oh i see you're a stickler for minor details. g

i can't figure out the context of your statement.
forgive my ignorance, but i don't recall the inquistion directly reaching
the mid east.
islamic culture was primarily driven out of spain somewhere around the time
of that great sailor, Chris C.
(an italian, by the way)

if you're referring to the current and ongoing inquistion...........well now
i get it.

gf.

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 13:22:35 -0500, DSK said:

No notable event in almost two thousand years? Isn't this leaving out a
good bit?

You mean inconsequential things like the Inquisition?

That oughta get Vito going.

"Peter Wiley" wrote in message
. ..
In article , Donal
wrote:

"Peter Wiley" wrote in message
. ..
In article , Donal
wrote:

"Peter Wiley" wrote in message
. ..

But you never will be in my position, Donal.

Correct.


You're Irish, I recall?

Your recollection is correct.

And you're living in England, a refugee from your homeland surrounded
by the very people who opressed your country for hundreds of years.

I admire your courage! If I had your ignorance I'd be afraid to display
it
in public.

Don't be so modest! You've proven many times that ignorance has not
deterred you from posting here.

If you knew anything at all about history, then you would know that the
people who surround me were as oppressed as the Irish were.

I do seem to be missing that bit of history. Can you point me to
reference material showing that the native Irish invaded, conquered and
confiscated most/all of the land comprising England any time in the
last thousand years or so? That they created landholdings, nobility,
built castles and treated the natural resources as their own?

You have purposely misunderstood my statement. The reality is that it was
not the "English" who conquered Ireland. When Ireland was invaded, England
didn't exist.

The invaders were rich men who could maintain armies. One of the worst
periods of land loss was during the Norman invasion. The Normans were
French.





No, I didn't think you could. Therefore my point stands and you're
trying to slide off - again.

Your question is utterly irrelevant. The "English" didn't invade Ireland.



Coffin boats
sailed from England and Wales, as well as Ireland.

Also, if you knew anything at all about the Internet, then you'd be able
to
figure out that I don't occupy a subservient position here.

Ah, sorry, didn't realise you were the Queen of England posting via a
sockpuppet. My apologies, your Highness. How are your corgies?

I'm not subservient to the Queen. Nowadays, nobody is.



That's sad. How do you cope with living and working with your
opressors, those who stole the land from your ancestors?

If you knew anything at all about history, then you would realise that
most
of the English were as oppressed as the Irish. It wasn't about
nationality - it was about social standing.

Irrelevant. We also seem to have strayed from the original point, but
that's standard with you it seems. To recap, you seem to think that I
am the possessor of stolen wealth in the form of land in Australia. At
the same time, you are benefiting from the country that oppressed and
exploited your fellow countrymen, but seem to feel no shame. Shrug.

That is really weird logic. You think that I shouldn't get any benefit from
the English because they benefited from my country???

Don't you think that I deserve some recompense?


Or were you
one of the Irish who sold their birthright to their English masters
and
became their running dogs? I suppose that might explain why you, as an
Irishman, doesn't live in Ireland.

.... And you don't live in England because your ancestor was a
criminal??????

Alas, I can't claim that distinction. Keep guessing. The answer is
amusing.

Go on, entertain us!



Can I take your lack of denial to the above as a tacit admission that
perhaps I've hit a little too close to the mark? Pity if so - hypocrisy
is always so interesting to dissect.

In some ways you are close to the mark.

I was brought up in a very nationalistic environment. However, I also saw
that violence was not the answer. In fact, violence is valid up to a
certain point. Once civil liberties are available to all, then violence
only serves to create more violence.






I should have realised that I was ethnically inferior to you.

Are you? How do you work that out?

You sound superior. You seem to be very intelligent, and I'm Irish.

Keep working on that inferiority complex, lad. Your seemingly innate
racism/ethnic issues could do with some exorcising as well.


How do you cope with women who are more intelligent than you?


I employ them.

What do you do with them?

The first one I met, I married. That was 29 years ago now.



The second
one is the godmother of my 2 daughters. The others - 2 of them I go
sailing with quite regularly. You see, I don't need to establish a
dominant power position (for example, employer-employee) to feel
comfortable in the company of women smarter than myself. I'm sad for
you that you can't say the same.

I agree that you don't need to establish a dominant power position with
women. Some men prefer dominant women. Clearly, you fall into that
category.






Regards


Donal
--

So if everyone is from somewhere else, and we all go back to where we came
from, would the world be any better?
Or any different?

"Vito" wrote in message
...
"DSK" wrote
Donal wrote:
Quite correct, Neal! Especially in Australia - where the land has all
been
stolen from the (ab)original owners.

Same in America... including South America. Same in much of Europe too,
especially those islands sticking out at the top.

And in Israel .... and the theft is still proceding.

In article ,
katysails wrote:
So if everyone is from somewhere else, and we all go back to where we came
from, would the world be any better?
Or any different?

Well, it would clean out a lot of the white trash...

