Are Palaistinian real or just a created modern word?

#91
Not agenda driven? It certainly seems so at times. And how can you blame people for thinking that when you:

1. Subscribe to the Jews out of Khazaria theory.

2. Subscribe to International Jewry and Rothchilds controlling the world's banks theory.

3. Are constantly critical of Israel.

Stop playing coy
Says the Nazi sympathiser.

Don't even try to deny it because I'll just quote you, in fact .......... I will.

Whenever I read a book on either WWI or WWII, I find myself rooting for the Germans
Also I don't know where you got No.3 from? ahhh I do you just made it up.

There's nothing I dislike more than posters like you who try to shut down historical debate to try and score SJW points.

Quite frankly its pathetic.

My comments or queries on both the Rothchild's or Khazaria are legitimate and if they weren't worth a discussion then how come no one can ever give a factually based answer?

My discussions are about historical facts only, these are two areas of hundreds of topics I've studied or queried, I couldn't give a crap about your political point scoring agenda, its of no interest to me whatsoever.

.......... but you carry on with your Nazi fetish though, probably why you get so jumpy whenever someone discusses Jewish people, guilty conscience?
 
#92
It doesn't matter if some Khazar Jews ended up in Poland because even if they did, the vast majority came from Central Europe. What's more is that the majority of Jews living in Khazaria (who would've been labeled as "Khazar Jews" much like Jews in America are called "American Jews") were ethnic Jews from the (Byzantine) Roman Empire and Persia.

There are no genetic studies that actually support the Khazar hypothesis. There are some (almost exclusively from a single person and his team) that try to prove it, but still fail miserably, so they end up creating insane narratives that defy all historical, linguistic, and genetic evidence. I'm not a geneticist, but I am literate and capable of critical thinking. Reading one of Elhaik's studies is like reading a conspiracy theory. And there's good reason that every expert in the field has dismissed it as nonsense. And what's more is that you can actually test all of this yourself with raw data from Ashkenazi Jews from commercial DNA tests. There are numerous forums with hundreds of people doing this.

The Khazar Jews (as in ethnic Khazar who may have converted to Judaism) were either absorbed into much, much larger pre-existing Jewish communities or, as is known in the case of the ruling class, were forcibly converted to Christianity.

I'm not sure what European geneticists you're referring to, but the main person pushing the theory from a genetic standpoint is Eran Elhaik, an Israeli non-Ashkenazi Jew living in the UK whose work and narrative are overtly political. And his studies make no sense. Just to be clear, aside from pushing a pseudo-Khazar narrative in which Ashkenazim actually originated as a "tribe" in northeast Turkey (which the Khazars never inhabited or controlled), he completely ignores the fact that his own data, that he has published, shows Ashkenazi, Italian, Greek, and North African Jews as being almost identical. So, for the Khazar hypothesis to have any credibility, you have to argue that ancient Jewish communities that have no historical or geographic connection to Khazars (and who lack the small amount of Eastern European ancestry in Ashkenazi Jew that could be potentially used to support the theory in a distorted way) are in fact also Khazars.

The reason it's contentious is because this is one of the central arguments that anti-Zionists (and anti-Semites, though the two are often one in the same) use to delegitimize Israel. It's also been used by European Christians who wanted to idealize the Israelites but hated the Jews, so they sought to dissociate the two. It also just happens to have no serious credibility and should've been long forgotten. It's a 19th century alternative theory that had no prior tradition.
Thanks for the post, good explanation.

My main biting point is that when people out and out deny it when in reality it could very well of happened, because of the timing and circumstances, I'd be more shocked if no Khazar's made the 700 miles to Poland rather than not, other jew's travelled much further and they didn't have hordes of enemies at their back.

My own theory would be that Jews from all of their settlements would of come to Poland, as the guy in that video stated, Poland had the most Jewish settlers of anywhere, Jews as we know live all over Europe and the Middle East, I don't think the Jews of Poland ever had just one ancestor, I think its more accurate to believe that after the first settlers, word spread and the migrated there over the centuries.

