Ramadan – The Month Of Jihad And Martyrdom

We are not talking about hatred of semites. This is about hatred against Jews.

Full stop. End of discussion.

 

You dragged in "Many Jews have been murdered over the last 50 years due to this irrational hatred."
And I showed you the hatred of Jews against Arabs got far more Arabs killed.
And you're not responded to it, even though I kept pointing it out.

You also dragged in "anti-Semitism", hawking the meaning of Semitism.
And that aint right. Full stop, end of discussion.

 

anti-Semitism means hatred of Jews.

Thats the end of this discussion.

 

You mean, you're imposing your Jewish culture on others and deny Arabs are Semites too in your cute definition.


That and it's getting rather cute you're not responding to how the hatred of Jews caused more Arabs to die.

 

Nope just helping you understand the meaning of a term. That's all.

 

The term speaks for itself. You're imposing your own definition as opposed to the etymological one. The term anti Semite literally means hatred of semites, that will be the historical definition in the years to come when the propaganda ceases. The coopting of the English definition is just another aspect of the dishonesty mentioned earlier.

This is a bad characteristic. It should be cut out immediately before it causes real damage. There is honour and there is honour taken too far which becomes pride and pride leads to the fall.

My faith will always be with Israel.

 

this is a very real problem the white Jewish Europeans have. Unless a Jew conforms to the WJE definition of what a Jew is then they are not Jews or lesser Jews. It's a caste system, much like Hindus where the paler the skin, the more Jewish you are. It's totally white supremacist. What are we to expect though, the motherland of the white race is Ukraine and guess where the white Jewish Europeans come from? Yep Ukraine.

 

Your way of "helping" is actually insisting that your western Jewish crooked cultural definition must prevail over sound logic.
I'm imposing sound logic on to you. You agree that Arabs are Semites. Go take that extra step and acknowledge being anti, is against.. and than combine the both.
Thanks.

And you're so obsessed that your crooked definition must remain so, that you don't even care that your the Jewish Israeli population kills more Arabs out of hate than the other way around .... where you previously whined that so many Jews are being killed out of hate. It's getting really typical of you to just go ignore Arabs when it doesn't fit your agenda.

 

Yeah... it's like hearing the declaration of independence with the ol' "All men are created equal"... but that does exclude this group because I got an agenda to uphold.

 

You're right.

The true meaning of "anti Semite" would include anyone who has an irrational hatred of :
" Arabs, Akkadians, Canaanites, Hebrews, some Ethiopians (including the Amhara and the Tigrayans), and Aramaean tribes.
"Semite, name given in the 19th century to a member of any people who speak one of the Semitic languages, a family of languages spoken primarily in parts of western Asia and Africa." (1)

So, true "anti Semitism" would be an irrational hatred of Arabs, including Palestinians and the numerous people who live in the region that are connected primarily by a Semitic language.

It is unfortunate that racist Zionist ideologues have attempted to appropriate the term "anti Semite" for only Jews and pitted Semite against Semite because before the invasion of foreign Zionist terrorists and militant Jewish "Settlers", the Jews and the Palestinians got along reasonably well (2).

Thanks,



(1). "Semite"
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Semite


(2). “Top Ten Myths about the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict”
http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2010/06/17/top-ten-myths-about-the-israeli-palestinian-conflict/


EXCERPT "Myth #1 – Jews and Arabs have always been in conflict in the region.

Although Arabs were a majority in Palestine prior to the creation of the state of Israel, there had always been a Jewish population, as well. For the most part, Jewish Palestinians got along with their Arab neighbors. This began to change with the onset of the Zionist movement, because the Zionists rejected the right of the Palestinians to self-determination and wanted Palestine for their own, to create a “Jewish State” in a region where Arabs were the majority and owned most of the land.

The British Hope-Simpson report of 1930 similarly noted that Jewish residents of non-Zionist communities in Palestine enjoyed friendship with their Arab neighbors. “It is quite a common sight to see an Arab sitting in the verandah of a Jewish house”, the report noted. “The position is entirely different in the Zionist colonies."CONTINUED

 

Most Ashkenazi Jews do not come from Ukraine. Full stop.

And the motherland of the white race is not Ukraine. Its Africa, as that is where all human beings originate from.

