The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy

[HERESY]

I should have said ’a few’ or small handful as opposed to ’remote’ pardon my syntax error.

No problem.

Yes this is true. However, aside from the US & Israel there are a few places in the world where it is safe to openly practice. (which was ultimately the point)

Again, where is your proof that it is NOT openly safe to practice in these areas? I am sure that they may experience some form of prejudice/racism, but peace and harmony is NOT exclusive to america. You have a lot of so-called anti-semitism here in america. With that being said, I would like for you to explain how these places are worse than america. Do these places have laws placing restrictions on so-called jews who marry? Do they have laws preventing so-called jews from openly practicing talmudism?


Btw, you speak of people not being able to practive religion, but look at what israel does to thoes who are married!

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article484122.ece

The semantics of my grammatical errors have detracted from my intent, resulting in the before mentioned inconsistencies. Looks like all and all, remote was simply the wrong choice of word.

We are past this point now.

Not tonight, but I will follow up…

I'll be waiting.

The statement reinforces the fact that there are few places outside of the US and Israel where it is safe to openly practice.

Please refer to my previous comments, statements and questions regarding the safety of so-called jews who openly practice their religion.

Again, I will gather some data, and report back soon…

Again, I'll be waiting.

http://www.british-israel.ca/Judah.htm

Seriously, we can go back and fourth all day.

http://www.users.cloud9.net/~recross/israel-watch/Khazars/Khazar-list.html

Also, I would like to point out that the site you gave us is full of wack jobs and supporters of false theories. The same site promotes teh REFUTED/DEBUNKED belief that the Shroud of Turin is proof of the resurrection.

http://www.british-israel.ca/Judah.htm

(section 4 in particular)

Also to again go on a tangent, but stay on the topic of linguistics… we must consider the Danish Jutes

Here is some plagiarism from another site…'
Among the SAXON invaders of Britain were the JUTES, a people who came from a part of Denmark still called JUTLAND, to settle in Kent and the Isle of Wight.

'Having noted the evidence previously offered which indicates the Israelitish origin of the Saxons as a whole, let us now consider the Jutes for they have in their name itself conclusive evidence of their Israelitish identity.

'This becomes clear when we remember the great change which took place in the languages of northern Europe some time previous to 100 B.C., whereby a great many words which had previously had in them the sound of our letter 'd' changed this to the sound of 't'. (Grimm's Law). As this change occurred during the years in which the Saxons were migrating to Western Europe from their old home east of the Black Sea, it is obvious that the people who arrived in Denmark as Jutes must have started out as JUDES or Judai.

'Further, as all of the Saxon tribes, including the Jutes, were descended from the SACAE (Sacasene) of MEDIA, it follows that the Sacae must have had among them a tribe called Judes or Judai even before they left Media.

'The importance of this becomes apparent when we remember that the Israel people were divided into TWO separate nations -- Israel and Judah, AND that when the Assyrians conquered Israel and drove the Israelites away into captivity in MEDIA, they ALSO took some of the people from the country districts of Judah. it is certain, therefore, that among the Israelites in Media there was a distinct group who would be known by a plural form of the name Judah -- Judahites, Judae, Judai, Judi, or Judes.

'In this connection we should note too that in the German language the Jews, who are a part of the people of Judah, are called JUDEN (singular -- Jude), which, is equivalent to 'Judes' in English. Further, in the Low German dialects, which are more closely related to Old English (the English of the Saxons and Jutes) the name Jude is pronounced 'Yut', which is equivalent to the English 'Jute'.

'We have, therefore, six known facts to consider: (1) that when the Israel people were deported to Media by the Assyrians, part of the people of the Kingdom of Judah were taken with them; (2) that, as a consequence, there was among the Israelites in Media a group of Judahites, Judai, or Judes; (3) that among the Saxons who came into Britain there was a tribe called Jutes; (4) that during the time they were migrating westward across Europe the 'd' in their language became 't'; (5) that the Saxons were descended from the Sacae of Media; and (6) that Sacae is the name by which the Israelites in Media were known to the Persian historians.

'It is certain, therefore, that the JUTES were originally called Judes or Judai, and that they were the descendants of that part of the people of JUDAH which the Assyrians carried away with Israel to Media

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/5951/BI.html

http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/nrms/britisrael.html#History

Next time give us something that is NOT derived from biased sources promoting identity movements. :dead:

http://www.khazaria.com


http://reference.allrefer.com/encycl...K/Khazars.html

Scythia , ancient region of Eurasia, extending from the Danube on the west to the borders of China on the east. The Scythians. flourished from the 8th to the 4th cent. B.C. They spoke an Indo-Iranian language but had no system of writing. They were nomadic conquerors and skilled horsemen. They seem to be related to the Saka, another nomadic tribe that roamed the steppes of central Asia at about the same time".