His reasoning of the Yiddish language being evidence doesn't sit well with me, no one is denying Jew's brought that language to Poland, so as with ALL language it becomes unified among the communities.

Just because Yiddish isn't Khazarian that doesn't mean they weren't there, it just means they took on the languages of the imported Jews who came after, as we know the Khazar Jews were mostly converts, they would obviously take on the traditions of older more established Jews.

The geneticists I mentioned were ones mentioned on the Wiki page on this subject.

The one crappy thing about this subject is as you say the political leanings of the researchers, I've rarely come across any subjects in all of history that's as hotbed subjects as those around Jewish people.

Yes I know there are those who have political leanings on the subject ......... but do most people? really? I honestly for the life of me don't understand why that would be unless your directly connected i.e a white supremist or Jewsish person who doesn't like the theory.
 
Jan 2019
9
United States
#93
Thanks for the post, good explanation.

My main biting point is that when people out and out deny it when in reality it could very well of happened, because of the timing and circumstances, I'd be more shocked if no Khazar's made the 700 miles to Poland rather than not, other jew's travelled much further and they didn't have hordes of enemies at their back.

My own theory would be that Jews from all of their settlements would of come to Poland, as the guy in that video stated, Poland had the most Jewish settlers of anywhere, Jews as we know live all over Europe and the Middle East, I don't think the Jews of Poland ever had just one ancestor, I think its more accurate to believe that after the first settlers, word spread and the migrated there over the centuries.

His reasoning of the Yiddish language being evidence doesn't sit well with me, no one is denying Jew's brought that language to Poland, so as with ALL language it becomes unified among the communities.

Just because Yiddish isn't Khazarian that doesn't mean they weren't there, it just means they took on the languages of the imported Jews who came after, as we know the Khazar Jews were mostly converts, they would obviously take on the traditions of older more established Jews.

The geneticists I mentioned were ones mentioned on the Wiki page on this subject.

The one crappy thing about this subject is as you say the political leanings of the researchers, I've rarely come across any subjects in all of history that's as hotbed subjects as those around Jewish people.

Yes I know there are those who have political leanings on the subject ......... but do most people? really? I honestly for the life of me don't understand why that would be unless your directly connected i.e a white supremist or Jewsish person who doesn't like the theory.
Well, I think it's important to realize that the notion that Ashkenazi Jews are descended from Khazars didn't appear until the 19th century. There was no prior tradition among Eastern European Jews of any connection to Khazars. There's no traceable cultural connections between the two. The closest you have are vague connections to Anatolian Turkish language/customs (which is markedly different from the Khazar culture/language) through clear Slavic intermediaries.

We do actually know that the vast majority of Jews living in Khazaria were likely Persian and Greek Jews, not converted ethnic Khazars. There have been Jews living in the Caucasus (associated with Persian and Babylonian communities) for 2500 years. There have been Greek Jews in Crimea and elsewhere in Eastern Europe for 2300 years. Both groups predate Khazars and any Khazar conversion by centuries at least.

The Jews who came to Poland overwhelmingly came from the west. This is clear due to settlement patterns and historical information. There were probably Jews already living in Eastern Europe, but as I mentioned earlier, these Jews (who were called "Knaanic Jews") were descended from Greek Jews. And they were overwhelmed numerically by the western Ashkenazi (Central European) Jewish migrants. Polish Jews didn't have on ancestor, but the vast majority of their ancestors came from Jewish communities in the west. And most of the population growth was due to natural increase, which despite being labeled as unrealistic is quite realistic.

In fact, the most obvious contenders for Jewish descendants of the Khazars would be the Jews who continued to live in the Caucasus or Crimea. Some of them even claimed Khazar descent during World War 2. But, as I've mentioned earlier, none of them show any actual genetic evidence of any relation to Khazars.