--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

everyone is from somewhere else

different: yeah of course.
better: not in my view

if this were a historical preservation thesis: you would be asked: to what
period do we return to.
there-in exists the impossiblity of an answer.

gf.

"katysails" wrote in message
...
So if everyone is from somewhere else, and we all go back to where we came
from, would the world be any better?
Or any different?

"Vito" wrote in message
...
"DSK" wrote
Donal wrote:
Quite correct, Neal! Especially in Australia - where the land has
all
been
stolen from the (ab)original owners.

Same in America... including South America. Same in much of Europe too,
especially those islands sticking out at the top.

And in Israel .... and the theft is still proceding.

got it.

gf.


"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 19:14:25 -0500, "gonefishiing" said:

i can't figure out the context of your statement.
forgive my ignorance, but i don't recall the inquistion directly reaching
the mid east.
islamic culture was primarily driven out of spain somewhere around the
time
of that great sailor,

The Inquisition was a significant factor in dispersing throughout Europe
Jews whose ancestors had originally fled from Palestine.

In actuality, the Normans were really Brits who had been previously driven
out of Great Britain to France and then decided to return and drive out the
Saxons, who were originally Germanic...

"Donal" wrote in message
...

"Peter Wiley" wrote in message
. ..
In article , Donal
wrote:

"Peter Wiley" wrote in message
. ..
In article , Donal
wrote:

"Peter Wiley" wrote in message
. ..

But you never will be in my position, Donal.

Correct.


You're Irish, I recall?

Your recollection is correct.

And you're living in England, a refugee from your homeland surrounded
by the very people who opressed your country for hundreds of years.

I admire your courage! If I had your ignorance I'd be afraid to
display
it
in public.

Don't be so modest! You've proven many times that ignorance has not
deterred you from posting here.

If you knew anything at all about history, then you would know that the
people who surround me were as oppressed as the Irish were.

I do seem to be missing that bit of history. Can you point me to
reference material showing that the native Irish invaded, conquered and
confiscated most/all of the land comprising England any time in the
last thousand years or so? That they created landholdings, nobility,
built castles and treated the natural resources as their own?

You have purposely misunderstood my statement. The reality is that it was
not the "English" who conquered Ireland. When Ireland was invaded,
England
didn't exist.

The invaders were rich men who could maintain armies. One of the worst
periods of land loss was during the Norman invasion. The Normans were
French.





No, I didn't think you could. Therefore my point stands and you're
trying to slide off - again.

Your question is utterly irrelevant. The "English" didn't invade Ireland.



Coffin boats
sailed from England and Wales, as well as Ireland.

Also, if you knew anything at all about the Internet, then you'd be
able
to
figure out that I don't occupy a subservient position here.

Ah, sorry, didn't realise you were the Queen of England posting via a
sockpuppet. My apologies, your Highness. How are your corgies?

I'm not subservient to the Queen. Nowadays, nobody is.



That's sad. How do you cope with living and working with your
opressors, those who stole the land from your ancestors?

If you knew anything at all about history, then you would realise that
most
of the English were as oppressed as the Irish. It wasn't about
nationality - it was about social standing.

Irrelevant. We also seem to have strayed from the original point, but
that's standard with you it seems. To recap, you seem to think that I
am the possessor of stolen wealth in the form of land in Australia. At
the same time, you are benefiting from the country that oppressed and
exploited your fellow countrymen, but seem to feel no shame. Shrug.

That is really weird logic. You think that I shouldn't get any benefit
from
the English because they benefited from my country???

Don't you think that I deserve some recompense?


Or were you
one of the Irish who sold their birthright to their English masters
and
became their running dogs? I suppose that might explain why you, as
an
Irishman, doesn't live in Ireland.

.... And you don't live in England because your ancestor was a
criminal??????

Alas, I can't claim that distinction. Keep guessing. The answer is
amusing.

Go on, entertain us!



Can I take your lack of denial to the above as a tacit admission that
perhaps I've hit a little too close to the mark? Pity if so - hypocrisy
is always so interesting to dissect.

In some ways you are close to the mark.

I was brought up in a very nationalistic environment. However, I also
saw
that violence was not the answer. In fact, violence is valid up to a
certain point. Once civil liberties are available to all, then violence
only serves to create more violence.






I should have realised that I was ethnically inferior to you.

Are you? How do you work that out?

You sound superior. You seem to be very intelligent, and I'm Irish.

Keep working on that inferiority complex, lad. Your seemingly innate
racism/ethnic issues could do with some exorcising as well.


How do you cope with women who are more intelligent than you?


I employ them.

What do you do with them?

The first one I met, I married. That was 29 years ago now.



The second
one is the godmother of my 2 daughters. The others - 2 of them I go
sailing with quite regularly. You see, I don't need to establish a
dominant power position (for example, employer-employee) to feel
comfortable in the company of women smarter than myself. I'm sad for
you that you can't say the same.

I agree that you don't need to establish a dominant power position with
women. Some men prefer dominant women. Clearly, you fall into that
category.






