Blumenthal on Jared Kushner and Israel-Gate

[Aleph MaleParticipant 214]

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, I can read between the lines. His obsession with genetics and the denigrative terminology he uses towards other races. No doubt, he supports Ethnic Cleansing of all Palestinians. He just won’t admit it publicly.

Sooooo, you have a problem with the imaginary “Ethnic Cleansing of all Palestinians™” and yet you have no problem whatsoever when your kamerad says he wants to see dead Jewish children?

Makes great sense!

Behind every miserable man there is a very happy woman.

[Cú ChulainnParticipant 3910]

Aleph Male wrote:

Cú Chulainn wrote:

He’s a hardcore Jewish supremacist who doesn’t recognise the humanity of Palestinians. He won’t answer what should be done with the Palestinians who don’t deserve a state. Maybe he has a FINAL SOLUTION for them?

The little Likud cyber-soldier lurks on the mgtow boards ready to SHUT IT DOWN when the middle easts only ipso facto fascist aggressive state gets called out. He’s sitting now sweating into his yarmulke whilst rapping about European savages and the genetic superiority of his tribe.

He’s been outed, he hasn’t posted anything but bigoted s~~~ about Europeans and Arabs. Everyone who disagrees is a “retard”.

C~~~ punt.

-Wants to shoot Israel children “for teh lulz”.
-Whines about my lack of humanity.

I’d have to invent you if you didn’t exist.

Surely with your superior genetics you can understand irony. Of course you do, it’s just you have an agenda here. You’re transparent.

Tick, tock, tick, tock…..

[Aleph MaleParticipant 214]

Anonymous wrote:

My sources are Reuters, what are yours?

“Reuters”? LMAO.

Here’s my source, Einstein: https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms15694

Have fun denying the data! 😉

Behind every miserable man there is a very happy woman.

[Anonymous 1]

Who should I believe researchers, iGENEA, who get wrote up in Reuters. Or an internet Asshole claiming to be an expert?

LONDON (Reuters) – Up to 70 percent of British men and half of all Western European men are related to the Egyptian Pharaoh Tutankhamun, geneticists in Switzerland said.

Scientists at Zurich-based DNA genealogy centre, iGENEA, reconstructed the DNA profile of the boy Pharaoh, who ascended the throne at the age of nine, his father Akhenaten and grandfather Amenhotep III, based on a film that was made for the Discovery Channel.

The results showed that King Tut belonged to a genetic profile group, known as haplogroup R1b1a2, to which more than 50 percent of all men in Western Europe belong, indicating that they share a common ancestor.

Among modern-day Egyptians this haplogroup contingent is below 1 percent, according to iGENEA.

“It was very interesting to discover that he belonged to a genetic group in Europe — there were many possible groups in Egypt that the DNA could have belonged to,” said Roman Scholz, director of the iGENEA Centre.

Around 70 percent of Spanish and 60 percent of French men also belong to the genetic group of the Pharaoh who ruled Egypt more than 3,000 years ago.

“We think the common ancestor lived in the Caucasus about 9,500 years ago,” Scholz told Reuters.

It is estimated that the earliest migration of haplogroup R1b1a2 into Europe began with the spread of agriculture in 7,000 BC, according to iGENEA.

However, the geneticists were not sure how Tutankhamun’s paternal lineage came to Egypt from its region of origin.

The centre is now using DNA testing to search for the closest living relatives of “King Tut.”

“The offer has only been publicised for three days but we have already seen a lot of interest,” Scholz told Reuters.

[Aleph MaleParticipant 214]

Cú Chulainn wrote:

Surely with your superior genetics you can understand irony. Of course you do, it’s just you have an agenda here. You’re transparent.

Tick, tock, tick, tock…..

So your excuse is “irony”? If so, you might want to perfect your skills, because it sounded more like irAny than irony to me.

The only one with an agenda here is you. That’s why you keep opening threads about the Jews here. You should go back to 4chan.

Behind every miserable man there is a very happy woman.

[Aleph MaleParticipant 214]

Anonymous wrote:

Who should I believe researchers, iGENEA, who get wrote up in Reuters. Or an internet Asshole claiming to be an expert?

LONDON (Reuters) – Up to 70 percent of British men and half of all Western European men are related to the Egyptian Pharaoh Tutankhamun, geneticists in Switzerland said.

Scientists at Zurich-based DNA genealogy centre, iGENEA, reconstructed the DNA profile of the boy Pharaoh, who ascended the throne at the age of nine, his father Akhenaten and grandfather Amenhotep III, based on a film that was made for the Discovery Channel.