I don't know what geneticists you're referring to, but the only geneticist who vocally continues to support something sort of resembling the Khazar narrative is Elhaik. If you're genuinely interested in the subject, you should check out Kevin Alan Brook's website Khazaria.com - History of Jewish Khazars, Khazar Turk, Khazarian Jews

Not only has he done extensive research on the Khazars specifically for the past 20+ years, but he has aggregated all of the relevant genetic data. He is an Ashkenazi Jew who originally approached the subject with the hypothesis that eastern Ashkenazi Jews are partly-descended from Khazars (as is evident in early editions of his book), but with the advent of modern genetics, he has concluded that this is simply not the case.
 
Apr 2018
511
India
#94
Just a reminder, the post-WW2 Palestinian population transfer was not the only one and was by far the "mildest" one. Look at what happened to the ethnic Germans in Sudetenland and modern day western Poland.
The Arabs in Palestine were offered pretty generous peaceful terms in 1948, but they refused, goaded by the neighboring Arab states thinking they can solve the "Jewish problem" using the military. After their war of aggression failed, they doubled down on it by refusing to provide citizenship to Palestinian Arabs, making them permanent 'refugees'. Remember, there was no Palestinian state since Arabs rejected the UN 1948 agreement, only Transjordan was carved out of the British mandate of Palestine that eventually became a sovereign state of Jordan. There is no such present day refugee issue with Sudetenland Germans, who were treated much more harshly.
Sudetenland, Silesia, Chechnya, Ingushetia, Partition of India the list is long and yes, compared to all these (only) the physical journey part of the aliyah was like a walk in a park.

But if we talk about the partition plan the whole thing was like a village council run Kangaroo court deciding whether a man can live with his wife or not. Everyone else in the world voted expect for the Jews and the native Arabs (I will not bring the hypocriticial, coward, overtly sentimental, b***hurt for no reason born losers of Iraq, Syria and Egypt into this discussion, simply not worthy of it.). So the would be Palestinians were totally duped by their own kind. Only Jordan, in my opinion, did its duty to some extent. They actively, as long as they could housed the entire establishment until PLO became an unbearable burden. Also noticable that it was Jordan that was least interested in taking part in the decadal camping trips into Israel planned by its buddies, but actually held the city of East Jersualem and West Bank for a good amount of time.

As for Sudetens, Pomeranians and Silesians, they were Germans and found home in Germany. I think it was Willy Brandt himself who formally ended the border issue with Poland.

Regarding modern day problems. Palestinians would have a much better argument against the walls and the excess Israeli security if they simply stopped the terrorist attacks and recognized the state of Israel right to exist. This is a pretty darn low bar. The only time that Israelis offered Palestinians independence and democratic elections, they elected Hamas... totally undermining the notion that they can govern themselves peacefully. Palestinians haven't organized elections since either, so Israel maintains the status quo. The Palestinian Arabs in Gaza, aside from occasional IDF raids to capture specific terrorists, are completely left to their own devices, and there is no indication that their situation is improving. In fact, they are even worse than the West Bank Palestinians, who have much more inconveniences and intrusions coming from the Israelis.
Agreed. But I'll just add one thing; Elections have to be overseen by a constitutional body with adequate support from security forces. There is an ocean of difference between "They elected HAMAS" and "HAMAS was elected".
 

Menshevik

Ad Honorem
Dec 2012
9,115
here
#95
Says the Nazi sympathiser.

Don't even try to deny it because I'll just quote you, in fact .......... I will.



Also I don't know where you got No.3 from? ahhh I do you just made it up.

There's nothing I dislike more than posters like you who try to shut down historical debate to try and score SJW points.

Quite frankly its pathetic.

My comments or queries on both the Rothchild's or Khazaria are legitimate and if they weren't worth a discussion then how come no one can ever give a factually based answer?

My discussions are about historical facts only, these are two areas of hundreds of topics I've studied or queried, I couldn't give a crap about your political point scoring agenda, its of no interest to me whatsoever.

.......... but you carry on with your Nazi fetish though, probably why you get so jumpy whenever someone discusses Jewish people, guilty conscience?
You've been told countless times by many different people that the burden of proof is on you, you're the one making these wild claims.