From http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/history/A0844169.html

Josephus Flavius records in his Antiquities of the Jews Book I Chapter 6 Section 1:

"Magog founded those that from him were named Magogites, but who are by the Greeks called Scythians."

The Scythians are to be related primarily with Gog and Magog. Many different Scythian tribes roamed southern modern day Russia. (which takes us back to www.Khazaria.com)

I do not accept the above as answers to the questions posed to you. Please answer the questions posed to you (read them again) or clarify your position and elaborate on how your statements answer the questions.

Who said anything about biased/unbiased? The symbolism was just an intersting side note...

Listen, you are passing this info off as gold and expecting people to believe it, yet you question my questioning of the material and its bias? Please. You are basically implying that an 18 minute film sheds so much light and has all this info, yet I am saying 18 minutes is not enough, and even if it were enough, the evidence would be questionable.

Pardon me, ‘condemned.’ I have no sympathy or excuse for any participant plain and simple.

As, I said I chalked it up as a typo. No harm done.

It was for centuries up until the end of the 3rd reich. Even afterwords to modern day, perhaps not as overt or nearly as prevalent as earlier times, but still existent.

Can you please cite credible sources validating your claim that the mistreatment was done because of success.

These are major factors.

Also, BBC type media outlets reporting continus Anti-Israel coverage (the same way Fox news toots US patriotism) is a contributor IMO. Its like the old newsweek article I read a few years back, which brings up the notion that anti-Semetic/Jewish sentiments have been modernized and replaced with an Anti-Israel sentiment.

If you are going to say something like that, I need to see something explaining how many people even hit BBC media outlets and how many are actually swayed by the material (as it relates to so-called anti-semitism.)

I’ll check ‘em out later, it’s getting’ late.

No problem.

Uganda was rejected because it was logistically not practical and most likely not worked out, in terms of establishing an independent Jewish State.

After the Independence War and/or 67 war I don’t see the point to address obsolete ‘violations’ of the Balfour agreement.

http://www.trincoll.edu/~kclark2/the..._jerusalem.htm

So, Uganda was rejected because it was logistically not practical and most likely not worked out, in terms of establishing an independent Jewish State, however I see nothing pertaining to the fact that people were already present (unless you consider it practicality.) The truth is, these so-called jews were going to make Uganda OR Argentina the promised land but had NO claims to these proposed sites. Btw, your link fails to define practicality and offers no real reasons/examples why Uganda was disregarded. Again, can you explain how the land was given away when the persons giving it away never owned it? Can you explain the current violation of the agreement and how the people of arab background still suffer in the land? If the violations are obsolete and rendered null and void (because of war) shouldn't that make the ENTIRE agreement and arrangement obsolete? BTW, the balfour agreement is still in effect (courtesy of the The Palestine Mandate), so please answer the questions posed to you.:dead:

If you want to get nit-picky, the groundwork for Zionism started at the time of the destruction of the 2nd temple in 70 AD, and gained even greater momentum during Bar Khobah’s revolt.

Post French revolution did lay some groundwork, however it wasn’t until the 1880’s where the first generation of Aliya was made, and Zionism gained momentum which leads to Herzls involvment in the creation of a Jewish State...

I disagree with the statement of the destruction of the temple being part of the groundwork for zionism. The people who experienced the tragedies of 70 a.d. were REAL jews/hebrews. The people who promote and actually implement zionism are not. I am not concerned with when zionism gained momentum. You said, "Zionism started as a labor movement in the 1880’s" and this is FALSE. Please, if you are going to post information and pass it off as factual info, make sure you at least do your homework. We can debate all day about 70 a.d. or Bar Khobah's revolt, but if you are going to pass something off as fact make sure you are on point.

It’s up to interpretation.

I disagree, but please answer the question or at least give your interpretation.

The current state of Israel was ultimately created out of necessity. I believe this would not have been possible without the intervention of Hashem during the war of indpendence. (an incredible victory)!

Jargon.

Heres an interesting read for those following this thread:

http://batr.org/wrack/061303.html

@Blackjack_1577 to understand Talmudism you should probably research Pharisaism.

http://www.come-and-hear.com/talmud/finkelstein.html

After you do that you can research Hasidism and you'll be set straight, and to answer your question, HELL NO!!!! What Moshe/Moses taught has nothing to do with the madness promoted by the so-called jews.