Islamophobia, Judaeophilia in contemporary indigenous Westerners and it says about us.

Black Azrael

PI Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2019
Messages
288
Likes
83
Why is Swords still a moderator, every day she starts these stupid discussions. The only people who respond to her do it so that to make fun of her. I think this hurts the site and she should not be allowed to do this.
I find the illiteracy of that poster aggravating. We can all make mistakes, but the edit function is there for second and third thoughts.

Even worse is the brutish ignorance: note how these posts conflate and confuse genetics with religious persuasion.

Something more positive:

The May/June issue of Archaeology (unashamedly aimed at the popular, not to say populist market, but well worth the trip) has two articles:
  • one on Lindisfarne, billed as 'Medieval England's power monastery';
  • another on Ein Gedi, the oasis half-way down the western shore of the Dead Sea (page 55ff):
In the early seventh century B.C. a group of newcomers built a village of stone and mudbrick houses and workshops on the hillside below the remains of the Ghassulian temple. During the 1960s, Israeli archaeologist Benjamin Mazar of Hebrew University found types of pottery — and identified Hebrew names on personal seal stamps — at the site, indicating that Ein Gedi was an Israelite village. This was the beginning of more than 1,000 years of nearly uninterrupted Jewish life there.
The village was one of several new settlements built east of Jerusalem, then the capital of the Jewish kingdom of Judea and a loyal vassal state of the Assyrian Empire. Settling at Ein Gedi was part of a trend of Judean expansion driven by the need to cultivate more land and ensure the Assyrian rulers access to the Dead Sea and its minerals. The words “for the king” stamped onto many vessels found at the site make it clear that the central government in Jerusalem controlled the economy, which relied on producĥ ing dates, grain, and salt.

Ein Gedi is a few hundred metres south of the 1949 Armistice Agreement Line, so the reserve and zoo, the early (and successful) kibbutz, the date plantations (attested in the Book of Chronicles) are all in controversial territory. Do 2,700 years of established history offer a few rights of possession?
Behold, I say, how they reward us, to come to cast us out of thy possession, which thou hast given us to inherit.
 
D

Deleted member 2694

Non Registered Member
GUEST
I find the illiteracy of that poster aggravating. We can all make mistakes, but the edit function is there for second and third thoughts.

Even worse is the brutish ignorance: note how these posts conflate and confuse genetics with religious persuasion.

Something more positive:

The May/June issue of Archaeology (unashamedly aimed at the popular, not to say populist market, but well worth the trip) has two articles:
  • one on Lindisfarne, billed as 'Medieval England's power monastery';
  • another on Ein Gedi, the oasis half-way down the western shore of the Dead Sea (page 55ff):
In the early seventh century B.C. a group of newcomers built a village of stone and mudbrick houses and workshops on the hillside below the remains of the Ghassulian temple. During the 1960s, Israeli archaeologist Benjamin Mazar of Hebrew University found types of pottery — and identified Hebrew names on personal seal stamps — at the site, indicating that Ein Gedi was an Israelite village. This was the beginning of more than 1,000 years of nearly uninterrupted Jewish life there.
The village was one of several new settlements built east of Jerusalem, then the capital of the Jewish kingdom of Judea and a loyal vassal state of the Assyrian Empire. Settling at Ein Gedi was part of a trend of Judean expansion driven by the need to cultivate more land and ensure the Assyrian rulers access to the Dead Sea and its minerals. The words “for the king” stamped onto many vessels found at the site make it clear that the central government in Jerusalem controlled the economy, which relied on producĥ ing dates, grain, and salt.