You see Jewish bankers were proven financiers so when people think "why wouldn't they just use English bankers" the point is this, Jewish bankers were proven money makers, they were also faction neutral and a country falling into debt because of wars or gearing up for a war would see bringing in Jewish bankers as an advantage.

So to summerize, there is a lot of mistrust and envy and thousand years worth of bad publicity, they also own the worlds monetary system, assassinate Presidents who try to refuse them, engineer takeovers of countries monetary structures and don't care who they have to kill or how many to do it.

They have killed or at least tried to kill 3 or so American Presidents, including Kennedy, Lincoln and Jackson all for either resisting or challenging the Federal Reserve, these Presidents even wrote and commented about it, this is not theory or conjecture but facts.
What are the root causes of anti semitism in Enlightened Western world ?

What part of "burden of proof," don't you understand?

And I've heard a lot of speculation regarding JFK's assassination, but never have I heard that it was Jewish bankers that were behind it. That's a doozy.
 
Last edited:
#96
You've been told countless times by many different people that the burden of proof is on you, you're the one making these wild claims.



What are the root causes of anti semitism in Enlightened Western world ?

What part of "burden of proof," don't you understand?

And I've heard a lot of speculation regarding JFK's assassination, but never have I heard that it was Jewish bankers that were behind it. That's a doozy.
Your the one too hung up on "Jewish", bankers are a conglomerate, not all of them are Jewish but there is an argument that "Are the most powerful ones Jewish?" if they are so what? their race / religion is not the issue for me but if they are, then they are and the Rothchilds are their poster boys mainstream.

The fact that they're jewish might bother a white sumpremist but I'm not white or a sumpremist so I couldn't give a rats which is why when you keep using that as your angle its met with nothing but disdain, in fact considering I'm of mixed race I couldn't be a supremist even if I tried which is why your pathetic accusations either baffle me or I just find them insulting.

I'm not the one who started a thread claiming they are sympathetic to Nazi's in WWII, that was you, which is the strangest thread I've ever seen to be frank.

As for your query on JFK you find it a "doozy" because your ignorant .......... otherwise you'd find it interesting instead as there are facts that back it up as a theory.
 
#98
Well, I think it's important to realize that the notion that Ashkenazi Jews are descended from Khazars didn't appear until the 19th century. There was no prior tradition among Eastern European Jews of any connection to Khazars. There's no traceable cultural connections between the two. The closest you have are vague connections to Anatolian Turkish language/customs (which is markedly different from the Khazar culture/language) through clear Slavic intermediaries.

We do actually know that the vast majority of Jews living in Khazaria were likely Persian and Greek Jews, not converted ethnic Khazars. There have been Jews living in the Caucasus (associated with Persian and Babylonian communities) for 2500 years. There have been Greek Jews in Crimea and elsewhere in Eastern Europe for 2300 years. Both groups predate Khazars and any Khazar conversion by centuries at least.

The Jews who came to Poland overwhelmingly came from the west. This is clear due to settlement patterns and historical information. There were probably Jews already living in Eastern Europe, but as I mentioned earlier, these Jews (who were called "Knaanic Jews") were descended from Greek Jews. And they were overwhelmed numerically by the western Ashkenazi (Central European) Jewish migrants. Polish Jews didn't have on ancestor, but the vast majority of their ancestors came from Jewish communities in the west. And most of the population growth was due to natural increase, which despite being labeled as unrealistic is quite realistic.

In fact, the most obvious contenders for Jewish descendants of the Khazars would be the Jews who continued to live in the Caucasus or Crimea. Some of them even claimed Khazar descent during World War 2. But, as I've mentioned earlier, none of them show any actual genetic evidence of any relation to Khazars.

