes the Idumeans were forcibly circumcised for political, not religious, reasons.[10] According to Shaye J. D. Cohen, “Ptolemy’s claim, that the Idumaeans were compelled to be circumcised and to adopt Jewish ways, is a simplified account of what these urban Idumaeans experienced.”[11] During the short reign of Hyrcanus’ eldest son, Aristobulus I (104–103 BC), the Hasmoneans gained control of Galilee. In this case, too, sources indicate that the residents were subjected to forced circumcision.[12] Archaeological evidence suggests that, during this period, Gentiles fled from Galilee to avoid being forcibly circumcised.[13] Recently, Isaac Soon has argued that 1 Macc 2:46 does not refer to circumcision “by force” but that Mattathias circumcised “in strength”. He argues that Mattathias did not forcibly circumcise, but instead re-established circumcision among Jewish inhabitants of Judea “in strength”.[14]

(From the Wikipedia on Forced Circumcision[1])

I think it goes to show two interesting things:

– Even Jewish people of the “right” geographic origin cannot be conceived of as being primarily of the Hebrews, a people we often think of as endogamous, closed off and sheltered from the world, and some true strain of ‘chosen people.’

– Jewish people before Christ were greatly struggling with national identity and just having ‘the numbers’ to occupy a place, so much so that they no longer cared for concepts like true descent from the right stock, or it is even perhaps the case that this was never something that they truly cared about as much as contemporary Jews care about it (which seems just as likely). The Jews themselves may have viewed descent as spiritual, not so much literal…

Which is also a very interesting conclusion to present because it makes great arguments for the Jews not necessarily having any special need for holding Jerusalem, and it affirms that there is not some inherent blood connection that legitimizes a lot of modern claims.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forced_circumcision

Perhaps, the Jews will bring upon the end of the “ Last stage of the Kali Yuga, when the Creator comes down to Earth..!?

This more tag is a really clever thing Ron has made.

Matter of utmost importance, is the nullity of genealogy concerning the Pharisées.
We should abandon that altogether. It is all long since destroyed.
Importance is the spiritual teaching in a special group, resulting in the Gaza-genocide!
Surely yo disprove of that nazi-Herod-Netanyahu project?

Here’s an interesting discussion on this subject :

Video Link

THE JESUIT ORDER AS A SYNAGOGUE OF JEWS (ROBERT ALEKSANDER MARYKS, PHD) ///

BitChute

Plenty of turks look jewy
Jews infiltration is present many places such as a virus which also doesn’t exist

It is the evil and amoral bullshit abundant in life lying beneath the surface of most everyone that must be crushed. Love is the only solution and this planet is a vibrational prison that we must ascend out of. By means of not egoically creating more slaves ie children that divide our one consciousness nor playing the idiotic 3d game of bullshit lies

Figure it out and merge back with the Infinite

“Asian” isn’t synonymous with gook, slant-eye, mongoloid. That is why the very polite terms “Oriental” or “East Asian” are used, to distinguish caucasoid “western” or “southern” orientals from those of the Far East.

I’m sort of embarrassed to admit being familiar with the streamer “pokemane” – but many people have wondered if she is part East Asian.

To the Western eye, there are many people from North Africa, West Asia, and even some from Europe, who show traits that are suggestive the “Oriental.”

See how Edward G. Robinsons’ and Yul Brynner’s “Oriental” traits are played up in this classic film.

Video Link

The idea of hereditary Punic Depravity existing in Jews because Pharisees converted the Phoenicians sounds like another iteration of the Khazar theory.

I didn’t say it was hereditary, if by that you mean genetic. It’s more likely that they’ve held onto their pagan culture because they’ve so strongly resisted outside influence ever since their initial conversion, which primarily happened as a way to resist Roman domination. If you read Unz’s article on this topic, I think it’s clear that the evidence of Punic descent is far stronger than with the Khazar theory.

Post your address oh brave one

lve seen those studies previously, very interesting. l trust my lying eyes – l have met plenty of jews with features that appear turkic. where in northern europe were all these supposedly european ashkenazi jews hiding in say 1200 ad – they were late arrivals in germany etc.
theyve been taking european women for literally 2000 years – jews ran the slave trade in roman times and have been involved in that enterprise up until recent times. by some reports 50% of present day jewish women are of european stock. l have always assumed phoenecians were closely related/linked to jews.
theres good reason to think the hyksos were jews – academics wont say it, they are too afraid

In fact, all those who learn the Chinese language will eventually and irreversibly become Chinese

This would seem to be contradicted by extensive emigration such as Chinese anchor babies in the US.

It’s just that foreigners often find Chinese too difficult

That’s true. For example, the Sassoon family who built Shanghai up from being an Asian shithole into a modern city never did learn Chinese since they had lots of Chinese servants to translate for them. As you must know, the Sassoon family that built Shanghai were Jews. They made their money by selling opium to Chinese people who didn’t have enough self-control to resist. It’s the addictive personality, you know, which also accounts for the extensive gambling and smoking. Chinese would probably be drunks too, except they can’t hold their liquor.

