Kissinger: Israel will not exist in 10 years

Nonsense.

 

Here is Hammer’s original publication (click the blue). We can see that the Hammer study was based on Y-chromosome studies. Did you see what the study that I quoted had to say about the Y Haplotypes? No? Failed. Try again.


But even given that, did you see how in Figure 2 he drew a circle (black dots) ‘clustering’ the European races, leaving a imbalanced distribution. He was severely criticised for that in peer review, because as even the layman can see, that the plot for the Ashkenazi Jews (Ash) clearly lies on a transition curve (a figure 2 - reversed S -in shape) from Middle eastern to European plots. I am surprised that you did not spot that, Dixon.

Did you also note that Hammer never discusses the Ashkenazi Jews separately? He always groups then with the ME Jews, who indeed do (PLEASE NOTE THIS; Dixon) show a remarkable similarity to non-Jewish ME populations, SUCH AS THE PALESTINIANS. In fact the 'Pal' plot is far more central to the ME Jews that is that of the 'Ash', which as I have pointed out, is clearly on the edge on its way towards the European character.

In the meantime, check out Hammer’s table 1. Did you spot that the Ashkenazi 1R haplotype at 12 is totally different to that of ME Jews? Did you notice, for instance, that the Pal 1R is exactly the same (at 5) as the 1R average for ME Jews? Ouch!!!

Many thanks for the chance to highlight that. So I don’t understand what your “nonsense” comment was based on regarding the hybrid nature of the Ashkenazi … you had the data at your fingertips all the time.

I will address your other references (Atzmon and Ostrer) purportedly pointing to “nonsense” in a short while.

….. (to be continued) ….

 

Would Jews consider a homeland, somewhere else?

I specifically ask this to the Israeli Jews that we have on here, of course?

If it was all above board, and it seemed like it may be a better location and future, for your children?

 

….. (continued) ….
So let me get this straight. You based your “Nonsense” response on the fact that the 2010 study of Atzmon-Ostrer found that “The IBD segment sharing and the proximity of European Jews to each other and to southern European populations suggested similar origins for European Jewry” disproved the dilution/hybridisation of the Ashkenazi Jewish bloodline in Europe. Is that correct? If so please reread that line extracted from your own evidence.

Regarding your quote from Dr Ostrer's book, it is perfectly in line with my posts:

1) He says that "all major Jewish groups do have common Middle Eastern origin". Absolutely correct. Note however, that he did not say that that was the ONLY regional characteristic in the Ashkenazi genes. He is not even quoted on what % of ME character there is, yet you say "nonsense" to my posts. He does say there was no large-scale genetic contribution from the Turkic Khazars. He does not say that there was none; but more importantly he is ominously silent in that quote about the contribution to mitochondrial genetic dilution by other European blood such as Greek, Roman, German, etc. Ask Gwenyth Paltrow.

The Myth of the pure ME bloodline of the Ashkenazim remains BUSTED

 

Try_This and Dixon, you both quoted this 1999 article by Mike Hammer in an attempt to deny the dilution of the ME genes of the Ashkenazi Jews by absorption of Europeans. Are you aware of his later publications, together with geneticists from the Technion and Rambam Medical Center, Haifa, Israel? I found this conclusion from a 2003 publication concerning the Haplogroup R1a1 which is very common in the Ashkenazi Levites, to be particularly compelling:

In other words the Ashkenazi Levites have the R1a1 Haplogroup which is common in Europeans but uncommon in non-Jewish ME peoples. Now I wonder what that could mean for the ancestral source of the Levites.

 

You must be joking. A real question from you ?
Now for the answer:
No, there can not be any other place I would feel at home.
Israle is the place I was born and the place I will die.
I have roots in Israel going back 4500 years, that is more than any Europeian/Middle easter/American can say for his country.
Had I met Kind Achav or King David today, I would be able to talk with them in my mother language. Can anybody here say the same ?
Israel is the only country in the world who speaks my language, Hebrew.
Why would anybody ever think I would want to be anywhere other than Israel ?

 

I didn't say you would, that is why I asked.

Someone else may answer differently.

People migrate or leave their nation, all the time, for a better life, a safer life, or merely to broaden their horizions.

Esp if, factoring in all the conditions, they felt doing so was safer for them, and their future family.

 

you are referring to Sephardic Jews.

There were also other Jews (Mizrahim or eastern Jews) who are descended from the original inhabitants of the region.

The Ashkenazi are more recent european Jews, and .... there is no evidence that they are all the same "race".

in fact, the notion of Jews being a race is a relatively modern concept.

 

this is why the Occupiers of Palestine posting Wikipedia sources will never count

[video=youtube;LofScCiJT4c]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LofScCiJT4c[/video]

 

You resurected Hebrew language from it's grave for political purposes.

It would be like a some Italian rebels adopting Latin to help get their own state recognised in the UN

 

You can continue to tell yourselve fairytales till the end of time.
This will not change history nor will it change me.
I did not invent Hebrew, this is the language my mother talked with me when I was born. This is the language my kids talk.
This is the language all the Jews spoke throughout history.
They could live in Egypt or in Germany or in China, still aside from the local lingua, they all undestood Hebrew, they all knew how to read, even when the local people did not know to read the local language.

 

Sure, people migrate all the time from various reasons.
You can look at the number of Arabs in Europe.

 

sorry but the lies do not convince me or anyone else

Hebrew as you know perfectly well was resurrected from the dead for political reason.