Regards


Donal
--

we'd all have to go back to Africa
Scout

"katysails" wrote in message
...
So if everyone is from somewhere else, and we all go back to where we came
from, would the world be any better?
Or any different?

"Vito" wrote in message
...
"DSK" wrote
Donal wrote:
Quite correct, Neal! Especially in Australia - where the land has
all
been
stolen from the (ab)original owners.

Same in America... including South America. Same in much of Europe too,
especially those islands sticking out at the top.

And in Israel .... and the theft is still proceding.

Scout wrote:
we'd all have to go back to Africa

Nah, some of us would go back to Thal...

DSK

I've never been there.

Scotty

"Scout" wrote in message
...
we'd all have to go back to Africa
Scout

"katysails" wrote in message
...
So if everyone is from somewhere else, and we all go back to where
we came
from, would the world be any better?
Or any different?

"Vito" wrote in message
...
"DSK" wrote
Donal wrote:
Quite correct, Neal! Especially in Australia - where the
land has
all
been
stolen from the (ab)original owners.

Same in America... including South America. Same in much of
Europe too,
especially those islands sticking out at the top.

And in Israel .... and the theft is still proceding.

I was born there.....

CM

"Scott Vernon" wrote in message
...
I've never been there.

Scotty

"Scout" wrote in message
...
we'd all have to go back to Africa
Scout

"katysails" wrote in message
...
So if everyone is from somewhere else, and we all go back to where
we came
from, would the world be any better?
Or any different?

"Vito" wrote in message
...
"DSK" wrote
Donal wrote:
Quite correct, Neal! Especially in Australia - where the
land has
all
been
stolen from the (ab)original owners.

Same in America... including South America. Same in much of
Europe too,
especially those islands sticking out at the top.

And in Israel .... and the theft is still proceding.

"DSK" wrote in message
...
Vito wrote:
Oy, talk about a narrow viewpoint. Ever wonder why you cannot comment or
diasgree without launching an ad hominum attack?

???

Other than to point out that you're wrong, please point to any 'ad
hominem' attacks I've made.

I'd call "narrow viewpoint" such an attack - of course if you're from NYC or
similar culture YMMV


Recent DNA studies show that, rather than stealing from the Canaanites,
the
Jews were simply Canaanites with a different religion

Baloney. References, please.

Discovery Channel


Meanwhile, back at the ranch, or rather about 70AD IIRC, Rome tired of
koher
pigheadeness, slaughtered the troublemakers and packed the rest into
exile
throughout the empire as slaves.

The Jewish Diaspora was less than 50% of the population. .....

That's not what the emperor was told .... orders were "kill 'em all" If you
know otherwise please cite.

That leaves a very large percent still there chugging along day to day.

Rather that leaves a very large number of people chugging along, including a
few Jews gone underground.

... Some (most?) of these people kept their
religion but lost their Canaan ethenicity and culture and took on those
of
their hosts over the next two millenia. Then along came Hitler

No notable event in almost two thousand years? Isn't this leaving out a
good bit?

Nothing important to this discussion. Christians tried their best to
destroy all of the knowledge and science western man ahd accumulated and
replace it with their myths but that has little effect on Euro-Jewish
history.


Having no place to go, but with historial ties to Roman Judea, these
EUROPEANS invaded what had become Palistine and created the Jewish State
of
Israel.

Uh huh. If this were the case, then what was the Balfour Doctrine all
about, about twenty years earlier? And why would Balfour, an English
politician, have found it expedient to make any statements on the
subject unless there were a politically (& economically... never forget
the money angle!) significant Zionist movement already under way?

I never said there was NO Zionist movement - a flow of outsiders into
Palistine - before the war. But it was a trickle compared to the flood of
"DPs" that came after. Until the halocost, Euro Jews had as little interest
in moving to Palistine as US Jews do today - they had their own rich
comfortable Euro-Jewish culture, even their own language (Yiddish). The few
who did go were assimilated.

Noted and approved. You're a better man than I. Now all you need are at
least one or two facts.

I'm sorry. You are right of course. The whole world, which is flat and
square, was once flooded, Moishe did indeed part the Red Sea (not the sea of
reeds mentioned in the original myth), Joshuah bit the bottle of Geritol,
and so on. Glory gee to bezus!

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 13:22:35 -0500, DSK said:

No notable event in almost two thousand years? Isn't this leaving out a
good bit?

You mean inconsequential things like the Inquisition?

That oughta get Vito going.

Naw, it was pretty inconsequential to Jews - just another pogrom.

Other than to point out that you're wrong, please point to any 'ad
hominem' attacks I've made.


Vito wrote:
I'd call "narrow viewpoint" such an attack

OK, I apologize for calling your viewpoint narrow. I should have
realized you'd be offended at any expectation of including real world facts.




Jews were simply Canaanites with a different religion

Baloney. References, please.


Discovery Channel

Oh, you saw it on TV so it's a definite fact?

Please explain how DNA testing can identify the consanguinity between
people who lived 3,000 years ago, when the identity of the people tested
is an open question.


