black magic: roman union jack jive talk
- Thread starter mika
- Start date
Richard Stanley
Well-Known Member
There you go again, Richard, making false distinctions where none exist. Why make it so difficult for us and faux Collectivist?! Them satanic Christ killing zio-nazi khazar Joos are all the same! Just remind me again why are we considering them Joos now?
mika,
There you go again, making deceptively bad argumentation. There can only be one reason for someone like you to not want people to examine any distinctions, true or false, and that is to prevent them from discovering the ugly truth, about Rome and Judea. I DO NOT believe that you are so stupid that you don't know that when I say 'talking about false distinctions' doesn't mean me 'making false distinctions' but rather exposing them.
Please tell me where I stated anything that you could interpret me as saying: "Them satanic Christ killing zio-nazi khazar Joos are all the same! Just remind me again why are we considering them Joos now?" You should be asking Collectivist, with his Neo-Nazi agit-prop that question.
It is Collectivist that is worried about you ritually killing children, not me. Get your facts straight, like the scholars Cyrus H. Gordon, Moses Hadas, Israel Shahak, and Shlomo Sand did, or were they self hating Jews (for taking off their Rome colored glasses like you have on)?
You are so concerned about maintaining your faux identity and legitimacy, that your confirmation bias wont allow you to even read clearly, as did Gordon, that Abraham's descendants were half Hittite and half Amorite. And as I discussed elsewhere, Roman Catholic theology institutionalized the hateful treatment of Jews (Shahak, Carroll), from Augustine onwards, for a reason. So you go right on with acting out your Virtual Stockholm Syndrome and protect, and forgive, your Roman masters.
However, you do share a trait with the faux Collectivist, and that is you want to paint me, and us, as being racist via the use of your similarly slimey tactics.
That, combined with that I find your use of the term 'J__s' to be highly offensive (as you are obviously trying to paint me with this brush) and recommend that Jerry purge you from the site if you engage this way once more.
Richard Stanley
Well-Known Member
Such DNA analysis can only corroborate literary and Biblical analysis that the entire underpinnings of Western civilization are a pious fraud from Homer to Moses. Voting with your feet will do lees than good if one doesn't first illuminate the frauds which Romisch rabbi mika wants us to ignore. First of all, there is no reason for anyone to walk away if they don't understand the frauds.
Sorry, Richard, I thought my humor/sarcasm was pretty easy to spot.
That said, you're way off your rocker. Homer and the TaNaKh are extremely accurate historical records. Read Velikovsky.
Furthermore, I care very little for the Roman caricature of Judaism trying to pass itself as orthodoxy. They are as much a fraud as the Romans that created and sponsored them.
That said, you're way off your rocker. Homer and the TaNaKh are extremely accurate historical records. Read Velikovsky.
Furthermore, I care very little for the Roman caricature of Judaism trying to pass itself as orthodoxy. They are as much a fraud as the Romans that created and sponsored them.
I can guarantee you that the DNA information will be weaponized, and victims will be you and I. They have complete control and total dominance over EVERYTHING. If you think you have a chance against them you're delusional.
Speaking of, please fill us in on the ugly truth about Rome and Judea.
Speaking of, please fill us in on the ugly truth about Rome and Judea.
The Amorites were a race of giants. The Hittites were a race of horsemen. Neither of such even remotely describes the Hebrews. This is the same as the Khazar idiocy that we encounter, where not even one Turkish word ever entered the lexicon of a Jewish population ANYWHERE.
Richard Stanley
Well-Known Member
When I unfortunately say things like you did then I mean it. BTW, we have emoticons, but personally I don't find they are adequate to connote negative emotions.
Who is off his rocker? That's not exactly what I said is it? Besides the problem is not always with inaccuracy, but sometimes rather with too much accuracy, e.g. El and the Elohim for starters. Then there is the 'historical' problem of how old the Earth, the cosmos, mankind, yada, yada, yada, is. Seriously? The most that can be said is that the Tanakh's history is circumscribed to fit the conceits of the rise of Mesopotamian agrarian civilizations.
So does this make you a Karaite then?
To which Mika replied:
Forum site policy:
Consider yourself twice warned, Mika. I'm a little curious how you'll reply to Richard's question about whether you consider yourself a Karaite -- otherwise you'd be banned already.
And by the way, before you go recommending Velikovsky as the last word in biblical accuracy or chronology, you really ought to read Emmet Sweeney.
Richard Stanley
Well-Known Member
It is Joe's burning desire for the DNA tests, and you may be correct that the results could be tampered with, maybe even if the samples are obtained surreptitiously and submitted similarly (another possible problem).
To put it in a nutshell, the collaboration between Rome and the 'bad' (for your sake - as opposed to the good one(s) like you) Judeans goes a lot wider than the Flavian project, in both directions of time. In order to achieve the global synthesis as your Tanakh admits (Isaiah - regarding Jesse's offspring), it does not do to have thousands of gods, as your Tanakh admits (before it doesn't later on in the text). This is what delusional religious fundamentalists fail to realize, i.e. that they are INDEED witnessing the accuracy of the Tanakh -- only in revealing the bloody religio-political process of winnowing down the number of Yhwh's brother and sister gods, so as to make the global victory a happy one - for the victors at least (and yes, even Victory is a goddess). We all (except for you no doubt) moronically ended up calling this noxious entity 'God', like naming your dog 'Dog', or mika as 'Man'.