The results showed that King Tut belonged to a genetic profile group, known as haplogroup R1b1a2, to which more than 50 percent of all men in Western Europe belong, indicating that they share a common ancestor.

Among modern-day Egyptians this haplogroup contingent is below 1 percent, according to iGENEA.

“It was very interesting to discover that he belonged to a genetic group in Europe — there were many possible groups in Egypt that the DNA could have belonged to,” said Roman Scholz, director of the iGENEA Centre.

Around 70 percent of Spanish and 60 percent of French men also belong to the genetic group of the Pharaoh who ruled Egypt more than 3,000 years ago.

“We think the common ancestor lived in the Caucasus about 9,500 years ago,” Scholz told Reuters.

It is estimated that the earliest migration of haplogroup R1b1a2 into Europe began with the spread of agriculture in 7,000 BC, according to iGENEA.

However, the geneticists were not sure how Tutankhamun’s paternal lineage came to Egypt from its region of origin.

The centre is now using DNA testing to search for the closest living relatives of “King Tut.”

“The offer has only been publicised for three days but we have already seen a lot of interest,” Scholz told Reuters.

By all means, don’t believe any of what I say, read this study instead: https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms15694

Behind every miserable man there is a very happy woman.

[Anonymous 14]

Aleph Male wrote:

Definition of anti-Semite
: a person who has a hostile, prejudiced attitude toward Jews : an anti-Semitic person

Source: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anti-Semite

Nothing about “Semites” here. Just Jews (you know, the folks you hate).

Definition of Semite

1 a : a member of any of a number of peoples of ancient southwestern Asia including the Akkadians, Phoenicians, Hebrews, and Arabs

b : a descendant of these peoples

Yes, the term Anti Semite has been misused for so long it has come to mean the definition you linked, but it is an incorrect use nonetheless. You see, Semites include Arabs. Do you mean to say I am Anti-Arab?

When Anti Semite is used by WHITE MEN WHO IDENDITY AS JEWS AKA SEMITES it is misused, and that is how it is predominantly used. White Jews are not descendants of Semites, most Palestinians are. Once again we are back to the race thing…

You do not get to muddy the waters with me, call me what you like, but I am no Anti-Semite, I am PRO SEMITE, as I back the plight of Palestinians more than I do Israel. Call me Anti-Support Israel’s Bulls~~~, because that is what I am. I do not take race into consideration, YOU TRY TO MAKE IT ABOUT RACE THOUGH SO THAT YOU CAN CRY RACISM WHEN I DO NOT SUPPORT YOU!

[Aleph MaleParticipant 214]

Anonymous wrote:

Definition of Semite

1 a : a member of any of a number of peoples of ancient southwestern Asia including the Akkadians, Phoenicians, Hebrews, and Arabs

b : a descendant of these peoples

Yes, the term Anti Semite has been misused for so long it means the top definition. But, Semites include Arabs. Do you mean to say I am Anti-Arab?

When Anti Semite is used by WHITE MEN WHO IDENDITY AS JEWS AKA SEMITES it is misused, and that is how it is predominantly used. White Jews are not descendants of Semites, most Palestinians are. Once again we are back to the race thing…

You not get to muddy the waters with me, call me what you like, but I am no Anti-Semite, I am PRO SEMITE, as I back the plight of Palestinians more than I do Israel. Call me Anti-Support Israel’s Bulls~~~, because that is what I am. I do not take race into consideration, YOU TRY TO MAKE IT ABOUT RACE THOUGH SO THAT YOU CAN CRY RACISM WHEN I DO NOT SUPPORT YOU!

Antisemitism has nothing to do with Akkadians, Phoenicians, Babylonians, Ethiopians or Arabs. Antisemitism is anti-Jewish racism, as per the definition I posted above.

There was a time when Jew-haters like you were proud of being antisemites and endorsed the label, they even had an antisemitic library in Paris:

This word scares you because it describes you perfectly.

Behind every miserable man there is a very happy woman.

[Anonymous 14]

Aleph Male wrote:

THX 1138 wrote:

Definition of Semite

1 a : a member of any of a number of peoples of ancient southwestern Asia including the Akkadians, Phoenicians, Hebrews, and Arabs

b : a descendant of these peoples

Yes, the term Anti Semite has been misused for so long it means the top definition. But, Semites include Arabs. Do you mean to say I am Anti-Arab?

When Anti Semite is used by WHITE MEN WHO IDENDITY AS JEWS AKA SEMITES it is misused, and that is how it is predominantly used. White Jews are not descendants of Semites, most Palestinians are. Once again we are back to the race thing…

You not get to muddy the waters with me, call me what you like, but I am no Anti-Semite, I am PRO SEMITE, as I back the plight of Palestinians more than I do Israel. Call me Anti-Support Israel’s Bulls~~~, because that is what I am. I do not take race into consideration, YOU TRY TO MAKE IT ABOUT RACE THOUGH SO THAT YOU CAN CRY RACISM WHEN I DO NOT SUPPORT YOU!