I don't know what geneticists you're referring to, but the only geneticist who vocally continues to support something sort of resembling the Khazar narrative is Elhaik. If you're genuinely interested in the subject, you should check out Kevin Alan Brook's website Khazaria.com - History of Jewish Khazars, Khazar Turk, Khazarian Jews

Not only has he done extensive research on the Khazars specifically for the past 20+ years, but he has aggregated all of the relevant genetic data. He is an Ashkenazi Jew who originally approached the subject with the hypothesis that eastern Ashkenazi Jews are partly-descended from Khazars (as is evident in early editions of his book), but with the advent of modern genetics, he has concluded that this is simply not the case.
Considering the closed ranks of Jewish communities would the 1st generation of Turkic Khazar's not of been bred out by now anyway amongst such an influx of Western Jews settlers in the region?

From what I've read and the sources on it state that Khazaria was a Turkic Kingdom which had a various population living under Khazar rule, some of the influx of migrants were Jewish and as you say likely from Iranian and Anatolian neighbouring territories, its stated that he Khazar nobles converted to this religion practiced by their population and other Khazar's followed suit.

Considering when you look up Jewish settlers in Poland (time of arrival) it was a huge surprise to me that it was practically noted as the exact year after the destruction of Khazaria by the Kievan's and Alan's so it naturally raises curiosity, the coincidence of timing cannot be brushed off, with only a 700 mile distance between their lands.

My question has always been .......... they couldn't go East as the Alans were there, they couldn't go North as the Kievans were there, south maybe but Byzantines were also their enemy and had influence there, West may of been their only safe route.

So my question is, if they didn't go West and take part in the setting up of the Polish Jewish settlements which appeared one year later ........... where did the population of this kingdom go?

Because they're not listed anywhere.
 
Aug 2010
16,035
Welsh Marches
#99
Jan 2019
9
United States
Considering the closed ranks of Jewish communities would the 1st generation of Turkic Khazar's not of been bred out by now anyway amongst such an influx of Western Jews settlers in the region?

From what I've read and the sources on it state that Khazaria was a Turkic Kingdom which had a various population living under Khazar rule, some of the influx of migrants were Jewish and as you say likely from Iranian and Anatolian neighbouring territories, its stated that he Khazar nobles converted to this religion practiced by their population and other Khazar's followed suit.

Considering when you look up Jewish settlers in Poland (time of arrival) it was a huge surprise to me that it was practically noted as the exact year after the destruction of Khazaria by the Kievan's and Alan's so it naturally raises curiosity, the coincidence of timing cannot be brushed off, with only a 700 mile distance between their lands.

My question has always been .......... they couldn't go East as the Alans were there, they couldn't go North as the Kievans were there, south maybe but Byzantines were also their enemy and had influence there, West may of been their only safe route.

So my question is, if they didn't go West and take part in the setting up of the Polish Jewish settlements which appeared one year later ........... where did the population of this kingdom go?

Because they're not listed anywhere.
Well, the dates you mention don't actually add up. The Jew (individual) who is described as arriving in Poland in 965 or 966--which coincidentally around the same time that Khazaria was being destroyed by the Rus'--was a Sephardi Jew with an Arabic name who was traveling along the Silk Road from Andalusia. In other words, there's zero connection between the two.

Mention of the first permanent Jewish community in Poland doesn't occur until over 100 years later, and it's mentioned by a German Jew, likely due to connections between the two communities. For hundreds of years after this, we know of numerous waves of migrations of Jews from Central/Western Europe into Poland, which gradually builds up the Jewish population in Poland.

Whatever Khazar Jews who were not extensively mixed with Persian and Greek (Anatolian or Balkan) Jews, likely converted to Islam or Christianity. Because, again I can't stress this enough, there's no genetic evidence of any significant (as in even a single percent) Khazar ancestry in modern Ashkenazi Jews or Mountain (Caucasus) or Georgian Jews. So even if there was an historical connection between the two, which there isn't, the genetic evidence would still refute it.

Again, if you're genuinely interested in the subject, check out khazaria.com. It can be tough to navigate because the interface is outdated, but there's tons of valuable information about both the Khazars and the relevant Jewish communities.
 
Likes: Teslatron

Similar History Discussions