The Jewish Diaspora was less than 50% of the population. .....


That's not what the emperor was told .... orders were "kill 'em all" If you
know otherwise please cite.

I suggest you read a bit of actual history. The episodes in question can
be found in Vespasian, Trajan, and Josephus. Some of the Septuarchy
talks a lot about it too.



That leaves a very large percent still there chugging along day to day.


Rather that leaves a very large number of people chugging along, including a
few Jews gone underground.

???

A thousand years later, the Crusaders found large Jewish populations in
the Holy Land. The Muslim rulers of the area, under various dynasties,
usually found it prudent & profitable to give a number of special
dispensations to Jews in these territories.


No notable event in almost two thousand years? Isn't this leaving out a
good bit?

Nothing important to this discussion.

In other words, nothing that supports your statements. A large number of
events that contradict them, though.



... Christians tried their best to
destroy all of the knowledge and science western man ahd accumulated and
replace it with their myths but that has little effect on Euro-Jewish
history.

???

It seems likely that the Christian churches adopted/adapted local
customs and pagan rituals & holidays wholesale. What does a tree have to
do with Christmas, or a bunny with Easter? You're getting your eras and
epochs all confused. The Catholic Church was the repository of all
knowledge in the West, and all types of learning was sought after. Look
at some of the stories of pilgrimages, bringing back scrolls of
Aristotle etc etc. Read a bit about Alfred the Great, Alcuin, the
Carolingian Renaissance, etc etc.

The Church did not set itself against knowledge until the later
Renaissance, when science began to contradict some of the doctrines the
Church had simply made up generations earlier.

Then you have people like Bishop Ussher, who no doubt was a fairly
intelligent man, but applied his brainpower rather foolishly and the
result of course is laughed at. The Church decided at some point to deal
in hocus-pocus and fol-de-rol instead of actual knowledge, probably
because it's easier to pretend to be smart than to actually learn stuff
and peasants usually don't know the difference.

The result plagues our society today.



Having no place to go, but with historial ties to Roman Judea, these
EUROPEANS invaded what had become Palistine and created the Jewish State
of
Israel.


Uh huh. If this were the case, then what was the Balfour Doctrine all
about, about twenty years earlier?


I never said there was NO Zionist movement

Oh, OK. You just forgot to mention it and would prefer to think it's an
insignificant little detail, right?

... - a flow of outsiders into
Palistine - before the war.

Well, where do you think the "Palestinians" came from? Dropped from
Heaven into that place? They were merely another group who wandered in
and usurped the land. So why, in your opinion, does their right to
accupy historical Judea and Israel supercede the Jews? Does this right
include killing all Jews who happen to still live there and stealing
their property?



.... Until the halocost, Euro Jews had as little interest
in moving to Palistine as US Jews do today - they had their own rich
comfortable Euro-Jewish culture, even their own language (Yiddish). The few
who did go were assimilated.

IMHO that's a bit of an exaggeration. It's true that emigration into
Israel picked up quite a lot after WW2... the biggest numbers were from
Russia, though. And it's only logical that once the state of Israel was
established and a going concern, that more Jewish people moved there.
BTW Quite a lot of them did not speak Yiddish at all. Please note that
Yiddish at this point is basically a dead language, Israel's language is
Hebrew.

So? You want to be called an 'African-Canadian?

SV

"Overproof" wrote in message
news:Ej_qd.209200$df2.50711@edtnps89...
I was born there.....

CM

"Scott Vernon" wrote in message
...
I've never been there.

Scotty

"Scout" wrote in message
...
we'd all have to go back to Africa
Scout

"katysails" wrote in message
...
So if everyone is from somewhere else, and we all go back to
where
we came
from, would the world be any better?
Or any different?

"Vito" wrote in message
...
"DSK" wrote
Donal wrote:
Quite correct, Neal! Especially in Australia - where the
land has
all
been
stolen from the (ab)original owners.

Same in America... including South America. Same in much of
Europe too,
especially those islands sticking out at the top.

And in Israel .... and the theft is still proceding.

"DSK" wrote
Vito wrote:

Jews were simply Canaanites with a different religion

Please explain how DNA testing can identify the consanguinity between
people who lived 3,000 years ago, when the identity of the people tested
is an open question.

Simple. According to legend Moishe's people came from near what's now
Baghdad via Egypt, killed all of the indigineous peoples in the "promised
land" and replaced them. Were that true there would be DNA evidence that
one gene pool had been replaced by another. Just the opposite is true.

Yiddish at this point is basically a dead language,....

That's not what I hear from the Bronx ... as in Bronx cheer.