Antisemitism has nothing to do with Akkadians, Phoenicians, Babylonians, Ethiopians or Arabs. Antisemitism is anti-Jewish racism, as per the definition I posted above.

There was a time when Jew-haters like you were proud of being antisemites and endorsed the label, they even had an antisemitic library in Paris:

This word scares you because it describes you perfectly.

Sorry, the term is still incorrect. The definition of Semite is not used specifically for White Jews. In fact is quite the opposite. Just because the term has been used incorrectly for a long time means nothing.

And this is why: I am not Anti-Arab. I am not Anti-Palestinian. Yet they fall under the umbrella of the term Semite. Therefore I cannot be an Anti-Semite. There is no way to logic past that, end of story.

Call me Anti-Support Israel’s bulls~~~, because that is what I am.

[Anonymous 1]

Aleph Male wrote:

By all means, don’t believe any of what I say, read this study instead: https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms15694%5B/quote%5D

Thanks, that strengthens my argument.

We find that ancient Egyptians are most closely related to Neolithic and Bronze Age samples in the Levant, as well as to Neolithic Anatolian and European populations (Fig. 5a,b). When comparing this pattern with modern Egyptians, we find that the ancient Egyptians are more closely related to all modern and ancient European populations that we tested (Fig. 5b), likely due to the additional African component in the modern population observed above.

[Joey AlfioParticipant]

Aleph Male wrote:

You still haven’t explained the discrepancy between my Y-chromosomal haplogroup (shared by 20% of Ashkenazi Jews) and your claim that “Ashkenazi Jews are not Semites”. Here’s another distribution map of my paternal marker to get you started:

I never said they weren’t. They were at some point in history but as I’ve shown centuries of mixing with Europeans such as Greeks, Italians, Balkans, Germans, Slavs, etc., changed the original Jewish genetic makeup to Ashkenazism. I don’t know what part of that you don’t understand. And that map isn’t just about Jewish ancestry but other Near Eastern people’s as well.

The genetics suggest many of the founding Ashkenazi women were actually converts from local European populations.

“The simplest explanation was that it was mainly women who converted and they married with men who’d come from the Near East,” Richards told LiveScience.

Another possibility is that Jews actively converted both men and women among local populations at this time, although researchers would need more detailed study of paternal lineages to test that hypothesis, Richards said.

https://www.livescience.com/40247-ashkenazi-jews-have-european-genes.html

Δεν υπάρχει τίποτε αδύνατο γι’ αυτόν που θα προσπαθήσει. - Μέγας Αλέξανδρος

[Cú ChulainnParticipant 3910]

Aleph Male wrote:

Cú Chulainn wrote:

Surely with your superior genetics you can understand irony. Of course you do, it’s just you have an agenda here. You’re transparent.

Tick, tock, tick, tock…..

So your excuse is “irony”? If so, you might want to perfect your skills, because it sounded more like irAny than irony to me.

The only one with an agenda here is you. That’s why you keep opening threads about the Jews here. You should go back to 4chan.

Nope. I open threads about ISRAEL, not Jews. Your logic needs some work.

What’s the matter Mosh? You failed the entrance exam for mossad? Now you’re reduced to bottom tier trolling for Zion on a board about men going their own way? Fantasising about shooting up whole families of Arabs while fiddling with yourself?

Nobody cares what we think about Israel?
Well guess what, nobody cares about Israel, everywhere, and your muscle is on the way out. Enjoy the collapse. If I was an Israeli right now I’d be making friends with my future masters, if they allow me to stay. Dhimmi for me, dhimmi for you, give me me your shekels oh please mistah Jew.

Tickety tock.

[Aleph MaleParticipant 214]

Anonymous wrote:

Sorry, the term is still incorrect. The definition of Semite is not used specifically for White Jews. In fact is quite the opposite. Just because the term has been used incorrectly for a long time means nothing.

And this is why: I am not Anti-Arab. I am not Anti-Palestinian. Yet they fall under the umbrella of the term Semite. Therefore I cannot be an Anti-Semite. There is no way to logic past that, end of story.

Call me Anti-Support Israel’s bulls~~~, because that is what I am.

You don’t get to redefine words. Antisemitism has nothing to do with Arabs, “Palestinians” or any other Semitic-speaking group. It has to do with hating the Jews. Which is why you’re an antisemite.