The idea that Chinese lack religion is also true, but not in the way you suggest. Rather, their obsession with worldly gain makes them obsessed with superstitions that are supposed to bring “luck” while leaving them insensitive to questions about the origins, purpose, and good of man.

Would you kindly elaborate the positive case for forgery?

After Paganism this was so refreshing to the folks they had to obey just one god that they all scrambled to Judaism.

I doubt that that’s what happened. How does this bode with Yahweh’s priests having to threaten the population with Yahweh’s wrath if they worship other gods?

Listen, Israel: Yahweh is our God. Yahweh is one […] Never worship any of the gods worshiped by the people around you, for Yahweh your God, who is present among you, is a jealous God—his anger will erupt against you and remove you from the land.

They had to fight with polytheism, I don’t think there was much that was voluntary there. See, for example, the history of christianization of Kievan Rus, it gives you an idea of how these religious conversions happen, voluntarily or not. Not to mention that Yahweh worship is not as fun as Dionysus worship, for example, why would folks want this Yahweh as the only god? 2 Kings 3 suggests he’s not even as strong as Chemosh/Kemosh (three armies of Yahweh get defeated by one army of Kemosh thanks to a well-timed human sacrifice).

Anyway, Deuteronomy 6 is basically a Yahwist version of the Nicene Creed, a statement of basic beliefs (with a ‘history’ lesson about how “we were Pharaoh’s slaves in Egypt, but Yahweh brought us out of there and promised us lots of goodies”). Both lay out the basics of who is god, what you should believe, and what you shouldn’t believe or do because it’s wrong, so as to lay out the correct version of religion and condemn “dangerous conspiracy theories” such as Arianism or worship of El, or Ba’al, or Asherah, or what have you.

The ancient Hebrews were from the “Asian” continent themselves were they not? You white nationalists seem to have this blindspot in your worldview. If you look at their faces, do Ashkenazi look Asian? Since when do Asians have light-colored eyes with huge noses and slightly curly hair? Its obvious they are Arab-European mixed mutts but you keep calling them Turkic? Since when do Turkics have huge noses with curly hair? Turkics look Mongolian more than anything else. Stop trying to tie Jews with Asians when its obvious they have more in common with YOU (your precious so-called white race).

GENETICS?!

“Genetic” studies show that the Chinese civilization was started by a tribe from Nigeria!
Believe it?

DNA is like a “virus”: Nobody ever could show it!

It takes some studying, but if one is really after the truth . . .
A first step would be searching for the work of a top-rate biologist, Harold Hillman.
And trying to understand the diffraction occurring in the X-ray analysis performed on tissues. The resultant pictures were interpreted as helical structures because the experience with crystallography of the analyst!

An interesting theory. I agree completely that the Palestinians of today are the direct descendents of the ancient Hebrews. This theory does not explain why Israel has banned genetic testing. The reason is obvious. The Ashkenazi have little to do with the ancient Hebrews. They are largely a Turkic and Asian people.

The leaders of Israel know very well that their “Jewish State” is built on lies. With the help of their media control, they have managed to bury the truth. Few Westerners know the truth.

Tracing your ancestral DNA is a popular activity throughout the world, companies offering home testing kits promise to uncover your geographic origins for a small fee. A Jewish TikToker took the test and found he had heritage in different parts of Europe, but in his results there was no trace of Levantine origins. A cool new thing to tell his friends about, however, he points out that if he was from Israel this test would be illegal. We delve into why Israel restricts tracing your ancestors DNA.

Israel’s DNA wars: Forbidden tests

Your constant rudeness degrades your every comment. You be unaware, that no only does whomever you are addressing, read your comments, but so do a few thousand others read them as well. You come across as an arrogant know-it-all. As far as blathering — which you accuse “many Unz Review commenters� of doing — remember this, everyone has a piece of the truth, even you. Respecting others begins with respecting yourself.

No doubt most people dipping into Unz’s comment threads are seeking “creditable factual matter� and sometimes have opinions that fail to exhibit your depth of knowledge, true — except your failure is a lack of understanding. Knowledge can be couched in simple terms — as it should be — which you seldom do. You should understand though that you cannot give people understanding neither can you receive understanding.

That you insult others here suggests a lack of understanding. Your last two sentences, “You have a mind barely better than a child’s. And like a child, you lack intellectual discipline and integrity,� is no doubt a projection!

so Russia, Brooklyn, Ucrania, Germany, UK,,,are Middle Eastern countres???? Zionism/Torah promised land is a Religiuous FANTASY..

You have no idea what you’re talking about. The majority of Israelis are middle eastern jews who look (you guessed it) middle eastern. You don’t even know basic information.