I had no intent of covering all of history in this forum nor debating
whether 50% or 49% or 1% of Jews escaped the Diaspora, especially with
anyone who "knows" that only Jews lived in Roman Judea but doesn't
understand genetic research - not because I deem you stupid but because such
religious beliefs cannot be challenged with truth. I made the simple
statement that Jews driven from Judea 2000 years ago had become ethnic and
cultural Europeans and that European Jews immigrated into Palestine after
ww2 to establish a Jewish state and displace the indigenous residents. The
point being that they had less right to do that as Boston's Irish have to
murder the residents of Ireland and take their place. Rather than accept
that you dissemble, bringing in and exaggerating impertinent information.
Who cares if 50% or 1% of Jews escaped Rome's diaspora - the point you'd
rather dodge is that the other 50% or 99% got hauled away elsewhere where
they intermarried with and absorbed the culture of their new neighbors. Then
after WW2 a flood of European "DPs" invaded Palistine to displace the
indigineous peoples thereof. What happened in between is moot except for the
fact that these Caananite Jews had became Europeans.

regards

Please explain how DNA testing can identify the consanguinity between
people who lived 3,000 years ago, when the identity of the people tested
is an open question.


Vito wrote:
Simple. According to legend Moishe's people came from near what's now
Baghdad via Egypt, killed all of the indigineous peoples in the "promised
land" and replaced them. Were that true there would be DNA evidence that
one gene pool had been replaced by another. Just the opposite is true.

You've ignored the basic barrier to answering the question.

How do you know the identities of the people you're getting the DNA from
after 3,000 years?

You assertions are of no value until you answer this first.

BTW in ancient warfare it was extremely uncommon to kill all the
defeated people. Where do you think slave girls & concubines came from?



I had no intent of covering all of history in this forum

Do you have any intention of discussing history?

... nor debating
whether 50% or 49% or 1% of Jews escaped the Diaspora, especially with
anyone who "knows" that only Jews lived in Roman Judea but doesn't
understand genetic research

!!!

You know all about it, you saw it on TV!


religious beliefs cannot be challenged with truth. I made the simple
statement that Jews driven from Judea 2000 years ago had become ethnic and
cultural Europeans

Somewhat, sure. But they were enough different from Christian Europeans
to be expelled and to suffer pogroms.

... and that European Jews immigrated into Palestine after
ww2 to establish a Jewish state

Slightly true but ignores 90% of what really happened to establish Israel.

... and displace the indigenous residents.

That doesn't seem to have been the Jews intention in 1947 and '48. What
really happened is that the Arabs rejected the partition, wanted *all*
the land and all Jewish property, and plotted to kill the Jews once the
British Army left them alone. Instead they got a big surprise and have
been crying "no fair, do over!" ever since.

DSK

So? You want to be called an 'African-Canadian?


Dave wrote:
Well, Mrs. Kerry says she's "African-American."


She was born in Africa, nyet??

DSK

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message ...
Thom, take you're comments elsewhere. The only idiot I see in this tread is
the ancient geezer who has stopped thinking rationally.

--

Thats because your the idiot Jon,

Ol Thom voted as a democrat most likely to party loyality that led way
back to years when the Democratic party has some decent leaders. He
has an excuse.

You and your type have so soiled the democrat party that Ol Thom kinda
feels like he should have taken a better look at todays Democrats....
I'm guessing.

You on the other hand show clearly just how far off track the
democraps have de-railed. People like Ol Tom are your only chance to
ever get back to a party that will have an ounce of respect.

And any commet Ol Thom makes will be seen by all as a 1000 times more
crediable than your comments and ability to gay up everything.

Joe











"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Thom Stewart" wrote in message
...
Oz,

Looks like you're an idiot there as well as Jon and Nutsy here. A
minority in both countries. I'm no better, I voted with the idiots.

So, its wallow 'round the sad boys, wallow 'round, cause we're going
down!!

Ole Thom

No... you can call me Capt. Mooron... like everyone else. I'm 100%
thoroughbred Belgian! I'm proud of that fact and my global history only adds
to make me much greater than the sum of my parts.

Capt. Mooron.... Spawned in the Hot, Humid Jungle of the African Congo.....
Forged in the Rugged North Atlantic.... and Tempered by the Cold Arctic
Ice!!

You only wish you were this good!..... :-D

CM


"Scott Vernon" wrote in message
...
So? You want to be called an 'African-Canadian?

SV

"Overproof" wrote in message
news:Ej_qd.209200$df2.50711@edtnps89...
I was born there.....

CM

"Scott Vernon" wrote in message
...
I've never been there.

Scotty

"Scout" wrote in message
...
we'd all have to go back to Africa
Scout

"katysails" wrote in message
...
So if everyone is from somewhere else, and we all go back to
where
we came
from, would the world be any better?
Or any different?

"Vito" wrote in message
...
"DSK" wrote
Donal wrote:
Quite correct, Neal! Especially in Australia - where the
land has
all
been
stolen from the (ab)original owners.

Same in America... including South America. Same in much of
Europe too,
especially those islands sticking out at the top.

And in Israel .... and the theft is still proceding.

"Dave" wrote in message

Well, Mrs. Kerry says she's "African-American."

She was born in Africa??

CM

Now that's what I call an inferiority complex.

Cheers

Overproof wrote:

No... you can call me Capt. Mooron... like everyone else. I'm 100%
thoroughbred Belgian! I'm proud of that fact and my global history only adds
to make me much greater than the sum of my parts.