Ein Gedi is a few hundred metres south of the 1949 Armistice Agreement Line, so the reserve and zoo, the early (and successful) kibbutz, the date plantations (attested in the Book of Chronicles) are all in controversial territory. Do 2,700 years of established history offer a few rights of possession?
Behold, I say, how they reward us, to come to cast us out of thy possession, which thou hast given us to inherit.
Not in Ireland where the cultural genocide is happening. Boat made 5,000 years ago found by men on River Boyne fishing trip
 

Black Azrael

PI Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2019
Messages
288
Likes
83
Not in Ireland where the cultural genocide is happening. Boat made 5,000 years ago found by men on River Boyne fishing trip
'5,000 years ago': look more carefully before spouting 'cultural genocide':
A sample of the wood has very recently been radiocarbon dated to between 3,300-2,900BC. It was during this period the ancient passage tomb complexes of Knowth, Dowth and Newgrange were built.
That puts the find into the Neolithic era. Around the time of the 1st Dynasty in Egypt, the first use of bricks in Egypt and Assyria, and before the rise of the early Minoan civilisation in Crete.

But long before the Celts arrived. Last time I looked, that was around 300 BC, with the La Têne culture coming into northern Ireland from what we'd now term 'Scotland'.

I'd reckon the Celts supplanting — or, more likely, interbreeding with — the previous residents could be a kind of 'cultural genocide'.
 

Tadhg Gaelach

Staff member
Moderator
Premium
PI Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2016
Messages
46,015
Likes
45,365
Location
By the Gulag wall.
'5,000 years ago': look more carefully before spouting 'cultural genocide':
A sample of the wood has very recently been radiocarbon dated to between 3,300-2,900BC. It was during this period the ancient passage tomb complexes of Knowth, Dowth and Newgrange were built.
That puts the find into the Neolithic era. Around the time of the 1st Dynasty in Egypt, the first use of bricks in Egypt and Assyria, and before the rise of the early Minoan civilisation in Crete.

But long before the Celts arrived. Last time I looked, that was around 300 BC, with the La Têne culture coming into northern Ireland from what we'd now term 'Scotland'.

I'd reckon the Celts supplanting — or, more likely, interbreeding with — the previous residents could be a kind of 'cultural genocide'.

It's likely the Celts were in Ireland long before 300BC. But, cultural genocide is what all invaders do - which is precisely why we Nationalists oppose mass immigration.

 

parentheses

PI Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2015
Messages
1,770
Likes
3,742
It is s
It's likely the Celts were in Ireland long before 300BC. But, cultural genocide is what all invaders do - which is precisely why we Nationalists oppose mass immigration.

Latest genetic evidence indicates that "Indo Europeans" arrived to Ireland by 2000BC or before. So it is quite likely that the Celtic culture developed from these early Indo Europeans in Ireland.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • Thread Starter
  • #19
OP
SwordOfStCatherine

SwordOfStCatherine

Staff member
Moderator
Premium
PI Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2015
Messages
15,531
Likes
18,149
Even worse is the brutish ignorance: note how these posts conflate and confuse genetics with religious persuasion.
Only I don't and argue strongly against people I know who have at least a strong tendency to do so. However at the same time it is important not to throw the baby out with the bath water. There is an observable coloration between ethnicity and approaches to Religion. One of huge reasons for the success of Protestantism I believe is that it connected with things in the North West and Central European psyche which fitted it, this does not mean at all that people with such psyches HAVE to be Protestant or will not be Catholic however it will give them an inclination to have certain traits associated with Protestantism- equally I think a large measure of the reasons why this rupture in Western Christendom was never healed was that "Latin"/Southern European ways came increasingly to dominate the Catholic Church after the lines coming from the "Reformation" were clearly drawn. The great Catholic Ulster man Father Vincent Mc Nabb O.P. wrote about this.

Than there is the fact that what your ancestors have thought, done and passionately believed in will of course leave it's effect on the psyche you have inherited from them. Likewise what we think, do and passionately believe will leave it's effect not only on our kids, but their kids' kids' kids' kids'.
 

Black Azrael

PI Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2019
Messages
288
Likes
83
Latest genetic evidence indicates that "Indo Europeans" arrived to Ireland by 2000BC or before. So it is quite likely that the Celtic culture developed from these early Indo Europeans in Ireland.
Interesting.

The very word, 'Celt', is open to interpretation.