Behind every miserable man there is a very happy woman.

[Anonymous 1]

Aleph Male wrote:

Have fun denying the data!

What do you say about IGENEA and their findings. Come on Mr. Genetic Expert, looks like King Tut was related to those “savage” Celts that you despise.

[Aleph MaleParticipant 214]

Anonymous wrote:

We find that ancient Egyptians are most closely related to Neolithic and Bronze Age samples in the Levant, as well as to Neolithic Anatolian and European populations (Fig. 5a,b). When comparing this pattern with modern Egyptians, we find that the ancient Egyptians are more closely related to all modern and ancient European populations that we tested (Fig. 5b), likely due to the additional African component in the modern population observed above.

It actually doesn’t, since you left out the first part:

“We find that ancient Egyptians are most closely related to Neolithic and Bronze Age samples in the Levant, as well as to Neolithic Anatolian”

You know, the same Neolithic Anatolians whose descendants built Stonehenge and who happen to be closer to Sardinians than to any present-day Northern European populations (Irish included).

That’s how this works you see.

Behind every miserable man there is a very happy woman.

[Aleph MaleParticipant 214]

Joey Alfio wrote:

I never said they weren’t. They were at some point in history but as I’ve shown centuries of mixing with Europeans such as Greeks, Italians, Balkans, Germans, Slavs, etc., changed the original Jewish genetic makeup to Ashkenazism. I don’t know what part of that you don’t understand. And that map isn’t just about Jewish ancestry but other Near Eastern people’s as well.

The genetics suggest many of the founding Ashkenazi women were actually converts from local European populations.

“The simplest explanation was that it was mainly women who converted and they married with men who’d come from the Near East,” Richards told LiveScience.

Another possibility is that Jews actively converted both men and women among local populations at this time, although researchers would need more detailed study of paternal lineages to test that hypothesis, Richards said.

https://www.livescience.com/40247-ashkenazi-jews-have-european-genes.html

You’re also in denial. 4 stages left for you as well.

Behind every miserable man there is a very happy woman.

[Aleph MaleParticipant 214]

Cú Chulainn wrote:

Nope. I open threads about ISRAEL, not Jews. Your logic needs some work.

What’s the matter Mosh? You failed the entrance exam for mossad? Now you’re reduced to bottom tier trolling for Zion on a board about men going their own way? Fantasising about shooting up whole families of Arabs while fiddling with yourself?

Nobody cares what we think about Israel?
Well guess what, nobody cares about Israel, everywhere, and your muscle is on the way out. Enjoy the collapse. If I was an Israeli right now I’d be making friends with my future masters, if they allow me to stay. Dhimmi for me, dhimmi for you, give me me your shekels oh please mistah Jew.

Tickety tock.

Because we all know Israel has nothing to do with the Jews, ain’t that right? 😉

Keep posting, you’re just making a fool out of yourself.

Behind every miserable man there is a very happy woman.

[Joey AlfioParticipant]

Aleph Male wrote:

You’re also in denial. 4 stages left for you as well.

Ashkenazi Jew with a non-Ashkenazi Jew. Now tell me who’s in denial?

Δεν υπάρχει τίποτε αδύνατο γι’ αυτόν που θα προσπαθήσει. - Μέγας Αλέξανδρος

[Cú ChulainnParticipant 3910]

Antisemitism is anti-Jewish racism, as per the definition I posted above.

Your logic is wanting.

Appeal to Definition
(also known as: appeal to the dictionary, victory by definition)

Description: Using a dictionary’s limited definition of a term as evidence that term cannot have another meaning, expanded meaning, or even conflicting meaning. This is a fallacy because dictionaries don’t reason; they simply are a reflection of an abbreviated version of the current accepted usage of a term, as determined by argumentation and eventual acceptance. In short, dictionaries tell you what a word meant, according to the authors, at the time of its writing, not what it meant before that time, after, or what it should mean.

Dictionary meanings are usually concise, and lack the depth found in an encyclopedia; therefore, terms found in dictionaries are often incomplete when it comes to helping people to gain a full understanding of the term.

Logical Form:

The dictionary definition of X does not mention Y.
Therefore, Y must not be part of X.

Your example:

The dictionary definition of antisemitism does not mention Akkadians, Phoenicians, Babylonians, Ethiopians or Arabs.
Therefore, Akkadians, Phoenicians, Babylonians, Ethiopians or Arabs must not be part of antisemitism.

[Anonymous 14]

Aleph Male wrote:

You’re also in denial. 4 stages left for you as well.

I think there may only be one stage of denial left for you, unfortunately for all of us it may only come right after you see a bright light from an Iranian nuke one day.

[Author]

Posts