Capt. Mooron.... Spawned in the Hot, Humid Jungle of the African Congo.....
Forged in the Rugged North Atlantic.... and Tempered by the Cold Arctic
Ice!!

You only wish you were this good!..... :-D

CM

"DSK" wrote ...
Please explain how DNA testing can identify the consanguinity between
people who lived 3,000 years ago, when the identity of the people tested
is an open question.


Vito wrote:
Simple. According to legend Moishe's people came from near what's now
Baghdad via Egypt, killed all of the indigineous peoples in the
"promised
land" and replaced them. Were that true there would be DNA evidence
that
one gene pool had been replaced by another. Just the opposite is true.

You've ignored the basic barrier to answering the question.

How do you know the identities of the people you're getting the DNA from
after 3,000 years?

I'm sorry, I misunderstood your question. They don't test people who lived
3000 years ago. They test a statistically sound number of people who's
ancestors have lived in and around Palistine for many generations. If the
Moses myth were true we'd find that people who descended from Moses'
invaders were in a different gene pool than those from areas that were not
invaded and that this pool would resemble those from Baghdad and/or Egypt.
That's not what was found. Instead the researchers, Israelis BTW, found no
statistical evidence that one gene pool replace another IAW the 5th book.
So, if Moses ever existed, and there is scant evidence either way, then his
followers were few and were simply absorbed into the area's indigineous gene
pool.


BTW in ancient warfare it was extremely uncommon to kill all the
defeated people. Where do you think slave girls & concubines came from?

But in this case God told them to kill off the locals. But DNA says they
didn't so the Moses myth is wrong on that score.



I had no intent of covering all of history in this forum

Do you have any intention of discussing history?

... nor debating
whether 50% or 49% or 1% of Jews escaped the Diaspora, especially with
anyone who "knows" that only Jews lived in Roman Judea but doesn't
understand genetic research

!!!

You know all about it, you saw it on TV!

Well actually no, I have a DD and try to keep up with discoveries, but
recent Discovery and History Channel essays are pretty factual and easily
researched.


religious beliefs cannot be challenged with truth. I made the simple
statement that Jews driven from Judea 2000 years ago had become ethnic
and
cultural Europeans

Somewhat, sure. But they were enough different from Christian Europeans
to be expelled and to suffer pogroms.

There you go disembling again. That's true, but Euro-Jews were and are more
similar to other Euros than they are to Jews from , say, Ethiopia.

... and that European Jews immigrated into Palestine after
ww2 to establish a Jewish state

Slightly true but ignores 90% of what really happened to establish Israel.

No, it's entirely true. There'd be no Israel were it not for that influx of
Euro culture. 90%? More like 99.9% because it isn't relevent to whether or
not Euro (and other) Jews have a right to Palistine. I mean, like Golda was
from Milwaukee IIRC but so what?


... and displace the indigenous residents.

That doesn't seem to have been the Jews intention in 1947 and '48. What
really happened is that the Arabs rejected the partition, wanted *all*
the land and all Jewish property, and plotted to kill the Jews once the
British Army left them alone. Instead they got a big surprise and have
been crying "no fair, do over!" ever since.

Which Jews' intention? Most? Prolly not? Some? For sure. Remember Sharon
defiling the mosque to derail the last peace plan? Radicals like the Lukid
party want to gather all Jews to Israel and there's not enough room unless
the Palistinians go away - as in to Allah.

What really happened? Arabs' plot got shafted by individual Brit soldiers
and non-coms (Source: Brit soldiers and non-coms). As Alfie put it, air you
are facing a boatload of refuges, people just like yourself, and you're told
to send them back to sea to protect a bunch of rag heads who wear skirts so
they can **** in the street! Sure, and me eyesight failed to notice anyone
disembarking. And when we were told to give up our weapons and ammo to the
same ragheads so they could slaughter these people we did even tho many were
"stolen" by the immigrants first if ye get me drift. Nor did we toss
grenades into any courtyards full of Arabs - we handed them over as nice as
you'd please! That's me story and I'm stickin too it! Even with 1000s of
Alfies to was touch and go and the Jews might have lost were it not for
"atoomic bombs" Try Michners(sp?) "The Source" for some insights into that.

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 09:16:05 -0500, "Vito" said:

Until the halocost, Euro Jews had as little interest
in moving to Palistine as US Jews do today -

I don't understand what you're saying here. Are you saying that US Jews
today do or do not have an interest in moving to Israel?

None of my friends ever considered it despite some lucrative offers to
retiring military - especially Old Crows. They say "It's a nice place to
visit but ....."

they had their own rich
comfortable Euro-Jewish culture, even their own language (Yiddish).

I'd suggest a trip to Eastern Europe before making a call about
"comfortable.". Visit the ghettos of Prague and Krakow, and investigate
some
of the rural areas of Poland and the Ukraine.

"Comfortable" is relative. Many Euros stayed home rather than come to
America. These places seemed better than the alternative until Nazis and
Commies came along.