Herodotus (so we're around 450BC) had some idea that the Celts could be found at the mouth of the Danube, but also in the south-west of Iberia (which might well be the modern Algarve). Anyone who has a clue how Herodotus defined 'Celt' is way, way ahead of the game.

Five centuries pass. C. Julius Caesar famously has all Gaul divided into three parts. Only one part is 'Celts', the rest are Gauls. Even then he confuses the issue further by observing that those may be 'Celts' in their own language, but they are Gauls in his Latin.

Throughout the period of classical and post-classical authors Britain and Ireland are Albion (or the Pretatanic Islands), Hibernia (or Ierne). Their inhabitants are the Britanni and the Hibernia, unless they are given more regional definition: Picti, Iceni, Catuvellauni or whatever. But not 'Celti'. Tacitus, who (unlike most of those authors) had actually been on the spot, had some notion of a link between the inhabitants of southern Britain and those of northern Gaul.

Then, for the better part of millennium, the term 'Celt' disappears from sight. Bede rabbits on about Gaels and Scots, Britons and Picts, but seems to have no particular grasp of who and what these aliens were — just that they were not his lot.

Then comes George Buchanan, scholar of St Andrews and Paris, who got himself into deep doo-doo for being a free thinker. When, mid 16th century, the Valois kings Henri II and François II turn ultra-Romanist, and 'free thinkers' are under suspicion (and far worse) Buchanan offs home to Calvinism and St Andrews, under the patronage of James Stewart, Earl of Moray. Buchanan turns up the ancient references to 'Celts', relates them to place-names, conceives a series of migrations, and in 1582 puts these 'Celts' back on the map.

Over the next couple of centuries Buchanan's speculative effort is treated as authentic history. Scholars then spotted similarities between the languages spoken at the edge of the European map — Scots Gaelic, Irish, Manx (well, what was left of it) , Welsh, Cornish and Breton. In 1703 Paul-Yves Pezron, a Breton monk, made a link back to those 'Celts' mentioned so briefly by C. Julius Caesar, and applied the term 'Celtic' to that family of languages. Coincidentally, or because he had come across Pezron's work, the Keeper of the Ashmlean in Oxford, one Edward Lhuyd (which name tells us where he is coming from) published in 1707, declaring that the peoples of this Archipelago and Brittany, before written history were the 'Celts' and their languages must be 'Celtic'.

Others linked these peoples to the megalithic erections around the place, which were supposed to be druidic.

Later still, as discovered artefacts became available and studied, the whole La Têne culture was defined as 'Celtic'. Daniel Wilson, working out of Edinburgh, wrote this up in 1851, and in doing so invented the term 'prehistory'. His academic circle picked up on Wilson's effort: names to look for — James Obadiah Westwood and Owen Jones (Grammar of Ornament, 1856), John Kemble (Studies in the Archaeology of Northern Nations, 1857, who made the link with spiral designs), Augustus Franks, at the British Museum, who saw Kemble's work into publication with illustrations from the BM collections. Although Franks made the links with wider European relics, it wasn't until Joseph Déchelette, in 1914, did a vast study of Iron Age materials that the continentals took notice.

The bottom line here is that 'Celtic' is a construct, an attempt (and the best one we have) to explain the development of an schema in art which originated as far back as the fifth to second centuries BC, spread across much of Europe, was overwritten by the Romans, re-emerged in the so-called 'Dark Ages' with a strong input from Nordic cultures, and was reinvented in later times.

What there isn't in all this is any all-embracing Celtic 'nationalism'. How could there be, in an era before 'nations' (as we understand them) evolved?
 

Tadhg Gaelach

Staff member
Moderator
Premium
PI Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2016
Messages
46,015
Likes
45,365
Location
By the Gulag wall.
Before anyone starts this thread is basically about contemporary indigenous Westerners from historically Christian or Christian backgrounds.

I have been part of a very interesting three way discussion on the subject of the interconnection or lack thereof between Judaeophilia/Judaeophobia on hand among Christian or historically Christian Westerners and Islamophobia among us involving besides myself a Palestinian Jewess and an English man.