 

here bookmark this so you know the facts in future instead of inventing lies


When Eliezer Ben-Yehuda (1858-1922), a Polish-born linguist, came to Jerusalem in 1881, he believed that ancient Hebrew, used mainly as a liturgical language since the 5th century B.C., should be the language of the reborn Zionist vision. He codified Hebrew grammar, wrote the first modern dictionary, and coined words necessary for a modern vocabulary. Ben-Yehuda and his wife, also a linguist, spoke only Hebrew to their son, Itamar, who became the first primarily Hebrew-speaking person in the modern world.

From the initial determination of the Ben-Yehuda family and their friends, the Hebrew language, with its uniqueness and vitality, was brought back to life..

 

I am sorry to inform you that Abu Sina is correct and that you are wrong. Here is a good reference: http://www.jefftk.com/final-papers/revival/revival.pdf

As a language spoken by the people, Hebrew has all but died out by the 4th C AD. It survived only as a liturgical language for priestly use as in Rabbinical literature in synagogues and in batei midrash. After the Zionist drive for emigration to Palestine, peoples came together whose mother tongues varied greatly, ranging from Yiddish (Ashkenazim) to Ladino (Sephardim), Russian, French, Czech, Hebrew (Jerusalem), Arabic and Farsi (Mizrahim). There was a need for a lingua franca for the masses and Hebrew was the natural choice. This revival was only started in the late 1900s.

Well done Abu Sina. Helping us learn a better appreciation of the Land of Conflict.

 

The fact you don't know something does not make other liyers.
Hebrew was a holy language for the Jews in the last 1500 years.
It was spoken, read and written but strictly for religouse perposes.
Every Jew knew how to read and write Hebrew, even when the people of the land did not know how to read or write any language.
Every Jew spoke hebrew and prayed using it in Synagogs every morning, noon and evening.

All you need to do is search the internet and you wil find examples of written Hebrew documents from the roman times till this day.

 

No, He was wrong and still is.
I wrote that every Jew knew Hebrew, spoke it and knew how to read it and write it.
And I am right. Most Jews through out history did know Hebrew. Did write it and did read it.
The argument was not whther it was a holy language, but was it the language of the Jews.
It was an still it.
Every Jew prayed in Hebrew at least 3 times a day for 1 hour.
They wrote religouse books in Hebrew. They read them and talked about them.
Please note: Not just the Rabi did, everyone did, Everybody prayed.
Kids age 3 went to a school and learned to read and write Hebrew, even during the middle ages when no one around could read.
Face it and go fight another battle.

Just read your own link:

 

This is simply not true when it comes to the statement "every Jew". For many centuries Hebrew occupied the place in Jewish culture that Latin occupied in Christian Europe: it was the language by which the well-educated Jews corresponded with each other and by which they learned and interpreted the Torah. It is true that the Jews had a higher percentage of such well-educated individuals but it was nowhere near the number of 100%. For that matter, Aramaic had definitely become the everyday language of the Holy Land by the time of Christ and probably for several hundred years before that, making Hebrew Judaism's Latin for over two millenium.

There was a good Hasidic story about an uneducated Ashkenazi wagon driver who wanted to pray to God in Hebrew but all he knew was the Hebrew alphabet. So he recites the alphabet out loud and then says in Yiddish: "there are the letters for my prayers, God. Take them and assemble them into the prayers you know I want to make". This joke wouldn't have been funny if there hadn't been a lot of Jews who knew little or no Hebrew.

 

Nothing of that such.
Judaism is not about believing in God, but practicing rituals.
Simply because in Jewish culture (religious culture as it was), Jews needed to pray 3 to 5 times a day in commune.
The prayers are not just 5 words prayer, but span many pages and each time of day had different prayers.
Sabbath has a whole different pack of prayers and holidays has each own.
Each year, the whole Torah is read from start to end by the layman, each week another person reads aloud for the whole community.
So we're talking about 200 pages of different prayers + the whole pages of the bible.
And this is before starting to learn high end text.
Nothing like Latin, where a couple of reading priests were enough for an entire state.

 

Right so, with that in mind, what would be the problem, if you felt doing so would lend itself to a safer/better for your children?

 

Really?

That must be the only monotheistic religion, in which one need not believe in a god.

What use are the rituals without it?

 

Do you really think that most laymen learned hebrew to that extent? Nobody got called unless it was the one passage he had memorized, or no-one stood silent or simply repeated what his neighbor was saying? Christianity had the same problem but more so with Latin, because Catholic church services were done in Latin and they were only semi-comprehensible to Romance language speakers and unintelligible to Germanic or Slavic peoples.

Furthermore, many Jews could not afford to pray 3 to 5 times a day in common. They were on a farm, or busy at a task and simply didn't have the time. There were also historical periods where Jewish populations fell into bad habits and reformers had to come along and reassert the Judaic religious practices in those communities. Freeman should look up the real (and quite interesting) history of the Diaspora Jews and then come back with a bit more historical knowledge and continue this debate.

As for Latin, it was also the common language of scholarship (essential for college and university studies), all of the church workers (the word clerk comes from the name for a low level monk) and was often the language of long-distance commerce (long distance being over 500 miles). Contracts were almost always written in Latin and formal documents like grants, dispensations and bills were also written in Latin.

 

Most Jews that went to the ME, could not speak Hebrew.

Yiddish, which is a German dialect, I think.

 

Abu Sina was correct. Hebrew had to be resuscitated as the common means of communication - as the everyday language of an entire people; as the lingua franca of a territory. You are wriggling on the end of a thin string in denying that.

 

Modern day Hebrew is a dialect of Ancient Hebrew (Biblical) that the Bible and Talmud are written, Yiddish is a dialect of Biblical Hebrew whitch they prayed and German, Ladino is a dialect of Ancient Hebrew (again, used for prayers) and Spanish. of those Modern day Hebrew is the most closest to Biblical Hebrew in my eyes, at least I can read the Bible without any problems. I would post links but it seems like a waste of time.