BTW, Yiddish is just one of two languages of European Jewry. (But of
course
you knew that.) Ladino has its own rich heritage.

Yes, thanks for reminding me.
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0798/ladino1.asp

Dave,

How about 600 years of Ottoman occupation of the Middle East. That sure
as hell screwed up boundaries. Enough so that the British, at the Hague,
could draw up new boundaries to split up oil bearing nations. National
boundaries weren't as important as influence by the 10% ers after WW1,
when Petroleum became important.

Ole Thom

How do you know the identities of the people you're getting the DNA from
after 3,000 years?


Vito wrote:
I'm sorry, I misunderstood your question. They don't test people who lived
3000 years ago. They test a statistically sound number of people who's
ancestors have lived in and around Palistine for many generations.

Uh huh. And we assign scientific accuracy to peoples' stating "Yes, my
ancestors have lived in this area for many generations."

Phooey! My ancestors have lived in the U.S. since before it was the U.S.
and guess what... doesn't change the *fact* that we grabbed it from the
Indians!


.... If the
Moses myth were true we'd find that people who descended from Moses'
invaders were in a different gene pool than those from areas that were not
invaded and that this pool would resemble those from Baghdad and/or Egypt.

After 3,000 years? Your knowledge of genetics needs a little brushing up.



That's not what was found. Instead the researchers, Israelis BTW, found no
statistical evidence that one gene pool replace another IAW the 5th book.
So, if Moses ever existed, and there is scant evidence either way, then his
followers were few and were simply absorbed into the area's indigineous gene
pool.

It sounds to me like this TV show you're quoting has a bit of an agenda,
and has skipped over quite a lot of scientific vertity trying to "prove"
the point. Without testing DNA from archeological forensics (and then
the question becomes one of "who is really in that particular grave")
there is no basis for comparing modern populations with ancient groups.




BTW in ancient warfare it was extremely uncommon to kill all the
defeated people. Where do you think slave girls & concubines came from?


But in this case God told them to kill off the locals. But DNA says they
didn't so the Moses myth is wrong on that score.

I think your Moses myth is as garbled as your genetics... Moses directed
his warriors, when victorious, to dash out the enemies babies brains on
the rocks... grisly enough but hardly evidence they attempted
genocide... which is never 100% successful anyway, and they would have
kept women slaves also... which would lead to genetic mixing, oh no!


Well actually no, I have a DD and try to keep up with discoveries, but
recent Discovery and History Channel essays are pretty factual and easily
researched.

If so, then you are massively misunderstanding the basics of DNA
fingerprinting. I suspect that you are freely interpreting part of
whatever it is they said.


... But they were enough different from Christian Europeans
to be expelled and to suffer pogroms.


There you go disembling again.

Oh right. The pogroms are just a minor little unimportant side issue...
unless you get caught in one..

...That's true, but Euro-Jews were and are more
similar to other Euros than they are to Jews from , say, Ethiopia.

.....meaning what?

Are you trying to claim that only 100% simon-pure Semites should be
allowed any claim whatever to land in Israel?


... and that European Jews immigrated into Palestine after
ww2 to establish a Jewish state

Slightly true but ignores 90% of what really happened to establish Israel.


No, it's entirely true. There'd be no Israel were it not for that influx of
Euro culture.

???
???

Did you just get home from a hell of a party?


.... Remember Sharon
defiling the mosque to derail the last peace plan?

Horse hockey. The ongoing intifada was planned & scheduled before Sharon
visited the Temple Mount, which hardly qualifies as "defiling" a mosque.




What really happened?

You don't don't know, do you?

You seem to consistantly take the most extreme pro-Palestinian slant,
what's up with that?

.... Arabs' plot got shafted by individual Brit soldiers
and non-coms (Source: Brit soldiers and non-coms). As Alfie put it, air you
are facing a boatload of refuges, people just like yourself, and you're told
to send them back to sea to protect a bunch of rag heads who wear skirts so
they can **** in the street! Sure, and me eyesight failed to notice anyone
disembarking. And when we were told to give up our weapons and ammo to the
same ragheads so they could slaughter these people we did even tho many were
"stolen" by the immigrants first if ye get me drift. Nor did we toss
grenades into any courtyards full of Arabs - we handed them over as nice as
you'd please! That's me story and I'm stickin too it! Even with 1000s of
Alfies to was touch and go and the Jews might have lost were it not for
"atoomic bombs" Try Michners(sp?) "The Source" for some insights into that.


Are you saying that the British gave direct military assistance to the Jews?

You really have no clue, apparently you think any wild fiction you can
invent should be given credibility. And go re-read 'The Source' because
what you've said bears no semblance whatever to the book... nor to reality.

DSK

DSK wrote:



I think your Moses myth is as garbled as your genetics... Moses directed
his warriors, when victorious, to dash out the enemies babies brains on
the rocks... grisly enough but hardly evidence they attempted
genocide... which is never 100% successful anyway,

There have been a few cases of true genocide in history. But really, the
point is that you do not need to kill very last man woman and child to
accomplish genocide. You simply have to kill so many that their cultural
and social (and genetic) identity is lost.