 

White skin doesn't originate in Africa, it originated in the caucus mountains, in the region of Ukraine/khazaria. This is white folks spiritual home. White skin is fairly recent mutation roughly beginning at the time Africans we're creating the Aegyptus civilization.

 

Where is your scientific evidence?

From what I read, light skin developed between 22,000 and 28,000 years ago and was present in Anatolia at least 9,000 years ago. Light skin was probably developed as a mutation to deal with the lack of sunlight and the necessity of vitamin D for human survival.

However there are other primates that have light skin including chimpanzees and orangutans. Gorillas are the only other primates with dark skin.


https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/exd.14142



Keep in mind this discussion is about science not silly non-scientific fairy tales.

 

Again all human beings originated in Africa. They then migrated to Europe and Asia. Light skin appears to have mutated for the European and Asian populations concurrently, to deal with the lower levels of sunlight and therefore the lack of naturally created vitamin d. Lighter skin allows for more development of vitamin d from lower levels of sun while dark skin prevents such natural activity. All things being equal including diet a black person in pre-historic Europe or Northern Asia is less healthy than a lighter skin person as the lighter skin person can much easier develop vitamin d through their skin.

Again like I said there are other primates with light skin who do live in Africa including chimpanzees. Orangutans have light skin and they live in Asia.

Darker skin is obviously an advantage for humans and other primates in Africa but is a disadvantage in Europe and Northern Asia, hence the natural development of lighter skin through evolution.

 

Light skin is not white skin. Light skin is Barack Obama, who is black. I'm talking white skin, which has only been around a few thousand years and originated in roughly the caucus mountains around 6000bce give or take.

This is why the west(white governments) are heavily invested in the Ukraine war, since it is their "Eden"

 

This discussion is not about religion or culture. It is about science. There is no evidence whatsoever that white skin developed in Ukraine and nowhere else. More than 1 billion Asians have white skin and their mutation did not develop in Ukraine.

There are also lots of other primates in Africa that have white skin. White skin has its advantages that's why it exists within many primate populations. It is useful for synthesizing vitamin d from the Sun. It is much more difficult to do that if you have black skin and live in Europe or northern asia.

 

White folk became white due to intermixing with neanderthals from the caucus mountains. Before that event, "white folk" were black. White skin can be traced to the caucuses (Ukraine) for this reason.

 

Hence why the Ukraine is heavily influenced by white supremacists, it's the Eden for whites, with the most hardcore followers on earth.

 

Again you have no scientific evidence for this.

You have no evidence that the Neanderthals were white-skinned and all homosapiens were black.

And you have no evidence that the Neanderthals and Homo sapiens only mixed in the Caucus area.

However it is true that black Africans have basically zero Neanderthal ancestry, while Europeans and Asians do.

It should however be noted that neanderthals were considered highly intelligent, cultured and sophisticated for the time. There is a theory that they were wiped out by the much more violent and aggressive homo sapiens, but the homo sapiens took on some of the Neanderthals more passive biological and behavioral traits.

 

Again this is all just comic book fairy tail nonsense without any connection whatsoever to the scientific discussion.

 

Don't forget white skin developed as a biological advantage. Human beings need vitamin D, and that is difficult to synthesize from the Sun with dark skin. So unless you can find a food source that is rich in vitamin d if you live in Europe or Northern Asia and you have dark skin you're going to be weak and sick.

 

But the Neanderthals went extinct around 28,000 years ago – long before modern humans in Europe gained a pale skin. Evidently Neanderthals did not pass these useful local adaptations on to modern humans, despite genetic evidence that the two species interbred.

https://www.newscientist.com/articl...s went extinct,that the two species interbred.


It appears European humans developed their advantageous white skin long after they interbred with and eventually wiped out the peaceful Neanderthals.

 

It's common knowledge that you're attempting to hide.

 

Neanderthals had white skin and straight hair and were very hairy. This genetic makeup was passed onto what we today call white folk. It's how whites could survive in the Arctic.

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/7000-year-old-human-bones-suggest-new-date-for-light-skin-gene/

Indeed Europeans actually had dark skin up until at least 7,000 years ago, tens of thousands of years after neanderthals disappeared. So clearly the most up-to-date science shows Europeans did not inherit white skin from Neanderthals.