That’s very true.

One of the weaknesses of Carthage against Rome appears to have been very limited Enthnoreligious “citizenship�. Romans always seemed to expand citizenship in their own day as a carrot. Even though the Legions brought the whip and colonies.

The city dwelling Peoni were distinct in their caste. Much like Jews. Hannibal couldn’t quite convert brilliant wins to conquest and occupation in mainland Italy.

Sabbatai Zevi the 17th century Jewish messiah. The Phoenecians means the Venetians, who dominated European politics for many generations and who created both the Dutch and the British Thalassocracies. “And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:” 2 Thessalonians 2:11. Much of the strong delusion centers on falsely long time periods and geography. Why do many events in the Torah have exact duplicates in 13th century Europe? Why do Abraham and Isaac the Blind have exact duplicates in important Kabbalists? Just coincidence, of course. Why did 100% of “ancient” Roman and Greek works miraculously appear in Europe (almost all in Italy) during the Renaissance? What did the Greeks write on? How, for example, did the works of Plato and Aristotle survive for almost two thousand years before their serendipitous re-discovery in the Renaissance? We have learned all lies. The more education one has, the more lies one has absorbed.

Still, you present no proof. And, since YOU asserted the existence of the alleged blood evidence that YOU allege was found under a NYC synagogue, YOU bear the burden of proof. I have no responsibility either of proving your assertion is truth or of proving it false.

You insult yourself, not me, by publishing a lurid and potentially dangerous assertion without supporting it with PROOF. And, PROOF is NOT either an alt right rag’s or the New York Time’s bare assertion or an evidence-free “report” of an assertion of some “official” or purportedly “knowledgeable” person who is, actually, a hack of some neocon, paleoconservative, neoliberal, progressive, or anti-Jew cause. Proof is valid, reliable, evidence sufficient to convince a fair-sized body of disinterested, honorable, intelligent individuals.

Since you do not comprehend that your earlier comment was irrelevant to the matter of whether the blood libel or blood Passover actually occurred, I expect you do not comprehend PROOF. Like too many Unz Review commenters, you blather whatever is consistent with your political taste or your biases — NOT legitimate, creditable factual matter properly probative of a worthy point.

If, actually, blood was found where you asserted and on the object(s) you named, then three vital questions beg answers: (a) Whose blood? (b) Did the blood deposit because of an assault (the term “assault” meaning, here, all of what it can mean)? (c) If assault explains the blood’s presence, how many assailants at how many times?

You have a mind barely better than a child’s. And like a child, you lack intellectual discipline and integrity.

Yes, so my suggestion is, outright repudiation of monotheistic cultures including Christianity, Judaism, and Islam.
Because Rome is the foundation of European culture.
Without Roman leaders to promote Christianity, Jesus was a failed liar.
Rome practically conquered Europe. To identify with Roman culture is to identify with a civilization that embraces Europe.
You can take Roman culture as a foundation and embrace Christianity.
Moreover, religions are still able to defraud vast amounts of property in the name of God, which is itself problematic.

The better explanation is that the core aristocracy was more or less the same folks as between Cadiz, Carthage, Tyre and Jerusalem. It does explain the Kitos War casualties in Cyprus and Cyrenaica to some extent.

The Carthaginians were carriers of Jews.

You should choose the third way.
I am Chinese.
We are atheists in the absolute sense.
But neither did we choose to plunder the world in disorder, as the Christian world and the Jewish did.
The arrival of Jews in our country will only result in the extermination of the Jews in Kaifeng, as advocated by the Western media, in fact, they were basically exterminated.
In fact, all those who learn the Chinese language will eventually and irreversibly become Chinese. It’s just that foreigners often find Chinese too difficult…
Once you have mastered Chinese, you can use it much more easily than English.

Special Night Squad UCLA

1. There is a fascinating book by Peter Mark Adams Game of Saturn in which he makes an elaborate argument that wealthy Renaissance Italy families worshiped Saturn.

His argument is based on an expensive tarot deck from 15 century Venice, the Sola Busci Tarochi. Deck includes depiction of infanticide which is akin to ritual sacrifice.

2. For the verse in Amos the Oxford Study Bible has Kaiwan, not Chiun, but says it’s Saturn.

“But ye have borne the tabernacle of your Moloch and Chiun your images, the star of your god, which ye made to yourselves.�

-Amos 5:26

Wow. Some of you believe in Bible shit? And cite the Bible of all things? Wake up.

You see, I’m Chinese, and most of us are atheists.
We also had various religions in very ancient times, but now religion is mainly a mascot in the form of tourist attractions.
Our existence shows that people can live well without religion.
We have essentially incorporated religion into our culture.
So religion no longer needs to exist as a subject.

IDF soldier ELRON BISMUT … in the country illegally cracks heads at UCLA leaving a student with permanent brain damage

https://twitter.com/i/status/1792684992033661387