Cheers

Nav wrote:
There have been a few cases of true genocide in history.

Yep. Some on purpose, some accidental...


... But really, the
point is that you do not need to kill very last man woman and child to
accomplish genocide. You simply have to kill so many that their cultural
and social (and genetic) identity is lost.

Agreed again... although with DNA fingerprinting, the genetic identity
would take many many generations to be truly lost.

DSK

In article ,
Joe wrote:
"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message ...
Thom, take you're comments elsewhere. The only idiot I see in this tread is
the ancient geezer who has stopped thinking rationally.

--

Thats because your the idiot Jon,

Ol Thom voted as a democrat most likely to party loyality that led way
back to years when the Democratic party has some decent leaders. He
has an excuse.

You and your type have so soiled the democrat party that Ol Thom kinda
feels like he should have taken a better look at todays Democrats....
I'm guessing.

You on the other hand show clearly just how far off track the
democraps have de-railed. People like Ol Tom are your only chance to
ever get back to a party that will have an ounce of respect.

And any commet Ol Thom makes will be seen by all as a 1000 times more
crediable than your comments and ability to gay up everything.

Joe

Interesting that you have decided to mention gays, whereas no one else
in this thread did. I wonder what that says about you.

--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

but yr g(50)-grandmother lived there.
Scout

"Scott Vernon" wrote in message
...
I've never been there.

Scotty

"Scout" wrote in message
...
we'd all have to go back to Africa
Scout

"katysails" wrote in message
...
So if everyone is from somewhere else, and we all go back to where
we came
from, would the world be any better?
Or any different?

"Vito" wrote in message
...
"DSK" wrote
Donal wrote:
Quite correct, Neal! Especially in Australia - where the
land has
all
been
stolen from the (ab)original owners.

Same in America... including South America. Same in much of
Europe too,
especially those islands sticking out at the top.

And in Israel .... and the theft is still proceding.

Which state?

"Scout" wrote in message
...
but yr g(50)-grandmother lived there.
Scout

"Scott Vernon" wrote in message
...
I've never been there.

Scotty

"Scout" wrote in message
...
we'd all have to go back to Africa

Hopefully not the state of denial.
http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence...e/realeve.html
Scout

"Scott Vernon" wrote in message
...
Which state?

"Scout" wrote in message
...
but yr g(50)-grandmother lived there.
Scout

"Scott Vernon" wrote in message
...
I've never been there.

Scotty

"Scout" wrote in message
...
we'd all have to go back to Africa

"katysails" wrote in message
...
In actuality, the Normans were really Brits who had been previously driven
out of Great Britain to France and then decided to return and drive out
the
Saxons, who were originally Germanic...



You're getting the hang of it. However, Britian didn't exist at the time
.... so they couldn't have been Brits.

Who were the dominant race in Britain before the Saxons?


Regards


Donal
--

On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 10:23:00 GMT, "Scout"
wrote this crap:

we'd all have to go back to Africa.

Not all of us. I'm Hungarian. My ancestors came from the Orient.




Pathetic Earthlings! No one can save you now!

ya gotta back up, at least 80,000 years.
Scout

"Horvath" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 10:23:00 GMT, "Scout"
wrote this crap:

we'd all have to go back to Africa.

Not all of us. I'm Hungarian. My ancestors came from the Orient.




Pathetic Earthlings! No one can save you now!

OzOne wrote:
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 19:24:28 -0500, Horvath
scribbled thusly:


On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 10:23:00 GMT, "Scout"
wrote this crap:


we'd all have to go back to Africa.

Not all of us. I'm Hungarian. My ancestors came from the Orient.


Sorry Holly....wrong again...though you could be of asian extraction .


Is he flat chested?

Cheers

no, but he may be lactose intolerant.
Scout

"Nav" wrote in message
...


OzOne wrote:
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 19:24:28 -0500, Horvath
scribbled thusly:


On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 10:23:00 GMT, "Scout"
wrote this crap:


we'd all have to go back to Africa.

Not all of us. I'm Hungarian. My ancestors came from the Orient.


Sorry Holly....wrong again...though you could be of asian extraction .


Is he flat chested?

Cheers

"Scout" wrote in message
...
relative humility
Scout


Yes, with me as his bro.

SV.

like a bleach-bottled blonde, you cannot escape your dark roots.
Scout

"Scott Vernon" wrote
relative repression

Well I know he can't hold his liquor...

Cheers

Scout wrote:

no, but he may be lactose intolerant.
Scout

"Nav" wrote in message
...


OzOne wrote:

On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 19:24:28 -0500, Horvath
scribbled thusly:



On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 10:23:00 GMT, "Scout"
wrote this crap:



we'd all have to go back to Africa.

Not all of us. I'm Hungarian. My ancestors came from the Orient.


Sorry Holly....wrong again...though you could be of asian extraction .


Is he flat chested?

Cheers