Plato, Cicero, and others all mention this otherwise unnamed 'god' before the time of the alleged Christ, which is really nothing more than a esoteric solar god concept. They, like the Epicureans, know that this entity is fake, but they are going to shove it down everyone's throats (along with the Jesus wafers) to achieve the re-enactment of Plato's totalitarian Republic, but mediated from what was too bizarrely achieved for Lycurgus' Spartan implementation. With Sparta, they didn't fully appreciate the lessons learned from Amarna about proceeding too quickly with the monotheism transformation.
This is why the Tanakh somewhat accurately describes a much slower genocide process in converting the Canaanite tribes to neo-Atonism. The 'backsliders' were just the people who wanted to stay with the old system, where in the good ol days, Yhwh and his wife and son were just one of the regular gods. Moses is no more than a literary vehicle to explain the transport of this idea from Egypt to the new social laboratory in the backwater of Judea. The fictive device of multiple 40 year 'generations' (just as this word was used in Jesus prophecy about the fall of Jerusalem to Christ Titus) was just a convenient tome filler. And here this same device, as were many other narrative aspects copied into the Aeneid (another equally bogus story). See Hadas's Hellenistic Culture.
For more you'll have to wait, but you can still buy Hadas's and Gordon's books. BTW, I have inherited all of Velikovsky's books, so maybe you can point me to some spots I should examine?
Richard Stanley
Well-Known Member
Wow, you are really reaching here. Clearly, unlike Cyrus H. Gordon, you don't know how to interpret your own texts. Furthermore, Gordon backs this up with a multitude of archaeological and other evidence, that .... uh hum, clearly demonstrate how truly accurate the Tanakh is. Problem for mika: "Be careful what you ask for, you just might get it".
The immediate descendants of Abraham practiced what is known as 'levirate marriage contracts'. This is what got Judah in hilarious fake prostitutional trouble with his daughter-in-law, ... and the mother of his children. The levirate marriage practice is not attested amongst other Semitic tribes, or even in Mesopotamia, but is attested in Hittite texts and India where a version of the practice is still known in modern times.
Abraham, who is likely just a fictional vehicle as well as Moses et al., is otherwise described very accurately as a typical caravan merchant prince with his typical retainer of (318) armed shepherds, the 'armed host'. A typical armed caravan merchant prince operating out of the Amorite region of Urfa (Edessa) / Haran, as attested by contemporaneous clay tablets from the region. He was welcomed by the Hittites within the Hittite trading colony of Hebron and allowed to buy burial land inside the colony, only because he was ... Hittite. That's the way such things worked back then. Sorry.
Amorites, were simply a typical Semitic tribe. Where is your evidence that they were 'giants'? It is much more likely that the names Abraham, Sarah, and Hagar were honorific paeans to the collapsed river systems of the collapsed Indus Valley Culture, whose time was not that far in advance of Abraham's supposed time. And the IVC had much contact with Sumeria and the Chaldees.
In the above context, Ezekiel's claim that Abraham's descendants were half Hittite and half Amorite make perfect sense.
Who said anything about Turks? But since you brought it up, Shlomo Sand claims that Yiddish is a Slavo-Turk dialect. Now who speaks Yiddish?
And since you've brought up language, like Hebrew supposedly being a sacred language of the Chosen Elect, Latin is claimed to be a sacred language, of yet 'another' Chosen Elect. While Hebrew is known to be just another Canaanite dialect of Phoenician today, Latin, at least, is a highly engineered language. Meaning it was not organicly evolved as with most other languages. It is well understood that both the important Sabini (Consuls, Caesars, and Popes) and the Latini, at least, were immigrants (from the East) to the Italian peninsula, regardless of the veracity of Livy or Vergil. In any case Troy, at least, is not that far from where Hatti was.
And then just why was it that Moses and Aaron's countenance was lighter? Was it really because they witnessed the glory of El Shadey, or was this really just a comical (levity) device to explain to the Canaanites (and maybe some Apiru) why the Levites had a lighter complexion. The Levites, those guys who didn't get to have any land of their own, because it already belonged to the indigenous Canaanite tribes who were targeted for the monotheistic conversion project, aka weaponized anthropology.
Regards
No, I'm not a Karite. I'm not religious in any sense. I deeply despise all religious ritual and all religious bureaucracies. I am a Hebrew/Israeli nationalist who knows and understands the TaNaKh to be an impeccable source of history, my history.
You'll have to forgive me, English is not my first language, nor second nor third nor forth
My understanding is that the expression "you're way off your rocker" is similar to "you're way off the mark" but also intones an emotional connotation of silliness.
No, I'm stating the facts and showing how ridiculous the theories which you uncritically bring forward are. What you are doing is reciting conjecture and wild false theories by corrupt personalities whose motives are malice, self-aggrandizement, and greed.
Last edited:
The Khazars were Turks. They spoke Turkish.
Shlomo Sand is a propaganda stooge and in the final analysis an ignorant moron. I know and speak Russian, Hebrew and Yiddish. Yiddish is a German dialect mixed with Hebrew words. There is no Slavo-Turk of any kind in Yiddish.
Never heard of him.
Nonsense.
Arab tribes practice levirate marriage to this day. Same for the Egyptians, which is probably where it was picked up by Israel.
According to you and yours, who are in my experience always in error and always are motivated by spite, malice, and deceit. Simply put, your "experts" are not.
Latin and latin history didn't come to existence until very late in Hebrew history (time of Hezekiah). The Latin alphabet is a derivative of the Greek alphabet, which itself is a derivative of the Hebrew alphabet.
Last edited:
What does that even mean?
According to you. You have no basis for this other than conjecture by ignorant personalities whose motives and politics are highly suspect, to say the least.
As I said, read Velikovsky. And just because you claim to have inherited a whole library of his books, doesn't necessarily mean you read and absorbed any in it.