It began over the contention of the Jewess that Tommy Robinson and his fans would be raging Judaeophobes as much as they are raging Islamophobes and what is stopping them is that they never come into proper contact with Jews and lack the curiosity to read up on Judaism because Judaism and Islam are essentially the same Religion. Now to the likes of roc_ and even many contemporary (historically this was not so) Orthodox Jews no mind the likes of Tommy Robinson and Douglas Murray this would appear totally off the wall. However she can back up this contention from extremely authoritative Rabbinic Jewish sources, as authoritative as Moses Maimonides and the Zohar both of whom see basically Islam as bargain basement Rabbinic Judaism and the best Religion for the Goy (Neturei Karta still hold this position today). Her views are more nuanced on this subject (basically some forms of Judaism are superior to some forms of Islam and forms of it are inferior to other forms).

The English man's objection to this is that vast majority of contemporary indigenous Westerners don't care about Theology even if they call themselves Christian. Also that major driving factors in historic Western Christian Judaeophobia were Jews being or been seen as having a mercantile/capitalist spirit, being cut off from nature and being effeminate (early Zionism agreed with the Judaeaphobes here and saw itself as the cure for these problems as they saw it- note that I am not saying that this was necessarily the case) but now the historically Christian peoples have basically embraced a mercantile/capitalistic spirit, are themselves cut off from nature and by the standards of their ancestors of the first half of the 20 th century no mind the Christian Middle Ages are most definitely effeminate, so the basis for wide spread Judaeophobia has basically vanished (echoes of Marx's comment that the Jews have triumphed by making the Christians essentially Jews here). Coupled with this is that a major drive behind Islamophobia is that Islam does not see Religion as private, individual affair even in it's most moderate forms and is in your face often about the fact in a way outside Palestine Rabbinic Judaism simply is not. Added to this is that in the contemporary West money more than anything else bestows Kudos, far more so than physical courage, piety, intelligence, etc, etc- and that Jews here are generally wealthy while as Muslims here are generally poor and while you do get Westerners into victim or supposed victim worshiping you do not exactly find such characters among Tommy Robinson fans.

The main reason Western Liberals are so enthralled by Judaism is that most Judaism is utterly meaningless - just like Liberalism is. That Judaism that does have meaning is almost identical to Islam. That's why the likes of Rabbi Weiss are treated as enemies by the Liberal elites.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • Thread Starter
  • #22
OP
SwordOfStCatherine

SwordOfStCatherine

Staff member
Moderator
Premium
PI Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2015
Messages
15,531
Likes
18,149
The main reason Western Liberals are so enthralled by Judaism is that most Judaism is utterly meaningless - just like Liberalism is. That Judaism that does have meaning is almost identical to Islam. That's why the likes of Rabbi Weiss are treated as enemies by the Liberal elites.
Something connected to this if you read some of Jacques Attali's books who is the eminence grise behind Macron (I don't think that Macron has much grise between his ears) and if you than read Heidegger's "Black Notebooks" well they are saying the exact time about Jews only the former sees it as a positive and the latter sees it as a negative- it is really startling. And the books by Attali were published before the "Black Notebooks" were published publicly and it is very doubtful he knew their contents.

Mossad's attacks on the Lithuanian-British Jewish community sympathetic to Rabbi Weiss during the surreal trial of Raed Salah in the UK were really crazy. Basically they were claiming through their flying monkeys that they were a marriage of Neo-Nazis and Al Qaeda to the UK State. In the end Ilan Pape got him off by the skin of his teeth through very possibly telling fibs. Raed Salah is a bit of a character but he has massive respect among a lot of people for his protecting both historic Mosques and Churches from colonial destruction within the Green Line in Palestine, and for shamelessly being arrogant back to Zionism in ways though technically legal still infuriate, probably more than bombs or bullets would (he is a citizen of the Zionist state). On a personal level I think he is great.

EI exclusive: UK charity with Mossad links secretly denounced anti-Zionist Jews to government
 
Top